View Single Post
Old 03-04-2002, 09:14 AM   #14
Richard Harnack
Dojo: Aikido Institute of Mid-America
Location: Maplewood, Missouri
Join Date: Oct 2000
Posts: 137
Offline
The mistake in the assumptions about testing

There is an underlying invalid assumption about kyu testing - that there is an "objective standard" to which everyone's kyu test can be compared.

The least standard is to set minimum number of hours of training. However, it is up to the student to practice and train while on the mat during these hours.

As an instructor, I know what constitutes a "fair" exam in comparision to an "excellent" exam, and I generally encourage, cajole, hint at, brow beat, my students to challenge their abilities in their training. However, a "fair" exam still passes, though they may sit in rank a while longer before their next exam. An "excellent" exam passes and sometimes is "jumped" a rank because of their skillfulness.

In terms of dan exams, anyone who seriously thinks nidan is a high rank has never taken a sandan exam. As to "politics" being involved in the higher ranks, this is somewhat true. However, if the person does not do anything in their organization to further promote their organization, they cannot really complain about not being elevated past their current rank. I am aware of some highly regarded sensei who are happy at their present rank and seek only to perfect their techniques. To such, peer recognition sometimes comes, sometimes not, they really don't care. Neither should their students.

In sum, there are no objective standards, only practice.

Last edited by Richard Harnack : 03-04-2002 at 09:17 AM.

Yours In Aiki,
Richard Harnack
  Reply With Quote