Instructors’ Conference, 10 April, 1964. I’m going to — taping this because there is a little bit of data here that I want to give you which you probably will feel is very unpalatable, but which is the ne plus ultra of training. I want to give you this very rapidly. It is also in the form of a policy letter of 10 April. I want to discuss these various points, and — since it’s difficult to put all these things out in a policy letter.

I’ll first just merely read you the policy letter. Scientology Courses. This does not necessarily apply only to the Saint Hill Course; this applies to all Scientology courses. And they consist of, as follows:

„There are three zones of responsibility in course management. These are:

„l. Providing valuable subject materials.“

Well, of course, that could apply in college as well as it could apply anyplace — is providing valuable subject materials. What determines their value? That might even be something else. But ordinarily, is it useful? Is it going to improve somebody? Is it going to forward something, or something like this, or going to make something effective? That’s the subject material. That could be physics, and so forth, and oddly enough, could even go as far down scale as metaphysics.

Now, under this particular zone in Scientology right now, we have, oddly enough, culminated — and this is hard to believe, because it is such a wildly embracive figure — we have culminated in anything that was desirable in the fields of religion, mysticism, spiritualism or mental sciences. Anything desirable in those particular fields have been discovered and culminated in the field of Scientology right now. That’s why I say it’s rather hard to believe, but you look at it, that’s true. So we do have valuable subject materials.

Now, that job is complete. And so, number one of these, course management, as far as we’re concerned, on a Scientology course, that is complete. We’re even throwing away material now which would have been enough to have made a complete science and revolutionized middle Europe, you know, two hundred years ago. We’re just throwing it away. It’s — we’ve got stuff that’s more effective than that and so we don’t pay much attention to it and so forth. There’s tons of such material that is just going out the window now. It goes into codification archives, research — level actions, contributive actions and so forth. And the truth of the matter is — and this will shock you, on the subject of valuable subject materials — on this little sheet which you see in front of you, right now, this little sheet here, is contained every process and auditor skill. This does not contain the philosophic side of Scientology, but this contains the auditor technical side of Scientology. And every process and every action on this one typewritten sheet, one side, eight by ten, is contained on this sheet.

And this last — you see, most of it is right up here at the top, a very small, little area here at the top. Well, that contains all of the auditor skills. And this long one here is just everything a Class VI Auditor ought to be able to do. It’s down to such tiny, little things as knowing about „no auditing.“ See, that „no auditing“ can upset somebody, you see? And the valuable subject materials, then, that we are teaching on all Scientology courses, and we’re teaching all of this at Saint Hill, are contained on this one little sheet. So there is not a vast amount of data when we get under valuable subject materials.

The whole philosophical side of this is, of course, left wide — open. These are sometimes what you call basics, ARC, and that sort of thing; we haven’t gone into the nature of man on this sheet. But this is the technical auditor side of the picture.

Now, the next one, number two, is „Organizing and codifying those materials so that they are highly effective and comprehensible.“

Now, that’s a codification of the material. And one early dawn here the other day, Suzie and I whipped out the form of presentation of a proper bulletin or a piece of data. And we’re actually throwing this stuff together — she is — from bulletins and so forth, with considerable speed. It’s under twelve headings, is it, or is it thirteen?

Female voice: Twelve.

Twelve headings. And these twelve headings, oddly enough — each one of these pieces of material is under the twelve headings, and the twelve headings comprise the question the Examiner should ask. All he’s got to do is convert it to a question, like what this process is for, you see, or something like that. All he has to say is „What is this process for?“ Don’t you see? So there’s a simplification even to that little piece of stuff.

Now, therefore, there are very few processes, and these are being codified up on very, very exact basis of format. So all a student has to do is know those. And that sheet that has to do with a process also contains the technical drills and the auditing requirements. So they’re all on the same sheet, but of course your technical drills and your auditing requirements — because one of them lasts for two or three processes — these are grouped as a separate group for your practical. And then the auditing requirement, of course, is whether or not the person can audit this. And that, of course, is the only auditing requirement there is, is „Can he audit it successfully.?“

So the codification of these materials to comprehensibility is underway. I will not say at this moment they are instantly and immediately available to you but if you recognize what we are heading for and if you have in hand this little sheet, you can make do with the instruction materials which you have up to the moment when they’re published in this very harshly pure format, and so on. For instance, you’ve got the materials for R1C, and so forth. Well, R1C is being converted to this other format. But you still have the materials that you can use and apply.

Now — now we get to the third — the third.

That’s just the comprehensibility of the materials and packaging it, and so on. That, of course, gets together your checksheets for the various levels, and that sort of thing. That all depends on these things, and these checksheets are still on this one little typewritten sheet.

Now, the third one concerns you very directly and very intimately, and that’s „Instructing the student in those materials to a point of high comprehension and competency.“ Instructing the student.

Now, if you’ve got the materials and you’ve got the know — how, and then that know — how is codified, we still have the problem of instructing the student in those materials. We still have this problem. And this is the part which you at first may not agree with, and you may find is too gruesome to confront for words, but I’ll just go on and read the remainder of this very rapidly.

„In Scientology, (1) has been done, fully and completely. There are no gaps or unanswered questions.

„In (2) the very best of Scientology has been selected out for instruction and is being written in such a way as to minimize any confusion and maximize the communication and practice of the data.“

Now, „In (3),“ — which is teaching the student with it, „we have our largest potential randomity. And it is this which this policy letter is concerned — with which this policy letter is concerned. The instruction of the student is a personalized matter. Students require answers to their own questions and clarification of their own understandings.“

The student comes up with a lot of preconceptions and so forth, and these get in his way most ghastly, and so that his clarification on the data which is being given to him becomes an important part of the communication of the data. But remember that the student is interjecting this barrier and it is up to the Instructor to keep that barrier wiped away.

And, „The burden of this falls on the Instructor.

„In auditing it has taken us a long time to learn that there are no bad preclears. There are only auditor errors.“

And, „We have now learned a similar thing about instructing. There are only slow Instructors. There are no slow students.“

Now, that’s a terrible thing, and I imagine that would seem very unpalatable to you, but I myself had to confront up to this as a datum.

„The length of time a student is on course is a direct index of the quality of instruction on that course.“

And, of course, we’re held back with the fact that we’ve only just culminated the material with the codification of „it’s in progress,“ so that, of course, is part of our difficulty at this present instant. But with those out of the way, you only have instruction.

Now, „A fast course is well instructed. And a slow course is poorly instructed.“

And the subject of this, of course, is how are we going to make this a fast course? See? Well, we’re taking care of these other zones, what our responsibility is, but this one is our zone of responsibility too, and it’ll be this one that we have to continue to live with. „A fast course is well instructed and a slow course is poorly instructed.“

„A bad course gets bad enrollments.“ This has to do with the number of people you have on a course. „A good course gets good enrollments. If enrollment is down, the course is a poor course. That has been observed continually in Academies for years and has no variations. If you want a full course, provide a well cons — instructed course.“

„If course enrollments are down, don’t ponder beyond how to improve the course.“ Don’t ponder beyond this how to improve the course. „And you’ll win if you improve the course.“

„This is a brick wall datum: a poor course will become an empty course.“

„The speed with which a student can go through a course depends only on (1), (2) and particularly (3) above. It does not depend on the student.“

And at this point, you poor Instructors who’ve had to live with these lines, of course, will probably throw up your hat and say, „Well, that’s it. I’ve had it. Now he’s said too much!“

But „Don’t blame the students. Look at (1), (2) and (3) above.“

„There are no slow students. There is only slow instruction.

„The future of Scientology courses depends on getting the student rapidly through the course and graduating him or her at a good level of competence.

„Scientology course futures do not depend on lowered rates.

„You’re already selling pearls for pennies.

„Just make sure you are selling pearls.

„I have taken care of (1), (2) is very thoroughly in hand, and (3) is up to the Instructors.

„A fast course is a well — instructed course. A full course is a well — instructed, fast course.“

And, „That’s all the mystery there is in it.“ There really isn’t anything else to a course and its management than just those factors.

Now, where does that bring us? Now, this meeting is timely and actually is not in condemnation of instruction, because you’ve had your — your worries have existed in (1) and (2) to a very marked degree. The valuable material was there, and actually it’s just culminated to a complete completion. The codification of that material and so forth is just now in hand.

You have your worries with tremendous quantities of materials which may or may not apply at this particular time. You may have excess tapes and all that sort of thing tends to get in your road. Some of your drills may be completely inadequate to what you’re trying to accomplish with them, that sort of thing. And you’ve had these things to worry with. But you also had, running along, this other thing.

Because those other things have existed, we have, to some degree, developed the idea of the slow student. And that one, as we repair (1) and (2), we’ve got to throw overboard. We could have such a thing as a troublesome student. He seems to be throwing more questions and misunderstandings into the situation than seems necessary at the particular moment, but under good instruction this is cared for. This is cared for. We had to develop methods of handling that, because he’s interjecting worries and concerns into the course material and it’s up to us to get those things smoothed out and put away.

Now, we have to have brief instruction materials and cover them extremely well, and this brings about our attitude of instruction. Our attitude of instruction should be very tough, but very helpful. We should be — learn to be very, very harsh on the subject of just pure obstructionism. Just pass on by it — don’t fool around with it — and recognize whether or not this fellow really is in some kind of a weird spin, if he’s just inventing one. And if he’s in some kind of a weird confusion about something or other, learn to grab him by the nape of the neck and say, „It’s yip and it’s yip and it’s yip — yip. Now, do you get that? Now, what don’t you understand about that? All right, very good. Well, that’s — well, what you’re worrying about there is not an important part of this; actually it’s yip — yip. Now, you tell me what this applies to,“ and so forth, and all of a sudden lights dawn.

An example out here. Fellow couldn’t get what an opposite was until he was told that it was an antonym. And being a former English teacher, he of course could grasp an antonym, but up to that moment he was saying, „What I would do would be entirely different.“ And it merely had to be harshly brought home to him that nobody under God’s green earth was interested in what he would do as an opposite action, that we were only interested in what was an opposite.

Now, you get there — we have, in one example, a clarification necessary. He couldn’t get it through his skull. All right, so we transpose the material cleverly and we say, well, it’s an antonym. „Oh, it’s an antonym.“ See?

He’s interposing this weird one: „What I would do . . .“

In that case we’re just simply tough. „Who the hell cares what you would do? We only want to know what an antonym is.“ You get the idea?

Then, to be very, very — very, very demanding, extremely demanding, for speed, dash and accuracy on essentials and let the nonessentials slip. So he doesn’t know the number of the bulletin. So he doesn’t know where the paragraph fits on the left — hand side of the ruddy rod. So he couldn’t find the tape if it had neon lights on it. So what?

„Is a pc audited during an ARC break?“

And he said, „Well, uh — le — uh — let me...“

„Flunk!“ See?

So he didn’t know where the tape was. So he didn’t know what body of material it came out of Well, all right, so what? So what? We’ll skip it, see?

But if you say to him, „Well, is somebody audited during an ARC break?“

And he said, „Well, uh . . . well, that uh . . .“

„Flunk! Flunk! Flunk! Flunk!“ You know? Say, „For God’s sakes, why don’t you understand this stuff?“ you know? „Now, go on back and study it.“

In other words, that’s when to take it and what not to. That depends to a large degree on the auditor’s judgment of the matter.

But what is essential material? Well, just be absolutely vicious on the subject. And nonessentials, plff, who cares? Do you see? So you don’t have a uniform level of examination. You have a — an examination level which is tough on essentials and just skips nonessentials. Guy can sit up against a wall and rattle off Model Session: poppeta — poppeta — poppeta — poppeta, bang — bang — bangety — bang. He can sit in a session, he can go Model Session all the way through, bang — bang, without a flaw or a droop, you see, anyplace along the line. Fine. Be absolutely death on his being able to do so, don’t you see?

Now, he’s rather worried about the evolution of a Model Session, and „Wouldn’t it be something or other?“ And „Wasn’t it true that a Model Session once — and so forth?“

Well? So he even argues about it on an examination paper. Well, we couldn’t care less. Can he do Model Session poppeta — poppeta — poppeta — poppeta? That’s all we’re looking for. See? He doesn’t even have to be letter — perfect on why he has to do Model Session. It’s not for him to ask. We’re making a technician.

So this — this level — this level of understanding of what’s essential and what isn’t essential is demanded of the Instructor. See? And that’s where fast instruction comes in. Your instruction is fast to the degree that you appreciate that this guy is walking around in a squirrel cage, and you try to get the data through to him somehow or another, the essential datum, so that he says, „Oh, why . . . ? Oh, well, yeah. What do you know!“ You know?

Or we see he’s walking around on a squirrel cage, „Wasn’t this actually developed at one time or another by Gurdjieff?“ See, or Goodgief or Harold Bell Wrightus, or something.

Somebody asked me if I’d studied the work of Frank Lloyd Wright the other day. I was quite interested. He concluded it with two philosophers, and so forth. I don’t think he was trying to pull anybody’s leg, I just think he didn’t know.

But he’s pulling something like this, you see? Well, the Instructor has to know. „Aw, lie down. Go off. Skip it! Get off that squirrel cage. It hasn’t anything whatsoever to do with what you are studying. Now, so — and — so, this is what we’re interested in. Now, can you do that or can’t you?“ It depends on the Instructor’s ability to evaluate the important and the unimportant as far as the student training is concerned.

Now, that will make a fast course. That will make a fast course. Now, we’re hitting for the moon, here. We want to get a Class IV through — and I mean through and competent as the devil — in sixteen weeks. We just want to get him through and smooth in sixteen weeks. Just ride all over him until he is, see? Get a Class VI through in four weeks. These are ideal periods. Four weeks. And get a co — audit so that they can bust on through to OT in twenty weeks. Now, those are your optimum times. This gives us four weeks on Class IV, to smooth it out and be sure. This gives us two to four weeks more on Class VI, so that we can get any question out of our mind, don’t you see? And we’ve hit the maximum period of time in thirty — two weeks to OT in the co — audit, see?

Now, we’ve hit the maximum periods. But we’re inevitably going to hit these maximum periods, and all I’m asking you to do is try to make them the maximum periods. And the only way we can do that is try to go like the devil for the minimum period. Try to shoot that minimum period every time and just go along on a total expectancy that the minimum period will be met. And don’t look for anything else to happen, but it will be met. Now, that gives you an expectancy of what you’re striking for.

Now, if we can do that, and if we’ve got a tough course with a good spirit of help, we can actually accomplish that. And if we can accomplish that, we’ll have a full course out here rolling very nicely and everything going along fine. And if we can’t accomplish that, we wont have. That’s about all there is to that.

Now, I’d want somebody like the Assoc Sec of — of Perth, let us say; he’s got this policy letter that tells him to bring somebody else. All right, well, he can’t be gone very long from there, don’t you see? It’s practically disaster he’s staring in the face to move off of the point anyhow. Well, let’s say he’s a retread or something like this. Well, for sure we could get him through here in just a little handful of weeks, you see? Kick him through, kick the person he’s brought along with him through, and kick them back onto an airplane again and be perfectly confident that something effective is going to happen in that co — audit team and that they will be able to carry on with the material, accomplish something when they get back there.

Now, if we can do this, we’ve got it made. We’ve got it made across the boards, because we’ll find out, then, that people will very often take a two — course shot at it. They’ll come on here at one period and get their basic and go home, and come on and get another — go on through to the end or something like this, or they’ll try to take a one — shot at the whole situation, and so on. But they can adjust their minds accordingly as long as we won’t put up with any other time budget than what we’ve got.

Now, I think you agree with me that it’s feasible as long as our codified material is out and that all dross is thrown off the course. I’ll read you here rapidly, just for your edification, and not for anything else particularly, because this will all be published under the classification bulletins, or policy letters.

„Level I: R1C for PTPs, R1CM. That’s fishing with TA on the meter.“ Those are broken into two processes because you lost a process, which is a good process, in R1C, when you suddenly started converting it over to using meter fishing. Picking up the things that blew down the meter while the guy was itsaing, see? That was actually a specialized application of R1C, so we lost a process. Here’s a process — the same process without a meter and the same process with a meter: Gives us two different processes.

„We’ve got assists; and we’ve got R2C, which is discussion by lists.“ For instance, Fred here prepared a list one time, lists of discussion. You know, just questions. „And Listen — style Auditing and itsa.“ And that’s what that whole level consists of, see, and that’s a pretty full level at that.

„Level II is repetitive processes, Model Session, Op Pro by Dup, 8 — C, CCHs, Havingness, General O/W, ARC 63, auditing cycle.“ And other materials from the Class VI Basic Auditing checksheet. Can he answer an auditing question, see, and can he be asked a question? You know, that sort of materials are simply poured in on top of this.

Now, the reason 8 — C is pulled independently from the CCHs is the CCHs are just taught as a theoretical action and 8 — C is taught as a process. See, so we come down with a thud, you see, on — can he perform 8 — C? Can he do that perfectly?. Well, we can just skate over the rest of the CCHs here at Saint Hill, don’t you see? In an Academy or in an HQS Course, something like that, why, they might hit them a little heavier.

Well, that’s the totality of the second level. „And the third level is Auditing by List.“ This is a brand — new name for a very old action. You clean up lists. We’ve got tons of lists and all the auditor does is clean each question. And that can be addressed to the most wide and wonderful things, and it so happens that due to the composition of the basic bank — which is weird enough — that becomes a health approach, and will accomplish healing. And big future opened up for this particular goofball process. Big future opened up for it. Because health is totally the broken dramatization of the GPM. When a guy can’t dramatize his GPM, he’s had it. And, what about the „destroy“ series? See?

So somebody’s sciatica doesn’t depend on what overts he’s committing, but very possibly upon what overts he’s been unable to commit. And you start running this by list, don’t you see. And you bend the list over on the other side and you ask a couple of trick questions or let some Class IV Auditor assess it as to which side of the fence this person is on, then he takes a certain series of lists. Now you go ahead and clean up each one of these questions, and what you got? You’ve got assessing on a prewritten list. And you also got health very definitely in your hands.

So that is — that is not much to teach, since if he can do this he can also do ARC break assessments, you see, and he can do a lot of other things.

Well, that’s of course Sec Checking by List and that’s written down here at the same time, but mostly to get a referral to what we’re talking about as Auditing by List.

Prepchecking. Prepchecking not to destimulate’ but prepchecking for blood, you know? Something that’s almost dropped out of our perimeter. „Problems Intensive, mid ruds and Model Session.“ And that’s the total of Level III, which mainly just puts it to Prepchecking, which is just cleaning a question on a meter, which is practically all Level III is. Can he take a question that he himself has asked or he’s read off a list and can he clean it? And that’s about all you’re teaching him at that whole level all the way through, which simplifies training there enormously.

Then we’ve got Level IV, which is R4SC, which is the service fac renumbered. That’s just a service fac. „ARC break assessments, R4H and case analysis.“ And all of this is assessment, assessment, assessment. So you’re teaching him to assess at Level IV, whatever kind of an assessment it is. You’re not trying to teach him, now, to clean a line; you’re teaching him to find the line to clean. So that’s the only — the only step up or improvement there, which makes it pretty easy to graduate up to in training.

And now we’ve got Level VI, of course, is „locating“ — this is all Level VI now consists of — is „Locating the truncation, checking goals, not finding goals, running the line plot, and track analysis.“ Where is the pc, see? That becomes the totality of Level VI. You haven’t got, actually, finding goals, putting together goals plots, or any of these other more difficult actions which made Level VI almost impossible.

Now, we get a Level VI Auditor here, and things an auditor should know at Level VI I will simply read off here very rapidly, as again, this will all be published for you.

„Case analysis, present time problem“ — he has to know how to handle these various things. Case analysis. Present time problem. Psychosomatic. Guy got a psychosomatic: What is it? ARC break. Got to handle a session. Class VI ARC breaks is different than session ARC breaks. He’s got to be able to do listing. He’s got to be able to null a list, and of course that includes Auditing by List. He’s got to know the Auditor’s Code. He’s got to know about completing a cycle of action. He’s got to know about havingness. He’s got to know about theory of restimulation and destimulation. He’s got to know by observation of a preclear — what’s the pc doing at the present moment? Reading a meter. Executing an auditing cycle. Knowing not to Q — and — A. Knowing about „no auditing.“ Symptoms of an ARC break. Good indicators. Bad indicators. Not to mess up a good — running pc. Not to continue the preclear who isn’t running. Knowing when to stop auditing and ending up the session. And how to handle a pc’s PTPs at Level VI when they show up. Track analysis. Getting the preclear to follow a line plot. Guiding the preclear down a goals plot. Finding out where a series is truncated. Finding out which type of goals series a pc is in. And looking good, crisp and businesslike as an auditor. And that gives you the totality, and I mean absolute totality, of what a Level VI Auditor ought to be able to do.

Well now, he’s got all the basics of that sort of thing. You understand that’s — most of that is simply a repeated action on what you’ve already taught on the lower level. So it’s just the refinement of this that has to be taught him in the Level VI Course. So it’s not a brand — new subject.

So that is the totality of making the auditor. Now, I’ve just read you, on that list, what it all amounts to. Well, you say that looks difficult in some respects. But if you’ve noticed, we’ve thrown out fantastic numbers of processes. You can right now think „What process? What about that process? What about some other process?“ Forget them. These are the senior processes of the bank. Under repetitive processes you have a very few processes. There’s not even a great number of those things going to be in very active use. „What question would you permit to be asked of you?“ or something like this, you see? That — they’re that type of session cycle process — that one, see?

And then you’ve got your pc handling taped here just underneath what processes will get the most effective results on the pc? I mean, if the pc goes into this, then you use that process, see, and it all weaves together so that none of an auditor’s training is wasted as you come up the line and it all catalyzes into the end product.

Now, therefore, that leaves you very few practical drills. You’ve got your meter drills, your listing drills, you’ve got your track analysis type drills. And you got your basic TRs and auditing cycle drills. All right, that gives you the package, you see?

Theory — this becomes a pipe, because everything is well codified and well straightened out. It’s padded up with lectures which, however, cover the same subject materials that are covered in the bulletins. So therefore lecture examination is not terribly important compared to bulletin examination because the same subject matter is covered.

Auditing is just a question, can the guy get a result with Process XZ Ben? See? All right. Well, there’s only — there’s only a dozen of these processes. Well, can he get a result with that one? Well, has he gotten a result with that one? Well, he’s passed on his auditing checksheet if he cleared up somebody’s PTP. Obviously he can handle a PTP; cleared up somebody’s PTP. And if the student has to point this out to you, then he’s now passed this requirement on the checksheet. So that becomes relatively simple in that zone. Is his case making progress is the other half of the Auditing Supervisor action.

Well, that becomes the totality and shape of a course.

Now, you already had a course that was running very well. Now, let’s get off into something else. Course was running very well. We complicated the course a little bit. We’re dropping back to the simplicity of that. There are no other administrative changes that are taking place. We’re actually dropping back to the administrative action which we had of a month or two — three months ago or something like that. About the same administrative action, which was the simpler one with — we have had. So that requires no reformation.

Well, I’ve given you here a rundown on, really, not just the Saint Hill Course, I’ve given you a rundown on Scientology courses. These things ought to be crisp and fast and to that degree they’ll be very successful. Okay?

Why don’t you take a break.