I think the main difference between east and west is to do with learning not teaching. In the east people still expect to learn for themselves; in the west, where the nanny state has reached every level of every country, too many people assume the onus is on the state/teacher to deliver. This, I gather, has been nicely captured in a scene from the latest Modern Families where a daughter's delight at getting a (US) college place turns to utter dismay when she learns she will be at college with Asians. I look forward to watching that.

The nanny situation has been acerbated in go here by two things. One is that getting a teacher has become a status symbol, like getting a personal trainer. The other is that too many westerners who fail to become pros peddle their wares as teachers - western-style teachers, unfortunately.

Of course what I say contains contentious elements, but a couple of personal experiences may illustrate why I believe in my view.

One is a friend who studied taiji, at enormous expense, with a Chinese grandmaster. After months of assiduous effort and constant repetition he was admonished by the master: "You wave hands in air. Very pretty. But not taiji." Since the master's English was very limited it was pointless asking what he meant. But my friend is stubborn and he went away and examined everything he was doing. Months later he said he suddenly "got" taiji. He went back to the master and demonstrated his form again. The master looked, nodded and said simply, "Now you go away and practise." Several years later, my friend is now a successful teacher, over 80 but looking under 60. This is using the teacher as a signpost, and not as the map, signpost, and means of conveyance all rolled into one.

The other is more directly my own experience. I played a teaching game on 4 stones with a Chinese pro. Mindful of the ever-present handicap-game commentary that Black must not roll over and play submissively, I attacked from the start. I was pushing her around and, although I lost, I felt that it was just a case of missing a final tesuji, and could/should have won. I was then rather taken aback by her comment: "You were too aggressive. I couldn't get a chance to teach you anything." This was her equivalent of "You wave hands in air. Very pretty. But not weiqi." I likewise went away and re-examined my approach, and I realised, amongst other things, that I had confused naked aggression with attacking. I also had to make myself properly receptive to teaching.

Some while later I played another teaching game with a pro in Korea, also on 4 stones. I now made a concerted effort to apply my new thinking. For that reason it was actually a very tiring struggle and I never felt in any kind of control, even though the pro kept clucking in approval. Towards the end I was so tired I made several bad oversights, and at no point did I feel that with one or two better moves I could have won. I was then utterly astonished when she said she thought I was at least 5-dan, but probably 6-dan. That was so preposterous that I told her so, and she became quite offended at having her professional judgement questioned. In the process of smoothing down ruffled feathers, however, I was able to glean what she meant. It was her equivalent of the nod and "go away and practise". What I had apparently done is to demonstrate to her that I had "got" baduk to a 5- or 6-dan level and so had been able to open the door to a long journey. However, even though a 6-dan (amateur) is sometimes associated with the level of a low-ranked pro, for me to get from 6-dan amateur to 1-dan pro would actually take most of the fabled 10,000 hours - the "go away and practise" bit. It was the difference between grade and rating in its starkest form.

Needless to say I haven't got anywhere near even the first 1,000 hours and never will, but I do feel thoroughly confident that at least I know where that journey would end: I would achieve the ability to play with "no mind" at that level - all the things that I was concentrating on and that exhausted me in that one game would become second nature. Instead, thanks to kgs, I have achieved "mindless" go of another stamp

That is just part of why I believe that arts that have a Way (dao) are best learned in the oriental fashion. To repeat, the onus is on the learner, not the teacher. It is not that a teacher is not needed, but he is mainly a signpost, and the onus is on the learner to prepare himself - tickets, hotels, travel jabs, travellers' cheques - even before he goes to the teacher where, if he clears check-in, he can then continue on the journey by himself to the next signpost.

How does this East/West split reconcile with the (perhaps unfair) stereotype that Asian schoolkids are good at getting stuffed with facts and passing tests but tend to do less well on the more creative, problem-solving, soft skills type of problems? I'd have thought being left to learn on their own would mean they were better, not worse, at this. Just playing devil's advocate a bit

P.S. Isn't rote learning, which I would classify as teacher-driven "Western-style", actually more popular in the East nowadays?

If there's one thing I remember from rote learning at school, even 60 years on, it is "read the question" (or the text).

I said "That is just part of why I believe that arts that have a Way (dao) are best learned in the oriental fashion." Arts, and a particular type at that. Nothing to do with school work.

@Bantari: maybe we have been discussing on parallel tracks. When I talk about "stone counting on small boards" it is obviously meant to introduce the rules in an interactive way. As soon as the newcomer becomes a serious student, then obviously 19x19 should be the size and probably already for some time.

Also, the emphasis has been too much on the alleged horrible teachers I had or witnessed. I really think a bad system breeds bad teaching, with the teachers being blissfully unaware of this. My account of it may have been too harsh. In any case I don't think any newcomer should be subjected to a sermon of wisdom for the sake of the teacher's feeling good.

That attitude extends well into the approach of serious students though. A student can spend hours of practice with 10 minutes of good advice. There's no point in drowning them in more advice.

@All: having said that, my original post advocated more, not less and so it may look as if I advocate stronger teachership. On one hand, yes, I'd like to see a few more dojos which are well structured and have a more methodical approach to teaching/learning. On the other hand, I concur with John F. that the real responsibility lies with the student. What a Dojo does then, is providing an atmosphere and culture where motivated students can thrive. Not all students know what this means though. They cannot always convert self motivation in proper attitude. A little help may be required, like "be on time", "respect your opponent", "do the review", "now it's time for tsumego" ... Some guidelines/rules.

I compared western go not only to eastern go (which I don't really know from experience) but also to other western sports clubs, like my table tennis club. I need to be on time, I cannot sit on the tables, when the coach explains we form a U in front of him, when we pair for exercises there's a system to avoid sparring with your best friend all the time etc etc

Most of these players are self motivated but they manage to keep their stamina thanks to an external structure. Without it, I know what happens: players show up when they like and play free table tennis or matches against partners of their preference. It's very hard for 2 motivated students to find each other and practice what is needed for their game.

This is also what happens in most go clubs. Free entrance & exit, drinking, chatting, games and at best a bit of review.

That's what I meant with failure of free club culture. It's not about teachers bombarding students with knowledge. It's about clubs setting up a structure in which students can thrive, scaffolded with requirements for the students' attitude.

Sounds wonderful

Quite, there is a difference between a go club and a go school (and many shades between). Some people play go for fun and don't care about improving, in fact if you presume they want to improve (which has some implications they should not be satisfied with their current level) it can be quite insulting.

Rote learning and memorization has a long history in both the East and the West.

_________________
The Adkins Principle:
At some point, doesn't thinking have to go on?
— Winona Adkins

Visualize whirled peas.

Everything with love. Stay safe.

Cool... so you are not talking about teaching at all, but about "introducing the rules". I have no problem with that, most rules are local anyways, so it does not matter what board you use to introduce them with.

Rock on.

_________________
- Bantari
______________________________________________
WARNING: This post might contain Opinions!!

This fits in with my previous comment about esoteric and exoteric knowledge. Waving hands is part of exoteric knowledge, getting taiji is not. You need to be able to look at the grass to tell which way the wind is blowing, as they say. Making the esoteric exoteric is mainly a Western phenomenon. Its heyday, I suppose, was in the 19th century, with European translations of Eastern and ancient texts, and the publication of popular books about Western occult knowledge and practice. Scientific knowledge is of its nature public and exoteric. OC, not all knowledge is scientific. There are things such that, as Fats Waller said when asked what is swing, "If you gotta ask, you'll never know." (Quote also attributed to Louis Armstrong and others, also about jazz.)

Now, there are not simply Eastern and Western ways of knowledge, esoteric or exoteric. Let me give an example from my teaching of taiji. (I am no great shakes at taiji, but I have lived at times and places where people wanted to learn taiji and there was no one else to teach them.) I took taiji from Professor Cheng and his students. (Also, briefly, from a few others, but i did not get the feeling that they "got" taiji.) The beginning classes were like, stand this way, hold your hands this way, etc., but the more advanced classes were far from "waving hands".

I started my first classes this way. I would ask a volunteer to come up and let me hold up his arm. He would rest his wrist in my hand and I would ask him if he was letting me hold his arm up. He would say yes and then I would take my hand away. OC, his arm would stay up. We would continue until he was able to allow me to hold his arm up. The next exercise was to pass a small object, usually a shoe, as it happened, around and have the students feel its weight.

Now, neither of these exercises is about getting taiji. But they are not hand waving, either. They are examples of experiential learning. They do not teach exoteric knowledge, nor do they set high hurdles for the novice. Instead, they break learning into small chunks. The teacher does not carry the student, but is more of a guide than a signpost.



One of my taiji students, whom I tutored one on one, was a scholar of Chinese literature. He started taking taiji when he was around 60, and had no history of sports or exercise. His first exercise went pretty much as expected, given all that. However, he showed remarkable improvement in his second lesson. I asked him what the difference was, and he replied, "Wu hsin."

_________________
The Adkins Principle:
At some point, doesn't thinking have to go on?
— Winona Adkins

Visualize whirled peas.

Everything with love. Stay safe.

Well, i hope most readers have understood by now that i advocate the existence of a few go schools, not a conversion of all go clubs.

Hi Bill,

Nice example.
Each time I hear one like that, I think with confusion:

Would these few months be saved if the teacher simply *explained* what the student was doing wrong, instead of just saying "this is not taiji"?
On the other hand - is the knowledge acquired through the few months of self-evaluation deeper and more valuable than if the teacher just explained?
On yet another hand - are there students who *never* get it via self-evaluation, but who would have had a chance to master the subject with better explanation?
And what is the gain in either case?

To me these (and other) questions are the core of the difference between what I understand "western" and "eastern" style teaching.

_________________
- Bantari
______________________________________________
WARNING: This post might contain Opinions!!

@ EdLee

_________________
The Adkins Principle:
At some point, doesn't thinking have to go on?
— Winona Adkins

Visualize whirled peas.

Everything with love. Stay safe.

Hi Bill,

Hi Bantari,I took the liberty to start a new thread --
I feel it's still on topic, but perhaps some disagree --
it also relates to a previous conversation we started.

Here's the new thread, Understanding .

How about a one-legged exercise?

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

[go]$$B Black to play and kill by standing on one leg
$$ ------------------
$$ | . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . O X X . . . .
$$ | . . . O X . . . .
$$ | . . . O X . . . .
$$ | . O O O X . . . .
$$ | . X . X X . . . .
$$ | . X . . . . . . .
$$ | . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . . . . . . . .[/go]

This is where the difference between social club and training club resides. And I find it a bit disheartening

Though, what you are hinting at is much like a baduk dojang. Could such club with such a system prosper in North America or Europe, when not more than a few are aware of the game's potential? I know that there are large Go centers in a few European and North American cities that are all about the game. Other than that there are a few clubs peppered about the landscape...