|
|
|
|
Bob Lloyd
Skeptic Friend
Spain
59 Posts |
 Posted - 02/08/2010 : 11:42:40
|
ITEC is an international examining board which offers validation of qualifications in Business, Sport, Beauty, and something called Complementary.
Within the latter, they are offering a Diploma in Reiki. Now Reiki is a belief in a healing energy that practitioners claim to be able to absorb and then transfer into the body of a customer. This transfer, it is claimed, enhances the body's own healing capability.
There is absolutely no evidence for the existence of this healing energy, nor therefore any tangible means of demonstrating a skill in handling it. ITEC have posted the syllabus and examining criteria online which illustrates how nonsensical the assessment of such a course is.
Since they attract funding from the Learning and Skills Council, it seems reasonable to ask them how they justify it. I therefore sent them an email, and others are invited to do the same. It will be interesting to see what they say.
Their email address is: info@itecworld.co.uk
Below is a copy of the email I sent them though others will doubtless want to ask other searching questions.
-----------------------------
Dear ITEC,
I was very surprised to discover that ITEC was validating courses in Reiki.
The teaching of real practical skills clearly depends on those skills having a tangible demonstrable effect. In the case of Reiki, the practice depends on a belief in an undetectable energy source, a healing energy, which the practitioners claim to be able to collect and transfer to patients, effecting improvements in their health.
This is so contrary to known human biology and medical science that at best it constitutes a religion, and at worst a fraud. In the absence of any evidence that there exists such an energy source (and clinical trials have consistently shown such claims to be groundless), and without even the practitioners being able to describe how it is supposed to work, it seems difficult for anyone to be able to validate a qualification.
As a simple practical point, we could ask how one tell the difference between a real Reiki treatment and a fraudulent one. Both would claim to have transferred the undetectable energy, and in neither case is there any tangible change in anything. For the assessment of students, there needs to be some tangible evidence of the exercise of skills but Reiki offers no such possibility. So anyone claiming to have Reiki skills will have no tangible way of demonstrating it. On that basis, no Reiki qualification can actually be counted of evidence of skill and so validating such a qualification gives false credibility to the claim.
A study of the Reiki syllabus shows that there is no evidentiary basis for the practice and that the course requires only that students reproduce what they are told. The practical assessment likewise requires no evidence that a skill has actually been demonstrated, for example that a treatment has had an evidenced therapeutic benefit.
Since ITEC receives funding from the Learning and Skills Council, how can ITEC justify validating qualifications in a therapy that has no basis in fact, no evidence of any efficacy, and no tangible means of demonstrating the skills claimed?
I look forward to hearing from you.
Bob Lloyd
-----------------------------
|
|
|
Zebra
Skeptic Friend
USA
354 Posts |
Posted - 02/08/2010 : 20:35:06 [Permalink]
|
Good for you. Let us know when (if?) you hear back from ITEC!
|
I think, you know, freedom means freedom for everyone* -Dick Cheney
*some restrictions may apply |
 |
|
|
HalfMooner
Dingaling
Philippines
15831 Posts |
Posted - 02/08/2010 : 21:18:52 [Permalink]
|
Good for you indeed, Bob!
Is it your strategy to complain to ITEC first, then when (not if) they they refuse to take action, take the matter up with the Learning and Skills Council? (This happening in the UK, right?)
Ah, reading up a bit I find this quote in Wikipedia, coming from one Digby Jones, Baron Jones of Birmingham:| "It is what I call the British Leyland model - you put a lot of money in at the top and an Austin Allegro comes out at the bottom. The money has not been spent in the right way and it is not delivering what the employers want." |
It's certainty "has not being spent in the right way" if a single Reiki practitioner quack "comes out at the bottom." |
“Biology is just physics that has begun to smell bad.” —HalfMooner
Here's a link to Moonscape News, and one to its Archive. |
| Edited by - HalfMooner on 02/08/2010 21:32:05 |
|
|
|
Bob Lloyd
Skeptic Friend
Spain
59 Posts |
Posted - 02/09/2010 : 08:11:54 [Permalink]
|
I have now received a reply from the Administration Manager of ITEC, Rachel Moran, who informs me that ITEC actually jointly developed the Diploma course in Reiki in collaboration with the Reiki Council. Presumably they therefore also bear the responsibility for the assessment process then. It also seems that ITEC don't actually get funding from the Learning and Skills Council, just those institutions teaching the course. Those misunderstandings aside (and I picked them up from the ITEC website), it seems that ITEC are very involved in the course development. Nevertheless Ms Moran refers me to the Reiki Council who she said does not regard Reiki as a treatment. A quick look at their site at http://www.reikicouncil.org.uk/ will show that they very much consider it a treatment, but include a legal disclaimer about it treating specific medical conditions.
I have replied to Rachel Moran, restating my questions which she did not answer, and asked again how it is possible to assess the manipulation of an undetectable healing energy? I've also pointed out the details of the OFQUAL regulations relevant to assessing skills and the Reiki course clearly fails to provide adequate means of assessing the manipulation of healing energy.
We'll see what the response is. Presumably there are similar courses in the US which similarly have to meet certain regulatory conditions?
I think even if it works as a shot across the bows, getting Quackademia to look over its shoulder is a useful exercise in itself.
In an endearing personal comment, Ms Moran declared her personal faith in Reiki - presumably we could use the same justification for having Christians run skills-based courses in "Miracles"? |
| Edited by - Bob Lloyd on 02/09/2010 08:12:59 |
|
|
|
cantbe323
Suspended
242 Posts |
Posted - 02/09/2010 : 15:47:24 [Permalink]
|
Reiki is a belief in a healing energy that practitioners claim to be able to absorb and then transfer into the body of a customer. This transfer, it is claimed, enhances the body's own healing capability. >>
Possible stress reduction and relaxing from so-called healing hands, but actually healing someone is pure fantasy.
cantbe323 |
|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26020 Posts |
Posted - 02/09/2010 : 16:39:44 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by cantbe323
Possible stress reduction and relaxing from so-called healing hands, but actually healing someone is pure fantasy. |
Why? |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
|
|
|
Bob Lloyd
Skeptic Friend
Spain
59 Posts |
Posted - 02/10/2010 : 04:55:37 [Permalink]
|
I had a reply from ITEC saying that as they weren't "experts" in Reiki, I should direct my questions to the believers at the Reiki Council. They did though say that they developed the course in response to a body called QCDA which is a government curriculum development authority.
It seems they checked out the training available in various industries and included alternative medicine in the list. They found that because Reiki practitioners get trained by another one, in a pyramid selling scheme, then the provision for youngsters wanting to get in on the act was "poor" - so they promoted the development of courses. ITEC collaborated with the Reiki Council in providing the course, producing all the necessary documents to get boxes ticked by QCDA.
Of course, missing from the mix was any consideration of the factual content of the course, or the academic standard. Since the syllabus included stuff about chakras, auras, and the like, it seems as though the content was left to the self-proclaimed experts in the Reiki world.
I've now followed up the query with QCDA and asked them how the course content was checked for academic content and standard. Any private institution promoting unevidenced healing therapies can come along and propose a course and if it isn't already provided by someone on the list, they can get the go-ahead to develop it. Then with a government stamp of approval, colleges of higher education will start teaching those courses and collect the course fees, generating bums on seats. Never mind the fact that the claims of these alt-med merchants are completely unevidenced. By avoiding consideration of the content (because the sponsors take care of it), these alt-med therapies are getting a rubber-stamp for credibility.
Quackademia is a very corrupting movement, undermining the understanding of human biology and science for large numbers of youngsters. David Colquhoun in the UK and ORAC in the US have been exposing these courses in the university sector, but very many more courses are flourishing at the next level down. I think we need to raise the volume on these questions, so if anyone wants to do something practical, they can send an email questioning the content of Reiki Diplomas to: info@qcda.gov.uk or maybe choose a bunch of the many courses in the US and send some emails asking a few searching questions. If we make a noise, maybe we'll have some effect. If we only talk to each other, no-one else will hear. |
|
|
|
Bob Lloyd
Skeptic Friend
Spain
59 Posts |
Posted - 02/16/2010 : 05:59:18 [Permalink]
|
QCDA tells me that OFQUAL are the people the talk to, so I did. A very helpful Julie Sayer told me... that it was down to the Skills for Health organisation, another government body.
These guys, the Skills for Health, published a report last May looking at training and qualifications in the area of Complementary and Natural Healthcare at: http://www.skillsforhealth.org.uk/~/media/Resource-Library/PDF/CNH-QualificationsMapping_May2009.ashx.
This is a very curious document that takes as fact the statements from the alt-med industry. For example it says "Cranial Therapies are hands-on therapeutic approaches for normalising the functioning of the craniosacral mechanism and reflected imbalances in the body tissues." It takes each of the claims of alt-med as fact and on that basis looks for the appropriate provision of courses.
Since there is no checking of the course contents, the focus being only on whether there are "professional" courses available, these therapies are automatically given the stamp of approval. And since no government body is charged with any responsibility for ensuring that the content is real and genuine, reflecting actual reality, literally any quack organisation can get certified as long as they jump through the hoops.
I'll chase it up with another email, this time to office@skillsforhealth.org.uk and we'll see what they have to say. It's becoming increasingly obvious that no-one has any responsibility for ensuring that the content of these courses reflect something real.
|
|
|
|
Bob Lloyd
Skeptic Friend
Spain
59 Posts |
Posted - 03/24/2010 : 08:32:26 [Permalink]
|
In following up the accreditation of the level 3 Diploma in Reiki offered by ITEC, some interesting facts have come to light.
Despite being told by ITEC that they weren't involved in the syllabus of the diploma as they weren't experts, and then being passed on to Ofqual and QCDA, both of those bodies also denied responsibility for checking the content of the syllabus. I was referred instead to Skills for Health.
Their helpful head of Information Governance and Security, Mr John Sheehan patiently explained that in fact there were two diplomas from ITEC in Reiki. One of them, the international diploma contained the references to healing energy, energy sensing skills, and so on, whereas the UK diploma lacked any mention.
Indeed, the syllabus for the UK diploma course didn't have anything specific about Reiki at all except to include it generically in amongst many other "alternative medicine" approaches. The only sign of any assessment in Reiki was a subjective assessment by observation. We can only wonder why it was necessary to have such a completely different syllabus.
In addition, if you check the ITEC website, you can currently find three places in the UK offering the international diploma (energy sensing skills included) but none for the UK diploma.
But that's not all. On the ITEC site itself, the international version of the level 3 diploma says that it has "UK Accreditation: QCA 500/3251/3 Level 3" so it seems that somewhere along the line it has been accredited. Either that, or the ITEC site is wrongly claiming it to be accredited in the UK and should take down the false claim.
We'll have to wait and see what Skills for Health has to say but it looks like the UK syllabus was kept vague so as not to mention that imaginary healing energy and the undetectable energy sensing skills.
We have now come full circle as expected: from ITEC to Ofqual and QCDA to Skills for Health, and back to ITEC. And in all that, not the slightest hint that anyone with a passing familiarity with science, or indeed anyone at all, has taken a rational look at the syllabus. Time for another approach to ITEC. |
|
|
|
Kil
Evil Skeptic
USA
13476 Posts |
Posted - 03/24/2010 : 10:12:29 [Permalink]
|
| Thanks for the update, Bob!!! |
Uncertainty may make you uncomfortable. Certainty makes you ridiculous.
Why not question something for a change?
Genetic Literacy Project |
|
|
|
Bob Lloyd
Skeptic Friend
Spain
59 Posts |
Posted - 03/26/2010 : 02:43:05 [Permalink]
|
ITEC, after promoting its international Level 3 Diploma in Reiki as having UK accreditation, has now been contacted by Skills for Health and told to take down the claim. ITEC have been told to remove the statement on their website that the course had "UK Accreditation: QCA 500/3251/3 Level 3" because it didn't. As of this morning, it has been removed.
This is the course that apparently is able to assess students showing "basic energy sensing skills" manipulating that undetectable healing energy that Reiki practitioners claim to be able to channel into their patients.
The UK variety of the course makes no mention of such skills, nor indeed anything much about Reiki at all. It's still called a Diploma in Reiki but given its syllabus, the only thing that seems to relate it to Reiki is the subjective assessment during some observation sessions, all sufficiently vague to allow anyone to teach what they like.
But the good thing is that, given a little persistence, we can put a bit of pressure on the organisations promoting these courses to pay attention to the evidence base. Skills for Health initially responded to my enquiries with a very cursory and unhelpful response but after I pursued it, their response improved. ITEC themselves sent me to Ofqual and QCDA, which sent me to Skills for Health, who initially referred me back to ITEC, the classic run-around.
It is clear that ITEC wanted to show their diploma had academic approval in the UK when it didn't. They claimed accreditation when it didn't have it. And now they've taken it down from their website. The international diploma course is still there, and still taught in some institutions in the UK, and youngsters will still see it advertised as a potential career path.
But its a small victory and the more of these we get, the more we can push back against irrationality creeping into vocational qualifications. Thanks to anyone who did something to help. |
|
|
|
HalfMooner
Dingaling
Philippines
15831 Posts |
Posted - 03/26/2010 : 03:14:34 [Permalink]
|
| Great work, Bob! Looks like you've just chopped off one head of the Woo Hydra. |
“Biology is just physics that has begun to smell bad.” —HalfMooner
Here's a link to Moonscape News, and one to its Archive. |
|
|
|
Bob Lloyd
Skeptic Friend
Spain
59 Posts |
Posted - 03/26/2010 : 05:37:02 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by HalfMooner
Great work, Bob! Looks like you've just chopped off one head of the Woo Hydra.
|
But as you imply, plenty more are growing back... I think we should be doing more of this sort of thing, challenging them to produce the evidence or moderate their claims.
The concern that motivated me over this was that kids leaving school looking for a career path would see this sort of qualification as something real and valuable when it is neither. It made me indignant to think that kids and other people looking for work opportunities would be treated this way.
Thanks for your support. |
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
ITEC validating courses in Reiki?
