Studies LOCAL PROGRAMS REVIEW MEETINGS Discussion and Research Paper Guidelines

KEMET UNIVERSITY HOME Forums Studies LOCAL PROGRAMS REVIEW MEETINGS Discussion and Research Paper Guidelines

  • This topic is empty.
Viewing 0 reply threads
  • Author
    Posts
    • #21081
      adminadmin
      Keymaster

      Guidelines for conducting reviews in the Local Programs Review classroom

       

      This page is for postings related to Local Programs -Researches

      Udja

      ASSIGNMENT

      This post contains the assignment protocols to follow in the Local Programs class discussions. The purpose is to present local programs being conducted by class members – for review and possible improvement as well as to promote consistency with the general principles and narratives set forth by the ancient tradition of Shetaut Neter.

      The principles outlined here will be applied to the current and future discussions in the Local Programs classroom.

      This note is to signal the commencement of the implementation with the following assignment.

      For the writer of this particular current paper under discussion the task is to review the document (LOCAL PROGRAMS REVIEW MEETINGS Discussion and Research Paper Guidelines for Clergy Studies) and to the best ability make sure the statements are in compliance with the guidelines. As discussions proceed and issues are discovered then the task is to revise the original paper in accord with the guidelines as discussions proceed. Present a revised document at the end of discussions.

      For the students reviewing the current document the task is to present a summary of the discussions held in each class along with any positive and negative items of note.

      Positive item is an item that is (or may not be) in compliance with the guidelines set forth.

      Negative item is an item that is (or may not be) in compliance with the guidelines set forth.

      300 word maximum

      Append your posts to the original paper post in the discussion forum –as a reply.

      ADDITION TO GUIDELINES

      What aspects of the submission to review

      How to report your findings

      In addition to the guidelines listed above you are to use the following guidance in formulating your reviews of local programs: Keep in mind that the purpose of reviews is to verify and or correct areas of research and or programing that are to be presented as being consistent with Sema Institute Temple of Shetaut Neter expositions of the Wisdom of Shetaut Neter as reflected in the Shetaut Neter Initiatic Narrative. Therefore, these are areas of “possible” inquiry that may or may not constitute detriments found in the program being reviewed so if any possible issues are noticed they may be included as possible and not definite issues to be redressed. That determination is to be made during the discussion sessions. Areas to be included in the reviews: Provide a finding for each item to be reviewed. If you did not find any issues then for each item write “no issues found relating to this issue.”

      • The reviewer should strive to not make unfounded suppositions by first doing some background research on what they are noting in their review and engaging in critical thinking about their own proposed possible issues of inquiry.
      • are there any possible factual errors?
      • are there any possible inconsistencies with initiatic narrative?
      • are there any aesthetic style issues that may adversely affect communication or understanding the thesis? Aesthetic issues include visual presentation, diction, vocabulary, images, etc.
      • are there any possibly unsupported statements that may be directly material to the main thesis?
        • Any unsupported statements based on assumptions logical emotional?
      • are there any possible deficiencies due to possible omission of possibly pertinent info?
      • are there any suggestions for possible improvement?
      • If there are any extrapolations are they supportable by the teachings? Is there deviating from initiatic narrative?
        • Extrapolations may be defined as conclusions or possible logical or intuitional insights about a teaching (philosophical tenet) that go beyond the scope of what is specifically stated in a scripture and are therefore added based on implications of the findings related to the thesis argument that are inferred by the person researching the teaching, presenting the findings and making assertions based on the inferred information garnered from the researches.
        • In order for extrapolations to be acceptable they need to be
          • Founded on solid logical understanding and interpretation of the teaching being discussed
          • Founded on supportable factual statements found in scriptural and or authoritative sources
          • Conforming to the central themes of the Initiatic narrative

      ===================================================================

      ===================================================================

      The following short outline was discussed already a few months (may 2020) ago and is to be applied to the Local Programs Reviews.

      video

      Guidelines for conducting reviews in the Local Programs Review classroom

      Udja

      LOCAL PROGRAMS REVIEW MEETINGS

      Re: Clergy studies component related to local programs being carried out or proposed by members of the clergy studies class. The purpose is to help those conducting or proposing to conduct programs in their geographical areas so as to help them develop qualitative programs and improve skills working as clergy in those settings.
       For some time it has been clear that we need to spend some additional time to work on discussions related to individual programs of the clergy course participants. So I have decided to institute a shorter additional meeting monthly to work on this aspect of the clergy program.
       So we will meet for 2-3 hours in addition to the regular 4 hour meeting. Each Local Programs review meeting will be conducted as follows.
       Each individual program will be discussed for 1 hour in order of submission. Then it will be taken up the next time that person’s turn comes up as we will work in rotation based on the order of submission unless there is urgent need to do otherwise.
       In the additional 2-3 hour meeting we will only discuss local programs by clergy students and conduct reviews and vetting of such programs intended to be implemented by the students.
       The first meeting will be held on Sat June 6 @ 7:30 pm
       **This first meeting will be mostly an orientation to review the parameters below that will guide the process

      Please review this document and also the references provided- before the first meeting.
      ===============================================================

      BENEFITS COMPONENTS

      Part of this program will be for the benefit of the person presenting the program so as to promote that it is up to certain qualitative standards and within the guidelines of Maat and Shetaut Neter.
      Part is to aid the person presenting to present well, practicing good communication skills.
      Part is for those reviewing to practice their critical thinking and non-violent communications skills.
      All participants are admonished to exercise conscious and non-violent speaking techniques to observe good communication such as the principles and techniques that were discussed last year including Gottman and Amenemopet.

      video

      SKILLS WITH CONSTRUCTIVE CRITICISM

      The clergy students will present the programs they want to have reviewed so other students are expected to develop insightful questions about the presentations, while using critical thinking and in a spirit of constructive review.
      Clergy students are to review the following articles on “constructive criticism” – You should expect to receive and to give “CC” and to develop objectivity with respect and self-awareness, neither taking nor giving egoistically and with goodwill and assuming goodwill from others unless otherwise demonstrated, at which time, if that were to occur, that can be discussed but in any event working to deal with that impersonally, and with the wisdom of Amenemopet.
      https://personalexcellence.co/blog/constructive-criticism/
      https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/think-well/201110/the-art-constructive-criticism
      https://www.thecut.com/article/how-to-give-constructive-criticism-at-work.html

      From reference article:

      Specifically (to develop critical thinking skills) we need to be able to:
      • Think about a topic or issue in an objective and critical way.
      • Identify the different arguments there are in relation to a particular issue.
      • Evaluate a point of view to determine how strong or valid it is.
      • Recognize any weaknesses or negative points that there are in the evidence or argument.
      • Notice what implications there might be behind a statement or argument.
      • Provide structured reasoning and support for an argument that we wish to make.
      Read more at: https://www.skillsyouneed.com/learn/critical-thinking.html

      From SMAA:

      Additionally, for the purposes of clergy studies and advancement, the following skills are to be added to the ones listed in the articles:
      I. Identify personal biases of oneself as the reviewer, either related to the presentation, or the personality of the presenter. A goal of critical thinking is to hone the thinking skills to lead the mind to discover higher truths and not to be used for personal or egoistic goals.

      II. After listening carefully to the presentation and its evidences, and conclusions (argument): Identify inconsistencies or possible inconsistencies when compared with the already vetted teachings

      III. Provide cogent and structured reasoning in support for areas of possible constructive items
      =====================================================================

      From SMAA:

      The presenter is to work to provide:

       Provide structured reasoning and support for each argument or finding of the presentation.
       Provide philosophical and or iconographical and or scriptural and/or architectural support for the arguments or findings of the presentation that are rooted in the already vetted classical and or older knowledgebase of Shetaut Neter.
       Note, while direct evidences are foundations and the rationale based on those evidences is secondary and therefore supported by those evidences, the accumulation of evidences builds a better support-base for the argument or finding, conclusion or opinion.
       Therefore, for example, if an intelligible, discerned, positively identified wisdom or philosophical point, idea, implies or appears to imply a particular wisdom point or philosophical idea/insight, then it can be legitimate to infer that finding/argument/idea as a supported/supportable particular wisdom point or philosophical idea/insight.
      o Philosophical insights can be supported by the finding of similar or exact points or tenets in other scriptures.
      o The higher authority as to the insights is the nehast (transcendental experience) so the philosophical insights are superseded by the mystic insight and therefore cannot contradict the mysticism. Yet, the mystic insight does not contradict the mythic or philosophical but rather surpasses them.
      o So, for the mythic and ritual level aspirant the teachings can mean something significantly limited from the mystic level but cannot contradict the mythic level. Mythic tenets may not contradict the highest mystic wisdom even if they only reflect a limited extent of intuitional absolute insight.
      o The mystic level is the ultimate truth of the mythic; therefore, if the mythic contradicts the mystic it is tending not towards the ultimate but rather towards the faith based, ego and time-space illusory notions of reality and is thus to be considered as an aberration, distortion, deviation from the highest ideal. Thus, the task of the clergy is to evaluate the gained insights, practices, productions, etc. in comparison to the ultimate, even if that ultimate is only presented within limited frameworks or understood intellectually and has not yet been experienced intuitionally.
       Demonstrate the sources from which the philosophical conclusions are how derived (rooted) in the Initiatic Narrative that is coherently conveyed through (matnu), (recht) and (sebait) and is inscribed in (tat), (medtu neter), and or (menu); While differentiating from imaginations, wishful thinking, illogical conclusions or logical but unsupported notions and refraining from logical leaps without connected supported mythic (matnu), philosophical (sebait) wisdom (recht) based in scriptural (medtu neter), iconographical (tat), architectural (menu) foundations.

      Proviso

      The reviews of programs by clergy students does not transfer to programs not reviewed. The reviewed programs may be deemed appropriate to share with others on the Temple of Shetaut Neter social media groups. Additionally, the occurrence of inconsistencies between the reviewed programs and other programs conducted by the students or ethical negative issues may affect the appropriateness of sharing the programs and listing of students graduates in good standing.
      HTP
      SMAA

       

Viewing 0 reply threads
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.