A response has been received and has been added to the end of this post (webmaster)
SAVE INDEPENDENT JUDO
A campaign to maintain the rights of independent judo groups
Tony Dallimore
Education Director
1 st 4Sport
Coachwise Ltd
Chelsea Close
Off Amberley rd
Leeds LS12 4PH
October 31 2007
1 st 4sport Qualifications
Level 1 and Level 2 Certificate in Coaching Judo
Pathway Unit specification
A summary of the Pathway Unit Requirements for
Recognised Centres, Tutors,
Assessors and Verifiers
Dear Tony,
Thank you for sending me the above documents relating to a judo UKCC.
Please read this letter in conjunction with the email you received from Andy Davies, leader of Saving Martial Arts & Your Right2Choose and head of the British Council for Korean Martial Arts, who is working in coordination with Save Independent Judo campaign.
Once again confusion reigns. Each time a new document becomes available or policy statement is made on your side, there is evidence that you contradict each other or repeat errors.
The authorities concerned are either:
- In such a mess with the UKCC they don't know what to do.
- Are attempting to fudge matters and make criteria fit the UKCC, the design of which was not thought through (as acknowledged by Richard Caborn MP, then Minister for Sport) to (a) include members of organisations outside of an NGB (b) to recognise that judo, as with all martial arts, is distinguishable from many sports.
- Have total disregard for non-BJA people and are intent on ensuring the development and implementation of judo UKCC goes ahead as they have always intended – restricted and applicable to BJA members only.
Click on more>>>>>>
SAVE INDEPENDENT JUDO
A campaign to maintain the rights of independent judo groups
Tony Dallimore
Education Director
1 st 4Sport
Coachwise Ltd
Chelsea Close
Off Amberley rd
Leeds LS12 4PH
October 31 2007
1 st 4sport Qualifications
Level 1 and Level 2 Certificate in Coaching Judo
Pathway Unit specification
A summary of the Pathway Unit Requirements for
Recognised Centres, Tutors,
Assessors and Verifiers
Dear Tony,
Thank you for sending me the above documents relating to a judo UKCC.
Please read this letter in conjunction with the email you received from Andy Davies, leader of Saving Martial Arts & Your Right2Choose and head of the British Council for Korean Martial Arts, who is working in coordination with Save Independent Judo campaign.
Once again confusion reigns. Each time a new document becomes available or policy statement is made on your side, there is evidence that you contradict each other or repeat errors.
The authorities concerned are either:
- In such a mess with the UKCC they don't know what to do.
- Are attempting to fudge matters and make criteria fit the UKCC, the design of which was not thought through (as acknowledged by Richard Caborn MP, then Minister for Sport) to (a) include members of organisations outside of an NGB (b) to recognise that judo, as with all martial arts, is distinguishable from many sports.
- Have total disregard for non-BJA people and are intent on ensuring the development and implementation of judo UKCC goes ahead as they have always intended – restricted and applicable to BJA members only.
When judo was introduced into the UKCC programme, Sport England and the British Judo Association (BJA) insisted that in order to access this new national qualification you must be a member of the BJA. Both these authorities wrote to me saying so.
In November 2005 Scott McCarthy, BJA chief executive, wrote, “It is imperative that all organisations offering coaching services adhere to the national curriculum of the BJA and are certified by the BJA.” He then went on to warn of “consequences” for the organisations that remained outside of the BJA.
Sport England wrote, “I can clarify the UKCC will only be available to BJA members.”
After more than a year of campaigning the BJA were forced to make a U-turn on their rock-like policy that the UKCC was to be available to BJA members only. Richard Carbon MP, then Minister for Sport, announced in the House, “Access to UKCC qualifications is not dependent on membership of a specified Governing Body.”
We are told that the authorities are “working on arrangements” to fulfil this promise.
Accessibility to the UKCC of course includes suitability. As things stand the proposed UKCC in judo is not suitable. It has not been designed for non-BJA members and the above Pathway Unit Specifications clearly show this to be so.
Where an activity is essentially the same, (including whether or not pursued competitively), and where there is one universally accepted set of rules, then it is not too difficult to formulate a coach education and award system that is universally applicable to the activity. And where it is not a requirement that the coach actually participates in the activity themselves, it makes it even easier.
But with judo and other martial arts this is not the case. Judo, as with all martial arts, is distinguishable from many sports.
In most sports, you are taught to do something, there are rules, and coaching usually refers to competition focussed training and development.
In judo, and other martial arts, development is very different. You do not just learn to do something and then get better at it, there is also a progression of content. This takes the form of a syllabus.
With varying types, styles, approaches to judo, there are many different judo organisations. The vast majority of judo takes place in groups and organisations outside of the BJA. Each judo organisation will have its own syllabus. These will vary considerably in content taking into account use of language, technique, rules, system, education programme, uniform and grading structure and of course the aims and ethos of the said group.
When the UKCC was first mooted Richard Carbon said “It is vital the process is consultative and inclusive seeking the input of all stakeholders.” It has not been, ”consultative and inclusive.”
We have repeatedly insisted that it is vital that the vast majority, non-BJA people, are included in the process to ensure that the design of a judo UKCC is suitable for all who wish to obtain it. In June 2006 Mr Carbon wrote to Save Independent Judo campaign, “I have asked my officials to take an urgent look at the issues you raise.”
In response to our continuing campaign Tony Blair MP, then Prime Minister, announced (June 2007) “Our position is clear. UKCC qualifications must be accessible to all.”
Since then, our repeated requests to be involved in the consultative process have been denied. In fact both DCMS and sports coach UK chairman Ian McGeechan, in copy-cat fashion, have written to me “Matter closed.” And in other copy-cat correspondence Gerry Sutcliffe, Minister for Sport, has imitated his policy official Rober Burles. Mr Sutcliffe writes complaining to my MP Angela Browning that he finds the amount of correspondence that I have written trying to get answers to legitimate questions, including request to be involved in discussion and consultation, (which haven't been answered or if they have, have been evasive, rank-closing, contradictory, or full of waffle) “vexatious.”
What is clear is that the authorities have, despite the promise of access for all, continued the development of the UKCC as they originally intended, brushing aside the rights of the vast majority of judo people, non-BJA members, without a moments thought.
The Pathway Unit Specifications that you sent me, concerning itself with requirements for Recognised Centres, Tutors, Assessors, and Verifiers blatantly show the UKCC in judo is not suitable for all.
These specification documents includes sports specific content based on one particular syllabus – that of the BJA. Level 1 the ‘Practical Syllabus' refers specifically to the BJA junior syllabus, Level 2 ‘Practical Syllabus' directly to the BJA senior syllabus.
In fact these documents refer to the BJA 57 times!
The BJA syllabus with its rules, techniques and language is different to vast majority of judo practitioners non-BJA members who practise their kind of judo in accordance with their syllabus and rules.
If there is to be sports specific content to the UKCC then it must be suitable for all. This can only be achieved by ensuring, as Mr Caborn said “was vital”, that, “the process is inclusive and consultative seeking the input of all stakeholders.”
Apart from the issue of human rights, if you embed the syllabus of a particular type of judo (in this case that of the BJA) into the tutor, assessors and verifiers specifications, you are effectively training tutors to produce coaches in that particular type of judo. In this case, you would be training candidates to be BJA coaches. This would restrict the variety of judo taught and practised and be of detriment to the sport
In addition to the issue of the sports specific content which directly refers to the BJA syllabus, and, on that on its own flaws the documents and the UKCC as being accessible to all, there are other issues that must be addressed. For example the documents talk of following BJA codes of conduct and candidates having a BJA recognised grade etc. Here again the content is designed, caters and addresses those who are in membership of the BJA.
As it stands the proposed judo UKCC is designed by the BJA for the BJA. In effect it is a BJA UKCC.
The UKCC qualification is a national award. As soon as an organisation interferes with this status, as the BJA have done, the award becomes invalid.
Dave Duffy, BJA Coaching Officer, has announced by individual letter to BJA coaches and in the BJA magazine Matside that the “proposed launch dates for UKCC Levels 1 and 2 are January 2008”
Does this mean that by January 2008 all the outstanding issues and problems we have raised will be solved? I would be interested to hear you what you have to say.
We insist that a judo UKCC cannot and must not be endorsed unless;
- it is fully accessible to all who want it in or out of the BJA/NGB
- it is suitable for all who want in or out of the BJA/NGB
- and on equal terms to all in or out of the BJA/NGB
Once again, is it not time for your people to consult our side?
I look forward to hearing from you.
Yours sincerely,
John Goldman
Campaign leader
Copies to:
Angela Browning MP
Roger Knapman MEP
Robert Burles DCMS
Gerry Sutcliffe MP Minister for Sport
Andy Davies, Saving Martial Arts & Your Right 2 Choose
Tom Hibbert MBE Amateur Martial Association
Paul Clifton, Magazine Publisher (Combat, Traditional Karate, Fighters, Taekwondo)
UPDATE: Posted 1st November .
In response to the above letter Tony Dallimore has this morning emailed the following.
John
Thank you for your letter, we have raised your issues, and those raised by Andy, with the powers that be and will be in a position to respond following consultation with a number of stakeholders.
Cheers
Tony Dallimore
Education Director
1st4sport Qualifications
Coachwise Ltd