If the instructor switches around terminals endlessly on a HAS Co-audit course, then you have nothing but rising needles left on these cases. It is necessary to get the very first terminal that dropped on the pc and convert it to a general form and run that terminal with a Communication Process until the terminal is again reading on the tone arm at male or female clear (depending on the sex of the pc, not the terminal) and stays there.

This is why you don't fill up the Co-audit.

Regimen on this is find the first thing that dropped on the pc then state it in a general term – make sure it drops. Example: pc's first assessment was on his wife. Find it again and see if it stops the needle rising; if it does, run: "From where could you communicate to a wife?" Note that it is a wife, not his wife. If the needle dropped the first time he was ever assessed on Bill, we have to find out what Bill is and run it.

On new enrollees in the Co-audit, take a body part only. A body part is then run on the Communication Process, "From where could you communicate to a (name of body part)".

This is only considered flat when no matter what or how many questions are asked about that body part, it registers on the tone arm of the meter at male or female clear, whichever the pc is. Only then can you go on to a new process.

Communication Processes look so simple. They are in reality terribly tricky and terribly effective.

Pick the right body part on the pc and he'll stay in the Co-audit until he's clear on that part, that's for sure.

When you see a pc getting fouled up by lousy Co-audit handling you are losing a student and, I am willing to confirm, gaining a victim computation.