Teachers and testing

By Charles Aarons, Aikido Takayama

I would like to share my thoughts on teaching and testing with all of you as it continues to evolve for me as an instructor.

As teachers we have a strong moral responsibility to not only disseminate knowledge learned from our senior instructors, but to insure that this knowledge is embedded firmly in the technique and performance of our students in their practice and testing for proper growth. All of us have had students who wish to test but weren't ready, and we have also had students who did not want to test and were ready. What to do? I feel very strongly that there must be a standard performance level that must be met by each student that includes the best execution of technique possible during testing, as well as a history of dedicated practice, proper manners and etiquette, and a growing knowledge of our art that derives from private study time on the part of each student.

Having said that, there seem to me to be many variables that come to the surface during the discussions among chief instructors and assistant instructors when testing time rolls around, specifically who is ready and who is not and why. Optimally, we all would like to see Olympian quality performance during a test, preceded by months of grueling training and deep personal study. But the truth is, each student has a different story. Many have family issues, work issues, health or emotional issues and a myriad of other variables that must be taken into consideration. Do we ignore these and stand firm, saying "you must meet our stringent requirements or you cannot test?" Or do we take these variables into consideration when we evaluate a student's history and record of training?

I myself feel that a teacher should have an adequate mixture of both a stern attitude towards performance in testing, mixed with an equal amount of compassion. This does not in any way mean that we should be overly lenient in grading and passing. A bar must be set for each student, and the level made higher each time to insure that he or she stretches his or her limit to improve.

But by the same token, I feel it important to look at the bigger picture in terms of the student's growth. This is where these other issues come into play. Where will they be in five or 10 years as an Aikido student or teacher? If we go by strict guidelines and deny the opportunity to test, will we kill a potentially great instructor who needs to grow into their role, or will we create a dojo of mediocre students who flounder in their practice? It's a tough question to answer for me at times.

Throughout my career, Chiba Sensei and all of our other senior instructors have shown all of the qualities that I admire in promoting the growth of students and teachers. They seem to take in consideration all of these factors during testing or promotion. During my own testing years, I can say that Jack Arnold Sensei has been both lenient and hard on me. I know full well that there were times when my performance was good and times when it was lacking. Nevertheless, a bigger picture was taken into account during my grading or promotion for my growth and the end result has been, for me, the chance to become the best instructor I can be and to be the embodiment of those above qualities that I not only respect, but feel are necessary to be a good teacher.

So, in closing, when we test our students and/or promote them, I feel it is important to dwell upon the factors that make each student what they are; their technical skill level, their personal problems or issues, their dedication to growth and most of all their passion for our art, Aikido. This represents, to me, a level of maturity and compassion in a good instructor.