Below is an article from the Scarsdale Aikido web site (www.scarsdaleaikido.com) suggesting two methods on how to look for an instructor (complete with cliff notes):

As I understand it, there are basically two methods to evaluate an instructor. However, before discussing them, I would like to briefly mention some of the basics one should examine before reaching that stage.

First, one should consider the art and the lineage. Does the art itself perform the function desired? For example, Karate and Kung Fu emphasize the development of skills that can disable an attacker from the outset. Aikido and traditional forms of Tai Chi emphasize the development of character to aid in avoiding the fight immediately. Which approach to self defense is more suitable to your personality and interests?

Second, what is the instructor’s background? Where did he learn his art? How do you know he is legitimate and did not learn from books or videos? Many people start learning and open a school before they are qualified to teach. Others twist or pervert the art they were originally taught based upon their misunderstandings. You should examine the lineage, the teacher’s teacher, etc. If an instructor refuses to tell you from whom he learned his art, that is a very important danger signal. You are in an unfair position from the start.  As a novice, you must judge the teacher's qualifications rather than rely on the judgment imparted by his teacher as a qualified master.  Why would an instructor place you in this position when tradition in martial arts mandates the opposite?  However, lineage is a limited tool. For example, an entire lineage can be bad, as I have seen in certain schools in New York City. In other cases, individuals mix arts before they really understand how they are put together. While certain very high level masters such as the founders of Judo and Aikido were clearly qualified to do so, the garden variety martial arts master is not qualified to mix different forms of knowledge, as it were.

Finally, the cosmetic aspects should also be evaluated. Location, class schedule, dues, etc. all play a part in establishing whether one can maintain a consistent practice. An important characteristic is whether the school belongs to a federation of schools or encourages access to higher level masters. In such cases, if you outgrow your first teacher (which happens often as described below), you will not have to change arts and start all over again. You can gain access to higher level instruction through seminars.  All of the above information can be gleaned from the web sites of the schools in question.

When actually visiting a class, the decision process becomes more complex. Now we enter the actual realm of the art. There are two basic methods of evaluating the instructor: (1) what you perceive directly, and (2) what you can establish through indirect examination.  Of course, you should determine your comfort with the instructor and the school personally, but the information below addresses primarily consideration of the instructor's level of knowledge.

A good example of the first method, direct perception, was expressed by a friend of mine who decided to quit from a school after 15 years of training. Despite the fact that the school was reasonably mundane to the naked eye, he looked into the instruction to find the fundamental nature of the techniques as taught. He said it was nothing more than violence and aggression. He developed proficiency in technical skills and wanted more knowledge beyond merely how to overpower an attacker and prove one’s strength. He looked at the teacher and directly understood that he had nothing more to offer. The teacher only knew how to prove how strong he was in order to dominate the attacker. If you spoke with the teacher separately, you never would have drawn that conclusion. The instructor used all of the right words. However, his understanding was rooted in this form of violence and was evident in his technique. My friend correctly decided to quit. This sort of phenomena is very common in martial arts training and suggested my friend outgrew his teacher.  One should ask questions of the instructor at the outset to assess this possibility with any potential school one evaluates.

Knowing this fact and the dangers of devoting 15 years to training in one art only to discover the time wasted, another friend embarked upon finding a teacher. In this case, as the instructors were supposedly high level masters with excellent lineage charts, he did not expect to be able to directly perceive the level of their practice. Instead, he utilized indirect examination. Here one goes to the instructor and asks a series of questions over time. That part is simple enough. The problem crops up, however, when one receives the answers. The reason one seeks a teacher is because they are supposed to know more than you do. How does one evaluate whether their answers are correct? Certain basic ideas, such as kindness, sincerity, selflessness, patience, generosity, ethics, etc. come to mind whereas egotism, conceit, and arrogance should be eschewed. These notions are clearly in the best interests of society, and martial arts training should develop one’s character in a positive manner. However, some of the more profound ideas manifest in a variety of ways that may be difficult to fathom. For example, some people teach that Confucius said a superior person should not compete with others, but only with themselves. On the surface, it sounds as if this idea might result in developing positive character, but this notion falters upon further inspection. How do I compete with myself if there are not two of me present at the same time? If I compete with the past or the future, which me is supposed to win? If I believe I am supposed to achieve steady and continuous progress over time, that may sound comfortable. However, in the context of martial arts training, that idea is well known as nothing more than an obstacle to learning. So, one asks, where exactly did Confucius say this?  Correct instruction is the idea that the attacker (or competitor) is not the true enemy, but the true enemy lies within.  Identifying and defeating this enemy is the point of martial arts training.  Therefore, through indirect examination, one might utilize the writings of the masters of the given art or other masters whom you know and trust.  If you persist in this process, you should be able to develop some idea of the teacher’s level of understanding over time, and also learn the art in more depth. An instructor may not know everything, but they should be sincere if they err and show a willingness to learn from their mistakes. They should also appreciate your diligence and effort in learning. In the case of this friend, he examined two teachers. It took 3 classes over 4 weeks to establish the first instructor had very serious character flaws. He evaluated the next teacher in 20 minutes. While he could not see what either teacher was doing directly in their technique, he was able to establish definitively that neither one was an appropriate instructor and so saved himself 15 years of training in the wrong place.

Direct perception is always best, but in the event you cannot see definitively what is going on (which will be true in most cases) the second approach is an important alternative. True, it requires work, and one must let go of their excitement over starting something new, but you will wind up saving a great deal more effort by avoiding training for untold years in the wrong place, only to find a need to begin anew.

To the extent you have any questions in this arena, feel free to contact us.