Subject for Teachers

[Royal Dragon]

I posted this on Cyberkoown, but that forum moves pretty slow so ithough I'd see what you guys think too,

RD


In the "Olden times" Teachers were VERY selective about who they taught (for the most part). A student would have to put forth great effort to prove themselves worthy, both in desire and moral foundation.

A Sifu took on students with the greatest of care and often got to know them personally inorder to be sure the prospect was of sound moral and ethical convictions before being trustes with the aweome power and responsibility that is Kung Fu.

The reasons for this were many, most importantly was the Sifu's desire to NOT give the criminally minded the tools needed to commit evil acts as well as maintain military superiority over what could someday become a fututre enemy.

As teachers, do we or should we be holding such strict standards in this day in age?? Or should be bear no thought as to the end use our knowledge, skill and teaching???

In a comercial seting, it's hard to know every student and thier true nature, but if you "SHOULD" discover a student has a dark nature, and the likely hood of them useing your teachings to harm others is high, (especially if they have already proven themseves capable and willing through a court conviction of some sort, or other reasonably verifyable act), do you have a moral obligation to refuse to teach them or aid them in thier martial persutes??

[Zapf Dingbat]

Sure. I mean you can choose not to teach whomever you want, as long as you can part with the money.

[Black Jack]

Their are a few systems and teachers out their who require that they get to know you a little bit, an interview, some speaking time, a background check maybe, have the student do resume, that type of thing.

It's not a bad idea but if you do you might have to throw away any commerical angle in the retrospect of having a lot of students, not that everybody is bad, but that most people don't feel that they have to explain any thing to you besides here's my monthly training fee.

I think for certain serious aspects of ones art, like weapons, more assaination based skills, a bad ground check to make sure he is not a pedophile or rapist or armed robber might be in order.

[Royal Dragon]

I have thought about this reacently. If done correctly, they may acutally be a good marketing stratigy by making prospective students feel that your school is a safe and sound enviroment.

Don't know yet though, I'd like to hear everyone's thoughts first.

[raving_limerick]

Hey RD,

I thought I read that some styles were actually affiliated with the "criminal" elements like tongs and triads?

I'm not knocking the idea of keeping criminals from learning MA, (in fact, I really agree with your point) but I'm just curious if this idea came about in the recent couple of generations or has long been a part of the CMAs?

[red_fists]

Olden times" Teachers were VERY selective about who they taught (for the most part). A student would have to put forth great effort to prove themselves worthy, both in desire and moral foundation.

I don't agree with that assesment, and think it is a idolised view.

Too many Masters of old also ran commercial Schools like today.
MA was not confined to 1 Teacher teaching only a few Students, yes, it was true for some but I doubt if it was the rule.

Problem is that History often only records the few really good Students, that continued the lineage.

Also how many Students does the Teacher need to find those few, pretty similar to today methinks.

Just my 2 Yen's worth.

[Royal Dragon]

All the "Legands" of old say this was how it was allways done, what ever that means.

[red_fists]

RD.

Agreed, that is waht the Legends say.

But look at the Chen Village for Chen Tai Chi. YLC was NOT the only Student there depending on which Legen you believe.

He is also recorded as running a School outside the Imperial Court where he taught Bodyguards.

But History & Legend only records a few Students of him.

[Royal Dragon]

I'll have to go with you on that as I don't have tome to double check, but who knows how things were doen. I don't se how it's posible to keep the arts out of the criminals hands.

BUT, do we have the obligation to try at least??

If so, how should it be done?

[red_fists]

I agree.

How it could be done.
Lengthy conversation over at E-Budo, if Schools should do background checks.

Personally, I think background checks are pretty usesless as they will only show the past and what is publicly known about the Student(i.e. convictions, arrests). In short they can be an indicator and that's about it.

Same prob with background checks on Teachers.

Best Option, would be interviews(Student, Family, close friends) and the Sifu/Sensei trying to get to know each Students and his motives.
And for this I think each style should have a teachers course that prospective Sifu & Sensei have to go through.
I know we have that in my System, once you finished the Curriculum, you can go and study further to be an Instructor in the Style.
In the old Days often Students were accepted by referals between Sifu's, and those I agree normally got special attention and went on to become known.

Again just my devalued 2 Yen worth..

[joedoe]

Teachers in my school often screen students - not necessarily when they ask to join the class, but as an ongoing process. My sifu often warns us to keep an eye on so-and-so, sometimes even tells us not to show them anything that might be dangerous.

My late Sigung was known to refuse students if he felt their character was no good.

Often both my sifu and sigung would take in a student with questionable character to try and change them. I guess they were still careful in what they taught these students until they could be sure that the student had changed. Personally, I do not have enough confidence in my ability to influence someone to try something like that .

[HuangKaiVun]

I think that it goes both ways: sifu AND student.

In general, a student does not study with a sifu that he doesn't think is compatible with his personality.

Hence a criminal student looking to learn how to hurt people probably wouldn't sign up for the typical kung fu class, which tends to feature at least hourlong sessions of RESTRAINT.

On the other hand, I know sifus that condoned fighting and then had to deal with students that went out and hurt people for the sake of "testing their skills". The law has a way of biting such sifus in the butt for their pugilistic tendencies.

Another thing is: when's the last time a criminal had big-time kung fu ability?

[gazza99]

I believe that screening students is important if you want to produce good MA'ers. You must see if the person is going to stick with it, and tell them everything you can to let them know what they are getting themselves into. Screening can simply be a quetionare, or sitting down for a cup of coffee with the person. If you feel they are a bit *off*. Then dont take them as a student, if you feel you can help them even though they may be *off* in some way, then teach them, just dont start showing them neck breaks etc...

Background checks are not only a bit pricey, but are also a bit extreme. If the person is a felon...etc.. and they are learning MA so they can hurt people it seems like there are easier ways to do this..IE buy a knife, gun, baseball bat..etc. In this day and age signing up for a MA class so you can be a better criminal may not be very common. But a simple interview will circumvent most of these problems.

Gary

[Royal Dragon]

Since when does it take big time ability to hurt innocent victums??? There are those out there right now claimimg to have 10 years of Wing Chun training that also have spem pretty scarry criminal records.

I also know of a Kung Fu player here in Chicago that killed a number of people during an attack on his life near the Robert Tailor homes. It was a legit self defence situation, but even he admits Killing all three was a mistake as only the leader was fully commited.

After this incident, he developed a "Thirst" for killing. When his teacher figured this out, he refused to continue teaching him, even though no further incedents occured, not because of the original incedent, but because of the strange psycological effect it had on the student.

I spent some amount of time under this student, or more correctly as his trainig partner before he told me this story, and when things got heated the look in his eye was pretty scarry. I had actually suspected he had killed before he told me the story. No, it was more like I felt it deep down. He obvously felt very guilty for what he had done, but I stilll understand his teachers decision to end his training, and he also did, and agreed with the decision.

Another incedent was during my studies at a local Kung Fu school. Apparently one of the students had taken to beating his wife. He had been a student there for quite some time as I understand, and was rather good. Somehow the Sifu got wind of what was going on, and dismissed him instantly. I rember not being fully aware of what was going on myself, but I'll never forget how all of a sudden the Sifu started talking about Women beaters, and how they were weak and insecure. He often was quoted saying "I'll fight guys like that all day", implying they would be easy to deal with. It was wierd, and out of context untill another senior explained what was going on. Even before I knew the whole story, I could see he was in pain about the subject for some reason. The fact that some one HE trained was doing some thing like this was obviously very disturbing to him.

Personally, from where I am sitting, IF you find out someone in your class is of questionalble charecter, I could'nt deal with what they might be doing with MY knowledge. I'd have to dismiss them.

I can deal with challenge matches and such between knowing and willing competitors, but there are "Other uses" of martial skills that I would feel disgusted with if I knew about it.

[raving_limerick]

RD,

I think what you said makes a lot of sense.

"Personally, from where I am sitting, IF you find out someone in your class is of questionalble charecter, I could'nt deal with what they might be doing with MY knowledge. I'd have to dismiss them. "

Can't really argue with that. Quality control of material isn't the only problem a teacher's got to deal with, I suppose. Character is important, but very slippery to define as "Good" or "Bad". What areas of someone's personality and beliefs are important to you? How do you know you've made the right choice? I don't mean that there's no moral guides here, I just want to know what things those of you who teach take into consideration when looking for students.