Minutus

Hi Erica

You can use Kent’s repertory for the repertorization part of the test only

Outside of that no other references are allowed
Donna
From: minutus@yahoogroups.com [mailto:minutus@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of McPhee Family
Sent: Friday, July 03, 2009 6:22 PM
To: minutus@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [Minutus] CHC Test (was Re: New Approaches (Was: provings))
This may be a stupid question but are you allowed to use a MM and rep during the test or do you have to memorize the majority of the polycrests?
Thanks!

Truly,

Erica

Not allowing MM's is just as stupid as not allowing dictionaries in
exams for translators.

The latter is downright stupid because it gets students to translate
from their memory, instead of looking up in a dictionary whether there
may be even better ways to express the original word - which makes ofr
an awful lot of very, very bad translations.

The same can probably be said for the test of homeopathy.

Reps were never made to replace the MM's - the final selection is to
be after verifying in the MM's what you found in the reps or had in
your mind.

Regards

Luise
--
One thought to all who, free of doubt,
So definitely know what's true:
2 and 2 is 22 -
and 2 times 2 is 2:-)
==========> ICQ yinyang 96391801 <==========

I agree.
A lazy examiner is behind memory exams that should be open book tests
of homeopathy skill.
Skill in looking up what's needed is essential to a homeopath. I
consider it important to repertorize (and use MM) in detail for
EVERY case and to NEVER go by memory - EVER!
Real life does not exclude access to information for a homeopath.
Just the opposite.
It's the skill in finding and using it that needs to be tested - not
the skill in memorising some of it (thus skewing the homeopath into
being a very biased one too).

What I object to most is a memory test of what remedy has which
symptoms.
It is the fastest way to teach students (and professionals) to
repertorize backwards - starting from remedy knowledge instead of
client knowledge.
- thus (worst mistake made by most homeopaths) trying to fit a
remedy to the client - when they should be fitting the client to a
remedy. CHC memory-exam, just tests prowess in doing it backwards!

It would be better to examine on a set of new imaginary remedies with
UNKNOWN symptoms documented in a book (repertory and MM), and give
the student a case to solve using the unknown remedies only. This
will FORCE them to repertorize the right way round - starting with
client symptoms only - and LEADING to remedy options. It is the
opposite of a memory test about remedies. It requires that the
remedies be the unknown. This then tests how good a homeopath the
candidate is.
I thought that was what we were to certify?????????????

But the CHC approach will pass anyone who can do CPR and who can
photo-memorize for repping backwards.
That is NOT homeopathy skill being tested!
IMO - It actually *teaches* backwards work (how to be a BAD
homeopath)....
as the CHC exam testing wrongly - forces it to be taught at schools
wrongly in preparation for CHC "exam".

Namaste,
Irene
--
Irene de Villiers, B.Sc AASCA MCSSA D.I.Hom/D.Vet.Hom.
P.O. Box 4703 Spokane WA 99220.
www.angelfire.com/fl/furryboots/clickhere.html (Veterinary Homeopath.)
"Man who say it cannot be done should not interrupt one doing it."

Got ya. An exam to pass if you have money to waste and time to spend,
but nothing to study for. Studying for it could ruin you as a
homeopath.
Best,
Ellen

On Sun, Jul 5, 2009 at 7:21 AM, Irene de
Villiers wrote:

That's how I feel yes.
People should also check that they fall within the narrow lanes of
those chosen few who are permitted to sit the exam in gthe first
place, before they waste time and money on studying and applying for
it
For example:
Nobody doing veterinary homeopathy.
Nobody in a wheelchair.
Nobody who can not sit a 9 hour exam in one go.
Nobody who works on such complex cases that they do 10 cases or less
a week.
Nobody who studied outside a listed school, no matter how good the
school where they did study.
Nobody who is awaiting immigration processing but is legally in USA.
Nobody outside USA
Nobody who is unable to do masses of rote memory work to regurgitate
etc

It's a VERY long list of exclusions (several unconstitutional at that).
Who is left in the elitist group? Do we really want to support such
an elitist system?

IMO not one of those exclusions is a *valid* reason for exclusion
from the homeopathy profession.

I keep hoping we shall have a real certifying body - namely one to
test *all* homeopaths wishing to be tested, regardless of background
or above ridiculous exclusions, and to do no more than certify that
they have a minimum level of competence in chronic case work using
homeopathy and are competent to handle homeopathy cases including
especially chronic cases. Open book, open computer, open anything
style - but the test questions can have enough smarts behind them to
involve (and thus test) such anatomy and physiology as a homeopath
would expect to find in a sample case.

Something of the sort of: Read the following case, and say how you
would handle it, and why.

I'd have: Prerequisites - None - but it is recommended that you first
complete the equivalent of.....(sensible list here) ..... as you are
unlikely to succeed with less.

Namaste,
Irene
--
Irene de Villiers, B.Sc AASCA MCSSA D.I.Hom/D.Vet.Hom.
P.O. Box 4703 Spokane WA 99220.
www.angelfire.com/fl/furryboots/clickhere.html (Veterinary Homeopath.)
"Man who say it cannot be done should not interrupt one doing it."

Hi Irene,

That is exactly what I meant.

Just as in translation work it teaches the students (I have raved at
it at the University - at least in one case with success about it)"How
to do sloppy translation".

Exam conditions should be as close to "real life" conditions as
possible.

Regards

Luise
--
One thought to all who, free of doubt,
So definitely know what's true:
2 and 2 is 22 -
and 2 times 2 is 2:-)
==========> ICQ yinyang 96391801 <==========

A brilliant suggestion, in my view.

John

--
------------------------------------------------------------------

"Nothing is so fatal to the progress of the human mind as to suppose that our views of science are ultimate; that there are no mysteries in nature; that our triumphs are complete; and that there are no new worlds to conquer."

— Sir Humphry Davy, in "An Account of some Galvanic Combinations", Philosophical Transactions 91 (1801), pp. 397–402 (as quoted by David Knight, Humphry Davy: Science and Power, Cambridge, 1998, p. 87)

Interesting typo here, Luise. We spent many years in UK trying to get a registration/self-regulation concensus going in order to avoid the state 'fist'! It fell apart at the eleventh hour and now an attempt by the largest organisation to go it alone and make the ensuing independent body open to non-members too also seems to have hit a wall. No-one is giving up on the ideal but it is looking increasingly unlikely to me that the state fist will be avoided. In our case there would be a general lowering of standards as our existing colleges mostly teach to well above the general standard of 'complementary' therapies. The emphasis would be on professional behaviour rather than quality and type of practice, I suspect.
Theresa
Luise wrote:
But would not the certification organisation have to be accredited by
the state fist in order to mean anything?

I mean, just as anyone can call himself a homeopath, any group of
people can set up a "certification board". set standards of their own
liking and start certifying - schools and individuals.

So standards would have to be agreed on by ALL those who consider
themselves homeopaths, they would have to speak in one voice to
persuade the authorities to agree to those standards. If there is
strife, you cannot expect the authorities to know enough to determine
whether classcal homeopathy or Heilkunst or mixopathy or.. standards
are best - and you cannot expect Heilkunst or mixopathy to agree that
"classical" is best or the only way.

I do not see how you can overcome that hurdle.

your point about 'not avoiding the state fist' is well noted.
and this is the most compelling reason to do the chc test.
as per the acupuncturists in the usa, when they finally passed
a licensing approval in new york, those who had a license
elsewhere were grandfathered in. in another type of profession,
home inspections, the state did the same thing. if you could
demonstrate 50 successful inspections they grandfathered you in
and licensed you. so, i suspect that individual states will begin
to set up their own licensing requirements which will allow
for grandfathering in a set of prescribed standards.
and you are right, those standards will also include the set of
ethics that they deem most important: do not discourage people
from seeing allopaths!
tanya

One thing strikes me about this suggestion : I have a feeling it would be really difficult to match the strange complexity that real remedies have – they have a genuine, deep coherence underlying a surface chaos. It would be a bit like writing and deciphering computer code if they were to fabricate hypothetical remedies – logical sequencing without the “SRPs” of life. I’m not sure that testing such skill would be particularly relevant to real case analysis and therapeutics. I believe what the examiners use now are actual cured cases that are relatively straightforward. The patient’s narration in a real case gives real cues, and it’s the overall picture of the symptoms, their relative importance, and the “gestalt” of the patient’s behavior and narrative, taken together, that point to the needed remedy – not just repertorization (which the exam tests separately, using real repertories, remedies, and rubrics but with no case context).
Rosemary
“The quieter you become, the more you can hear."
~Ram Das
From: minutus@yahoogroups.com [mailto:minutus@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of John Harvey
Sent: Saturday, July 04, 2009 11:39 PM
To: minutus@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [Minutus] CHC Test
A brilliant suggestion, in my view.
John
--
------------------------------------------------------------------

"Nothing is so fatal to the progress of the human mind as to suppose that our views of science are ultimate; that there are no mysteries in nature; that our triumphs are complete; and that there are no new worlds to conquer."

— Sir Humphry Davy, in "An Account of some Galvanic Combinations", Philosophical Transactions 91 (1801), pp. 397–402 (as quoted by David Knight, Humphry Davy: Science and Power, Cambridge, 1998, p. 87)