Is Bad Training Better Then No Training At All? Why?

[Cosmolo]

I was aked this question today and am interested in your thoughts. My answer is no- absoultely not!

[Purpley]

I think NO aswell. Training should be a positive thing for both owner and dog, and it should always finish on a positive note.

I have left training in tears due to stupid instructors, and I can tell you that it put me and my dog 10 steps back. It also took me a long time to get back to training as I was scared about the same things occuring.

As for the quality of the training, then the same goes. There is no point training wrong and hoping it will just turn out the best. You might as well jut not train.

[arawnhaus]

No way,better to not train at all then to do it incorrectly,Leaving the dog confused and perhaps without realising training bad habits and undesirable traits is all that achieves.

[Mrsdog]

OK my darlings, let's look at this from an instructor's point of view:

Some people come to training with their dogs, don't listen to the instructor, (not you of course) continue doing what they are doing, continue making the same old mistakes, and guess what? The dogs learn anyway. Clever old puppies, eh? Perhaps they are listening to the instructor or perhaps watching what the other dogs are doing, anyway they DO learn.

So I would consider this bad training, but much better than no training at all. Remember, bad training can come from you, not just from a poor unpaid instructor at doggy school.

To my way of thinking anyone who makes an effort to bring their dog for training cares about their dog and deserves all the help we are able to give. So they don't always listen, treat class like a social outing and prefer to talk when you are explaining, forget that you told them last week not to wear thongs as they are flipping in the mini foxies face, try to give hand signals with a bunch of keys in their hand, are finding it hard to bend down with the baby in the packpack (oh and then they decide to take baby out and put it on ground in middle of dogs!). There are a million stories in a dog trainer's day..........

As amazing as it may seem, all dogs will learn everything eventually, sometimes in spite of us! Can't help but love 'em.

Noels.

[Reddii]

I caveat my comments with the fact I have a VERY real lack of experience with my first dogs only just reaching trial level recently. To my way of thinking it depends on what you are trying to achieve.

If you really want to compete with you dogs and do well at sports etc then don't waste your time in training badly. BUT if you want to spend time with your dog and bond with them then surely it is better to be spending time with them working, albeit in a not totally productive manner as long as both owner and dog are enjoying it?

You may not end up with a dog that is at trial standard or even approaching it, but you will end up with one that looks to you for guidance and leadership which really is all most people need from a family pet isn't it?

[Erny]

I think the answer depends on the definition of 'bad'.

[The Spotted Devil]

I think the answer depends on the definition of 'bad'.

Couldn't agree more Erny And by whose standards?

My first dog was an ACD - by golly she was a brilliant dog and did really well despite the fact that I was a bad trainer with poor, 'old-fashioned' advice from an obedience club. However, she was a heck of a lot more relaxed when working with me than when she was left in the backyard bored out of her brain until the age of 2!

From a welfare perspective, the research indicates that "inconsistent" handling gives a similar or higher stress response than "negative" handling i.e. randomly praising/punishing the same response.

[Cosmolo]

Thanks for responses- good point Erny- and i think it would vary depending on the dog. I think that some dogs can cope fine with average or poor training while others need great timing and consistency, not just to learn but to maintain a reasonable state of mind as well.

[Erny]

'Bad' can mean a variety of things.

'Bad' as in bad for the dog in terms of stress levels. (eg. poor house-training .... punishment for soiling)

'Bad' as in having taught it to ignore commands (through eg. inconsistent training)

'Bad' as in having taught the dog to do the wrong things (eg. jumping up)

'Bad' as in unfair.

And for that matter, 'training' as in obedience commands?

Or 'training' in relation to behaviour?

Or both?

If it is purely obedience, I'd prefer a dog not to have received training than to have received 'bad' training where it has been taught it doesn't need to comply. It is easier to train well from scratch than it is to have to undo a dog's learnt belief system that commands mean nothing.

But, the dog I work with might have been taught (eg) 'sit' badly (perhaps poorly administered methodology) but in spite of that has picked it up ok. And because of that albeit 'bad' training, I might be able to use that known 'sit' command to assist in behaviour modification.

So that's why I think definition of 'bad' and of 'training' is required.

Edited April 21, 2008 by Erny

[Cosmolo]

Agree completely

[Lablover]

What's good training? Frankly no one is perfect. Heck sometimes we do not know what we are thinking, how do we expect our dogs to learn as perfectly as possible.

Cosmolo, the header of this topic confused me at first. The use of THEN, Yes bad training usually leads to no training, as some owners give up, and the dogs suffer.