A few days before this course, I was reviewing the material and made a remark to Jen Platt on how much “good” stuff is in this course, that I forget about from year to year. It is so enjoyable to have an opportunity to discuss the reasoning one might use before selecting a position to place a client or patient in, before selecting a non-manual technique. What went into the thought processing regarding reference centers and concepts and why is it important to select an appropriate primary reference for desirable “referent” behavioral outcomes?
Results are based on preparation. Preparing the patient on what to be mindful of, sense, possibly expect, experience, etc. are all more important than making sure they are doing the technique “correctly”. Processing information can be difficult if individual centers of tactility are not explored first. Words matter, word placement matters, word meaning matters, word correlates matter, word integration matters and word synchrony matters.
This course allows me to review this communication process, inhibitory intensity and neurologic effort for those who have unique limitations but very similar outcome needs, relating to pattern development around asymmetrical design. Over twenty different non-manual techniques, many of which were selected by the attendees, were reviewed, torn apart, discussed, re-designed and then re-designed again, to recognize reliability of approach and validity of use. It is personal for me. And therefore, an opportunity for those who share their transparencies to reap “good” stuff.
Comments