A legitimate rank issuing organization issues rank to students who have been:
- Trained by a certified instructor of the organization.
- Tested in person by a certified instructor, or a group of certified instructors, of the organization.
- Recommended for rank by a certified instructor, or a group of instructors, of the organization as having met or exceeded the organizations requirements for the rank.
A karate 5th degree recently took offense with the part of the description that said that for rank to be legitimate, the person must have been tested in person. He said that I must be ignorant of the current way rank is awarded in the martial arts industry. He said that lower ranks are, and should be, tested in person but that high ranks (4th degree and above) are usually awarded rank by means of correspondence (previous rank certificates, resume, letters of recommendation, thesis, video of performance, tournament records, etc.). He said he had competed extensively around the country and that most of the high ranks he knew had received their rank this way. and that this was the way most organizations issue high rank. He said most ranks above 3rd degree were honorary anyway and were mostly awarded for time in rank and for work in the art and the organization, not for physical performance. He said most of the high ranking TKD martial artists he knew had received their rank through correspondence and that my statement that rank should be awarded in person was disrespectfull toward them. He thought that people who expect high ranks to test in person were ignorant of the way high rank is issued nowadays, must be envious of the rank, and are probably criticizing the rank in an effort to increase the status of their own rank.
What about you; what is your opinion on this HOT TOPIC? Some questions:
- What is high rank? The writer says it is 4th degree and above.
- Do high ranks have to test in person in your organization?
- Should high ranks have to test in person?
- Should high ranks even have to test?
- Is it wrong to expect high ranks to test?
- Is awarding high rank by correspondence now the accepted industry norm?
6 comments:
It probably depends a lot on the discipline. In (official) ITF Taekwon-do, high rank would probably count as Master, i.e. 7th degree upwards, although other (non-ITF) TKD schools often have people calling themselves master at 5th dan. You have to test in person up to 7th degree; 8th & 9th are awarded in recognition of services to TKD, but the candidate may choose to test if they wish, although this is probably more of a demonstration than an actual test as such. Personally, I don't feel testing by correspondence could be as rigorous as testing in person.
When I was growing up, my parents always told me that it's not polite to take offense when guests in our house unknowingly broke the rules or did things which were for me not permitted, such as putting my elbows on the table or placing my napkin by my plate instead of in my lap. Correspondence vs In-Person testing is only a better/worse argument when judged from the same standpoint on all sides. I train in the ATA, which introduces new curriculum at each rank, from 9th grade white belt to 9th dan black belt. Each promotion requires a testing in person by a qualified examiner at a specified time and date. The exam is an examination of skill, ability and technique but also of personal stamina, endurance, fortitude, and composure. The physical elements can be seen over the camera, but the personal qualities displayed are equally important. The tester must prepare for the exam and sacrifice time long before and shortly after the exam for completion. The belts themselves are worthless; they might cost a few dollars to manufacture and they'll fall to pieces over a few decades. It's the personal development, learned discipline, and attained composure which is achieved in the run-up to the set exam date and location as well as the necessity to perform with the highest degree of skill and proficiency that forms the importance attached to the belt. Whether we're fighting about who should and shouldn't receive high ranks is meaningless between systems. Songahm has 9 degrees of black belt. Some styles of karate have 15 degrees of black belt. I even once heard that a style of ninjitsu had more than 20 degrees fo black belt. Even kung fu schools have adopted belt systems, and I've always been told that the chinese styles traditionally don't use belts. More, the +9 belt color system are a modern invention; I was taught that the belts were only developed ~100 years ago as a means of ranking and further developed for commercial and cosmetic reasons. Songahm is not shotokahn is not kyokushinkai is not wing tsun is not jiujitsu is not thai boxing. A black belt from School A is not the same as a black belt form School B because each school or organization has different training and organizational goals. If the goal is to develop a physically talented fighter who must undergo rigorous training to promote, then perhaps in-person testing is more appropriate, such as in the kyokushinkai karate schools. When I trained in the ITF, my instructor was a 5th degree received it not for physical performance, but for his contribution to the community and ongoing support of the national organization, where as my last instructor, a 6th degree master, had to perform a test for 6th degree, apply for mastership, become accepted, complete a year-long candidacy, fast for a week, and perform a final physical examination. Did it make one or the other a better martial artist? Probably not. But each organization has its own traditions and means or signs of accomplishment; it's not like comparing apples and oranges, it's like comparing circles and squares - it doesn't work. I think it's just like my parents told me - don't insist that other people follow your rules unless they're a member of the family. They're guests, aren't they? I don't impose my values and goals on karatekas I meet, and they don't insist that I do bareknuckle fighting to promote. I'm more concerned with discipline and the development of perfect technique; they're more concerned with personal fortitude and practical application. And some people are only concerned with competition and performance. In the end, we all have our own belt ranking systems - get it? Our own belt ranking systems. Promotion is granted by different means in different schools because not all schools hold the same values and goals. As an analogy, certain methods of testing can be likened to gay marriage: if you don't approve of gay marriages, don't get one. I haven't used this forum before, so I don't have an id, but if you think that I was unreasonable or I offended you, you're welcome to email me at jamesbuhls@yahoo.com.
What about when a guest knowingly breaks the rules in your house, would you take offense at this behavior? When a black belt that earned his or her ranks by correspondence rather than by hands-on training and testing enters your school, how much respect do you have for his or her opinion? Would you permit the person to advise or teach your students?
Which is better, a medical degree awarded by correspondence, or a medical degree awarded by direct observation of the person’s skill by other doctors? Is it wrong for me, or anyone else, to question the credentials, skills, and legitimacy of the correspondence degree? I am not insisting that any martial art has to do things my way, or any other way, I am only questioning the way that some do the things they do and the logic and reasoning they use to justify why they do things the way they do. Do you question the legitimacy of masters who claim they can kiai in a way that will knockout opponents? Your opinion seems to be, if you do not approve of improper or criminal behavior, then do not engage in it, but do not question the motives or condemn those who engage in the behavior; just let them do whatever they want to do.
When everyone thinks that, as martial artists, we should all gather round the campfire, sing Kumbaya, and love and respect one another no matter what our differences, then the public’s respect for the martial arts will decline; they will not know what to believe or who to trust and they will continue to be defrauded by pseudo-masters. There are differences, and then there is right and wrong.
The meaning of rank structure, how it differs amongst the various martial arts, its legitimacy between organizations, etc., and comparisons of the effectiveness and legitimacy of various martial arts are discussed in various topics and email responses within TKDTutor.com. The question at hand only deals with whether testing high ranks by correspondence is widespread and whether it is as legitimate as in-person testing. Of course, correspondence testing is legitimate within the organization that allows it, but is the public being confused, fooled, or even defrauded by correspondence ranks?
What is high rank? The writer says it is 4th degree and above.
It depends on the entire rank structure of the style/organization. I've seen some groups, where a 3rd degree was 'really' up there. I've seen some groups where 3rd degree was at the lower end of the scale.
Do high ranks have to test in person in your organization?
In the ATA, yes.
I know of at least two organization that will accept a video testing. ONE such organization VERY clearly specifies that it MUST be CLEAR video, and they do cross check with photos, to be sure the one requesting consideration, IS the one performing in the video.
Should high ranks have to test in person?
On that, I have not decided yet. I'm a fan of testing live, in front of a panel. On the other hand, even via video, it's not very hard to critique a good clear video performance and figure out if the testee's on the ball.
Generally, the higher the rank, the more likely I'd say that at some point, they're going to have to step out before those they lead and set the example. SOOO... Yes... It should be a public display. Whether that's just in front of their students and sent in via video, or whatever... it should not happen behind closed doors.
Should high ranks even have to test?
Three golden words. Leadership by example. YES. Without ANY doubt.
Is it wrong to expect high ranks to test?
Not at all. Why wouldn't a high rank want to perform in front of everyone? It's motivating to lower ranks, and it's a whale of a lot of fun TO perform! If it is not fun to them, then they need to be taking up crossword puzzles or something they do find fun.
Is awarding high rank by correspondence now the accepted industry norm?
There are more groups out there doing it. I still wouldn't say it's a prevailing concern. Most organizations do not at this time.
That said, I don't object to the concept of things like video testing, IF there are reasonably defined and published standards.
In my mind, NO organization's rank certificate, is more than nice paper and a keepsake for the one whose name is on it. If anyone comes to ME, bearing even an ATA certificate, I'm still going to evaluate their performance. Just like the military... rank may have its privleges, BUT, it doesn't mean the wearer knows their butt from a hole in the ground.
I feel the same way about belts. My black belt means a lot to me. That's as far as it goes. My belt and 7 bucks gets me dinner and coffee at the local diner and I get change back. No belt and 7 bucks does exactly the same thing.
I don't expect anyone else to give me credence because of my belt. It's only cloth. My own words and deeds will and SHOULD be the real defining factor, as to how much or little esteem I am granted.
I've never met a General, or a Police Chief, or Fire Chief in my 39 years, whose rank gave them a 'free pass'.
If they were idiots, they were idiots with, or without the rank. If they were on the ball, I didn't care what their rank was.
Competance trumps rank where I come from. I've met white belts that amazed me, and I've met higher ranks that were dumber than the boards they were trying to break.
Today, there are schools that are fantastic that are not part of ANY county, state, national or international organization. There always have been. There are great organizations that have great schools too now.
In short, its not the paper, nor the belt, nor the certification, nor the method of certification. It's the human being that presents themselves in front of you, and what they are made of that really counts. Is it a 'real' black belt in front of you? Don't ask... open your eyes and judge for yourself. The real proof, is in the pudding, and largely, even THAT is a matter of personal opinion.
What is high rank? The writer says it is 4th degree and above.
---
The ATA agrees with that concept. Up to 3rd Degree, a student can test for rank within a school as long as the testing panel has sufficient people of required rank on it. To test for 4th Degree and above, the student must appear in person and test before the International Testing Committee.
===================================
Do high ranks have to test in person in your organization?
--------
In the ATA, yes. Everyone tests. Period.
===================================
Should high ranks have to test in person? Should high ranks even have to test? Is it wrong to expect high ranks to test?
--------
As has been pointed out earlier, there is a concept of Leadership By Example. I tell my students that yes, I am a 5th Degree and an instructor, but bottom line, I am a student just like they are. The stuff I study is just a little more complex. :-) But when the time comes, I have to go out on that floor and show my stuff, just like they do.
===================================
Is awarding high rank by correspondence now the accepted industry norm?
--------
I don't know. I hope not.
Every person who is interested in advancing a rank should test and in person. In my opinion a martial artist should be able to display they are worthy of their new rank by showing they mastered their previous rank. Who decided because your now on a certain level you are above testing? If all along I've tested in person why shouldn't I be given the opportunity to show I've gained knowledge and made improvements since my last exam.imyfbtst
Post a Comment