Inquiry Method - Interesting info for coaches

[Aesopian]

I'll be back probably later this year. I want to get to the Portland gym too. Yeah, it was Chapman. I did as well as I could have hoped against a black belt. He was a really friendly guy (like everyone at the gym) and was happy to help me in any way he could. I look forward to meeting up when I'm in town.

[Cojofl]

I've trained in an sbg place the whole time I've done bjj, so I've learned in large part through this system. I also take a few judo classes from time to time in college. While I find the I method effective for groundwork, i find it less so for standup. I think there is two major reasons for this. Firstly, in judo the the basics can take a long time to learn, people need longer to develop the basic toolbox throws which are needed to use the I method . Also I think the standup range has a lot less constaints than groundwork (movement, positional restrictions etc) and beginners have difficulty coping with picking an option among so many viable alternatives. It probably also has a lot to do with me not learning my standup grappling via the I method. All that being said, I find the I method very useful for standup once people have 2/3 yrs of experience under their belts.

[LCDforMe]

Originally Posted by Aesopian

I'll be back probably later this year. I want to get to the Portland gym too. Yeah, it was Chapman. I did as well as I could have hoped against a black belt. He was a really friendly guy (like everyone at the gym) and was happy to help me in any way he could. I look forward to meeting up when I'm in town.

Sounds like you had fun. PM me sometime if you got questions/are coming into town.

[Luther]

Cojofl, good observation about the stand-up game.

Originally Posted by Aesopian

"Drills the fundamentals endlessly" removes these problems, especially when the Isolation stage and progressive resistance is used extensively. The Inquiry Method can then be used to solve problems that come up, even if the instructor doesn't really know the solution.

"Drill the fundamentals endlessly"

I wonder if by "fundamentals" they mean a core of techniques, a core of principles, or both. Do they have a "core syllabus"? If so, it would be interesting to know what techniques they consider fundamentals to be drilled extensively (with I-method I think).

I've got some more information on SBG coaching that I'll post, since I think everyone could benefit from it, especially the guys who are running their own clubs.

Yes, I'm very interested, and looking forward it. Thanks.

[Cojofl]

Originally Posted by Luther

I wonder if by "fundamentals" they mean a core of techniques, a core of principles, or both. Do they have a "core syllabus"? If so, it would be interesting to know what techniques they consider fundamentals to be drilled extensively (with I-method I think).

By fundamentals they mean both, but from what I can gather principles are focused on more relative to other places. I don't think a core syllabus exists, couldn't be sure though.

[Caddock]

Great thread Aesopian. Makes it worth the visit to find these nuggets of gold. Matt had a few articles up at http://aliveness101.blogspot.com/ that I enjoyed reading too.

[scorcho]

Interesting read. However, I also think it is important not to over analyse or over structure training.

[Cojofl]

Originally Posted by scorcho

Interesting read. However, I also think it is important not to over analyse or over structure training.

Why?

I personally like to understand why I'm training as I do.

[Aesopian]

I must warn you, everything I say below is based on speculation, since I've never had a chance to run the Iquiry Method on any sizeable group. But I love speculating so here we go.

The most common concern I run into when sharing the inquiry method with people is that they don't think it would really benefit a white belt, since they lack a base of knowledge to draw from and don't have enough experience to "make up a good technique". I understand the concern and agree that more experienced people will have more potential for improvisation and invention in making up solutions. But they need to keep in mind that one of the main purposes of inquiry education is for the teacher to "gauge their success by change in students' inquiry behaviors (with the characteristics of 'good learners' as a goal)". So "amazing new techniques" aren't what's important, but the fostering of the student's ability to think for themselves and solve their own problems, which can be done at any level.

But at the same time, I still think it'd be good for the student to develop something that's going to work for themselves and hopefully others, and I think the teacher can aid this without feeding answers or telling students "that will work, that won't work".

When people hear that the students are supposed to come up with their own techniques and solutions, they tend to think of all these crazy ninja moves and white belts spazzing out and making up senseless junk. I could see that happening if you just told some guys to "make up some stuff", but that's not how inquiry method is run. As a teacher, you have the ability to present the initial problem, and so you could give them one that you feel matches their level.

For example, I wouldn't ask a bunch of white belts "How do you sweep from guard?" and expect them to come up with sweeps all by themselves. But I might ask them "How can you keep posture when someone is pulling you down by your collar and opening your elbow?" This presents a specific problem that is more appropriate for their level of experience and doesn't leave room for too much zaniness. The solutions they come up with might be as simple as "Make sure I look up so I don't lean forward, and turn my elbow in." Or maybe it'll be something else. But I doubt it's going to be anything beyond a fundamental, and if it is, I expect it will get pounded out in Isolation.

While working over this issue on my own, I came up with another flow chart. The main difference is that I added an Introduction phase to the start, to allow the teacher to have greater control of the topic being addressed, but still allow the students to work it over with inquiry.

[Bubble Boy]

Interesting stuff. It does seem like a lot of the theories already exist intuitively. As you said Aesopian, most judo, bjj, grappling schools already incorporate some form of the I-Method into their training system.

Not all, however, work the Inquiry Method into the mix.

I've spent a good deal of time observing wrestling classes. The local wrestling coach utilizes absolutely zero percent inquiry method. Zero. It's his way or the highway. They are a very, very tough team, and they regularly produce state champs. It is literally like a boot camp in his wrestling room, a very intense environment.

On the other hand, the University Judo club I sometimes travel to has a unique approach to class instruction that seems to be related to the inquiry method. Last month we did this:
After warming up, the instructor had eveyone gather around (there were about 50 people on the mat, novice to national champs) and he had one guy turtle extremely defensively. Then he had the brown belts and black belts (and a couple visiting bjj guys who were obviously advanced) each demonstrate how they would crack the turtle, several times, with explaination. Questions were encouraged. The novice students were asked to observe and pick one they liked the best, and then pick a partner and practice (drill). If they had further questions they were to approach the guy who demonstrated it for tips.
Afterwards there was a brief: "So what discoveries did you guys make? Anyone come up with something new?" conversation. If someone had found something interesting in the drills they demdonstrated it now.
To finish up the class we rolled newaza and focused on our little turtle techniques (so this entire class was set up on a I-Method framework (Introduce, Isolate, Integrate).

I suppose I see benefit in both (the wrestling room drill sergeant vs the warm and fuzzy combuya inquiry method), and perhaps the wrestling coach can get away with it because he's got highschoolers who already have all the basic techniques in the bag, and he's pretty much 90% doing integration stuff with them. I could personally never train in an environment like that, except for perhaps in short bursts every now and then. The inquiry method seems much more productive and progressive.