Keith Larman

FWIW over the last few years there has been a push underway within our organization to implement teacher certification. Up until the attempt to implement certification it was really up to each dojo to decide who could teach what and when. There are a lot of issues in our particular case that muddied the waters, so to speak, so we've had issues. One in particular is the impression many have that somehow being awarded a shodan meant the person is okay to teach. I'm not exactly sure where that impression came from, but some did believe that and believed it quite strongly. Me, coming from a background of testing and skills measurement, well, I find that ludicrous. The reality is that only some people teach well. And getting to a demonstrated skill level doesn't mean one can transmit those skills to others.

Of course the next issue becomes how to go about it. And oddly enough the way we did it before (which essentially left it up to each dojo to decide who among their own was qualified to teach) probably worked fairly well in some sense of the word. What it did was allowed the local ostensibly "most qualified" person to decide who could teach. And they could base that on their impression of their teaching ability, skills, results, etc. Since this is such a "hands-on" IHTBF kinda deal it really does make some sense to do it that way.

The problem, of course, is that as an organization grows and you are trying to keep some standardization as to "what" it is you're teaching from location to location you need to implement something to get a more consistent approach to teaching. Which in many cases means instructor certification. So in our case they implemented checklists for those in charge at each dojo to go through for various levels of certification. The higher the certification the more stringent the requirements, such as having their teaching observed and evaluated by shihan for instance.

My feeling on all of this is actually rather complex. In a small group it really should be up to the top people to simply indicate who should teach. As it grows if the organization wants to keep some degree of consistency they really do need to come up with a certification protocol of some sort as it becomes too difficult for one person to fill that role. I personally think certification should be separate but somewhat related (i.e., a shodan is going to top out as an assistant teacher) to rank.

Teaching ability is sometimes quite different from the skill in the art itself. Sure, there are very talented shodan out there. And I'm sure someone is going to raise the objection that super-duper shodan Bob over hear is an exceptional teacher with amazing abilities and he never pursued higher rank so he should have a higher certification than allowed by his rank. To nip that objection in the bud, that's actually a criticism of the ranking system rather than a criticism of the certification. If everything is done correctly I think it is a good thing as rank and teaching ability, while somewhat related and certainly interdependent in some ways, are actually two different factors.

But underlying assumption to this sort of discussion is that the certification system is itself coherent, well thought out, and implemented consistently. If it is then you have the very best people giving out those teaching "licenses" if you will. The idea is to avoid the idea of the certification as a sort of "collecting pins" but instead have it as a set of high hurdles that are meaningful.

If you look at many koryu arts without ranks many simply have different levels of "teaching permissions" handed down. So someone can teach the first "level" of arts as a first step. The "ranking" of sorts is along these lines and ideally should reflect both the person's mastery of the art as well as their ability to pass it along to the next student, at least at the level they're at.

FWIW.