It is really too bad. There is an absolutely excellent course buried away in here somewhere. I did dislike some of the more experiential elements. Probably because my mindfulness/meditation practice has moved on after a number of retreats and so the meditation practices felt a little basic and ungrounded. Although useful for many I am sure. Many o
...Read MoreRead more about It is really too bad. There is anf the more academic modules were however fascinating and have provided many ideas and much material which I am sure will enrich my life now and in the future. Slavoj ZiZek, Zen & Zazen, Dogen & Instructions for the Cook, come to mind. There are many more. The course also reawakened an interest in meditation more generally which has been invaluable in my present circumstances.
However, there is a sloppiness about the whole thing which I find hard to disregard. The course obviously came from somewhere else. There are references in the videos and podcasts to elements that are not within the Future Learn configuration. (What on earth is the honours project?). Much of the material is quite old, from around 2016 – 2019. A video around a third of the way through week 5 notes the end of the course, with still the rest of week 5 and week 6 to complete. Transcripts for videos disappeared after week 4. The project gallery in week 6 has some interesting ideas and yet all could have done with a good proofread. The English is often clunky and ideas poorly conceived and expressed. And these are exemplars. For our own projects we are expected to consider – for instance - theoretical frameworks, methodologies, samples, ethical implications, social motivations all within the space of 1200 characters. Detailed project frameworks also. Which simply cannot be done with any serious intent.
This sheen of gravitas and academic rigour is quite out of place. Although some students may engage seriously with the material, completion of a module can be as simple as a cursory review of the material and the click of a button. Irrespective of all of the academic and theoretical sophistry there is no assessment or demand for any real understanding. Many of the comments reflect only the vaguest most cursory understanding of the material. And there is no evidence of any external review of course progression. No comments. Nothing. We could all be talking complete twaddle to each other and no-one would be any the wiser. This could have consequences. It would not be unreasonable to suppose that a mindfulness course might attract those with a degree of vulnerability whose comments may be indicative of underlying issues requiring some form of advice or intervention.
In addition, there feels to be an aura of cleverness, of cynicism possibly, which is troubling. On the academic side, it is stressed that the course is clearly insufficient for instruction in mindfulness. Quite rightly so. Dr Chris Goto-Jones then notes that some unqualified teachers can be brilliant and inspirational. Quite a get out of jail card for the unscrupulous. Further, one of the projects in week 6 seems to strongly suggest that mindfulness instruction for vulnerable inner city groups is being considered simply on the basis of completion of the course. A cynic might conclude that something of a game is being played here. Structurally, the course was advertised with a suggested weekly time duration of 6 hours over a 6 week period with the option to pay for unlimited access. Given the timings of videos and meditation practices, completion within this time frame is clearly impossible therefore strongly pre-disposing students towards an upgrade costing around 45 euro. Quite a potentially lucrative proposition and a good example of the commercialisation of mindfulness. Read LessRead less about It is really too bad. There is an