Aikido
Learning Curve
(Extracted from Aikido-L)
Date: Wed, 3 Apr 2002 13:36:21 +0200
From: Kjartan Clausen
Subject: Aikido learning curve...
I was reading 'Hyperspace' the other day and read that the amount of
knowledge about everything is doubling every 30 years or so, which of course
made me think about Aikido.
What do people think the Aikido learning curve is?
Is it a geometric progression? Exponential? Do we learn more about Aikido
the first few years or after 20 years?
--
Kjartan Clausen Aikido is Origami with people instead of paper (tm)
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 3 Apr 2002 04:17:58 -0800
From: Greg Jennings <gregs_shell_account@YAHOO.COM>
Subject: Re: Aikido learning curve...
Hi Kjartan. Long time, no exchange of bytes.
My own learning curve seems to be a kind of step
function. I.e., Flat for awhile, a small vertical
jump followed by flat again.
I think the first years/later years question depends
on the person. I've seen people top out in lower kyu
grades(1) and I hear stories about people whose aikido
blossoms late in life or after a strength-robbing
injury/illness.
(1) I've seen a couple. They didn't stay. After a
couple of years of no progress, they got frustrated
and left. Mostly, it's a relief. It seemed that it
was personal issues that were holding them back. They
were NOT a joy to have in the dojo.
Best Regards,
=====
Greg Jennings
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 3 Apr 2002 07:31:08 -0800
From: jake williams
Subject: Re: Aikido learning curve...
I'm delurking because I actually have something to say
about this :)
I was reading a book about synchronicity(sp?) a few
years ago and it presented the theory that once
something has been done, it is easier and faster to do
in the future. The example that the book brought up
was the growth of crystals in a labratory. Each
succesive time that the crystals were grown, the
process went faster, even when they were grown in labs
across the Atlantic from each other. The scientists
could find no good explanation for this. The book also
said that this theory could be applied to learning. I
have had conversations with one of my instructors
about this topic, and he said that the new generation
is learning at a much greater rate that he did when he
first started, and he brought up the theory I
mentioned before. Interesting, huh?
Jake
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 3 Apr 2002 10:46:45 -0500
From: Mike Bartman
Subject: Re: Aikido learning curve...
At 01:36 PM 4/3/02 +0200, Kjartan Clausen wrote:
>I was reading 'Hyperspace' the other day and read that the amount of
>knowledge about everything is doubling every 30 years or so, which of course
>made me think about Aikido.
Yeah? Makes me wonder how they know that...
>What do people think the Aikido learning curve is?
>Is it a geometric progression? Exponential? Do we learn more about Aikido
>the first few years or after 20 years?
It depends who's teaching. It depends on how much time you spend learning,
and not just on the mat...thinking about it and using things you've learned
in everyday life counts to some extent too.
It even depends on what you mean by "Aikido". Do you mean just the
techniques that you get tested on? Or do you include internalizing the
principles so that you invent techniques as needed, use of "verbal Aikido",
resolution of the ego that often makes people fight when there's no real
need for it, alterations of personal outlook, and other things that can
happen when you study Aikido? How do you quantify "Aikido knowledge" so
that you can chart it to see what shape your progress is?
Or do you, like me, just look at how you were last year and compare it to
how you are today and ask, "am I making progress or not?" and base your
decision on whether to continue on that and not worry about the shape of
the learning curve?
-- Mike "a flatter curve than most I expect" Bartman --
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 4 Apr 2002 10:05:54 -0500
From: "Drysdale, Alan E." <drysdalea@XCH-BSCO-05.KSC.NASA.GOV>
Subject: Re: Aikido learning curve...
jake said:
>I was reading a book about synchronicity(sp?) a few years ago and it presented
the theory that once something has been done, it is easier and faster to
do in the future. The example that the book brought up was the growth of
crystals in a labratory. Each succesive time that the crystals were grown, the
process went faster, even when they were grown in labs across the Atlantic from
each other. The scientists could find no good explanation for this.
Sounds like bad science to me.
>The book also said that this theory could be applied to learning. I have had
conversations with one of my instructors about this topic, and he said that the
new generation is learning at a much greater rate that he did when he first
started, and he brought up the theory I mentioned before. Interesting, huh?
This I believe. I think the standard of teaching in aikido is better than
it was when I came up through the ranks, when most teaching seemed to be of
the demonstrate a few times, students practice what they thought they saw
type. If you asked a question, you got called out and smashed around a few
times. (This is the same way I was "taught" basketball, and I hate it to
this day.)
Alan
------------------------------
Last updated on 13 Sep 2002