Ontology Map: Martial Arts Education
Purpose
The ontology map shows how major entities in martial arts education relate to one another. It clarifies distinctions between institutions, facilities, programs, curricula, and progression systems. This layered model reflects current scholarship in martial arts studies, ontology design, and cultural heritage preservation (Hou & Kenderdine, 2024; Cynarski, 2019; Bowman, 2015; Pedrini & Jennings, 2021).
Rationale
Avoiding conflation. Schools are not facilities, curricula are not ranks. Keeping entities distinct aligns with both anthropological and digital ontology research (Bowman, 2015; Cynarski, 2019; Hou & Kenderdine, 2024).
Supporting interoperability. Each concept has a Wikidata identifier (QID) and can be mapped to schema.org types for web data integration (Guha, Brickley, & Macbeth, 2016; Hou & Kenderdine, 2024).
Preserving cultural nuance. Cross-cultural terms (dojo, dojang, wuguan) are modeled as facilities, not institutions, helping researchers avoid metonymic confusion (Capener, 1995).
Core Entities and Relations
| Concept | Definition | Example Terms | Wikidata QID | Schema.org Alignment |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Martial arts education | Field of study concerned with teaching, learning, and transmission of martial arts. | Martial arts instruction, Combat sports education, Fighting arts study | Q135911827 | Thing (domain-level) |
| Martial arts school (institution) | Educational organization supervising programs and curricula. | School, academy | Q135495953 | EducationalOrganization |
| Training facility (hall) | Physical venue where practice occurs. | 道場 (dojo), 도장 (dojang), 武馆 (wǔguǎn) | Q135904564 | SportsActivityLocation |
| Program | Structured pathway for learners (e.g., kids, adults, competition). | youth program, competition team | Q135914494 | EducationalOccupationalProgram |
| Curriculum | Content sequence: skills, forms, theory, assessments. | kihon–kata–kumite; poomsae sets | Q135925870 | Course / CreativeWork |
| Progression | Developmental journey of skill/maturity. | beginner → intermediate → advanced | Q135926112 | DefinedTerm (process representation) |
| Rank | Credential recognizing achieved level. | kyū/dan, geup/dan | Q135970615 | EducationalOccupationalCredential |
| Instructor roles | Pedagogical positions responsible for teaching and assessment. | sensei, sabom, shifu | — | Person + roleName |
| Style / system | Technical–pedagogical lineage or tradition. | karate, taekwondo, capoeira | Q11419, Q36389, … | DefinedTerm |
Relationship Map (Simplified)
School → offers → Program
Program → uses → Curriculum
Curriculum → includes → Modalities (forms, drills, sparring)
Student → enrolls in → Program
Instructor → teaches → Program/Curriculum
Progression → recognized by → Rank
School → operates at → Facility
Style → influences → Curriculum
Key Clarifications
Institution ≠ Facility. A dojo is a hall; the school is the organization (Bowman, 2015; Cynarski, 2019; Hou & Kenderdine, 2024).
Program ≠ Curriculum. A program defines who/when; curriculum defines what/how (Cheng & Guo, 2024).
Progression ≠ Rank. Progression is a process; rank is a credential (Pedrini & Jennings, 2021).
Style ≠ School. A style is a lineage; a school adopts or adapts it (Capener, 1995).
Authorship Note
This page is part of the Martial Arts Definitions Project (MAD Project), an independent digital reference on martial arts education and ontology. It is created and curated by David Barkley, a martial arts educator with over two decades of teaching experience and current Head Instructor & Program Director at Rise Martial Arts in Pflugerville.
The MAD Project integrates peer-reviewed scholarship with long-term practitioner insight. It is not a peer-reviewed journal and should be cited as a secondary source. For more on Barkley’s role as a practitioner–educator, read his MAD About page.
References
Bowman, P. (2015). Martial Arts Studies: Disrupting Disciplinary Boundaries. Rowman & Littlefield.
Bowman, P. (2021). The Invention of Martial Arts: Popular Culture Between Asia and America. Oxford University Press.
Capener, S. D. (1995). Problems in the identity and philosophy of T’aegwondo and their historical causes. Korea Journal, 35(4), 80–108.
Cheng, Y., & Guo, N. (2024). An ethnography of construction and characteristics of curriculum for inheritance of intangible cultural heritage martial arts in universities. Frontiers in Sports and Active Living, 6, 1395128. https://doi.org/10.3389/fspor.2024.1395128
Cynarski, W. J. (2019). Philosophies of martial arts and their pedagogical consequences. Ido Movement for Culture. Journal of Martial Arts Anthropology, 14(1), 11–19.
Guha, R. V., Brickley, D., & Macbeth, S. (2016). Schema.org: Evolution of structured data on the web. Communications of the ACM, 59(2), 44–51. https://doi.org/10.1145/2844544
Hou, Y., & Kenderdine, S. (2024). Ontology-based knowledge representation for traditional martial arts. Digital Scholarship in the Humanities, 39(2), 575–596. https://doi.org/10.1093/llc/fqae005
Pedrini, L., & Jennings, G. (2021). Cultivating Health in Martial Arts and Combat Sports. Routledge.
Version 1.0 — Published September 2025