5
This article was downloaded by: [Northeastern University] On: 03 November 2014, At: 15:22 Publisher: Routledge Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered office: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK Strategies: A Journal for Physical and Sport Educators Publication details, including instructions for authors and subscription information: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/ustr20 How to Incorporate Self-Defense Instruction into Physical Activity Programs Christopher S. Ousley a , Ritchie G. Shuford a & Tom Roberts a a Department of Health and Exercise Studies , North Carolina State University , Raleigh , NC Published online: 08 May 2013. To cite this article: Christopher S. Ousley , Ritchie G. Shuford & Tom Roberts (2013) How to Incorporate Self-Defense Instruction into Physical Activity Programs, Strategies: A Journal for Physical and Sport Educators, 26:3, 25-28, DOI: 10.1080/08924562.2013.779867 To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/08924562.2013.779867 PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the “Content”) contained in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis, our agents, and our licensors make no representations or warranties whatsoever as to the accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinions and views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors, and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Content should not be relied upon and should be independently verified with primary sources of information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any losses, actions, claims, proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or arising out of the use of the Content. This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any substantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

How to Incorporate Self-Defense Instruction into Physical Activity Programs

  • Upload
    tom

  • View
    213

  • Download
    0

Embed Size (px)

Citation preview

Page 1: How to Incorporate Self-Defense Instruction into Physical Activity Programs

This article was downloaded by: [Northeastern University]On: 03 November 2014, At: 15:22Publisher: RoutledgeInforma Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered office: Mortimer House, 37-41Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

Strategies: A Journal for Physical and Sport EducatorsPublication details, including instructions for authors and subscription information:http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/ustr20

How to Incorporate Self-Defense Instruction into PhysicalActivity ProgramsChristopher S. Ousley a , Ritchie G. Shuford a & Tom Roberts aa Department of Health and Exercise Studies , North Carolina State University , Raleigh , NCPublished online: 08 May 2013.

To cite this article: Christopher S. Ousley , Ritchie G. Shuford & Tom Roberts (2013) How to Incorporate Self-Defense Instruction intoPhysical Activity Programs, Strategies: A Journal for Physical and Sport Educators, 26:3, 25-28, DOI: 10.1080/08924562.2013.779867

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/08924562.2013.779867

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the “Content”) contained in thepublications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis, our agents, and our licensors make no representations orwarranties whatsoever as to the accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinions andviews expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors, and are not the views of or endorsed byTaylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Content should not be relied upon and should be independently verified with primarysources of information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any losses, actions, claims, proceedings, demands, costs,expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with,in relation to or arising out of the use of the Content.

This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any substantial or systematic reproduction,redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expresslyforbidden. Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

Page 2: How to Incorporate Self-Defense Instruction into Physical Activity Programs

There were 3,817,380 violent crimes committed in the United States in 2010, which included 3,148,250 assaults and 188,380 rapes or sexual

attacks. This equates to more than 9,000 assaults per day nationwide (U.S. Department of Justice, 2011). These numbers alone are prime examples of why self-defense is in demand in some form or fashion by all demographics of society.

By Christopher S. Ousley, Ritchie G. Shuford, and Tom Roberts

How to Incorporate

Volume 26 • May/June 25

Self-Defense Instruction into

Physical Activity Programs

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Nor

thea

ster

n U

nive

rsity

] at

15:

22 0

3 N

ovem

ber

2014

Page 3: How to Incorporate Self-Defense Instruction into Physical Activity Programs

26 Strategies

Demand for self-defense instruction has found its way to school settings at all levels. Classes are more prevalent on college campuses than ever before because students and administrators acknowledge the value of such instruction. As a point of refer-ence, half of 16 University of North Carolina (UNC) schools and universities offer a course in self-defense. This article will describe the why and how of adding self-defense to an instructional physi-cal activity program at the university level. Ultimately, the meth-ods used to produce and fund self-defense classes at the college/university level can easily be replicated at the middle and high school levels. A UNC-system university self-defense program is presented as a case study in this article.

Defining Self-DefenseThe broad spectrum of self-defense began at the dawn of time

as the earliest humans had to learn how to protect themselves and teach their strategies to others (Dunn, 2007). Self-defense has evolved from combative strategies adapted from military and cultural art forms that were passed from generation to generation around the world. Modern self-defense has no one particular style and has been refined to encompass essential strategies for survival on the street.

Self-defense classes are often taught by experts with years of experience in a martial art form (i.e., muay Thai, Brazilian jiu-jitsu, karate, Hapkido, taekwondo) who have attained the high-est level of mastery in their respective discipline. There are many benefits to these types of training including physical improvement (coordination, flexibility, balance) and psychological enhancement (discipline, self-confidence). However, many martial arts tech-niques are based on ancient traditions that do not readily translate to a street defense situation. Three such examples are a roundhouse kick to the head that could leave a victim off-balance and vulner-able, a low cross-block that could leave the head exposed to possible strikes, and use of a wide stance that restricts the dynamic move-ment necessary in a constantly changing attack situation.

Another popular form of self-defense instruction is based on the popular sport of mixed martial arts (MMA). This training phi-losophy is ideal for physical conditioning, but MMA techniques are often confined to the sporting world where the combatants are protected by rules in a controlled environment. Training in MMA can actually decrease the ability to defend oneself as the skills and tactics needed to win tournaments are often useless or

even detrimental for street self-defense (Dynamic Defense Inter-national, 2006).

It is not unusual for commercial self-defense venues, whether they teach traditional martial arts or MMA for sport, to encour-age students to purchase yearly or monthly memberships for further training. In contrast, self-defense classes taught in a uni-versity setting normally do not require nor do they promote ad-ditional training.

Case Study: Evolution of a Self-Defense Class

Support and approvalDepartment, division, and university curriculum committees

were tasked with review of a new physical education class in 2001; this class was titled “Self-Defense” and was designed for coeduca-tional instruction. A pointed question was asked of the sponsor-ing instructors by all committees: “Why offer self-defense, and why especially at the college level?” Rationale for a self-defense class included: (a) We had overwhelming student demand as ourdepartment had offered experimental sections that were con-sistently full; (b) the class would contribute to the department’s diversity of offerings; (c) teaching self-defense within a physical education program was appropriate because physical and motor skill development by expert instruction was “what we do best”; and (d) taking a proactive versus reactive approach to the pre-vention of on-campus violence was appropriate for college-aged students. Support for this class was evident throughout the uni-versity and approval was gained at all levels of curricular review. Classes were first offered in the 2003–2004 academic year and have been part of the curriculum every semester thereafter. These coed classes have been consistently full, with an average enroll-ment of 27 students per section. Assessment of the self-defense curriculum was included annually to verify that course objectives and learning outcomes were obtained.

Resources (Materials)Equipment and supply costs were not (and need not be) exces-

sive. Adequate teaching space was available and equipment cost was minimal. Self-defense instruction can be held in a myriad of locations, and our classes were initially offered in a converted fencing room. This room was spacious but did not provide ad-equate safety features for many self-defense techniques; the car-peted floor, wall mirrors, and existing support columns proved to be problematic. Renovations to older racquetball courts ultimately provided a new venue that included padded floors and walls that gave instructors and students a better teaching environment. However, the size of this room required that a duplicate space be established in the next court to accommodate all students. This additional space was welcomed, but it introduced a supervision issue that did not pass safety and educational scrutiny. The third (and current) teaching space was established when a yoga teach-ing station came available. Instructors now have the balance of space, proper flooring, and equipment to effectively conduct all aspects of a modern-day self-defense class.

The need to secure funding for protective equipment and ma-terials is evident for a self-defense class. We have obtained funds

The methods used to produce and fund self-defense classes

at the college/university level can easily be replicated at the middle and high school levels.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Nor

thea

ster

n U

nive

rsity

] at

15:

22 0

3 N

ovem

ber

2014

Page 4: How to Incorporate Self-Defense Instruction into Physical Activity Programs

Volume 26 • May/June 27

for equipment and supplies through our annual operating budget and via two campus grant programs. Our operating budget has funded strike pads, dummies, and specialized training weapons. We purchased square hand targets, kick pads, adjustable padded mannequins, and BOB (upper torso) dummies as targets. Stu-dents were given safety goggles when utilizing rubber guns and knives for weapons training. Airsoft pistols were also obtained for a more realistic experience. External funding was used to purchase an instructor training suit that enabled students to learn blunt-force skills to protect them from a live attacker. We purchased a combination of upper-torso gear and full body suits for protective yet more comfortable training. Surplus matting obtained from other activity courses was gradually replaced with newer versions when funding became available. The total annual cost for outfit-ting a self-defense class for 25 to 30 students is less than that for a similar-sized aerobics class.

Resources (Instructors)A background in martial arts and MMA can be helpful and

our instructors had years of experience in these disciplines prior to the development of this class. Our instructors initially taught a hybrid of traditional kickboxing and martial arts techniques along with MMA strategies. However, instructors retrained to expand their knowledge base to give students the most effective self-defense strategies and tools available. Advanced credentials were obtained by attending clinics and utilizing technology.

Seminar and workshop participation led instructors to reeval- uate what was being taught to our students in our self-defense classes. The opportunity to register for additional training resulted from professional development funds via department and instruc-tor sources. Between 2007 and 2011, instructors attended two American Women’s Self-Defense Association seminars in Ari-zona and North Carolina, the Hand, Stick, Knife, and Gun semi-nar in Georgia, and the ISR (Intercept Stabilize Resolve) Matrix camp in Florida. Instructors earned rape-prevention instructor certifications and also participated in numerous training and

information sessions with professionals from law enforcement, military, martial arts, and educational settings. Upon return from conferences and seminars, instructors field-tested the new tech-niques and adjusted the existing framework of our self-defense class based on how effective these techniques were for a student population. Many techniques were adapted; others were deemed noneffective and were not incorporated into our class.

Utilization of technology was another lower-cost way of gain-ing new concepts and techniques. Instructors have reviewed video series from the Self-Defense Company, Kelly McCann’s Crucible, and the Association of American Krav Maga. The effectiveness of video studies was enhanced by having corresponding training sessions to practice the fluid self-defense movements and dy-namic situations depicted in the instructional technology mate-rial. Technology options are especially useful whenever travel to certification clinics is prohibited by a lack of professional develop-ment funds. The cost to keep an instructor current in self-defense techniques can be less than $150 per academic year if various in-structional methods are utilized.

Curriculum (Current)Our teaching philosophy has evolved after years of continuing

education and self-defense training. Our curriculum is based on a continuum of responses that students can use in any self-defense situation, from being harassed to being ambushed. We adhere to the five important aspects of combatives, which are simplicity, ex-plosiveness, capability/self-awareness, aggressiveness/ferocity, and consequences (McCann, 2009).

Instructors reach class objectives through a combination of class lectures and exercise sessions that develop skills needed for self-defense. Students enhance motor skills, concepts, and strate-gies used in physical activities and gain a working knowledge of the history and safety of self-defense. Students are evaluated by written examinations, fitness testing relevant to the activity, and practical self-defense skill demonstrations utilizing a point-scale rubric to determine grades. Our semester-long teaching model is arranged in six base categories: (a) avoidance techniques; (b) escapes; (c) blunt-force techniques; (d) multiattack scenarios; (e) weapons defense; and (f ) legal consequences.

Avoidance techniques. Initial class instruction introduces strat-egies that emphasize avoidance, deterrence, and de-escalation of potentially harmful situations as the primary tenets of defense. Protective stances and methods of verbally defending oneself are taught through individual drills that progress to partner and group sessions to reinforce effective skills.

The total annual cost for outfitting a self-defense class

for 25 to 30 students is less than that for a similar-sized

aerobics class.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Nor

thea

ster

n U

nive

rsity

] at

15:

22 0

3 N

ovem

ber

2014

Page 5: How to Incorporate Self-Defense Instruction into Physical Activity Programs

28 Strategies

The bottom line concerning self-defense classes at the

university level is that they are popular, low-cost, and

extremely effective as part of a diverse curriculum.

Escapes. Students learn to escape from grabs/chokes and how to defend themselves while on the ground. Instructors use circuits that allow students to work with different body types and sizes of attackers. Instructors focus on how to escape various attacks (i.e., rape situations, bullying, school violence, muggings) along with the situational psychology involved. For example, men generally do not stand and throw punches while assaulting women; they typically attempt to surround women from the front or behind and force them to the ground (Mattingly, 2007).

Blunt-force techniques. Students are taught to be assertive in certain situations by making strikes to target areas that the assail-ant leaves unprotected. Conversely, strategies and techniques for protecting oneself from strikes and tackles are covered for times when the assailant is in attack mode. Students practice techniques on pads and dummies and eventually progress to applying these strikes to a padded attacker.

Multiattack scenarios. There are sessions devoted to defend-ing oneself from two to four attackers at once. Special emphasis is placed on movement of the defender while trying to prevent an attack from behind.

Weapons defense. Students learn basic defense strategies against someone using a baseball bat, knife, or a handgun. Skills

acquired earlier in the semester are applied with some technique variation to enhance the speed of the learning process.

Legal considerations. Instructors research the specific laws regarding self-defense according to the state in which they live. Some basic concepts covered are: (a) “Force should equal force”; (b) a court’s view of what a reasonable and prudent person would do in the same situation; and (c) the Castle Doctrine.

Service to the CommunitySelf-defense classes can range from youth to senior, men or

women, and beginner level to advanced level. Introductory classes for university and community populations are easily established if space, equipment, and instructor availability are properly ar-ranged. Our instructors conduct several workshops each semester that are available to students, faculty, and staff to give them the basic tools for self-defense and an introduction to our class phi-losophies. One of our most requested sessions serves a campus faculty/staff adult fitness program with an average participant age of 65 years. Many special population participants will attend an introductory session and will then enroll in a regular class to con-tinue their training.

SummaryThe bottom line concerning self-defense classes at the univer-

sity level is that they are popular, low-cost, and extremely effective as part of a diverse curriculum. These variables also transfer very readily to middle and high school settings. If a physical education program, at any level, is willing to invest in core instructor train-ing and basic equipment needs, the results for students and the department are impressive.

Scenario training in self-defense classes often provides a “light bulb” experience for many students, and they understand that the application of their newly learned skills could mean the difference between an escape and injury. There are few physical education classes other than self-defense that can make such a difference in one’s safety, with the exception of water safety courses for non-swimmers.

ReferencesDunn, J. (2007). The history of self defense. Retrieved from http://www.

articlesbase.com/sports-and-fitness-articles/the-history-of-self- defense-192790.html

Dynamic Defense International. (2006). Practical self defense. Retrieved from http://www.dynamicselfdefense.com/defense-history.html

Mattingly, K. (2007). Self-defense steps to survival. Champaign, IL: Hu-man Kinetics.

McCann, K. (2009). Combatives for street survival. Seoul, South Korea: Ohara Publications.

U.S. Department of Justice. (2011). Criminal victimization, 2010. Wash-ington, DC: Truman. S

Christopher S. Ousley and Ritchie G. Shuford are lecturers in the Depart-ment of Health and Exercise Studies at North Carolina State University in Raleigh, NC; and Tom Roberts is a professor in the Department of Health and Exercise Studies at North Carolina State University in Raleigh, NC.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Nor

thea

ster

n U

nive

rsity

] at

15:

22 0

3 N

ovem

ber

2014