Snoopy, the colleges here teach Kentian prescribing [apart from the Practical College which teaches multiple remedy 'prescribing'], with all the guesswork that involves, repetition of dry doses, and bias towards the notion of a "constitutional remedy" and people's characters being symptoms for treatment.

A fundamental priciple in Hahnemann's treatment of chronic diseases is the distinction between antipsorics and non-antipsorics, which was not mentioned at my college.
In other words, the methodology taught by Hahnemann for treating chronic disease was omitted in four years teaching; the essential tools that he approved, such as the works by Boenninghausen and Jahr were overlooked.

The college I attended is considered one of the best in the UK. From what I have seen of other UK college graduates it is the same everywhere here.
I think it is probably the same worldwide although different teaching (equally unHahnemannian) prevails in India. This is why there are gurus in homoeopathy who fly around the world giving lectures about their latest "methods" and new remedies. The level of uncertainty amongst practitioners gives rise to the flocking to guru lectures in the hope of enlightenment. If we only sit down and study the fundamental texts we have no need of false gurus. A teacher in homoeopathy is one who sits beside us as we study the methods of Hahnemann for ourselves.