Dont Say No To Your Dog?

[dark angel]

In the last couple of weeks i have "sat in" on some dog training classes around my area just to see what others do.

I went to three actually.

The first thing i found surprising was that they had chairs and cute little mats for the dogs to sit on.Nice and comfy i thought.Cant see how one can train dogs sitting down but hey ill keep watching.

The dogs and owners began to arrive .EVERY dog was pulling the owner by their harness not one was walking/heeling.So they sat down in a circle on the chairs (the owners that is). Most dogs had calmed down by now still a few jumps up to the owner.Then a late commer arrived.A boisterous loud large breed.Immediately the owner was told to sit out of the circle as the dog would disrupt the class.So owner and dog are now segregated from the rest of the class.

Now i thought came the strange part.

The trainer went on ...Here we never tell the do NO,we dont use any harsh tones in our voice and we dont use anything which will hurt the dog.If it does something we dont want it to do we ignore it or distract it.Immediately i had visions of a dog its teeth around ones ankle and ignoring it mmmmmmm as i scratched my head.

But for behaviours we like, we give them a treat.This reinforces the good behaviours and the dog shouldnt do unwanted ones as it doesnt receive a treat.Mumblings of "spoilt lil Sh*ts" from my better half.

Through the hour lesson i noticed a few things.

Maybe im cynical ... but it seemed that some of the dogs had the owner trained? They would walk around a little then sit.... get treated.get up walk sit get treated.No command to sit just sit and get treated.It seemed like to me the dog knew that it could get treated by sitting in front of the owner on its own accord?Not because the owner told it to sit..just because it did.

On recalls ...a 10 metre lead let the dog wander/run off call it and pull it back treat it.Yes i thought seems good to me ..Until the trainer/teacher walked past and instead of the dog going to the owner it went to the trainer.Dog sat in front of trainer and she treated it !Not once did this happen but numerous times.I couldnt help but chuckle at getting a treat for doing the wrong thing.I was lost.

As it was getting late we thought we would amble home which brought us ohhh 15 metres from the dogs when walking.They were still doing recalls.One dog its owner holding the lead with two hands trying to stop the dog ,calling it to come to her,decided that we were more interesting that its owner it was actually pulling the owner towards us.

As we left with the words ringing in our ears ..."it was unfortunate that those people walked past as you were trying to recall him"

I am going back to watch the progress of this class as i am quite interested in how long and it takes dogs to be trained this way.

This is more of an observation/statement rather than a question..

But the question i have is how does the dog know its done something wrong if you dont tell it?

can they work out something is a no no just because they dont get a treat?

Its ok to reprimand a child when it does something wrong yet not for a dog?

they say they treat their dogs humanely yet us humans say no and reprimand humans yet cant to dogs

seems almost a little unbalanced?

[bedazzledx2]

It does sound a bit haphazard . I prescribe to the mind set of error-less learning. I try very hard to set my dog/puppy up to be right and control the environment as best I can so that there is no need to correct or admonish. Positive is not permissive. It sounds as though they are trying very hard to be positive which is great but maybe something is being lost in the translation? Group classes are not easy and I have to admit I would never take a youngster to one other than be around the sidelines doing my own thing.

In the last couple of weeks i have "sat in" on some dog training classes around my area just to see what others do.

I went to three actually.

The first thing i found surprising was that they had chairs and cute little mats for the dogs to sit on.Nice and comfy i thought.Cant see how one can train dogs sitting down but hey ill keep watching.

The dogs and owners began to arrive .EVERY dog was pulling the owner by their harness not one was walking/heeling.So they sat down in a circle on the chairs (the owners that is). Most dogs had calmed down by now still a few jumps up to the owner.Then a late commer arrived.A boisterous loud large breed.Immediately the owner was told to sit out of the circle as the dog would disrupt the class.So owner and dog are now segregated from the rest of the class.

Now i thought came the strange part.

The trainer went on ...Here we never tell the do NO,we dont use any harsh tones in our voice and we dont use anything which will hurt the dog.If it does something we dont want it to do we ignore it or distract it.Immediately i had visions of a dog its teeth around ones ankle and ignoring it mmmmmmm as i scratched my head.

But for behaviours we like, we give them a treat.This reinforces the good behaviours and the dog shouldnt do unwanted ones as it doesnt receive a treat.Mumblings of "spoilt lil Sh*ts" from my better half.

Through the hour lesson i noticed a few things.

Maybe im cynical ... but it seemed that some of the dogs had the owner trained? They would walk around a little then sit.... get treated.get up walk sit get treated.No command to sit just sit and get treated.It seemed like to me the dog knew that it could get treated by sitting in front of the owner on its own accord?Not because the owner told it to sit..just because it did.

On recalls ...a 10 metre lead let the dog wander/run off call it and pull it back treat it.Yes i thought seems good to me ..Until the trainer/teacher walked past and instead of the dog going to the owner it went to the trainer.Dog sat in front of trainer and she treated it !Not once did this happen but numerous times.I couldnt help but chuckle at getting a treat for doing the wrong thing.I was lost.

As it was getting late we thought we would amble home which brought us ohhh 15 metres from the dogs when walking.They were still doing recalls.One dog its owner holding the lead with two hands trying to stop the dog ,calling it to come to her,decided that we were more interesting that its owner it was actually pulling the owner towards us.

As we left with the words ringing in our ears ..."it was unfortunate that those people walked past as you were trying to recall him"

I am going back to watch the progress of this class as i am quite interested in how long and it takes dogs to be trained this way.

This is more of an observation/statement rather than a question..

But the question i have is how does the dog know its done something wrong if you dont tell it?

can they work out something is a no no just because they dont get a treat?

Its ok to reprimand a child when it does something wrong yet not for a dog?

they say they treat their dogs humanely yet us humans say no and reprimand humans yet cant to dogs

seems almost a little unbalanced?

[GoldenGirl85]

In my classes they dont recommend we use the word 'no' they prefer we say something like 'whoops' because its hard to use a negative tone with that word. They dont enforce it though, I use 'no' with my dogs

[Lab lady]

I have trained dogs using the old method of check-chains and corrections and now train using only positive reinforcements and would say that the dogs learn much much quicker with the later.

I still use the 'no' word where needed but where with the older style of training it was a firm 'NO' it's now a softer 'no' used more as a communication rather than a correction. Things like recall from memory where once only taught once the dogs was at a higher level but now taught from very early on.

[Gamby]

Reading your message makes me wonder if it was a puppy or older puppy or Class 1 you were watching.

My reason for saying that is that the dogs being put on the mat is to get the dog to understand the word Calm. How often would we like our dogs to drop calmly while we are talking, watching or whatever.

Did you ask someone about the class/es. Maybe you would have had an idea of what the lesson plans were.

Asking the handler of the boisterous dog to sit outside the circle was because the dog would be too distracted in the class if made to stay in the circle. As dogs are Pack Animals, the dog will soon learn that if it calms down it will be able to join the pack.

Ignore bad behaviour, Reward good behaviour is better than yelling at the dog when it has done the wrong thing.

I look forward to reading your updates on this class. I would also like you to have a talk to the Head Instructor/Instructor to find out what the class is about.

[wuffles]

Doesn't sound all that bad to me, sounds like a beginners class.

I often treat my puppy when she does something I like without me asking. If she comes to me and sits, this is a behaviour I want to continue happening, so she gets a treat. If she is lying down calmly in the lounge room, sometimes she gets a treat just for being calm. When she takes herself outside to wee, she gets praised and treated. This method works VERY well Occasionally I've gotten angry and yelled at her, and she starts to shy away - definitely not something I want to happen - she responds much better to a gentle "no", distract, and give her something better to do.

Many beginner dogs would run off to say hello to strangers in a recall (my older dog had terrible recalls, he would still do the occasional fly-by in advanced classes, but if I'd punished him "occasional" would have become "all the time"). That's why they're at a training class, to learn!

[spottychick]

I have to say it sounds okay to me. It must be a beginners class and the dogs are getting treated for sitting and "coming" without being told to (including "coming" to the trainer). They are also being trained in a way where it's almost impossible for them to fail. This is great. When they are doing the right thing of their own accord that to me is better than only doing it when told to. They are figuring out for themselves what the right thing to do is. As I understand it when they start doing that solidly - on their own initiative - you give their action a name - "sit" "come" and reinforce it as a great thing.

I only recently learnt the value of letting the dog work out what to do first, without you telling it to, when I tried out the Triangle of Temptation on my 8 year old lunatic adopted dog. Believe me, it really works.

[Cosmolo]

The offering of behaviours for rewards is fine- its a good thing for dogs to offer nice behaviours without commands. Instructors rewarding dogs for coming to them instead of owner- not so good! Did the dog who sat outside the circle get to join the class eventually?

I do use appropriate corrections as i believe the situations where i use them warrant it. Our group classes are much more difficult to run though because we have methods and equipment to suit each dog, ie- in one class we will have dogs on harnesses, headcollars, flat collars, martingales and maybe one or two correction chains. I totally understand why others choose not to do this because its tough and we only have small classes with 2 instructors. Within a group, when instructor attention is divided and the group inexperienced, i think leaning toward more positive is a safer option.

But for us, we never rule out anything- different things for different dogs AND owners.

[angelsun]

Positive is not permissive.

This sums things up totally. I am a positive person with a positive attitude towards training, however I am NOT permissive when it comes to dogs actions/behaviours.

I have been hearing (from my class of 'problem children') similar methods of training, which are not effective for the majority of dogs or owners. Dogs and owners being told that they are disruptive (and not because they are late, but because of either the owner or the breed involved!) Dogs deemed unsuitable for class because they are leash aggressive, dogs asked to not return to class because they quite simply, have issues beyond the instructors ablility to fix by feeding them.

This is why I have an obedience class now. These people and their pets need structure and yes, with a positive twist. I allow food but instruct when the best time to use it, I also like to see a toy reward if a dog is more toy/play motivated, but again, only when suitable. I will not allow head halters or body harnesses on my dogs in class because it does not help fix any problems, and hence why you see all those dogs yanking their owners around. They are simply not taught to respect the lead. I will not hurt any dogs in my class, but I do make them mind. I do not advocate yelling at the dogs, but a stern 'no' won't crush their spirit. We don't have chairs or mats, because sitting down isn't teaching a dog to stop pulling on a lead. The first ten minutes of class is usually a bit spirited but they all settle down and begin to focus and work. We teach focus with praise and not allowing the dog to sit around and be bored. We teach attentiveness with quick direction changes when heeling. I teach the handlers to use a correction collar properly, and the goal is to move to a flat collar when the dog earns that reward.

In a short period of time, we have the leash aggressive dog, walking about 2 metres from other dogs without lunging. We have the barker, not barking and we have the sniffing gundog more focused and wanting to work.

Many of these dogs in my class attempted the so called 'positive reinforcement' classes and yet are now with me. They are learning and are happy owners that say their dogs are like new animals because of some basic rules.

I won't compare dogs to kids...as it usually incites a riot on the forum, but I will say flat out....can you imagine your frustration if you didn't speak a language and you were surrounded by it and clearly being asked to do something which you weren't sure of. Asked to behave or move a certain way and yet because you don't speak the language and have no negative impact from an action, you continue to act a certain way, not knowing that in fact it is the undesired behaviour. It's hard to explain this properly, and I do it much better in an inclass situation!

I recently heard a statistic of in the course of one year, three CGC graduates for a club and this was considered to be a 'great' achievement. After digging into the CGC issue (as noted in another thread) and learning more about the current methods of teaching by those that hold these tests, I can in a way see why they consider this to be a big deal......I've watched dogs that have moved through these instructions and taken course and level after level, to be substandard when it comes to behaving in an acceptable manner (in my opinion and compared to counterparts with similar starting issues using other training methods)

There will always be a debate when it comes to who's right and what method is more correct, but I will add that the current major positive reinforcement trainers from what I have seen/witnessed do not take into account the individual breeds and their predisposition towards certain behaviours and attempt to lump all dogs into one pile and apply one technique to deal with them.

I have a wide variety of dogs in my current class, all with separate issues which I know have not been handled by the instructors out there with their 'diplomas' in positive reinforcement training. These dogs that when they came to me, were in fact a bit chaotic, have made drastic changes and all positive.

[huski]

But for behaviours we like, we give them a treat.This reinforces the good behaviours and the dog shouldnt do unwanted ones as it doesnt receive a treat.Mumblings of "spoilt lil Sh*ts" from my better half.

Not sure how rewarding a dog for good behaviour makes it a spoilt little shit?

I think for many dogs removing a reward is corrective/punishment. My dog certainly finds it unpleasant!

On recalls ...a 10 metre lead let the dog wander/run off call it and pull it back treat it.Yes i thought seems good to me ..Until the trainer/teacher walked past and instead of the dog going to the owner it went to the trainer.Dog sat in front of trainer and she treated it !Not once did this happen but numerous times.I couldnt help but chuckle at getting a treat for doing the wrong thing.I was lost.

How odd, it does sound like the class was a bit all over the place. I don't want anyone but me treating my dog when we are training and I would be cranky if the instructor took it upon themselves to treat my dog for doing the wrong thing.

It doesn't sound dissimilar to the DELTA puppy school class we went to. It was easily the worst puppy school or training class I've ever been to. The class went for over an hour (often close to two hours) with the baby puppies having to be tied to the chairs on a short leash and forced to sit on their mats and "be calm" the entire time. I had a 12 week old beagle pup who thought this was ridiculous and getting her to sit calmly for more than five minutes was a big achievement! The instructor kept feeding her pigs ear after pigs ear and by the end of the class Daisy was like a kid on too much red cordial.

The instructor also told us never to correct our dogs or tell them no etc, funnily enough she was happy to recommend head collars as a positive tool

Was easily the most useless class I've ever been to and did nothing for my very strong willed, energetic beagle pup.

Having said that I've done the hour long bash the paddock obedience classes too and I won't do those again. It really turned my dog off heel work and constantly correcting her for scenting was not productive in the long run. Instead harnessing her drive and using it in a productive way gave me a dog who was way more switched on and eager to work. You need to use a method that's most suitable for the dog, people who train in drive don't often use corrections when developing drive because you don't want to lose drive or lessen it.

[Mas1981]

When I am training my dog I dont use any harsh corrections I just say too bad and thats it. However when I am not training him and he does something wrong, like for eg he tried to snatch something out my hand this morning i used a very firm "NO". He knows when I do this he has done something very wrong and he sits and looks at me for a few seconds as if to say I am very sorry mum.

[kiesha09]

I completely agree with your trainer about not saying no to your dog. That isn't giving your dog any information and not telling it what you do want it to do. For example if my dog grabs my sock and is about to run off with it what is the point of saying NO? It doesn't tell the dog what I do want it to do. Instead a better way to go about it is to ask the dog to come to me and the give.

If I had been managing things better the dog would never had a chance to get the sock (errorless learning) as I would have managed the situation better so as the habit is never formed.

We need to be as specific as possible to our dogs because they don't know english just a few different cues that we have trained them to know. Most of the time they have no idea what 'NO' means except that humans say it in a gruff, loud, angry voice so its something that should be feared. To me thats no basis for a good relationship with your dog.

[Erny]

Is the school against saying "no" because it views it as a negative to the dog and that it (the school) is against the application of any negatives in training?

I don't understand the training benefit of a trainer reinforcing a recall when the dog clearly has not responded to the owner's command. I wonder - perhaps the dog had a history of fear of strangers and it was being rewarded for a confident approach to the trainer. Sure - not a great training technique for teaching recall for the dog, but perhaps an opportunity to encourage confidence and discourage fear, which might be seen by the trainer as a priority. I'm not saying this is the reason why the trainer might have done what he/she did, nor am I saying this is what I would or wouldn't do (circumstance and situation would need to dictate) but I am saying that without knowing, it would be unfair to judge a trainer or training school on this one observation.

I do understand the use of "whoops" and how it psychologically avoids a negative tone of voice by the owner. The word itself also encourages a different look on the handler's face. Dogs are very sensitive to facial expressions. To me this would be the same as a NRM. I use NRM's. Not exclusively to all else though. "Whoops" is a word we use in agility training, for exactly the reason mentioned. NRM's are good, but the handlers need to have an understanding of what they are doing to know they are using it appropriately.

"No" can transfer information to a dog if the word has been paired with an action that gives meaning to it. Even "no" can be a NRM. Or it can represent "you're in trouble". And/or it can represent a correction. Depending on when and how it is paired. Many people use the word "no". But they each use it differently and not even use it the same way consistently. Consequently, I'm not a big fan of having people in my classes use the word "no". Only for the fact they each have their own different interpretations of it and are therefore likely to use it (and have probably used it in the past) in ways I do not intend for them to use it towards their respective dogs in training.

I encourage the use of food treat rewards in class. Along with reward toys (tug). This doesn't make for "spoilt" dogs but used appropriately can make learning easier for the dogs. What schedule of reinforcement I use and whether there are corrections (be they verbal, physical or by way of negative punishment) depends on the level of training the class is at. Not only do I like to the dogs to learn what to do before corrections for what not to do are too quickly introduced, I like the handlers to at least build up some sense of delivery-timing via reward before I expect them to have a sense of understanding of delivery-timing via correction.

I think some additional explanation is needed to be able to properly comment and unless the instructor/s whom were being observed at the time are asked, judgement can prove to be inaccurate and/or unfair. This is why, if people wish to observe the classes I run before deciding to join, I have a policy of arranging to meet them at a prescribed time for a prescribed period, and a trainer allocated to be with them so that explanation of what the class is doing may be proffered. At least then people are able to form an educated opinion on whether they like or don't like the training methods I employ.

Edited April 3, 2010 by Erny

[dark angel]

The offering of behaviours for rewards is fine- its a good thing for dogs to offer nice behaviours without commands. Instructors rewarding dogs for coming to them instead of owner- not so good! Did the dog who sat outside the circle get to join the class eventually?

I do use appropriate corrections as i believe the situations where i use them warrant it. Our group classes are much more difficult to run though because we have methods and equipment to suit each dog, ie- in one class we will have dogs on harnesses, headcollars, flat collars, martingales and maybe one or two correction chains. I totally understand why others choose not to do this because its tough and we only have small classes with 2 instructors. Within a group, when instructor attention is divided and the group inexperienced, i think leaning toward more positive is a safer option.

But for us, we never rule out anything- different things for different dogs AND owners.

The circle was largened (mmm is that a word?) to accomodate the dog later...

If the dog went to the trainer for any reason it was rewarded after it sat.I agree i dont think the trainer should be rewarding the dog for any reason

[dark angel]

Is the school against saying "no" because it views it as a negative to the dog and that it (the school) is against the application of any negatives in training?

I don't understand the training benefit of a trainer reinforcing a recall when the dog clearly has not responded to the owner's command. I wonder - perhaps the dog had a history of fear of strangers and it was being rewarded for a confident approach to the trainer. Sure - not a great training technique for teaching recall for the dog, but perhaps an opportunity to encourage confidence and discourage fear, which might be seen by the trainer as a priority. I'm not saying this is the reason why the trainer might have done what he/she did, nor am I saying this is what I would or wouldn't do (circumstance and situation would need to dictate) but I am saying that without knowing, it would be unfair to judge a trainer or training school on this one observation.

I do understand the use of "whoops" and how it psychologically avoids a negative tone of voice by the owner. The word itself also encourages a different look on the handler's face. Dogs are very sensitive to facial expressions. To me this would be the same as a NRM. I use NRM's. Not exclusively to all else though. "Whoops" is a word we use in agility training, for exactly the reason mentioned. NRM's are good, but the handlers need to have an understanding of what they are doing to know they are using it appropriately.

"No" can transfer information to a dog if the word has been paired with an action that gives meaning to it. Even "no" can be a NRM. Or it can represent "you're in trouble". And/or it can represent a correction. Depending on when and how it is paired. Many people use the word "no". But they each use it differently and not even use it the same way consistently. Consequently, I'm not a big fan of having people in my classes use the word "no". Only for the fact they each have their own different interpretations of it and are therefore likely to use it (and have probably used it in the past) in ways I do not intend for them to use it towards their respective dogs in training.

I encourage the use of food treat rewards in class. Along with reward toys (tug). This doesn't make for "spoilt" dogs but used appropriately can make learning easier for the dogs. What schedule of reinforcement I use and whether there are corrections (be they verbal, physical or by way of negative punishment) depends on the level of training the class is at. Not only do I like to the dogs to learn what to do before corrections for what not to do are too quickly introduced, I like the handlers to at least build up some sense of delivery-timing via reward before I expect them to have a sense of understanding of delivery-timing via correction.

I think some additional explanation is needed to be able to properly comment and unless the instructor/s whom were being observed at the time are asked, judgement can prove to be inaccurate and/or unfair. This is why, if people wish to observe the classes I run before deciding to join, I have a policy of arranging to meet them at a prescribed time for a prescribed period, and a trainer allocated to be with them so that explanation of what the class is doing may be proffered. At least then people are able to form an educated opinion on whether they like or don't like the training methods I employ.

Yes they are against the application of all negatives.

Thinking about the no word ive realized i dont use it either more of a ah ah

The spoiling issue after asking the better half came from "the dog just sat down and expected something.when it got what it wanted if left again"

I am in agreeance with your comment on learning what to do before corrections no point correcting for something the dog doesnt know.That is unfair.

And yes rewards before corrections

[Erny]

Yes they are against the application of all negatives.

Hhhhhmmm .... wonder if they realise that training without any negatives is impossible.

Wonder if they have any notion of how stressful to the dog that negative punishment can be.

[angelsun]

Have they forgotten how a mother dog will discipline their young? How a wild wolf or dingo will discpline a naughty puppy?

[Longcoat]

What is the finished product of the training process that the OP has described???. Do you end up with a dog that responds to voice commands in a reliable fashion without a leash under high distraction???. Does the training centre demonstrate a dog's ability trained in these methods when completed???

[dark angel]

What is the finished product of the training process that the OP has described???. Do you end up with a dog that responds to voice commands in a reliable fashion without a leash under high distraction???. Does the training centre demonstrate a dog's ability trained in these methods when completed???

This i cant answer until i see further lessons and how the dogs react etc

I still cant understand if a distraction is greater than the reward does it not mean that the reward pales in significance to the distraction?

As i previously stated i have been to 3 DIFFERENT schools all under the same association guidlines and i have seen the same at all three.But i will wait and see.

Regarding the dogs ability when completed , i believe that a trainers dog would be the guide to what can be achieved?

Well after counting seven breaks from a drop not counting the ones before hand before i started counting... it leaves a lot left to be desired.Eventually the dog was tied up.This was in the hour we were there.No i am not exagerating or colouring the truth for the benifit of this thread.Each time, the owner/trainer causally walked back to the dog led it back to its spot and told it to drop then left again ...oh there was a little bit of friendly finger shaking at it then a pat.

so whats in the pudding???

[bedazzledx2]

What's your point Longcoat?

What is the finished product of the training process that the OP has described???. Do you end up with a dog that responds to voice commands in a reliable fashion without a leash under high distraction???. Does the training centre demonstrate a dog's ability trained in these methods when completed???