Dean wrote:So you believe you cannot fail in drills?
Perhaps the drills need to be more dynamic?
Perhaps the drills teach you too much how and not enough why.
I have improved because of freeplay and light sparring.
If you go back to the example of dagger play versus sword, how will your free play teach you?
I have improved because of freeplay and light sparring. It has given me the incentive to improve and stick with what I find a bit dull. To work through the problems that prevented me from learning using the Oriental style.
What's wrong with looking at developmental theory and general concepts of learning and recognise the importance and value of play?
The timing is what is wrong. You were given the theories and sound principle to work to. This gave you a solid foundation on which to try your creative talents. The value of play comes from having a firm structure to begin with.[/quote]
No it doesn't. The value of play is a safe environment that can allow you experiment and improve. It helps develop new schemata and allows new information to be accommodated. You don't need to be skilled to benefit from play.
I would suggest you have had training as a tester however it may not have been formal.
I would state that I have not had any training.. my informal training was a development of freeplay. If you're going to tell me "no it wasn't"- you'd better have a damn good reason to call me a liar.
If your testing regime was not of a set standard, then your employer would reap pecuniary punishment.
Of a set standard..pecuniary.... you're talking managementese. Please, try to use plain English instead of hiding behind jargon. I don't use long words to try and bludgeon people into submission. Your condescending tone suggests to me you need to hide behind polysyllabic outbursts.
The set standard is produce a working system that works.
Perhaps a more obvious case might suit.
Imagine you are surgeon, how does free play effect your employer, and possibly the patient? Again note the surgeon has passed a formal testing procedure.
Perhaps you are in medical school, how does free play effect your employer, and a live patient?
That would be perhaps a more specific case
. Not a more obvious. Now I would like to say you have said ALL. If it really is all, you could explain where freeplay has harmed the company I work for without the assertion that I am either a liar or ignorant.
My formal training as a trainer, and evaluator.
Is it Turtles all the way down?
My formal training is sounding the BS alarm.... still you have formal training as a trainer- maybe you should take some formal training as a communicator.
Nope- no sound logic there. You seek knowledge and 'perceived accuracy of translation' others seek to understand the fight.
You APPEAR to dismiss it as a tool because you want to work along what seems to be a fairly oriental model of katas and paired drills. Which is understandable, given the kind of formal training you claim you have.
I am not saying this is wrong- but I am saying that it would not work for me.
You dismiss competitions and freeplay because you cannot see who is technically the best. Others argue that how can you learn sword fighting without fighting. One is more 'logically sound' than the other.
Oh, and the video camera is your friend.. You should formally know this with your formal training.
A good teacher should be able to incorporate freeplay without feeling the need to spend 6 months teaching a student how to walk, 3 months on how to grip a sword and a month on which end goes into the bad guy.
A good trainer follows a well proven path of success. While the science of brain memory and retrieval and how to train people is still improving, there is little or no evidence to suggest that training centres have poor performance. [/quote]
If you don't respect me enough to try plain English, don't expect me to fall for even more managementese. You're not talking to a bunch of plebs here.
Besides I did not say trainer... I said teacher. A good teacher, teaches.
You can take your well proven path of success and inflict your milgram of pavlovian training on someone else.
There is considerable evidence that the established present education system has been slow to adapt. Most reports have suggested for them work quite well for less than ¼ of the population, moderately less for some others, and poor for kinaesthetic learners. I suggest kinaesthetic learners would do well in most sword classes.
And what has this got to do with the value of freeplay- a tool that can easily work on both a motivational and analytical level?
"Rapier is in my opinion a weapon ideally suited for nit picking, pedantic, perfectionist control freaks" - Guy Windsor