School of Economic Science Reviews 4

Class content well organized (e.g., lectures/emails follow syllabus, PowerPoint). Teachers are very knowledgeable and sincere. Focused student discussions, written materials, and Awareness recording support home practice. Practical Philosophy has enhanced regularity and quality of my meditation practice, in turn, affecting my life and those around me in a positive manner. I look forward to next semester (Class #2 of a set of 3): Happiness.

I've just finished the first two online practical philosophy courses (wisdom and happiness).

Both ten-week courses were insightful, and like everything, you get what you put into it. We had a good interactive group both times, although less people attended the 2nd one (from my group at least). However, we had all got to know one another by the 2nd course and so the intimate group was more relaxed. I think we went from about 12-15 on the first course, to about half of that on the second.

Most of the content was new to me, but some served as a reminder for me. Each week's practices are short and practical (hence the title!) and easy to implement in your day-to-day life.

Each week we recapped on previous week's session, then introduced more material, had various opportunities to discuss or ask questions, and ended with practices to do (i.e. homework). I took notes but the week's lesson with additional information is emailed the next day (I think other tutors give the material upfront).

There are options to join another group if you can't make your usual one for whatever reason, and there is usually a week's break about halfway.

I do recommend it, the first course (wisdom) at the very least as it's very useful. I also found the 2nd course (happiness) very helpful too.

I've taken a break from them all for now, as I want to read some of the material at a more leisurely pace. I will likely come back.

Ps. I've just read the other reviews and am quite shocked. I didn't experience anything of the sort. I see they are older reviews so perhaps The School of Philosophy and Economic Science had a few 'bad apples' at that time. My experience was online as well but find it hard to believe having 'met' a couple of the other tutors (who I believe are all volunteers).

In April 2018 I enrolled on Part 3 of a Philosophy course run by the School of Economics.

I’ll not identify the actual area, for that would then identify those involved and for GDPR reasons I ought not to do.

I had previously attended Parts 1 and 2 and enjoyed being with like-minded people.

During the course the facilitator would spend a minimum of 20 minutes talking about Part 4, emphasising the meditative aspects of the course. I was not the only person irritated by this, for it was 20 minutes taken up on a future course, rather than 20 minutes spent on the course which we had all paid to attend.

After the 20 minutes, the facilitator finally focused on the present and the evening’s session. It was not uncommon for the facilitator to become distracted again and refer to Part 4, and explaining that prior to enrolling for Part 4, a visit to Sheffield and an induction process was necessary.

Those present on Part 3 were consistently encouraged to consider enrolling for Part 4. Eventually, I decided to do so, having been unsure for a few weeks.

Part 3 facilitator emphasised the need for eye closed meditation during Part 4 sessions. I explained my preference to eye open or even lowering my eye lids; this apparently was unacceptable!

Three members of the group collectively travelled to Sheffield; it was enjoyable to spend time with two other members.

There was a second part of the Part 4 enrolment process was to then meet with the facilitator of the Part 4 group. Part 3 facilitator emailed the Part 4 facilitator informing them to meet me in a specific room within the building.

I arrived five minutes early for the appointment; after ten minutes I left the room and went to the kitchen for it was very hot. Whilst in the kitchen, the Part 4 facilitator appeared and I explained that I had been sitting in the room that had been agreed with the Part 3 facilitator, as per their email to the Part 4 facilitator. Part 4 facilitator advised that they had been sitting in another room; they had failed to heed the arrangements.

The appointment with the Part 4 facilitator took place downstairs; it was very hot and muggy and windows remained closed, so during the 35 minutes appointment it became quite unbearable.

Part 4 facilitator explained preference to eye closed meditation at which point I explained my reasons for my preference to eye open or even lowering eye lids during meditation.

My reasons, and explanations clearly satisfied Part 4 facilitator for they agreed I could join Part 4 group. The appointment had been for 35 minutes, which actually left me feeling quite drained, partly due to the muggy, stuffy, airless basement yet more to do with the interrogation practises of the Part 4 facilitator.

Upon returning upstairs, existing members of the Part 4 facilitator’s group had arrived. Part 4 facilitator then proceeded to introduce me to those three existing members, advising that I would be joining the group. A pleasant exchange took place with those three members, who welcomed me to the group and such similar comments.

The following evening, I attended the Part 3 group and the facilitator asked if they might have a word with me during the break.

Part 3 facilitator informed me that having discussed me with the Part 4 facilitator that I was unable to join the Part 4 group in September 2018.

Part 3 facilitator informed me that “it has nothing to do with your personality”; clearly it did!

Rather than allow Part 3 facilitator to comment further upon my personality, I stopped him from continuing and raised my right hand and left the room. I was most upset at being rejected from the Part 4 group.
Part 4 had accepted me joining the Part4 course (after their interrogation process), and they then introduced me to three of the Part 4 members. Now, I was being rejected!

Two members of the Part 3 group were joining and I now had to inform them that Part 3 and Part 4 facilitators did not consider me sufficiently worthy of joining the group. One of the two said “… but that’s unheard of” and was genuinely surprised.

One month later, I emailed Part 3 facilitator expressing my concerns at how Part 4 facilitator had treated me for they were a bully.

I emailed the principal and his colleague copying them in on my email to Part 3 facilitator. Their reply emails expressed concern and that they would revert back to me; they failed to do so.

I received a reply from Part 3 facilitator, who sounded surprised that I was in any way upset by how I had been treated!

Part 3 facilitator informed me that the area manager, Mr Area Manager, would be notified and that he would meet with Part 3 and Part 4 facilitators. I would then be contacted for Mr Area Manager to meet with me.

Part 3 facilitator emailed me with a date, time and venue for me to meet with Mr Area Manager. I had to cancel it, for being self-employed arrangements can change at short notice.

At no time did Mr Area Manager email me directly; arrangements were via Part 3 facilitator. Clearly, (i) Mr Area Manager was uninterested in my complaint (ii) Mr Area Manager expected me to meet him on a date, time and venue convenient to him! It was all a simple “tick box” exercise.

I emailed Part 3 facilitator expressing my irritation that my feelings were of no interest. I requested a refund of £70 and that I did not want to meet with Mr Area Manager; there was no benefit in doing do.

I emailed the principal of SES; he failed to reply. The principal of SES is clearly a weak and ineffective person. Had he had any authority, he would have investigated why Part 4 facilitator treated me in such a manner.

A bully has unresolved issues of low self-esteem, low self-worth and can perceive others as a threat, hence they resort to bullying behaviour being an attempt at self-preservation.

Once Part 4 facilitator failed to meet me as had been arranged by Part 3, it was evident they were attempting to control the situation and bully me. Having identified their appalling manner toward me, Part 4’s behaviour ceased to have any effect upon me, it being weak and ineffective.

Part 4 facilitator chosen profession is a counsellor! Part 4 facilitator is an unpleasant, and thoroughly unprofessional person who lacks confidence in their own abilities and experiences low self-esteem issues; they are in need of counselling!

Management ought to be ashamed of themselves. They consistently failed to (i) deal with this legitimate complaint concerning Part 4 facilitator’s bullying techniques and (ii) failed to reply to me advising me of their findings concerning their alleged investigation.