Each and every school teaches students the forms in a certain time frame. If the student were an average practitioner, how much time would you say is given between the forms? How long would it take for the average student to learn all three hand forms? What do you think the propose of have a short period verse a longer period is? I find some practitioners want the student to get a very good grasp of a level before moving on to a new stage. Others find there is no harm learning the forms quickly. What are your thoughts?
Learning the forms quickly?? then how good can you be? seriously? It is not how much you know that is important… it is how well you know it! a student should not learn a form untill he understands the previous one..
Originally posted by Patrick Gordon
[B]Howdy folks,
Each and every school teaches students the forms in a certain time frame. If the student were an average practitioner, how much time would you say is given between the forms? How long would it take for the average student to learn all three hand forms? What do you think the propose of have a short period verse a longer period is? I find some practitioners want the student to get a very good grasp of a level before moving on to a new stage. Others find there is no harm learning the forms quickly. What are your thoughts?
Patrick Gordon. [/B]
I am of two minds on teaching the forms. I have seen both approaches: a long study of each form, as Atleastimnotyou advocates, and also teaching the forms early on and letting the students thereby learn the many hands and footwork patterns so that when they progress to chi sao, they have some tools to use.
I guess I’m leaning to teaching them as quickly as the student can grasp the moves and then returning to refine the movements. I am also inclined to show some dummy hands early before formally “teaching” the dummy set.
Part of the reason I would teach as much as possible as soon as possible is to keep motivation and interest high and with luck, eliminate some of the high drop-out rate that one sees as students are brought along at a slow mastery learning pace.
Neither approach would be ideal for every student, though. There is also the negative of the rapid approach in perhaps making the students too greedy, both for “technique” and not solid fundamentals, as well as for power and hitting skills. Some students like to learn full mastery at each stage before proceeding, others want it fed to them quickly. At any rate, I think it is up to the teacher to decide when the student is ready to proceed to a new level.
I’ve been training for about a year and half and have been taught SNT and the first section of CK.
When I’ve asked Yuanfen a similar question he said he was still working on getting SNT right. At most classes I attend, we (regardless of our time in WC) go through SNT… so I guess we aim to constantly improve our first form.
I practise the first section of CK to work my turning, and should be shown the rest of this form in the next few months. Personally, I don’t see the point in waiting years and years before you’re given a glimpse of the second form. (well, not unless you’re really struggling with SNT)
I think students with an apptitude should be ‘shown’ the motions… it will, after all, take us many years to ‘perfect them’.
I think that the forms should only be taught as fast as the student can handle, or slower. I would strongly disagree to teaching all the forms in a very short time frame, then going back over them to refine. The longer spent on each the better IMHO. I spent around 18 months on the first form, and near the beginning nearly lost my patience with it, but in the end I believe it was worth it. Judging by where my older brothers and sisters are, I would expect to be learning the rest of the second form over the next 18 months to 2 years
I think it should be customised to each student. A goal should be set for each form eg - SNT : body unity, CK: movement while maintaining body unity..etc and the student must be able to competently and frequently show he/she has a thorough grasp of the concepts before being allowed to progress (and not before).
Some of the more commercialised schools I know; have programs where you must go to X amount of lessons before you’re allowed to see the next stage. But why boar the student if they can do what the forms main aim is. Of course it takes a life time to perfect and refine, but I see noting wrong with giving students information if they can digest it.
Actually I have to say I think this is a problem in TCMA. There seems to be an attitude of “you don’t deserve the information” in a lot (not all) schools. How can practitioners get any good if people act all secretive about their fighting methods. Its the practice that makes people good. If some one is ready and wanting to learn then they should be taught. Other arts like boxing or even other sports all openly teach their techniques and methods; so the guy who works the hardest is the best (which is why I believe they are competent in combat compared). Its pretty ridiculous to talk in riddles and cryptic messages IMHO. The only thing I can think of, is that some people have insecurities about their skill OR feel that “well I had to work it out for myself so then everyone else should too”.
But if everyone helped each other I think it would be beneficial to the WC community as a whole, pushing the base skill level up will force a lot of people to become better at the art.
Within reason I don’t think it matters too much. The fact that Yuanfen says he is still working on SNT tells you that just because you start on CK or BJ (or in his case you are an experienced teacher) you do not stop working on the earlier forms.
I can see how moving on too quickly might lead the student to collect techniques but I don’t think that is necessarily the case. I suppose some people will inevitably use the form you know as a substitute for a ranking system - but that is their problem not necessarily one of learning the forms sooner rather than later.
Tricky one to call as all students develop at differing speeds. I would tend to teach one form in about 16 months - year and a half. However, all students practice SNT at every class. Also students are not enetered to grade unless they show proficiency and understanding in what they have learned so far.
As ive probably said before , learning shapes is pretty easy but mastering those shapes in conjunction with the principles behind them is the hard but.
HOWEVER…i fell there can be some advantages to learning some elements early. My ‘Yiu Ma’ was awful and i had real problem with it. My previous teacher showed me the first section of Chum Kil and it worked a treat. Similarly the dummy - it is atool to learn from and not a deity! Yes it will take years to understand the principles properly and to flow through the form, but i feel there is no harm in learning basics on te dummy from and early stage.
What you must also remeber is that the Wing Chun system is attritional - for e.g by the time you get to Bil Jee, we will have already used many of the forms techniques and principles. For example when teaching defence against arm locks, i show my students how to use bil sao as soon as they feel their elbow / centreline being controlled. By using yiu ma and bil sao they can recover their centre. Should they not be taught this then until 5 years down the line?!?!?
Come on guys, one of the reasons why WC is so popular for self-defence is that one can be proficient in a relatively short space of time. What we must always keep in mind is that even if we have completed the whole sytem - you never stop learning.
I think it depends on the individual student’s progress.Siu Lim Tao is containing elements of the other forms already and if a student is doing well with SLT and it’s demands,I don’t see why it should be necessary to have him wait for a long period of times.
Chum Kiu is so important and can give so much to a student concerning structure and body unity that I am inclined to say that a student should learn it as soon as he can.(IMHO)
On the other hand a lot of the Mc Kwoons like to place this air of mystery on the learning of the forms.
“No, you’re not ready for the advanced stage yet” (because you haven’t paid enough money) “but you can do an advanced ‘Course’ to learn the secrets” (at a Hugely inflated cost).
I know of one association in the UK with a hundreds of students, where only 5 or 6 have learned the jong.
I strongly believe in holding back until the student is ready, but holding out to fleece them is a far worse offence.
Wing Chun can be ‘learned’ quickly, but takes a life time to ‘master’.
I think the forms should be used to differentiate between the sihings and plebes, that they should be considered secret so that they can’t be seen by younger students and it should take AS LONG AS POSSIBLE to learn them so that Sifu may profit handsomely. Oh, yeah the mystical knife form should cost at least your first born to learn (After the obligatory 20-30 year wait, of course).
I see no problem with tailor making the time for specific students for learning the forms. I think that some folks make too much of different levels and testing for different levels. It has elements of marketing. Having said that however - how do you judge readiness? Is it
knowing sequences(?)knowing the underlying structural and functional principles involved(?) knowing how to apply them(?)
coordination and balance in appropriate motion(?). I have advanced students doing/practicing chum kiu and biu jee around beginning students so the latter get a sense of where they are heading. Sections of chum kiu and biu jee and dummy can be used for drills and devlopment. But for teaching the full chum kiu and specially biu jee—the teacher needs to have a keen sense of the students readiness. If the student does not show the coordination, balance,
softness and sinking and clarity in the slt— how will throwing in chum kiu help? If they dont have the basic punch down right- how will various turning punches be developed except by importing bad habits? The old adage is a good one- “When the student is ready-the teacher will come”.
That’s why I said “As soon as he can”
BTW, I feel some places are using the forms as ritualistic passages of some sorts or as guardians of the gates!..Is that the money factor or the quality concern?..
Sure, marketing & fortune-cookie secrecy play a role here, but so does safety- in karate, you could not safely teach board-breaking to a 2-day student, so they’ll look for readiness and development the same as we.
I suppose in WC it would be similar to looking for good-enough leg development to handle the stresses of turning, sufficient relaxation to engage in chi sao, etc.
The difference is to look for what is ‘necessary versus sufficient’, I guess. A stable stance in turning is necessary to do CK right, but it is sufficient to know about and perform turning correctly at least sometimes in order to learn it. How soon, tho? Don’t know. Could be dependent on goals of the teacher- does he want ‘proper development’ or someone rapidly trained that he/she can chi sao with? It happens, after all.
OTOH, this is one of the annoying but good things I tend to like about CMA- you get nowhere till you do the work, so it’s earned. This thread brings up another question: does wing chun have any higher a dropout rate than other arts? if so, why?
I will base teaching the student Chum Kiu on a few requirements.
They are able to do their Siu lim tao very well
They can express their SLT motions well in their chi sau
they have a good attitude.
If the student shows they have been able to absorb the form and its application, I feel they are ready for the next form. As for a good attitude. I am not going to waste my time on a pri!#. Although, I don’t have to worry about a difficult student because they usually don’t stick around since they are not getting what the want. My sifu says, a teacher will attract similiar types of people, they relate. With this in mind, all my students are fantastic individuals, just look at Old Jong.
If the Siu Lim Tao is poor, so will their Chum Kiu. If the fisrt two forms are good, you cannot have a poor third.
I have been doing WC for about 2.5 years. I know all 3 empty hand forms and we actually have another short empty hand form. However, I think when to show a student a form depends on that students abilities and understanding of principles. For example, in CK I notice that I am not always completely balanced on the lan saos with stance turning and the kick at the end before the gum saos (tu gerk?) is not quite correct. But at least I realize this and pay attention every time I do it or an application of it. Similarly, in BJ I feel off-balanced with the kwai jarns and I pay close attention to correcting this. Sifu shows us some applications from the forms as we progress, we learned seung gan sao very early on as a deflection of a roundhouse kick. Had we not had the opportunity to attend a seminar by Alan Lamb teaching BJ, I would not have learned it. But, I had demonstrated the dedication to learn WC and was in the “advanced” class and was able to go, so I was lucky. Sifu is focusing on footwork at the moment and coordination between hands and feet. I’ve seen only the tip of the iceberg, which only makes me want to train more as I see how pieces are just added here and there to what you already know and have been practicing and now you have more options.
Brilliantly complex and simple at the same time.
