Thank you for your time.
Remember that Karate is a self defense art which implies that she is the victim and has already been attacked and must now react essentially being trained to react to the first punch instead of being proactive when danger has been sensed. Kata forms are the equivelant of a boxer or Muay Thai fighter throwing combinations or a wrestler chain wrestling or a grappler technques chaining the difference is in intent. Katas are reactionary and are intended to be automatic reactions self defense in nature as was the purpose of Karate meaning the damage has been done already. The others are proactive in nature and imply that the attacker is striking first. Karate does not teach adapting to the reality of a fight the others dictate where the fight happens and are free flow adapting to the opponents reactions.
My view of the "choreography" is that it's developing gross motor skill and muscle memory. Also as a way of herding a group of cats
But I'm leery of it developing linear responses and stagnation in reacting to an advisory's attack. My daughter often sees things as black and white, and I can envision her stagnating over choosing the "right" response rather than reacting. The SA aspect is something that we touch on here at home and around town once in a while.
2) Is realism typically left out for kids?
In competitive martial arts such as wrestling, boxing, Judo, Ju Jitsu, Muay Thai etc...effectiveness isn't left out. There is not such thing as realism in MA training, I have never seen the fight or flight response replicated, the fear of imminent death, never seen any art here students actually kick others in the groin, gouge eyes, punch throats, knife fight, disarm real bad guys or break necks. There are more realistic arts where a person has to prove their techniques such a single leg takedown, dominant positioning, chokes, a punch or kick followed up by others and responses so you get feedback against a live opponent.
Aye, the discussion about the scarless knife fighting instructor comes to mind.
The closest she gets to realism is fully padded, torso-contact sparring. (and one tournament) She hasn't felt a hard block in training, nor punched something with little give. The latter parts of your comment match what my old sensei teaches to students her age - go at it and figur out what works.
Pull her out of Karate and enroll her in MMA training, she will be far more aware of the reality of what someone tells her as being probable or a gimmick.
I'd love to change, but this is the only place for martial arts training for roughly 30 miles around. Hence looking for way to enrich what's here.
Many ancient arts taught by American "Sensei" usually teach unrealistic techniques and sometimes make false claims of the lethality without ever having use the art themselves. Having heard from friends in Okinawa the origin of Karate being taught by Masters the commercialism in the U.S. has corrupted the art to being inadequate. The history of Karate was an art for the Okinawan people the poor farmers etc...to defend themselves from mercenaries of Japan called Ninja who governed the Island. It's purpose was out of necessity due to being not allowed to own weapons and the brutality of the bully ninja's but today.....
What you state regarding the commercialism is interesting. This school does seem a bit like a mill rather than teaching something "proven". While this place does well in "karate tournaments", I haven't seen them pad-up the bo staff or escrima sticks and go at it.
Good food for thought. Thanks.
Rumbly