2000: Assembly Working Groups

One working group considered the values and constraints that this international body wished to set on the development of a Competency profile:

(ABC Report from 2000 Assembly)

A project such as defining competencies is highly sensitive to implicit values. Thus, it is important to be conscious of the values underlying the process and decision making. Further, when the values are understood, then decisions can be much clearer, for they will be made from a conscious balancing of multiple agreed upon values.

Some of the values that came up include:

* Develop the competencies in a way compatible with the Method
* Focus on how the competencies assist practitioner needs
* Envision what is ideal and move toward it
* Allow time for processing and consideration
* Think and be thoughtful
* Shift perspective and/or point of view
* Include all (be "democratic")
* Allow an organic rhythm to occur
* Go with, not against, and enhance what is possible while drawing in the perceived limitations
* Practitioners are continuing to develop themselves
* Consult with the different involved agents.

Other values include more global considerations such as:

* However the assessment is done, it will be respectful to the practitioner
* The competencies will provide worldwide standards, allowing practitioners to practice around the world
* The procedure for setting up competency standards will be transparent
* Recognition of differences within IFF membership.

From: Quality and Competence: Why, What and How [May 2000 IFF Assembly]. by Rob Black, Barbara Pieper and Markus Riesen. International Feldenkrais Federation Newsletter January 2001:

Another group realized that there were numerous stakeholders and developed a role-play to learn more about the relationships between the different stakeholders. This activity provided profound insights in the participants, as related below. This role play has been re-enacted in a number of locations with many of the same issues arising spontaneously.

A role-play emerged showing the interactions of different agents or stakeholders. It was so fascinating and informative that we are including it. The roles were (1) the public interest, e.g. the state or insurance agent, (2) the client, (3) the trainer and (4) the practitioner. The role-play began with the wish for a competent and qualified practitioner.

The state or insurance agent demanded security for citizens and standards, otherwise she would set up laws. Her attitude and posture expressed administrative and legal power. The trainer's position was that she was above all these arguments on competencies. What she needed was freedom to teach. The students get a qualified training! How to run a practice is up to them. The client was quite clear about her intentions: "I only pay for competent help. A diploma is important, as is the personality of the practitioner, too. Even more important, I need to feel secure, otherwise I am looking for somebody else."

Finally, the practitioner felt insecure, vulnerable, with neither protection nor power. She found she had to defend herself personally and professionally. She knew she was competent, but could not satisfy the demands expressed by the state or insurance agent. As a single practitioner she had practically no chance to stand up in that situation. She was longing for support by peers and an organisation.

We were very surprised to realise this weak position of the practitioner! Yet, upon reflection, this is the kind of feedback that practitioners have expressed repeatedly to their Guilds over the years. So we thought a process of developing competencies has to locate the interests of the practitioner in its center and provide the practitioner with support and protection. It became obvious that within this process we have to consider the different personnel and financial resources (access to power and money) of the stakeholders and look for providing the practitioner with support and protection.

When practitioners consider the benefits of a Competency Profile from the perspective of a practitioner, two themes emerge. One theme is for the profile to inform the practitioner how to increase his or her competence or proficiency in the Method. A second is for the practitioner to be able to show the public that he or she has met or exceeded standards.

From: Quality and Competence: Why, What and How [May 2000 IFF Assembly]. by Rob Black, Barbara Pieper and Markus Riesen. International Feldenkrais Federation Newsletter January 2001:

Other considerations at the Assembly included:

• the process for being a proficient practitioner is a developmental one (see Report-developmental)
• the profile have a flexible set of "ingredients" with some "core" elements, and some "elective" elements (see Report-flexible)
• what is entailed by having an assessment process? (see Report-assessment)
  

Summary

From these experiences and discussions, there arose clearer understandings of the need for competency.

The practitioner's needs are at the center of concern for competencies. Many of the historic activities of the IFF (and local Guilds) have been to develop the competence of practitioners. As we move toward identifying a Competency Profile, these activities will have a clearer intention and focus.

Further, a multi-faceted approach could be useful in helping to identify and integrate different interests, abilities, and skills and the perspectives of different involved agents (stakeholders) within, and outside of, the Feldenkrais world.

One process suggested was to hold Round Table discussions. In this way, the different perspectives would be acknowledged and have important input into the decision-making process.

It has been clear that, if we are going to develop assessment and evaluation processes, they must be specific to our method. Further, these processes must be open to evaluation within our community, by governing bodies (the state) and by the general public. The processes must meet, as of fairness, validity, reliability, variability and transparency.

From: Quality and Competence: Why, What and How [May 2000 IFF Assembly]. by Rob Black, Barbara Pieper and Markus Riesen. International Feldenkrais Federation Newsletter January 2001: