Mindset of an martial artist in academic teaching

Students teaching each other

Learning is not just a skill, but also an attitude. 

The mindset of a teacher in an evolving martial art is that of a relationship where both student and instructor are venturing in a common effort to excel. The training place, the dojo, is a safe place to make mistakes and the instructor-student relationship is based on creating independence by learning how to learn. The Asian-influenced philosophy that is nourishing mindfullness in learning, with the aim to improve skills, can seem somewhat reversed compared to Western thinking that dominates in academia.

A typical class room or dojo

In academia, a lot of time is spent on adsorbing a lot of information with a presumption that students know how to process this raw information. This stands in contrast to the thinking in martial arts, where possessing a text with an important technique would be considered useless or misleading without a moral understanding. The written information of a technique in martial arts cannot be grasped unless one is able, with assistance of a teacher, to contextualize and animate it and appreciate its synergy with one’s present moral and intellectual understanding. With age and experience, the understanding continues to grow. Though the Asian-inspired thinking in teaching is hundreds of yeas old it is only now beginning to gain popularity in Western academia. Alvin Toffler and Roy Leighton are among a few who strongly speak in favour of replacing the overall understanding of education in a modern society from an obsolete form based on memorization, were information is available to anyone anywhere, with the ability of applying the knowledge available.

Wonderful teacher-student interaction when teaching in Japan

As an university teacher with a background in martial arts, the academic education seems incomplete by allowing students to pass a higher education by displaying a mere ability to answer written or oral tests as expected, without simultaneously educating the person how to apply the knowledge for something good.

To become a good instructor in martial arts, the teacher needs to be a leader among equals: respecting the students while destroying his or hers own ego. Developing skills in academia to a higher level (as it is the goal in martial arts) is possible if the teacher embodies the passion for the subject and insists on communication with students. This contact is based on a mutual respect and striving for excellence by example. 

A thought example. Imagine attending a martial art class where you for 45 minutes listened to a power point presentation of a teacher explaining how you should move and behave. Would you come back for the next lesson? Now imagine a university lecturer who takes the students somewhere relevant and interesting for the subject, shows and explains about the subject as examples appear or in response to questions, insist student explore and use their senses. Would you come back for that next lesson? Perhaps even go home and read about questions that appeared in the discussion?

Today's class is under water

Promoting passion and healthy self-criticism above long-term purely academic aims, such as degrees, might also result in overall better-doing students. In addition, constant self-reflecting empowers students to adapt to inevitable changes in life and constantly reflect on their roles in collaborations. One aim of higher education should be that the students would find they have an excess of passion and begin teaching back on their own initiative - thus showing they have developed a heart for learning. 

Students teaching and learning, and smiling!

Link: Bujinkan Estonia Tartu Dojo

Where is the passion (in science and education)?

I recently had the pleasure to speak with one of my old course mates from university. He took the path of a high profiled career, working in several countries and continents under top-researchers in cutting edge micro-biology. I took a path of a different country too, but settled with a very modest income, work on my own a lot of the time, but with huge freedom to persue interesting subjects with relevance.


It was thus surprising to hear from him that he felt that his work was, indeed cutting edge and just what politicians and industry are singing about, but dull and unsatisfactory on the personal level due to the hollow feeling of: yes, this was interesting, but probably no living thing improved their life from those millions invested. I have been left with that question in my head too when reading high profiled articles: "OK, scientific approach, but so what?" But hearing the same coming from the horses mouth is interesting. Often I felt a bit off the track myself because my research often feels very low tech when I try to solve a practical problem or fill a large gap in the basic knowledge. I feel like I am slowing myself down since the top dogs scream for so called "cutting edge" research. As if complexity or more expensive studies per default makes better results.

I can not myself understand why I need to build a skyscraper with a hovercraft when the foundation is obviously missing and requires a shovel.

My friend and I began a discussion of how come it is that so few of us (molecular biologists) actually become researchers (only 5 to my knowledge of our group of our year.) What was it that made us want to become researchers?
It was not a specific course we could conclude. It was not because there was particular interested supervisors for our 2 year research project in the M.Sc. program. It was not the prospects of finding a dictated Ph.d.-project or an interesting job (those were bleak.) But it was our sense of "we can make a difference" and passionate teachers - THAT made a difference! Or in short just "passion!"

It seems so obvious but I was a bit surprised anyhow.

It is about individuals caring about what they do, and do it. 

It is because it is not what is in the universities or what is valued among research most places. No wonder the industry or society as a whole do not get problem solving academics if they are demotivated and basically looking for something else to do when they are finally through the university.

So, perhaps it is not very useful to measure in (number of) articles published, pages read, the skill to take written exams, and number of passed students per year. Perhaps students finding and trying to solve projects they care about within the frame of their education with motivated and flexible teachers would get different results.

Just an idea.  


I am at the point where I teach a bit.  Perhaps I can help breaking the cycle a bit by being an interested supervisor inspiring the next generation feeling they can make a difference. Gotta try!

One major funding agency that seems to have understood the above is Welcome Trust (UK) who states:

We believe passionately that breakthroughs emerge when the most talented researchers are given the resources and freedom they need to pursue their goals.

 In addition to funding people rather than projects they fully and openly support Open Access and data sharing of research as a policy! 

Bravo.

(I leave you with Black Eyed Peas similar question of do you practice what you teach: "Where is the Love?")

Educational Blocks - Amazing what We do not Know

In my highschool advanced physics class of my final year, I asked my physics teacher while working with thermodynamics: "Aren't there a device that can make electricity of heat (explaining that I did not mean heating something, but heat itself)?" I never forget the look on my teaches face, I could see he struggled with himself to put his words in a way where he would not wound me in my ignorance (I liked my physics teacher, he is a good person). He told me kindly that if anyone would ever invent such a device they would be filthy rich. I naturally interperted this answer as a "no".

It is not until now, during my investigations for this blog, I know that this device were invented years earlier than my question to my teacher. This device was developed by Dennis Lee and his team and went into production in 1984 originally ass a low temperature phase change system (any weather) for producing heat. It was named The Alternative and is one of the technologies that actaully came into production and use in USA, and as it claimed. It was a little later that is device was discovered to produce energy as well with some modifications involving a modified Sterling engine, originally invented by Dr Robert Stirling in 1816. The device however went out of production in a competitive struggle with athoroties and cooperations that I will let the reader investigate themselves, since it is hard to present it objectivly. Read for yourselves (1, 2) about this product. The short story is that the inventor had to go to jail for selling the device on some very odd charges (if any).

As I wrote previously, my teacher and others teachers, have a lot of responsebility in molding our minds to be able to believe in greater advances. I am certain they do not do it intentionally. But I also had an opposite statement, to the skeptism I got in school, from a professor in the university, that opened my eyes again. When I asked him supportive questions to the class that had ended, he suprisingly said "we don't know!" I was in the begining of my studies and professors were like small gods of knowledge - how could they not know? I was curious and asked him to speculate. To this he replied: "It is amazing what we scientists do not know! That is what makes it so fun!" I can only wish more scientists, teachers and people were like him. If we do not know, it does not mean it can not exist - just that we have not discovered why it can work!