> > Leaving aside the kids learning via the David Lynch FOundation, you mean... > Yes, and quite rightly so. Counting only the people who make a choice to learn off of their own backs gives us a better idea of the level of demand in society as compared with including people who are a captive audience and learn as part of a package.
To judge the actual popularity of TM amongst kids you'd have to check out the traffic on Facebook amongst kids regarding TM. It's close to nil. Which implies that even though hundreds and thousands have learned there's little real enthusiasm and therefore very few are going to go on to become teachers. The probability that one of the "at risk kids" who learn as part of the DLF package going on to become a TM teacher is close to nil. If someone walks in to a TM center, pays their own course fees, and learns because they've made up their own mind, then the probability that they go on to become a TM teacher although it's still close to nil it is much greater. We don't have figures but I'd guess it's orders of magnitude greater. In the long run it's not the number of people that learn that counts, it's the number that become teachers. Therefore it's not worth counting the number of "at risk kids" who learn.
