Yoga News, Articles & Comment
YOGA AND EDUCATION
There have recently been moves in the UK to regulate Yoga education, both as found in general Yoga classes and in the training of Yoga teachers, and to consider it in line with general educational principles which have some kind of governmental endorsement. At least three instances of this tendency spring to mind.
The one we are most familiar with is the collaboration of the BWY with the fitness industry bodies REPS and SkillsActive to produce the so-called National Occupational Standard (NOS) for a Yoga Teacher. This attempt to create a standard for the education of Yoga teachers takes the Yoga teacher to be a type of fitness instructor.
For some time, Yoga teachers working in Adult Education establishments have been urged to conform to yet another educational requirement. Pressure has been put on many of them to get the C&G Certificate in adult education (7307). Like the NOS, this is a cross-discipline qualification which receives some government support. In this instance, Yoga education finds itself in bed with flower-arranging, conversational French, life drawing and line dancing. (http://www.cityandguilds.com)
Yet another initiative is being considered by the British Council for Yoga Therapy. Their big idea is that Yoga teaching and Yoga teacher training should come under the same regulation as that now being proposed for Yoga therapy. (This is another NOS and like the SkillsActive "standard" it conforms to NVQ level 3.) Like the attempt to bring Yoga education into the fold of fitness, this too would allow Yoga education to be influenced by a non-yogic body, in this case the quango Skills for Health. Again, the standards that would be applied to Yoga education are cross-disciplinary and Yoga teaching will be likened to aromatherapy and so on. (http://www.Yogatherapyforum.org.uk/)
For all their apparent rigor, all of these approaches to Yoga education are built upon the same unexamined presupposition. What those involved in these initiatives have taken for granted, as though it did not deserve a second thought, is that Yoga education is sufficiently similar to other very general categories of education to be coherently considered under their rubric. In what follows, I'd like to examine that presupposition to see if we can safely continue to presuppose it.
The first fundamental question is this: "Is Yoga training education at all?" Well, what is education? The term "educate" derives from the Latin "educere" which means "to lead forth". Education, then, is a "leading forth", and this gives us a workable picture of what, ideally, education should entail: there is the one who leads, the teacher, and the one led, the student, and the immaturity and ignorance from which the student is "led forth". This is clearly applicable to the situation in which an experienced Yogi leads a student, through various means, towards the experiences, transformations, intuitions and states of being that Yoga promises. This process is one which is necessarily gone though by one who would himself lead others forth: it applies to teacher training as well as to general Yoga teaching.
So both Yoga training and Yoga teacher training are forms of education, at least in its original conception. So how does Yoga education compare with the education received in schools, colleges and universities and the vocational training received in practical disciplines?
The similarities first: Yoga like every other type of educational project has an informational content. It is generally thought that we need to learn what the techniques of Yoga are called, what they are for and to get acquainted with some model of how they work and so on. This is comparable to learning names of the various types of joints, pipes and valves needed by a central heating system, their functions, and the theory of hydraulics which enables us to mentally picture a whole system and so on. Knowledge of the history, textual basis, psychology and philosophy of Yoga is also thought useful in Yoga education, if only because it enables the student to place what he or she is practicing into a meaningful context. Confining study to these matters, however, remains in the sphere of scholarship and doesn't move into the sphere of Yoga itself which values practice and experience above all other aspects of education.
Again like most other practical areas of education, Yoga education imparts certain techniques and skills. Just as we might show someone how to solder a joint in water pipes, we might show someone how to perform a Yoga asana or pranayama. We will then get our student to execute the technique for himself whilst we observe and we will then in all likelihood correct any mistakes. We will do this several or even many times if necessary. The inward aspects of Yoga discipline, however, are not quite so amenable to this method.
The third similarity is that both Yoga education and education in general transform the student. Someone who acquires literacy has the course of their life changed (hopefully for the better) with knock-on effects for the way that they are, and the same applies to someone who tastes the fruits of Yoga.
Like education in general, then, Yoga education contains informational, practical and transformational elements and on this basis we are surely justified in treating it like any other educational project.
But this conclusion, to my mind, is too hasty. It rests on an inadequate consideration of the transformational element in Yoga education. It underestimates just how radical the transformation of the human being that Yoga education promises is and how it is of a wholly different order from the undeniably beneficial transformations in an individual's confidence, social integration and so on that come from gaining a university degree or becoming literate or acquiring skills in plumbing.
There are many ways within the Yoga traditions of conceptualising and expressing Yoga's transformational promise and it would take us too far afield to try and survey even a few of them. But what is clear is that Patanjali's "chitta vritti nirodha" or the sublime vision of cosmic unity of the Gita are a far cry from the well-being that derives from the improved position in the market place we gain on qualifying as a maths teacher, reflexologist or plumber.
Yoga education, if successful, re-orientates one's whole being, not only at the surface but in the very depths. (And this paradoxically remains the case if the Yoga education ends up persuading the practitioner [as I am so persuaded] that there is nothing to do and nothing to undo!) Yoga education exists to effect this radical transformation. All else is a spin-off, including health, flexibility, confidence, social integration, nice teaching career and so on. Techniques too are secondary - they are there only to do a job and are not an end in themselves.
And here we meet the decisive difference between Yoga education and all other educational programmes. The education which produces a maths teacher, reflexologist or plumber exists primarily to produce people who have the information and practical skills to fulfil these roles in the economy. Any positive transformation of the individual is welcome, but secondary. By contrast, Yoga education is primarily aimed at profound transformation of the individual and all other results are secondary.
This concern with radical individual transformation, which defines Yoga, also places it apart from pretty well all other educational programmes. Does this leave the informational and practical aspects of Yoga education untouched so that they can be considered in the context of education in general and accordingly prescribed with the transformational aspects alone being left to Yoga itself?
This indeed is the view of the authors of the NOS (Yoga Teacher) and it is just plain wrong. If transformation is the raison d'être of Yoga education then everything else about Yoga education must be subservient to it and determined by it. In the NOS (Yoga Teacher) programme, the practical and informational elements of what purports to be a Yoga education are determined from outside of Yoga. Consequently, Yoga's transformational element is cut adrift which is why it goes unmentioned in the NOS documents. The NOS in fact fails completely to map out a Yoga education because it severs the determining link between Yoga's transformational essence and what that requires practically and informationally.
It is because of this kind of fracturing of Yoga's educational structure that we see some Yoga teacher training programmes emulating academic disciplines with essays, tests and all the rest of the rigmarole. But if we look carefully here we will see that this is a deformation of Yoga education. A little thought-experiment makes the point: it would be perfectly possible for a very accomplished and inspiring Yogi to fail miserably in the attempt to become, say, a BWY certified teacher. The reverse is also the case: it is perfectly possible for someone to succeed very well in the kind of training that makes information primary whilst having absolutely no experience whatsoever of Yogic transformation and consequently no ability to help students to encounter Yoga's transformative essence. There is such a thing as Yoga scholarship, (and fine it is too), but it is not Yoga.
Consider now the practical aspects of Yoga education. The practical aspects are the means by which transformation is approached. Obviously, without a clear view of the ends, the means cannot be prescribed. But as we have seen, treating Yoga education alongside other educational programmes obscures its unique end, the transformation of the individual. This must necessarily also obscure its means. (The practical result is the inevitable emptying out of techniques of their transformational charge at the same time as technique is fetishised.)
As far as I can see, only the IYN/Yoga Register initiative takes account of the unique structure proper to Yoga education and does not erroneously conflate Yoga with education in general. If we are to remain true to the insight which has guided us this far, we should reject attempts by non-Yogic bodies such as SkillsActive and Skills for Health to gain hegemony over Yoga training and Yoga teacher training and encourage others to do the same. That the SkillsActive and Skills for Health meddling is being done in the name of educational rigour when the most basic thinking about the nature of education and its relationship to Yoga has not been done is alarming to say the least. That some yogis are happy to go along with it is even more alarming and unless this tendency is successfully countered the Yoga of the future will have no spark within it and will be just a dry, dead shell.
Pete Yates 3/5/2006
NOTE quotation
from Skills for Health document: "National Occupational Standards
are written within a defined structure regardless of the nature of the
occupation. This generic structure makes it possible for the standards
to be recognised across occupational areas and by national awarding bodies
and other accrediting institutions. It also means that while details of
content can be amended as a result of consultation the basic structure
of the document cannot be amended…." (Skills for Health
document downloadable from http://www.skillsforhealth.org.uk/development_documents.php?id=17)
(My italics.)
THE
INDEPENDENT YOGA NETWORK AND THE NEW YOGA REGISTER
- an exciting initiative by Yogis for Yoga!
History of The Independent Yoga Network
For those of us involved in Yoga, this is the most exciting time. Anyone seeing the enthusiastic crowds at the Yoga Show last year will be in no doubt that Yoga is moving into the mainstream of our culture, a development with tremendous potential to improve the lives of many and make our society more peaceful, more vibrant and more compassionate.
But promise, as always, is accompanied by danger. The recent explosion of interest in Yoga is without a doubt fuelled by a genuine thirst for the peace of mind that yogis have long told us is our birthright. But it is also accompanied by commercialism, sectarianism within the Yoga Community and the threat of bureaucratic intervention by government and other large, powerful bodies.
It was with these concerns in mind that a number of Yoga teacher trainers, myself amongst them, met up at the Yoga Show in November last year and formed the Independent Yoga Network. At that time, it seemed that many Yoga teachers who also trained others to teach were going to be marginalised or even put out of business by moves by the fitness industry to regulate Yoga teaching and Yoga teacher training and that there was a real urgency for us to prevent this. Naturally we wanted to continue doing what we loved, but we also had a conviction that for Yoga to thrive and for its promise for our culture to become a reality, it needed to remain both independent and diverse and not to fall under any kind of domination - whether commercial, sectarian or bureaucratic.
What struck me at that meeting was the breadth and depth of committed practice that these remarkable people had quietly been putting in. There were centuries of collective experience here and this was obvious from the abundance of energy that the group seemed to generate. We were all excited by the creative possibilities of this energy and friendship and we were planning festivals, publishing projects and teacher exchanges and more from the very outset. Our solidarity had begun in reaction to a perceived threat but quickly it became something altogether more positive and we saw that we could be of real creative service to Yoga and the Yoga Community. Since that original meeting more teacher trainers have joined us and there are now a dozen members encompassing a very wide range of approaches to Yoga.
The Yoga Register
But the first problem that we had to address was the need for some kind of register specifically for Yoga teachers and Yoga teacher training schools. Without it, Yoga in the UK would be dominated by the fitness industry and none of us were prepared to see Yoga teachers "officially" defined as exotic fitness instructors. Moreover, if correspondence we were receiving was anything to go by, the absence of truly appropriate registration for Yoga teachers would leave quite a large number of excellent teachers dispirited and perhaps in limbo. In our view, an alternative had to be put into place if the integrity of Yoga was to be maintained. The Yoga Register was conceived as that alternative. It would enable the public to find competent and authentic teachers and those wanting to become teachers to find excellent in-depth teacher training with teachers they resonated with. It would never seek to be anything other than entirely voluntary and would only seek the influence that comes from a well-deserved repuatation. It would be created by Yogis for Yoga.
Our next task was to determine the standard of competence that Yoga teachers and teacher training schools would need to meet in order to be admitted to the register. This was a difficult job because it had to reconcile the commitment to diversity with the obvious need for rigour.
At first, we thought we might model our registration standard on that of the Yoga Alliance and the International Yoga Federation. This standard at least had the virtue of having been devised by yogis. It has proved itself serviceable in the US where 10,000 teachers and 400 schools have registered with the Yoga Alliance since 1999. We did feel though that the standard was rather crude and mechanical, being based on a requirement to study various curriculum components for stipulated numbers of hours. In a flash of creative optimism, we decided to attempt a bolder solution to the problem of devising the registration standard. We decided to develop a standard both flexible and rigorous and based on fundamental principles with which any authentic Yoga school can agree.
What we came up with is this. A teacher's approach to teaching and a school's approach to training teachers needed to flow out of the Yogic principles of satya - truthfulness, ahimsa - non-violence, and svadhyaya - self-study. These somewhat abstract considerations were then translated into concrete requirements that good teachers had to embody and a good training programme had to enable them to embody.
The result of this exercise turned out to be quite common-sensical. A good teacher has to be safe, that is, they have to embody ahimsa. They need certain practical skills appropriate to the type of Yoga they teach. (E.g. if the style they teach requires hands-on adjustment of yoga asana, they need the ability to do this effectively.) They need to operate from a sound knowledge base which is rooted in the Yogic traditions and in other areas of knowledge (e.g. anatomy) appropriate to the Yoga they teach. Both of these requirements are simply a requirement for honesty (satya) on the part of the teacher: honesty requires that we can do what we profess to be able to do and that we do know what we profess to know. Crucially, the Yoga teacher needs to teach on the basis of their own experience and diligent practice. A particularly important aspect of their practice is self-study (svadhyaya) and this should have given her the self-knowledge that informs really effective teaching. Honesty, again, is the key here to the requirement. There are also ramifications of the application of these Yogic principles for teacher training programmes. A teacher training programme needs to have assessed that a prospective teacher has mastered all of these four components. Yet again this is a matter of honesty: a certificate awarded to a teacher needs to be truthful in its assertion that the teacher is competent and so some assessment of the teacher needs to have taken place.
The use of these fundamental principles to develop the standard clearly allows for a wide diversity of approach whilst simultaneously ensuring rigour. Notice, for example, that there is no stipulation of the Yoga style to be taught or the philosophical and textual underpinnings a teacher training must have, and no need for such stipulation. If the commitment to satya is taken on board by a school, rigour will automatically follow. Schools are also free to assess their students by means appropriate to their style and philosophy. All that matters is that the assessment method is effective and honest. This freedom for teacher training schools is necessary, on our view, to allow Yoga to develop and adapt to our culture and to remain true to its experimental essence.
Types of registration
We will continue to refine this work on the standard but are now ready to launch the Yoga Register and take applications from schools and teachers. The registration of a teacher training school is quite straightforward, though perhaps daunting at first sight. A teacher training school wishing to register submits a range of documentation, including a sample of teaching materials, to the register. The main part of the submission is the presentation of a case which illustrates that the school equips its graduates with the four concrete requirements of safety in teaching, practical skill, knowledge, and bases all of this firmly on personal practice. They are given the opportunity to support their case by reference to their teaching materials, statement of aims, ethical statement and so on. As far as duration of courses are concerned: here we have followed internationally agreed guidelines and added a level of our own. Courses are categorised according to duration as 200 hours, 500 hours or 1000 hours. We have test-driven this application process and found that it makes even the most experienced teacher reflect on her teaching and practice. Of course, this is no bad thing!
As far as teacher registration is concerned: there are four different ways in which a teacher can apply for registration with the Yoga Register. Firstly, a graduate from a registered school can be registered automatically on presentation of her certificate and payment of a minimal fee annual fee (£25). A graduate from a non-registered school will need to demonstrate from the course material of her school that the standard of training matches or exceeds that of the Register standard. The third type of applicant is the one most likely to experience difficulties in the current climate. We are particularly keen to help these people because there are many excellent teachers amongst them. They are what we call "applicants by independent study". They will be assessed on the basis of a portfolio of training and experience. This might apply to an uncertified training by apprenticeship with a guru or a combination of trainings from various schools. The fourth category applies to "Yoga Elders". This is for those with 5000 hours of successful teaching under their belt. They will need to document their teaching career and supply two references.
In this initial phase, applications are being assessed by a panel of IYN members. In time a professional registrar will be employed and IYN will put the Yoga Register at arms length.
Invitation
I have only give a brief outline here of the work of the Yoga Register and the registration process. But I hope I have said enough to convince the Yoga Community of the necessity for this initiative.
At this point I want to appeal to teacher training schools to come on board and register their training and, if they want to be a part of the creativity at the heart of this work, to join the IYN. For us, this is a way of expressing commitment to diversity in Yoga and helping to keep Yoga independent and vital. It is a way of grasping the opportunity that Yoga has before it to seep deeply into the fabric of our culture to the good of all. It is a way of helping to bring about some solidarity within the Yoga Community, a solidarity that will make us a force for good and keep Yoga fresh and alive. It is also a way for teacher trainers to help their students to find their way in the world when they finish their training.
I also want to appeal to everybody out there who is actively teaching to apply for registration. Everything I have said to teacher trainers applies to you too. Registration is also a way of getting your excellent work recognised by your peers. It will put you in the strong position of belonging to a family in which the members support each other in the momentous work to be done. For our part, we are ready to work very hard to promote the Yoga Register standard in order to be of service to Yoga teachers and those who they teach.
For further details and application forms see the web sites or phone us.
www.theyogaregister.org
www.independentyoganetwork.org
May all beings be free!!!
Pete Yates
Chair, IYN
21/8/05 (First published in Yoga August 2005)
CORPORATE TAKE OVER OF YOGA
There is quite an upheaval happening on planet Yoga in the UK at the moment. The Yogi-in-the-street might not be aware of it, but for those of us who are full-time teachers and teacher trainers the impact is considerable. One of the consequences of this seismic shift is that there is a lot of misinformation flying about regarding the future of Yoga and the legal status of teachers.
One of the commonest misconceptions is that The British Wheel of Yoga (BWY) has some sort of legal clout which entitles it to say who can and cannot teach Yoga. This misconception arises because the BWY continually announces itself as "The National Governing Body for Yoga in the UK". They often fail to mention that this title was awarded by the Sports Council. When we reunite "Governing Body" and "Sports Council" and apply a bit of logic, we get an interesting result. Let's do it:
BWY is the governing body for Yoga according to the Sports Council.
The Sports Council appoints governing bodies for specific sports.
Therefore Yoga is a sport.
Therefore BWY is the governing body of the Sport of Yoga.
This is patently absurd. No one with even the slightest scintilla of awareness about Yoga is going to claim that it is a sport. By continually parroting this stuff, the BWY is showing its profound ignorance of what it purports to govern. They are also clearly ignorant of the Yogic ethical precept of satya or truthfulness in that they often fail to tie "Governing Body" with "Sports Council" and are happy to give people the false impression that their claim to govern Yoga has some sort of weight. In fact, it is entirely spurious.
Another common misconception is that the fitness industry body SkillsActive has some sort of legal power over Yoga. It doesn't. Let's clarify the position.
Skillsactive is an employer led organization, licensed by the government to be the "Skills Sector Council for Active Leisure and Learning". It is a registered charity.
REPS (The Register of Exercise Professionals) is owned by SkillsActive and is a non-profit company.
SkillsActive is currently finalizing the grandiosely titled "National Occupational Standard for Yoga" and expects to have done so some time in February 2005. This standard is a sub-set of the National Occupational Standard for Fitness Instructor Level 3. The latter is known as the "generic standard" and the former as the "Yoga specific" standard. The generic standard is now fixed and is non-negotiable. The specific standard will soon be fixed and Skillsactive have consulted on it with those in the Yoga Community they have been able to reach and who were willing. (At the time of writing they still seem to be inviting input.) The generic standard is quite long at 41 pages and very detailed. The Yoga standard in its current draft form is quite short and fairly general. The Yoga specific standard has been set by BWY and the consultation results are going to be inspected by BWY.
The two standards form the basis for assessing whether anyone applying to REPS can be admitted to the register. The applicant's training and experience have to map on to the standards in every detail. If they do, then the applicant is admitted. To stay on the register, a CPR certificate is required, though six month's grace is given. Also, the registrant has to undertake continuing professional development (CPD). SkillsActive endorses certain providers of this and in time will insist that the registrant gets her CPD through them.
At the moment there are two routes onto REPS. A BWY graduate is automatically admitted even though the Yoga standard is not yet set. This is because of an agreement made between the Sports Council and SkillsActive at the time of the latter's inception. Besides this route, an individual can apply directly to REPS at a cost of £25. REPS will assess his or her suitability on the basis of experience and qualifications. I know a number of non-BWY teachers who have successfully followed this route (even though the Yoga specific standard is not yet set).
In the future, admittance to REPS will be possible through any teacher training school that has had its curriculum approved by SkillActive. Such a curriculum has to map onto both standards 100%. Obviously, this can only happen when the Yoga standard is settled. Also, the teacher of the curriculum has to be deemed suitable to deliver a TT programme by SkillsActive. The criteria for this will involve the teacher training tutor's experience and qualifications and the course will be subject to external verification, i.e. observation of its delivery by an appointed "expert".
REPS are about to embark on a massive publicity campaign, a part of which is to get the public to ask if their instructors are registered with them.
Another key player, the Fitness Industry Association (FIA www.fia.org.uk) have incorporated a clause into its code of practice requiring its members to have all its employees on REPS by August 2005.
All this clearly will have an impact on Yoga teacher training and teacher employment prospects, though what that will be is unclear. Clearly though the initial effect will be felt within the fitness industry, that is, in gyms and fitness centres, since the standard is set by the fitness industry for the fitness industry. REPS would no doubt like it to spread further than that but the Registrar at REPS would not tell me what the reach of REPS is likely to be and declined to define the fitness industry.
Personally, I don't believe this state of affairs should go unchallenged by the Yoga Community. It cannot be right that the fitness industry should be able to define Yoga and say who can and cannot teach it. This is a matter for Yogis and the Yoga Community. A large segment of the fitness industry exists primarily to make profits for shareholders and not to promote the spiritual development of human beings and this will colour Yoga as it is practised in the fitness industry and will also dilute the public understanding of Yoga. Another problem is that the generic standard for fitness instructor level three is not appropriate to Yoga. It makes the mistake that Yoga is a fitness regime when "exercise" is only a fragment of what it is. (No wonder BWY have teamed up with this gang: they share the same delusion.) It also demands a pedagogic style which just does not apply to good Yoga teaching.
It is because of misgivings like these that I have joined with a dozen or more other teacher trainers to form the Independent Yoga Network (IYN). The majority of teacher trainers both inside and outside this organisation who I have spoken to believe that Yoga Standards are the business of Yogis and not of the fitness industry and much work is now being done to establish and then publicise those standards. This is difficult work and I'm not sure yet how successful we will be. But without success in this endeavour, Yoga will be the victim of yet another corporate rip-off.
P.Yates, 3/2/2005
(All the information in this article is derived from publicly available documents on SkillsAcitive, REPS and BWY web sites and has been confirmed in conversations with officials of those bodies.)
Post Script - The so-called Yoga standard is now in place (21/8/05)
about the parkdale yoga centre
links to useful & interesting sites
*NEW* bowen technique treatments
Contact:
The Parkdale Yoga Centre
10 Parkdale West
Wolverhampton
WV1 4TE
Phone: 01902 424048
