Star of the World
3/5
The Diploma in Ayurvedic lifestyle and nutrition course 2023-4
1. The course is excellently composed. One learns visually from the written materials, auditorily from the e-learning videos + Q&A, kinaesthetically from the medicine class [where students try samples], training clinics, case studies.
2. The Sanskrit videos + written materials are brilliant. The teacher teaches creatively, clearly, with a system, humour, and through song to easily remember slokaha.
3. The principal lecturer Dr. Deepika's moments of brilliance are concepts through metaphors that one remembers forever. And she makes people laugh!
4. The videos that show how to make remedies are clear + easy to follow.
5. The secondary lecturer Dr. Wathsala leads the medicine classes systematically + explains clearly.
6. The Q&A are a great source of learning.
7. The OSP & recipes are the most valuable documents of the written materials.
8. The directive reading is highly valuable.
9. They clearly explain everything about the exam.
10. The exam is well composed. Its format gives everyone a fair chance.
11. that about allopathic medicine + pharma companies which one reviewer who gave 1 * on Google named a rant is accurate reality. It may offend some people. But the reality remains so.
1. The course was poor value for money. Several parts of the modules repeated material from the beginning. Teaching new knowledge would constitute good value for the £4,800 / 4,300 with a discount. They repeat to reinforce learning. The tail side of the coin is little value.
2. They started 10 minutes late as standard, 15’ late several times. They explain it as giving students a chance to join + resolving tech issues. They should teach + model excellent timekeeping. if 6 immersions of 2 days per immersion start 10 minutes late for each day of each immersion on average, that detracts 2 hours which should be filled with learning. Losing 2 hours due to lateness = even worse value.
3. The course materials contain a disclaimer against stereotyping doshas, yet they stereotype doshas a lot with remarks such as “we are all vata and kapha at the clinic and get on excellently. We hope that a pitta person doesn’t join us.” This edition was heavily biased pro vata and against pitta. I don’t count examples of the good and bad points of each dosha. They demonstrate what the doshas are like and how they behave and interact. They’re fine.
4. Teaching the course in a foreign language is admirable. Dr. Deepika does what she can, but at times didn’t express herself accurately and that caused inaccuracies and confusion of students. Answering questions that arose from confusion took time which could be filled with new learning and detracted from the value.
5. This edition contained too much handholding and pep talk about the exam. That detracted from the value. Support is good, but too much support takes time. Students should be led to study on their initiative so that they become excellent professionals! The reality of their Ayurvedic practice will throw them into the deep end of solving situations on own initiative.
6. Dr. Deepika often answered different questions from the asked questions.
7. When Dr. Deepika didn’t know or want to give too much away, she didn’t answer questions to the point.
8. They teach that students must tell patients exactly how to make + take remedies from what ingredients in what quantities when for how long, but they do not practise what they teach. Explanations of recipes didn’t always have a chronology according to which listeners could visualise the process, & students had to ask what quantities to take when for how long.
9. They ask for ONLY GOOD reviews. The decision to leave a review, and especially whether it should be good or bad should always be the customer’s. I reviewed the bad points from a different account as Google allows 1 review per business. After a 2-hour talk with Dr. Deepika I modified this review, so her response to only good points is from the old time. She responded to all bad points too.