A new teaching method

[YouKnowWho]

I have one student who has been with me for 12 years. In the past many classes, I had changed my teaching method. Instead of teaching what I wanted to teach, I taught what he wanted to learn. He is the guy always tested his skill in local MMA gym. Every week he would tell me his experience and asked me how to handle certain situations that came from his MMA opponents. I find this kind of teaching to be very interest. It's how to solve a certain problem instead of how to develop a certain skill. For example, in one class, we just worked on how to deal with the waist surrounding arm. We worked on the "cracking" skill in many different ways to solve different problems.

What's your opinion on this kind of teaching method?

[-N-]

I have one student who has been with me for 12 years. In the past many classes, I had changed my teaching method. Instead of teaching what I wanted to teach, I taught what he wanted to learn. He is the guy always tested his skill in local MMA gym. Every week he would tell me his experience and asked me how to handle certain situations that came from his MMA opponents. I find this kind of teaching to be very interest. It's how to solve a certain problem instead of how to develop a certain skill. For example, in one class, we just worked on how to deal with the waist surrounding arm. We worked on the "cracking" skill in many different ways to solve different problems.

What's your opinion on this kind of teaching method?

I like to do a combination of teaching from a general framework, then vary based on student needs, abilities, and interest.

I like to have the student actively think in terms of problem solving, and coach him through options based on the system. This keeps it interesting for the teacher and the student.

You can reference and reiterate previous material, as well as introduce new material in this format. You just need to provide the continuity between all of that.

Lots of ways to get to the end result. Eventually, the student needs to see it all, so it's not that big a deal.

I like to ask the students to think about what they learned/trained previously. Ask if they have questions or problems. Follow up on their comments with whatever coaching as necessary. Build on prior instruction, and gradually expand their knowledge, insights, and skills.

I'll have in mind some things I can see they need, but I also will ask what they would like to work on. I can be flexible in the material and still move things in the direction they need to move.

That's what KF usage is all about, right?

[-N-]

This actually isn't necessarily a new teaching method.

Brendan Lai did this with us, but not explicitly. He had a continuity from class to class and a general lesson plan.

We realized that if we wanted to explore or develop a particular thing, we just had to train it like hell while getting ready for class. Then he would notice, and come over and start coaching and giving us pointers and related material. Then a good portion of the class would continue from there.

Actions speak louder than words, and nothing more that a teacher likes than seeing students training and trying to improve.

[SPJ]

Depending on what the student wants and needs to work on.

Give some advices or lessons as they arise.

That is great.

However, I would still keep a general course for students in general.

I do not want to be accused of not covering certain materials or hiding from the students.

:)

[YouKnowWho]

In my situation, since my student has been with me for over 12 years. I have taught him almost everything that I was good at. Of course there are still material that have not be covered. But those material are not that important (otherwise it should be covered long time ago).

[David Jamieson]

I have one student who has been with me for 12 years. In the past many classes, I had changed my teaching method. Instead of teaching what I wanted to teach, I taught what he wanted to learn. He is the guy always tested his skill in local MMA gym. Every week he would tell me his experience and asked me how to handle certain situations that came from his MMA opponents. I find this kind of teaching to be very interest. It's how to solve a certain problem instead of how to develop a certain skill. For example, in one class, we just worked on how to deal with the waist surrounding arm. We worked on the "cracking" skill in many different ways to solve different problems.

What's your opinion on this kind of teaching method?

This is a good way I think. It is related to direct experience and he is getting out of the art what he needs in today's problem sets that he challenges himself too.
It will of course likely lead to him asking for the requisite skills in order to improve the power and strength of the techniques.

Whenever I am out training with others from different styles, that is pretty much how it goes. What do we use to deal with a given attack or defense etc.
:)

[Kellen Bassette]

I have taught him almost everything that I was good at. Of course there are still material that have not be covered. But those material are not that important (otherwise it should be covered long time ago).

That's an excellent point. Some people would have you believe you need to be with them 30 years to learn everything about their system. If you haven't covered all the important stuff in 2 or 3 years, someone isn't doing their part.

[David Jamieson]

That's an excellent point. Some people would have you believe you need to be with them 30 years to learn everything about their system. If you haven't covered all the important stuff in 2 or 3 years, someone isn't doing their part.

Indeed. the law of diminishing returns kicks in around 3-5 years in any martial art and are in full force by the time years 7-10 are rolling around. After that, it's learn through continuance and application or wallow in vacillation and musing. :)

[bawang]

this is the best teaching method to produce fighter.

deca+tren+winstrol 6 weeks
pct +trt +hgh
win

(as taught by sifu ken shamrock)