I chose the name "Touchstone" for my school to express my philosophy of teaching.
Webster's defines "Touchstone" as:
Therefore, TOUCHSTONE MARTIAL ARTS is dedicated to the proposition that it is of paramount importance to:
While that might sound like something no one would oppose (and none do so publicly), the lack of standards, or the failure to require adherence to them, is in fact one of the greatest problems in the martial arts community in general and in the Wing Chun community in particular. It is those who lack standards who give everyone else a bad name whether they are instructors or beginning students.
Most instructors fall into one of two categories: they either (1) use the traditional teaching method and format or (2) they cater to the "fast food" desires of some students, resulting in what is commonly referred to as a "belt mill". Any middle ground between these two positions is usually occupied by those sliding from the former to the latter (this discussion presumes the instructor is qualified. Unqualified instructors are another, though related, problem). There is one other category: instructors who uphold traditional standards but look for ways of overcoming the negative effects some traditional methods cause many students..
Too many instructors believe they must "push" students along, teaching them new things before they've demonstrated acceptable skill with regard to the earlier lessons. This is done to keep them as students because these instructors fear losing them if traditional methods are followed. These instructors believe that most students don't have the discipline to persevere. While that is probably true, catering to the lowest common denominator (at least to the most impatient or undisciplined) is, at best, a formula for mediocrity.
Certainly most people will not have what it takes to stick with the traditional training program. Historically, 50% to 70% of students drop out during the first six months. That fact dooms to the financial doldrums an instructor who upholds traditional methods. But is that a valid reason for lowering one's standards? Instructors who do so argue it's a necessity for business reasons. My observation has been that when standards are lowered, students eventually experience greater frustration because they can't make sense of the art and therefore can't make it work for themselves. They reach a point where their bad habits and poor foundation become insurmountable obstacles to progress. The justification for lowering standards, improving business, is therefore ultimately hurt by the action taken to supposedly enhance it.
It is a rare student who can admit he has bad habits and who will go back and relearn the lessons glossed over. Most egos just won't tolerate such an admission, not to mention the frustration of essentially starting over. Teaching students who have layer upon layer of bad habits is also very frustrating for the instructor. Intermediate and advanced students with bad habits set a poor example for junior students who seem to pick up bad habits easier than good one ones. This makes the instructor's job much more difficult and adds unnecessary frustration. In a relatively short time, such a problem can become so bad it cannot be corrected and the instructor actually loses control of the class. All this because we (both students and instructors) lack patience and self-discipline, and are willing to trade short-term gratification for ultimate competence (doesn't this just sound like every other area of life).
In addition to all of the above, I have concluded that the traditional method of instruction has an intended element of frustration built into it. In fact, I really believe the old-time masters devised a methodology that, while taught openly, obfuscated and kept the "golden level" of their art hidden to all but the "chosen few". Those few are chosen not by anyone in particular, though an instructor could certainly take more time with a favorite student, but rather they are chosen by the action of the process sifting out all but those who respond correctly and who have that "certain something". That certain something is a quality which enables students to comprehend in spite of the process.
That is why there are so few good Wing Chun instructors today. Just because someone learned all the forms and drills from a famous teacher, or just because he is a tough guy and a good fighter, doesn't mean he has the qualities which enable him to "see through the fog" to truly understand the subtlety and sophistication of this fascinating art. It also doesn't mean he can effectively communicate it to the next generation.
The purpose of that "fog" is as difficult to understand today as it is to define (most aren't even aware of its existence). Actually, it has several causes and a number of effects (which this humble work makes no attempt to comprehensively define). With regard to the intentional aspect of this problem, it should not be accepted because it's purpose is simply to weed out a certain number of students who are deemed to be unqualified based upon reasons for the most part inapplicable today. Some of those reasons relate to differences in culture, to the changing times, and to the effect those factors have upon the students who are of a distinctly different temperament today. Weeding out certain students may have been a useful thing in the "good old days" when an instructor taught his sons, a nephew, and one or two others in his living room. However today, it makes little sense (the exception would naturally be if a student were obviously unfit in some way). Besides, it frustrates me to put all that effort into a student only to see him quit, no matter the reason.
A good illustration of this problem applied to just one situation is that I can think of only one, possibly two, non-Asian kids who got to the senior level in the almost six years I ran my instructor's children's class. I can only attribute that fact to a culturally-based, family-instilled discipline present in the families of the Asian children and lacking in the families of those who didn't persevere (many of whom were also Asian but probably more "Americanized"). This factor would include both children and parents placing martial arts training high on their priority list. .
It was very apparent that there was a filtering process at work in that class resulting from the instruction but affecting students differently based upon the presence or lack of that factor (the culturally based, family-instilled discipline). However, would anyone argue that the students who dropped out didn't need the training? They actually needed it more! However, they were screened out because they didn't have the discipline to continue in a program I believe puts unnecessary stress on this weakness. The lack of the very thing they needed most from the training was used to disqualify them from participating in it. That's wrong. Correcting this and related problems is the challenge for today's concerned instructor.
I have seen other students limited in their acquisition of knowledge, (1) with regard to the level to which they could ultimately rise, or (2) frustrated to the point of quitting by their competitive nature. Some of these are "too greedy to hit," because they are unable to distinguish between learning and winning. The unfortunate result is that they get themselves beat up by their seniors and instructors who can't find any other way to address the problem. Some are too greedy for advancement, either being advanced too rapidly to their confoundment ("careful what you wish for…you may get it"), or quitting in frustration because they are not advanced. Each of these factors contribute to the development of serious bad habits which frustrate everyone involved and corrupt the art. Other students cannot give up relying upon their natural strength or speed so they can learn the "lesson that is in the feeling of the movement." That is where the essence of Wing Chun is to be found. Such students cannot put their egos aside to learn that lesson and experience that essence. They have to win at all costs, even though they lose in the final analysis in terms of the extent and depth of their knowledge. Unfortunately, many of today's instructors came from these ranks.
Therefore, the following questions must be asked:
A good analogy might be to a person who finds that he wants to go to college but who has inadequate education for the task (even though, sadly, he may possess a high school diploma). He must take remedial courses. The application of this analogy to today's average martial arts student (or potential student) is that he needs "remedial" lessons in self-discipline simply because that quality is lacking in our modern culture (lack of self-discipline is but one of several factors limiting perception).
Some will argue that all martial arts training involves starting from the beginning both in terms of technical skills and discipline. But, again, that ignores the business reality facing the instructor. Only a small percentage of applicants make it out the other end of the US Navy SEAL or British SAS training programs. However, those programs have different goals because they have a different mission. Unless a martial arts instructor intends employing his students on special operations behind enemy lines, he can afford to, and in fact should, structure his program in order to make his art available to more rather than to fewer people. Obviously, this should be done without sacrificing ultimate competence. This is not only good for the student and teacher, but for the art as well.
For some who may already have the self-discipline and mature character, it is a question of presenting an activity that they will value above others on their busy agenda. With regard to the program I've developed (described below), I hope those who join my class already possessing all the necessary positive qualities will recognize the ultimate value of this approach. Additionally, I hope they recognize the benefit of participating in what is essentially an apprenticeship instructor's program that will provide them guidance in the form of a well thought-out teaching methodology. Advanced students are appreciative of the guidance my written course syllabus provides when they assist me teaching junior students. It removes the uncertainty new instructors experience by telling them what the students know and what to teach next.
What I've done to address the very real problem of traditional training discouraging beginning students (and frustrating me) is to develop an "abridged" version of Wing Chun. This abridged version seeks as its goal to give students effective fighting skills in 8 to 12 months while omitting (temporarily) some aspects of the art which seem to be stumbling blocks for most. Included in this program are some of the very effective yet simple tactics and techniques that aren't learned by students in the traditional program for years. Blocking and striking techniques are also organized into logical forms and drills so they can be better understood and practiced. This program is 100% Wing Chun, albeit a restructured version.
This approach makes students effective fighters in a shorter time and, ultimately, leads to better overall understanding of the art because they have a better grounding in the technical and tactical aspects of Wing Chun before beginning the traditional sensitivity training. I've noticed that many (many, many, many...) advanced practitioners, who actually have some good sensitivity skills, have a serious deficit with regard to their comprehension of the technical side of Wing Chun. This affects not just their ability to apply the art, but also their ability to pass it on to the next generation. Bluntly stated, they have serious bad habits which they can't help but pass on to their students.
Sensitivity skills, developed primarily through chi sao practice, function like a missile delivery system. A missile gets a warhead to the target. The delivery system (Wing Chun sensitivity) and the warhead (Wing Chun technique) must function together at maximum efficiency to create the best offense.
My abridged program doesn't delay the training of students who continue on to the full system because everything they learn is something they will have to eventually learn anyway. This is a technique based program, emphasizing a full understanding of those techniques, with many of the traditional "sensitivity" drills left for a later time when the student is better able to appreciate them, and more likely to tolerate learning the subtleties of each.
I find a lacking in technical expertise even among my students who progressed beyond the beginner's level in the traditional method prior to implementation of my abridged program, (remember, I emphasize application drills and perfection of technique more than anyone I know). This is a criticism of me and of the traditional method, and not of them. As described below, the sensitivity training of the traditional system "sets in concrete" whatever habits students may have. It does this because to make the sensitivity work at its best, a level of "intuitive action" must be reached. At that level, the practitioner must put his mind in "neutral" and let his hands "go" on their own. It is extremely difficult to change any bad habits or incorrect knowledge once the level of intuitive action is reached. Therefore, it is of paramount importance NOT to develop bad habits. That is one of the primary goals of my abridged system - preventing the formation of bad habits in the first place so correcting them doesn't have to be such a frustration in the second place.
Ultimately, it all boils down to one simple fact: a student only has so much time. Choices must be made as to what order of instruction will be followed and which lessons will be emphasized. The traditional method tries to teach technique and sensitivity concurrently. With few exceptions, this has serious negative consequences: practitioners who are, shall we kindly say, less than "well rounded."
I have concluded that a practitioner with good sensitivity and sloppy technique is (1) practically uncorrectable because his sloppiness is primarily an interlocking series of bad habits, beginning with an undisciplined mind, (2) is intolerable as an example to junior students, and (3) is unacceptable as an assistant instructor because he is essentially incompetent to teach the subtleties of the technical side of Wing Chun due quite simply to his lack of technical comprehension.
The primary ingredient in the above-described student's emerging incompetency is his being permitted to spar too soon and/or too frequently (which of course means he was also taught just about everything else too soon and inadequately). All too often, sparring becomes the primary focus to the detriment of the basics. This occurs because sparring is addicting. That is due to several factors, competitive nature not being the least of them. While the student may want to spar, the problem that results from indulging this urge is the fault of the instructor, because he (1) gives into the student's desire, (2) because he enjoys knocking his students around (OK, it's fun - there, I've said it), an (3) he wants to see his students gain the benefits of sparring and become effective practitioners.
Sparring is very beneficial. There are things that just cannot be learned by any other method. However, it must be used in balance with the other aspects of training. There are negative "side effects" that accrue when it is done improperly and mindlessly which seems to happen more often than not. Correcting the bad habits that accrue from those "side effects" is almost impossible--prevention is the only reasonable approach. That approach is the premise of my abridged Wing Chun system.
Sparing is where a student applies his knowledge in a situation that contains (1) "live" energy and (2) unpredictability. The proper combination of these factors permit a student to train his will and his emotions to the end that he learns to control both his own and his opponent's energy flow (chi, if you must) in situations of ever increasing intensity. As the student progresses, he learns to put his mind in neutral, put his emotions aside, and use his will in a manner that could never be imagined beforehand. He learns to control the fight by controlling the energy flow between and among the participants. I could perpetuate a myth and say it's mystical, but I won't because it's not. It is the natural effect of that which is described below.
Most critically, such fantastic results are impossible without first constructing the foundation. That foundation consists of correct knowledge which must be internalized and applied intuitively at the most advanced level. If students reach the intuitive level with bad habits and poor technical knowledge, those bad habits and that poor knowledge will be "set in concrete." After that happens, correction will be as difficult as repairing a concrete slab poured over uneven ground and into poorly constructed forms. In addition to the neuromuscular problems, the main impediments are the ego and the undisciplined mind.
In order of priority, correct knowledge is composed of (1) the techniques, (2) the tactical and theoretical understanding of the art, and (3) the benefits of Wing Chun sensitivity training (lop sao, pak sao, don chi sao, seong chi sao, chi sao trapping, and Wing Chun "push hands"). Numbers 2 and 3 (the "delivery system") direct #1 (the "warhead"). All three must precede (4) the training stage of sparring, and then it (sparring) must be mixed in as the final ingredient is stirred into a culinary masterpiece (the same process must be used for each of the first three "ingredients" in their turn). If such caution is not exercised with either the culinary or martial masterpieces, they will be ruined--improperly mixed ingredients will make the food lumpy and the Wing Chun student sloppy and ineffective.
Simply stated, my abridged system produces the positive results described herein because it is based upon the principle I've found to be the essence of effective instruction: simplification of the lesson. I found this true teaching children, the elderly, the disabled, and those who learn more slowly than average. It also works on the modern American with "self-discipline deficit disorder" (SDDD) or "humility deficit disorder" (HDD).
Why has this problem gone undiagnosed and untreated for so long? Because most of us who become instructors forget one or more of several things when teaching others: (1) that we are naturally gifted in terms of motivation and/or learning abilities (if not naturally gifted, then we forget that certain someone who encouraged us and guided us over the rough spots, or at least we forget the rough spots); (2) that in spite of our natural acumen and our selective memory, we were in fact quite awkward ourselves in the beginning; and (3) that properly executed Wing Chun is quite sophisticated due to its subtle compound movements, unique energy development, and due to its tactics and techniques, most of which goes against natural tendencies. Most critically, (4) it is difficult to be patient teaching those who are struggling to comprehend, especially with those who mistakenly (read, "egotistically") believe they do comprehend, and who often have such an impenetrable "wall" of interlocking bad habits (including mental/egotistical ones) that they will not, and usually cannot, "empty their cup." Humility is often the missing ingredient in these situations (on the part of both the student and teacher).
Finally, because my abridged system is much easier for students to learn, it is therefore easier for them to immediately turn around and teach. This accomplishes two things: first, it provides the chief instructor help with the most time demanding students--beginners; and second, it exposes for self-correction a common attitude problem which is best exemplified by the statement "show me something new" (implying he has accomplished all previous lessons). The first of my 5-level abridged system addresses this problem by being fairly simple. But when students, as part of their 2nd level lesson, try to teach the techniques contained in the 1st level, they discover how little they really understand. And I don't have to worry about bruising their egos--they discover it for themselves and can now willingly dedicate themselves to the remedial lessons at this early stage of their development, applying a new attitude to future lessons.
This 5-level abridged system actually constitutes a simplified apprenticeship instructor's program wherein the principles of effective learning and teaching can be more easily developed and understood within the context of teaching an effective, albeit abridged, martial art. Essentially, what I've tried to do is "translate" this fantastic martial art from 18th century Chinese culture to 21st century American culture.
If the reader would please take the time, I would greatly appreciate responses to the following questions*:
Questions for instructors:
Questions for students (instructors are welcome to respond to these also):
*Please email any response to these questions to sakaishi@hotmail.com.
Thank you for your time and input.
Michael Nedderman
Page maintained by Thomas Sakaishi. Created: 9/7/98 Updated: 7/28/05