Why is there a Clash between the Tutors and the AFC

Admin wrote:That is an awful lot that is going on here about qualifications. I really like the idea of qualifying with a Government Accredited Certificate, Diploma or Degree. Defining the theoretical and practical aspects would be important. A lot of mediums go wrong because they never have the basics properly explained by a teacher who is great at both aspects. The next stage is an ongoing training assessment program.

Interesting that the Ministerial aspect was mentioned, in itself this is interesting because OSNU's and MSNU's may be able to perform, for example marriages in the UK but not in other countries. I Know someone here who is doing the OSNU in Australia and suddenly realised she had to study to become a marriage Registrar in Australia to be able to work here.

Janhar wrote:

Admin wrote:That is an awful lot that is going on here about qualifications. I really like the idea of qualifying with a Government Accredited Certificate, Diploma or Degree. Defining the theoretical and practical aspects would be important. A lot of mediums go wrong because they never have the basics properly explained by a teacher who is great at both aspects. The next stage is an ongoing training assessment program.

Interesting that the Ministerial aspect was mentioned, in itself this is interesting because OSNU's and MSNU's may be able to perform, for example marriages in the UK but not in other countries. I Know someone here who is doing the OSNU in Australia and suddenly realised she had to study to become a marriage Registrar in Australia to be able to work here.

You don’t mean Government accredited mediumship diploma or degree I presume? That would require  government education departments  to embrace life after death as a fact. I think we might be at least a few hundred years away from that. A degree in the study of Spiritual practices, purely theory, I think might already be out there albeit under different titles. Theology degrees include it for sure. A teacher of mediumship needs to be a medium. The theory and the practice needs to be taught by a medium. Some of the mechanics of mediumship could be explained to a non medium but only someone who has that mediumship mechanism awakening within them can relate properly to what is being explained. Many mediums work without ever understanding the mechanics of it nor feel the need to understand the mechanics of it, but they could never teach it. That is what the AFC does. It teaches mediums how to understand the mechanics of their own mediumship, to explore how it is operating within themself so that they can differentiate between their own mind and a communication from another, leading to a far better standard of mediumship..  Personally, I would run a mile from a government accredited diploma of mediumship if it existed in the foreseeable future. It would be unlikely to be taught by mediums and it would encourage people to think they know all about things they have no idea about. Dangerous in fact.

notabigjump wrote:

Janhar wrote:
You don’t mean Government accredited mediumship diploma or degree I presume? That would require  government education departments  to embrace life after death as a fact. [end]

This misses the point of government educational accreditation. It is not about the government believing in the subject. It is about a course of educational study being correctly designed and delivered, with a rational curriculum, learning outcomes, policies etc. It has nothing to do with with embracing life after death as a fact. This is what professional governments accredited training providers look for.

I know because I am an accredited training provider myself.

mac wrote:

notabigjump wrote:

Janhar wrote:
You don’t mean Government accredited mediumship diploma or degree I presume? That would require  government education departments  to embrace life after death as a fact. [end]

This misses the point of government educational accreditation. It is not about the government believing in the subject. It is about a course of educational study being correctly designed and delivered, with a rational curriculum, learning outcomes, policies etc. It has nothing to do with with embracing life after death as a fact. This is what professional governments accredited training providers look for.

I know because I am an accredited training provider myself.

Might a "rational curriculum and "learning outcomes" be a problem?  Could non-understanders (I don't say 'non-believers' - I don't consider my understanding of survival as belief.) assess whether a particular curriculum for study of survival/related-spiritual issues is "rational"?

notabigjump wrote:returning to the subject of the tutor dispute:

I again express my deep concern regarding the ongoing dispute involving the tutors at the Arthur Findlay College. Despite being forced to sign gagging orders and thus unable to fully share their side of the dispute, these dedicated educators have maintained their integrity by keeping silent about the full reasons behind this dispute.

On the other hand, their employer, the Spiritualists' National Union (SNU), has made an official public statement on the matter, clearly disregarding the gagging order, which the tutors have respected. This is profoundly unfair as it leaves our valued tutors unable to give their full account as to what led to the dispute and voiceless in defending themselves publicly.

Adding insult to injury, it appears that SNU leadership has shown no humility, support or care towards these professionals publicly. Rather than working rapidly towards a resolution and welcoming them back, they have already filled course slots for up to a year and a half with other tutors. To add insult to injury, the additional weeks of works awarded to themselves, is excessive and unnecessary.

The arranged mediation, whilst extensive is taking a significant amount of time and only began in earnest after the recent presidential elections. This delayed matters considerably and prevented the voters from knowing the truth before they made a decision to vote.

The President has at no time expressed their sorrow and determination to help the tutors return to their courses and the college. Surely a good leader must show care and compassion for all parties? They simply demonstrate an aloofness and that they will show them how they are easily replaceable, with no regard for their experience, let alone the impact on their personal and professional lives.

This situation not only undermines trust but also disrespects those who have contributed significantly to our spiritualist community’s growth and learning for many years.

Even worse, is that the process to resolve the matter is taking so long. Others are incorrectly believing that the tutors have given up and have no intention to return to work. This is untrue and unjust.

Imagine training for so long at significant personal expense, working for years to build a reputation and support the college and when a conflict arises, the leaders are more concerned with replacing you, than assisting your return. This is a classic example of how to be a very bad employer.

notabigjump wrote:

Not really Mac. It's about the design of the curriculum. I could write a course on 'the ideal diet for unicorns' and as long as the journey of learning made sense and executed correctly, plus learning outcomes, refund and dispute policies, were all in order, it could be accredited. It has to be assumed the learner has free choice to believe and learn about what they wish. The course itself is accredited for its learning merit.

notabigjump wrote:

Janhar wrote:
You don’t mean Government accredited mediumship diploma or degree I presume? That would require  government education departments  to embrace life after death as a fact. [end]

This misses the point of government educational accreditation. It is not about the government believing in the subject. It is about a course of educational study being correctly designed and delivered, with a rational curriculum, learning outcomes, policies etc. It has nothing to do with with embracing life after death as a fact. This is what professional governments accredited training providers look for.

I know because I am an accredited training provider myself.

mac wrote:

notabigjump wrote:

Janhar wrote:
You don’t mean Government accredited mediumship diploma or degree I presume? That would require  government education departments  to embrace life after death as a fact. [end]

This misses the point of government educational accreditation. It is not about the government believing in the subject. It is about a course of educational study being correctly designed and delivered, with a rational curriculum, learning outcomes, policies etc. It has nothing to do with with embracing life after death as a fact. This is what professional governments accredited training providers look for.

I know because I am an accredited training provider myself.

Might a "rational curriculum and "learning outcomes" be a problem?  Could non-understanders (I don't say 'non-believers' - I don't consider my understanding of survival as belief.) assess whether a particular curriculum for study of survival/related-spiritual issues is "rational"?

Janhar wrote:

notabigjump wrote:

Janhar wrote:
You don’t mean Government accredited mediumship diploma or degree I presume? That would require  government education departments  to embrace life after death as a fact. [end]

This misses the point of government educational accreditation. It is not about the government believing in the subject. It is about a course of educational study being correctly designed and delivered, with a rational curriculum, learning outcomes, policies etc. It has nothing to do with with embracing life after death as a fact. This is what professional governments accredited training providers look for.

I know because I am an accredited training provider myself.

Would be pretty useless though as a credential as a medium or a teacher of mediumship. Those SNU members had better hang on to those awards I say.

notabigjump wrote:

Janhar wrote:

notabigjump wrote:

Janhar wrote:
You don’t mean Government accredited mediumship diploma or degree I presume? That would require  government education departments  to embrace life after death as a fact. [end]

This misses the point of government educational accreditation. It is not about the government believing in the subject. It is about a course of educational study being correctly designed and delivered, with a rational curriculum, learning outcomes, policies etc. It has nothing to do with with embracing life after death as a fact. This is what professional governments accredited training providers look for.

I know because I am an accredited training provider myself.

Would be pretty useless though as a credential as a medium or a teacher of mediumship. Those SNU members had better hang on to those awards I say.

I disagree. It can show that a prescribed course of learning has been thoroughly examined and approved for its learning structure.

Janhar wrote:

notabigjump wrote:

Janhar wrote:

notabigjump wrote:

Janhar wrote:
You don’t mean Government accredited mediumship diploma or degree I presume? That would require  government education departments  to embrace life after death as a fact. [end]

This misses the point of government educational accreditation. It is not about the government believing in the subject. It is about a course of educational study being correctly designed and delivered, with a rational curriculum, learning outcomes, policies etc. It has nothing to do with with embracing life after death as a fact. This is what professional governments accredited training providers look for.

I know because I am an accredited training provider myself.

Would be pretty useless though as a credential as a medium or a teacher of mediumship. Those SNU members had better hang on to those awards I say.

I disagree. It can show that a prescribed course of learning has been thoroughly examined and approved for its learning structure.

But it wouldn't certify that your ability as a medium had been examined.

notabigjump wrote:Leaked and confirmed from an NEC source. Lisa Dawson (Head of Governance for the SNU) and the SNU General Manager Rachael Loukes have resigned. The SNU were trying to keep it under wraps before the AGM, but it seems as if the NEC are losing the will with the president now.

If we tally the number of people who have left, are leaving or in exile - there will soon be no SNU or AFC.

It is time for this president to resign herself. This is disastrous for Spiritualism!

Anniemillo1 wrote:I have only briefly read these posts so can I ask what would be the difference from an SNU Award and an Accredited Award.   To me the only difference is that the SNU Award no matter how much studying and money you spend if you leave the SNU or perhaps banished then it is all up in smoke because they say you cannot use your SNU awards.    The Payche Accredited awards for mediumship, inspirational speaking etc, are taught and assessed by qualified tutors in these fields.   So I think I am missing the point somehow.

notabigjump wrote:Leaked and confirmed from an NEC source. Lisa Dawson (Head of Governance for the SNU) and the SNU General Manager Rachael Loukes have resigned. The SNU were trying to keep it under wraps before the AGM, but it seems as if the NEC are losing the will with the president now.

If we tally the number of people who have left, are leaving or in exile - there will soon be no SNU or AFC.

It is time for this president to resign herself. This is disastrous for Spiritualism!

mac wrote:

notabigjump wrote:Leaked and confirmed from an NEC source. Lisa Dawson (Head of Governance for the SNU) and the SNU General Manager Rachael Loukes have resigned. The SNU were trying to keep it under wraps before the AGM, but it seems as if the NEC are losing the will with the president now.

If we tally the number of people who have left, are leaving or in exile - there will soon be no SNU or AFC.

It is time for this president to resign herself. This is disastrous for Spiritualism!

The President and maybe others resigning would be the right thing but.......  

Maybe it wouldn't be disastrous if that were to happen?  Time to make a fresh start.  

Interesting to learn about the resignations.  Who would truly want to be associated with what's going on?

Janhar wrote:
Re the SNU awards. You would still have your paper certificate to show you were awarded it. Everyone understands the SNU position of only recognising it if you stay in the SNU but everyone else would know you had earned it.... unless you had it removed for bad behaviour of course.

notabigjump wrote:

mac wrote:

notabigjump wrote:Leaked and confirmed from an NEC source. Lisa Dawson (Head of Governance for the SNU) and the SNU General Manager Rachael Loukes have resigned. The SNU were trying to keep it under wraps before the AGM, but it seems as if the NEC are losing the will with the president now.

If we tally the number of people who have left, are leaving or in exile - there will soon be no SNU or AFC.

It is time for this president to resign herself. This is disastrous for Spiritualism!

The President and maybe others resigning would be the right thing but.......  

Maybe it wouldn't be disastrous if that were to happen?  Time to make a fresh start.  

Interesting to learn about the resignations.  Who would truly want to be associated with what's going on?

Exactly Mac. It needs a complete reset. None of the old crowd. A new leadership.

Anniemillo1 wrote:Janhar wrote:

Re the SNU awards. You would still have your paper certificate to show you were awarded it. Everyone understands the SNU position of only recognising it if you stay in the SNU but everyone else would know you had earned it.... unless you had it removed for bad behaviour of course.

The following were actually mac's responses (muddled up when quoted above)    :

"Those were points I made earlier.....  

Would it really make any difference other than if a current certification/accreditation were demanded in a specific role?

Would one stop being competent at a previously recognised level JUST because an organisation said an award/certificate was being removed?

That's a high-handed, intimidatory approach to once-valued members, a ruse to keep 'em in line with an unenforceable, valueless diktat."