Possible Limitations With The Ecological Dynamic Approach - A Remote Learning Lesson Report
- jamie03066
- Nov 4
- 4 min read
16.10.2025
Tonight's Task
My client from Hostlebro Taekwondo Klub in Denmark concluded his three-part teacher consultancy course with me on the ecological dynamics/constraints-led approach to teaching martial arts. The purpose of our course has been to help him write a dissertation for his next black belt grade focusing on this method of training. We have gone into detail various problems that the approach can solve and how much it redefines such core concepts as technique. In order to maintain our science-based critical thinking and in the interests of producing a balanced review, we decided to play devil's advocate this week and look at potential limitations with the approach as well as some common criticisms.
Common Criticisms Of Ecological Dynamics
Okay, first out the gate let's clear up some common arguments that are outright incorrect. An obvious one is the all-too-familiar appeal to tradition. This is a logical fallacy. Just because a martial arts teacher has always taught in a certain way it doesn't mean it is efficient or effective or any better than the ecological dynamics approach. Many traditional methods are products of their time. Besides, upon investigation far more methods are actually pseudo-traditional in nature and the ecological approach (or live practice) methods are actually older in their rawest form to the way martial arts used to be taught.
Conversely the sports martial arts world, an appeal to popularity argument is often made against the ecological dynamics approach. Many argue that all the top teams don't use an ecological dynamics approach. Again, this is a logical fallacy, but there are some less dismissive counters. First of all, the worst teams don't use the ecological dynamics approach either. All this demonstrates is that the ecological dynamics approach isn't commonly practised in the mainstream. That's fine. Cutting edge technology always takes a while before it filters into the mainstream. People can do well in spite of having bad practices in their martial arts schools not because of them. Besides, I know that all the top players in combat sports regularly spar and good coaches, whether or not they realise they are following the ecological dynamics approach, know the value of specific sparring.
A big issue many of the critics of ecological dynamics have is the academic manner that it is often delivered. This often comes across as elitist, pompous and gimmicky. I definitely think there is a branding issue in this sense. Although defenders will no doubt argue that they are merely sticking to the science and it's not up to them to dumb down the language.
Others have stated that the ecological dynamics approach is great, but not suitable for beginners. Many cannot get their head around the idea that a technique can be learned live before a teacher models it. However, I found that in self-defence, almost by accident through my teaching of children, that techniques can be quarried from live situations. If someone discovers a move that works for them thanks to a coach's careful planning of an objective-based task, they are more likely to remember and "own" it.
I worked hard to promote a live-based approach to all my martial arts and self-defence teaching. It makes sense to me that people get better at something by doing the actual activity. They improve by focusing on specific areas. Providing all safety measures are in place and the games are handled sensibly.
In my experience, eco approach encourages discovery based learning. “Traditional” drilling approach encourages repetition/memorisation based learning. There are good ways to utilise both eco and trad. Both have produced high level competitors. I will say that in my personal experience, the schools that take a more eco approach retain more beginner students.
Over-Training Sloppy Techniques
Over-training sloppy techniques - when students are tired they may be limited to train certain techniques safely or with any degree of complexity. This can present a problem in live training. Rather than weed out bad form, which is what live training should do, a tired or stressed student might get stuck in a "death cycle" where they just repeat the same bad response. For this reason, I like to put focus mitt and heavy bag work at the end of lessons. A good coach can see what techniques and strategies are consistently working through the constraints-led games and isolate them on the training equipment. Exercises should be tapered down to the end of the lesson with single, simpler moves being left to the very end where students are less likely to reinforce bad habits. It is comparable to the way isolation exercises are programmed towards the end of weight-lifting sessions.
Exceptions
Despite my arguments for the wholesale discovery of techniques, I appreciate there is still a strong degree of idealism present. My goal is to be able gamify everything and take a totally hands-off approach, but this isn't alway 100% effective. A degree of technical training needs to be in place to see certain techniques. Although the objective is discover the technique, there are certain moves that are much slower to achieve without being shown the basic shape.
Injuries
Sometimes the presence of injuries makes live training especially risky. This is where pad-work, heavy bag work and solo training can be very helpful.
Comments