Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

On Feldenkrais Training

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #91
    I'm interested in Alexander Technique.

    Dan, thanks for the link to that youtube channel it's some of the best work of this type I've seen online.

    Comment


    • #92
      Originally posted by CynthiaAllen View Post
      Just curious, but why is it that the Alexander Technique isn't the approach being discussed here? Are PT's not aware of it? Or not as interested?
      Not sure, other than the title of the thread is "On Feldenkrais Training" and maybe no one wanted branch out.

      Here's an older thread I found (Alexander technic ?) that maybe a great place for you to add your input and get people talking again... if you don't want to talk about it on this one.
      C.O. ( gender: ) - LMT, BS(Anatomy), DC
      Music Fog... pick a song to listen to... you can't go wrong.
      Need relaxation samples for your office? I have made a Deep Relaxation Massage Music Pandora Station and have others that may also be useful - about 8 massage music stations and about 49 other nifty options.

      Comment


      • #93
        Originally posted by Curious One View Post
        .

        Here's an older thread I found (Alexander technic ?)
        Thanks! Interestingly short thread. I would guess that the Feldenkrais Method has done at least a little something right to catch this much interest on Soma Simple where the Alexander Technique very little. I have only had a little exposure to AT. So I don't have that much to add. The cuing seems very good. And the touch expert. I get a few clients who have tried AT. They all feel they benefited but also don't feel they learned how to care for themselves over the long run. Those that end up doing FM like the variety of lessons and self care they can learn. Other than that, I don't actually have much direct connection with AT.

        Comment


        • #94
          Hi Cynthia; brief reply

          I can get very ranty about the evolution of the Feldenkrais work.
          Can't we all

          I have tried to switch from rant to what I can do about it the last few years. We formed a nonprofit where the emphasis is to offer training programs that actually have CEUs for physical, occupational, and massage therapy and to treat the fields and the participants with respect and welcome their knowledge base.
          I believe this is your website, correct?

          Out of curiosity, what have you found works in terms of re-packaging Feldenkrais for CEUs?

          Also just one thing to offer about the closed door nature of the materials which I believe I read somewhere in this thread. Moshe's work is owned by his family. Some of the lack of availability has to do with his family and not all of it is related to the Feldenkrais Guild climate.
          Of course, it's impossible to 'own' movement sequences....thus the successful Anat Baniel split. IIRC, the Feldenkrais family own the original Feldenkrais training videos and the name but beyond that, I'm not sure it's possible to own anything.

          In terms of good encapsulations of the method (such that someone could pick it up and run with it) I recommend Yochanan Rywerant, Jeff Haller and Larry Goldfarb's; they present succinct, stand-alone packages. I note another Feldy has come to a similar conclusion.

          I agree that has been the case, but I don't see any reason why I have to continue it. I feel I and my teaching partner Carol Montgomery are doing a pretty good darn job in this respect. But, it is a drop in the bucket. AND it is painstaking to get a PT in the door to study with us even with our attempts to collaborate and make the work extremely accessible with plenty of lecture to do with the experiential.
          Please feel free to update this thread with your progress. There are several parties here that may be interested. There's a real paucity of quality research on FM.

          I study Spiral Dynamics and Ken Wilber's integral philosophy work as a way of understanding human and cultural development. This has lead me to seeing much of what has happened in the Feldenkrais community as "age-appropriate."
          Sounds interesting. Weirdly, after (what? 40?) years, not much progress has been made. Does Wilber have any suggestions as to why that might be and/or what to do about it?

          I like what a PT told me some years ago. "Cynthia, you only get to see the people that PT has failed. We actually do help a lot of people." That has stuck with me. And I know realize that somewhere someone is getting to see the people that I have "failed." It isn't good to make broad brush strokes off of such limited data but probably inevitable.
          :thumbs_up

          Just curious, but why is it that the Alexander Technique isn't the approach being discussed here? Are PT's not aware of it? Or not as interested?
          You can see the reasons for this thread in post #1; namely it arose due to some comments/frustrations by a current trainee. SS has not had much success in getting Feldenkrais people to comment / interact, so I wanted to do something to counter-act that by providing resources, commentary, analysis and honest dialog.
          Last edited by Dan84; 10-10-2013, 05:30 PM.
          Dan
          Tactile Raconteur

          Comment


          • #95
            Speaking of good resources, I've been remiss in not mentioning Case of Nora

            And, although this isn't a Feldenkrais book, The Design of Everyday Things first got me to thinking about the theory of affordance

            If you read the wiki page there, I think you can see where I'm going with this.

            BTW, this thread is almost to 7000 views. I think that's more views then there are Feldenkraisers. Perhaps I should have asked the IFF for some $$$ for doing such a swell marketing job :P
            Last edited by Dan84; 10-10-2013, 06:07 PM.
            Dan
            Tactile Raconteur

            Comment


            • #96
              Feldenkrais and PT or whatever Dan called this to begin with

              Originally posted by Dan84 View Post
              I believe this is your website, correct?
              Yes. We have major updating to do as we let the organization set this past year but it is the non-profit organization I helped found.

              Originally posted by Dan84 View Post
              Out of curiosity, what have you found works in terms of re-packaging Feldenkrais for CEUs?
              I am not sure I understand that question. Does "work" mean people show up or does "work" mean gets awarded CEUs by professional certification groups such as the Ohio PTA? Or something else?


              Originally posted by Dan84 View Post
              Of course, it's impossible to 'own' movement sequences....thus the successful Anat Baniel split. IIRC, the Feldenkrais family own the original Feldenkrais training videos and the name but beyond that, I'm not sure it's possible to own anything.
              True. The family owns his actual writings, videos and audios. As long as we make substantial changes in how we produce his work (that is we don't read it verbatim and sell it) we are of course free to sell or distribute our own Feldenkrais lessons. The use of the term Feldenkrais is legally regulated in each country per each country's laws. A physical therapist who is not a Feldenkrais practitioner cannot legally say they teach Feldenkrais lessons or sell material to that end. Nearly impossible to enforce however and questionable whether it is helpful to do so unless it is blatantly bad quality.

              Originally posted by Dan84 View Post
              Please feel free to update this thread with your progress. There are several parties here that may be interested. There's a real paucity of quality research on FM.
              Yes there is. Did you see the finally published research by Jim Stephens this month on using Feldenkrais ATM for hamstring length? A drop but every drop helps.


              Originally posted by Dan84 View Post
              Sounds interesting. Weirdly, after (what? 40?) years, not much progress has been made. Does Wilber have any suggestions as to why that might be and/or what to do about it?
              This is a huge topic and I can only spend a little time on it but will give it a quick go.

              40 years sounds like a long time, but really isn't in the life of a work. PT goes back to trainers in the day of Hippocrates? I just did a quick search on Wiki so really don't know how that formed. But it was quickly picked up by the medical field.

              This 40 years is compounded by the fact that is was a single person who created it. And there are other related fields also created around the same time. Alexander Technique, Silver's Sensory Awareness. Thomas Hannah's work, and Laban's work. If these fields were to group under an umbrella together there might be more potential in numbers. Pilates started about 40 years earlier than Feldenkrais and it took until the 1990 to really take off and it is vastly simply body of work from what I can te..

              It also isn't a long time for a work that sees itself operating outside of the cultural norms. This automatically sets up a different tension/dynamic. That identity would need to be shaken up a bit.

              In terms of Don Beck's Spiral Dynamics, which is the study of how cultures develop, I think the Feldenkrais culture's center of gravity is operating out of a blue stance which has a clear god and clear ideas about the right way. This is a normal developmental phase and actually not that different from the center of gravity of the entire field of physical therapy. Although PT is ahead moving strongly into the next level of orange.

              The mission of the Feldenkrais guild has tended to be to protect the legacy of Moshe Feldenkrais which as my husband says is to become a museum. To transition to the next phase of orange where rules are used for self-advantage instead of to keep ourselves in line and the rest of the world out, environmental conditions must be ideal. Ideal means certain skill acquisition as well as wanting it bad enough to let go of the old identity. To acquire these skills is very difficult because by operating outside of the mainstream each practitioner is left to recreate the wheel of becoming a successful practitioner.

              For a physical therapist, they will likely be "mentored" in a system that will give them income, status, and a common language that works more or less throughout the healthcare system. More experienced therapists will look over their shoulders and vice versa so there is a chance to be brought along at a quicker pace. However, this has its downsides. It also makes it less likely that the therapist will learn to be their own inner authority. Creativity seldom thrives in these environments. Both aspects, self-autonomy and creativity are fundamental aspects of the Feldenkrais Method.

              Back to ideal conditions: Either the environment is so favorable it is easy to jump to the next level of development or conditions are so unfavorable that one risks going extinct without change.

              Ken Wilber is more the study of mutiple lenses for every phenomena. His map is very helpful. It consists of quandrants, lines of development/intelligence, levels, times and states.
              The quandrant map is divided first into subjective and objective experience then halved again into individual/it or we/its.
              On the quadrant map I find that the Feldenkrais Method values the subjective individual experience. We value development from the inside out and we are almost entirely a field that explores from this lens. PT is more of an objective process. It has a high value on what can be seen, studied, replicated. While both subjective and objective exist in every situation, there is a tendency to value one over the other and this is why each has something to offer the other. Another aspect of his map is the importance in developmental sequences which runs the gammit of evolution to values to cells. He puts the most value on the lower levels of development as they support the upper levels. This fits with the Feldenkrais approach which is to take a person back to lower developmental movements and improve those to make a difference in the upper levels. This is an intention of PT as I understand it but sometimes gets lost in practice.

              You asked about a solution, Dan from Wilber's perspective. Wilber's thing is to try and help all of us realize that we are really exploring over the same elephant but from different perspectives. The elephant only gets more complete by valuing each other's lenses.

              That is a pretty poor explanation of their works (particularly Wilber who has authored around 30 books). If I find some easy reference links in the next few days I can post, I will.

              This conversation makes me a little nervous since I can really only speak for myself and clearly there are many opinions on the FM and PT and Integral. I am thinking out loud above and I would need to spend much more time honing my thoughts into something that has legs or that I would be willing to defend.

              Comment


              • #97
                Link to overview of spiral dynamics

                Originally posted by CynthiaAllen View Post
                If I find some easy reference links in the next few days I can post, I will.
                This is just a broad review of the value meme development in Spiral Dynamics. There is a great deal more on change, etc in the text Spiral Dynamics by Cowan and Beck.

                http://www.mcs-international.org/dow...namics_wie.pdf

                This overview happened to be published in a spirituality magazine but I wouldn't say the model is particularly spiritual so if that bothers you, try to get past the beginning and to the description of the various levels.

                Comment


                • #98
                  Originally posted by CynthiaAllen View Post

                  This overview happened to be published in a spirituality magazine but I wouldn't say the model is particularly spiritual so if that bothers you, try to get past the beginning and to the description of the various levels.

                  The organisation that produced this bothers me.

                  http://whatenlightenment.blogspot.co...age-of_21.html
                  Last edited by Jo Bowyer; 19-10-2013, 03:12 AM.
                  Jo Bowyer
                  Chartered Physiotherapist Registered Osteopath.
                  "Out beyond ideas of wrongdoing and rightdoing,there is a field. I'll meet you there." Rumi

                  Comment


                  • #99
                    Sorry I'm coming to this thread late buy I wanted to make a few comments about some old posts and t'ai chi's double weighted principle.

                    I just wanted to say that being double weighted in t'ai chi is not if you have a 50/50 weight distribution. It's probably more like insisting on an action that is not likely to be effective... it's basically just being stubborn. So it's pretty much in line with what you were saying minus the 50/50 part.

                    Also, with regards to the video posted last may with the young girl with CP. I think it's important to note that she is likely a GMFCS of 3 and seems pretty cognitively with it. Enough so to respond to commands to push.

                    I work with this population and frequently have had issues with Feldenkrais practitioners that make promises to parents that this method is what their child needs. It might help a certain subset of the population, however, if you have a GMFCS level of 5 with communication and cognitive issues, there is no way that you can convince me that this is more beneficial than some meaningful motor learning strategy (which can be quite simple and cheaply implemented). I've seen plenty of money and time wasted on these promises and it frankly drives me nuts. Especially if it is at odds with what we are trying to accomplish with the student at school.

                    I'm all for handling in a way that respects the people you are working with, however, if that handling is so specialized that it can only be provided by a few people with long hours of training, how can you get the thousands of reps needed to learn a skill?
                    Christopher Bryhan MPT

                    "You are more likely to learn something by finding surprises in your own behavior then by hearing surprising facts about people in general"
                    Daniel Kahneman - Thinking Fast and Slow

                    Comment


                    • Hi Christopher

                      If you take a look again, you can see I specifically mentioned that the taichi example had nothing to do with 50:50 balance. Rather it has to do with not over committing to one direction and being unable to "change".

                      Fair comment on the little girl with CP. Video cited as example and not definitive word in treatment of CP.

                      I'd like to come back to your last comment wrt skill acquisition when I have something better than an IPhone to type with. I think this represents a fundamental difference and possible limitation in utility of FM. Namely that FM is not designed as a discrete motor skills training method but rather for something else.
                      Dan
                      Tactile Raconteur

                      Comment


                      • Right; just kicking this along a bit:

                        I think anyone with a background in skills acquisition & athletics can see the potential for FM...but also the limit, at least in the way it is generally taught. Without going off on too long a diatribe, I think it can be summarized as "there's a point at which we need to segue from cognitive, past associative to autonomous performance, simulating relevant task environment, if we are truly discussing motor skills". This is to say nothing of spaced or grouped repetition, varied practice conditions etc

                        (BTW, I can argue back and forth on the point re: the importance of variation in developing a skill, but ultimately the most direct route is the most direct route. A fun discussion along these lines can be seen in the pages of The Talent Code)

                        Note the below (from http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12848224

                        The Feldenkrais Method has recently been discussed to fit within a dynamic systems model of human movement. One basis for this discussion is that small changes in one system--for example, enhanced body awareness--has far reaching implications across the whole of human performance. An alternative view on the Feldenkrais Method is argued here. It is argued that the clinical data do not support the Feldenkrais Method as being an effective way to improve motor performance.
                        Which, in terms of skill acquisition for specific motor tasks seems non-controversial. More to the point -

                        Further, it is argued that positive outcomes in pain and other wellness measures following Feldenkrais interventions can be ascribed to self-regulation. As part of this discussion, the role of body awareness, attentional focus, and kinesthesia in motor leaning and control are explored.
                        I think that's a fair summation. FM is about developing self-regulation through novel situations and ideally generalizing that ability.

                        That's not to say that a skill prax. couldn't take something like throwing a shotput, walking on crutches or performing Japanese tea-ceremony (all skilled motor acts) as "the novel situation"; however (IMHO) the intention wouldn't be (per se) on 'getting better at x' but rather 'what can I learn about myself when I do x1 like this, that I can use to make xyz better?'

                        Hopefully that makes sense. FM isn't exercise or skill development in the traditional sense.

                        Unfortunately, for the reasons previously identified by Mac, this distinction can go unnoticed by some in the FM community.
                        Last edited by Dan84; 25-10-2013, 08:51 PM.
                        Dan
                        Tactile Raconteur

                        Comment


                        • This if from a old ppt I sometimes used in explaining FM.

                          Upon reflection, the words 'self regulation = ...." should have be in there, somehow.



                          Gee...doesn't that look somewhat familiar?

                          FWIW, FM put forward the above in the 1940's. Hmmm
                          Last edited by Dan84; 25-10-2013, 09:46 PM.
                          Dan
                          Tactile Raconteur

                          Comment


                          • Feldenkrais an PT and resources

                            Originally posted by Dan84 View Post
                            Speaking of good resources, I've been remiss in not mentioning Case of Nora
                            :P
                            I highly recommend Robert Burgess' "A GuideTo Body Sense." http://www.efeld.com/product/

                            He gives permission to copy the movement sequences and send home with patients. If you do not know how to teach Awareness Through Movement (and this does matter otherwise it turns into mindless movents with much less impact) purchase his CDs too so you can get a feel for the delivery style. I am assuming his style is a good one. I have not listened to the since it isn't a need for me. You should not layer more than one lesson in a PT session. I have seen PTs take these lesson and teach 4-6 in 45 min. There may be some benefit but that is no longer the Feldenkrais model.

                            I also recommend Frank Wildman's "Reversing Aging" book. Very useable.

                            I suggest many clients purchase Eileen Bach-y-Rita's "Aligning the Body" audio series. The lessons are around 25 min. It is useable for a couple of years at least for more people so well worth $100. I also think these are good lessons for a therapist to experience, hear the languaging and the pacing. Afterwards you can take your own time to reflect on your experience and exactly what is happening in the lesson and how you might apply it.

                            In my Cincinnati fantasy, I have been dreaming for a couple of years now of starting some kind of study group for physical therapists. The first hour I teach a lesson and then we move into application and perhaps even some hands on. I don't know whether I can attract any to show up but won't know until I try. So in 2014, I am at least going to float the idea among past PT/OT clients or
                            students. Would this idea appeal to you? If so, what frequency, length of time, format would you benefit from?

                            Comment


                            • I've not read any of those, so can't comment directly; they could indeed be very good, but I'm hesitant to recommend anything I've not seen for myself.

                              On the topic of groups / texts:

                              Generally speaking, I think there's sometimes a lack of a deep model / explanation as to why things are done (in either FI or ATM) from many sources. For example, why does B follow A in X? Oh, well, obviously because....

                              I think people come up with some amazing pet theories that they try to shoe-horn around ATMs; I've heard ideas ranging from silly to outright biologically implausible. For a scientifically astute audience, this can especially be a turn off.

                              That's why - IMHO - Rywerant's work is important. As far as I can tell, it represents the closest approximation of *why* Feldenkrais did it the way he did it. Knowing that, one can generalize and develop; not knowing that, one is either left at the cookie-cutter approach level or strays towards the above (fill the blank space of 'why' with anything that tickles your fancy).

                              In any case, I think it would be interesting to read Acquiring the Feldenkrais Profession first, then taking a look at the Case of Nora, in order to cross-match ideas.

                              As for PT groups: I did something similar some years ago. It was a weird internal struggle between showing interesting things and making sure I wasn't giving them a proto-Feldenkrais training. There was also an element of 'hang on....I spent a lot of time and money learning this stuff ... surely you don't think you can learn how to do this in 2 days and walk away with your Feldenkrais merit badge?".

                              That toolbox mentality is thick on the ground.

                              Anyway, we were left in some weird middle space wherein we'd discuss a theme, do an ATM to that theme....and then them wanting me to show them *exactly* what it was about / how to roll the neck just so in order for them to walk away with a nice, new trick. IOW, not interested in experiential learning at all...just transfer of technical know how.

                              Let me know if you figure out a way around that* - it just left me somewhat bitter :/

                              *= of course, one way around that is to, in fact, conduct a feldenkrais proto-training. Call it whatver ever you need to (do you research: I doubt the present lingo attached to the method is going to attract many new-comers).

                              Taking a look at several successful models, such as DMA, it seems that the multiple level of credentialing, covering set pieces / body regions is the preffered model in this space.
                              Last edited by Dan84; 28-10-2013, 07:25 PM.
                              Dan
                              Tactile Raconteur

                              Comment


                              • My development thus far has taken me from initial exposure from Barrett (scientific rationale), through Feldenrais' work (difficult to read), to more recently reading books such as the Feldenkrais companion (excellent practical) and even Hanna's book on somatics (sketchy science but good practical).

                                I'm looking to take this deeper and further. I'm feeling very strong with the scientific foundations, but definitely need a bit more guidance interacting with my patient during the lessons.

                                Are the home-based resources on the Achieving Excellence website (or others) worth pursuing in this regard? Any other suggestions are welcomed.
                                Rod Henderson, PT, ScD, OCS
                                It is useless to attempt to reason a man out of a thing he was never reasoned into. — Jonathan Swift

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X