Quote:
Originally Posted by Dent
I heard this week that one organization held an international grading recently, and about 60% of the candidates passed. Should it have been more, or less? Was 60% ok because of the standard of the group, or was there a greater issue internationally?
|
With an exception to last grading, I think 60% is about how many passes in our organization when it comes to the higher grades (brown/black belt). In addition to the many who are denied attending grading. In my opinion, this is not because the students are poorly trained, but because it's hard to pass, as it should be. It keeps the standard high.
Quote:
Originally Posted by tmd
If the tests were harder, if you didn't think they desplayed the right character for the next grade and didn't let them grade automatically based on attendence would this make them weaker or stronger?
|
Individuals might be weaker, but overall the group will become stronger when you set the standards high. When it comes to higher junior grades (I'm thinking around green belt and up) the instructor should expect more from his students. Those who are not good enough, simply should not grade. If that takes the motivation out of them, and if that make some of them quit, then so be it. Ideally the instructor should try to motivate the students differently, and tell them that gradings are a secondary product to their progress. It's hard to turn a child down over and over, but it is for the best.