Where Is Dog Training Heading?

[corvus]

Corvus, you don't need to edit your posts (well i assume you don't and that you weren't swearing at every one or something) and i like hearing what you have to say.

That's very kind of you, but alas, the whole forum is not as tolerant. I can't be ranting here because apparently I'm already an arrogant know-it-all who refuses to listen to people that know better than I do. And that was when I was being restrained, open-minded and fair! Probably best not to let them see how arrogant I really am.

[corvus]

It's not that hard!

Have you trained a certified sniffer/search and rescue dog, police dog, guide dog for the visually disabled, Australian customs dog?

There are a lot of poor human teachers, social workers, psychiatrists. (Look at some of their children).

So, I take it that means you think trainers should have Bachelor degrees at least?

[JulesP]

Corvus, you don't need to edit your posts (well i assume you don't and that you weren't swearing at every one or something) and i like hearing what you have to say.

That's very kind of you, but alas, the whole forum is not as tolerant. I can't be ranting here because apparently I'm already an arrogant know-it-all who refuses to listen to people that know better than I do. And that was when I was being restrained, open-minded and fair! Probably best not to let them see how arrogant I really am.

Corvus I feel that I have a communication issue with you but I am trying. I don't tend to give up. I am sure it would all be fine if we spoke face to face.

[corvus]

I get on with nearly everyone in person. But I often find this place frustrating. I've learnt not to share everything I know, suspect or have heard. People would prefer me not to burst their bubbles, so I limit it to two a day in the interests of public relations.

[OSoSwift]

I am interested in what you think constitues the correct type or amount of theory Corvus, not picking a fight but wondering what you think it is?

[corvus]

I don't think there IS a "correct type" or "enough" theory so much as I think training should be guided by recent science and there ought to be some sort of minimum. I disagree that a better understanding of theory is unlikely to help. I disagree because it sure as hell has helped me. Just like having a wild hare has helped me, and having a degree in zoology has helped me. It's disheartening to me when I have paid for the services of a trainer who tells me a load of codswallop I KNOW is untrue because science says it's untrue, and gives me a blank look when I start talking about reward frequency, emotional conditioning, the potential aversives of delivering the wrong reward, establishing operations, and Premack. I mean, come on. If I have zero formal training and I'm paying them, is it too much to ask that they know more about it than I do?? I usually just talk to some hobbyists I know who will have heard of what I'm talking about and will have a different point of view on it than me.

[Aidan3]

How can the likes of Pavlov, Thorndike and Skinner's research be interpreted in so many different ways, is it all still valid now? Where is the evidence that the latest methods work?

Thorndike and Skinner both concluded that punishment was an inferior (frequently ineffective, unpredictable) method of behaviour modification. The "latest methods" have an astounding amount of empirical support, I think if there is a problem it is in application outside of the lab. Avoidance, escape and punishment have more empirical support and are better understood now, and with a greater degree of theoretical understanding could be better utilised (humanely) in dog training.

[Diva]

It's disheartening to me when I have paid for the services of a trainer who tells me a load of codswallop I KNOW is untrue because science says it's untrue,

So why did you hire them in the first place Corvus? No due diligence? It's hard for the average punter to sort the wheat from the chaff, but it shouldn't be hard for any afficienado of training to find what suits them just by asking a few questions of the trainer in question. The average punter who is sold a load of codswallop I feel sorry for, but how come you didn't know better? It's very disillusioning for me that some who claims to know so much hired such a trainer.

[corvus]

It's disheartening to me when I have paid for the services of a trainer who tells me a load of codswallop I KNOW is untrue because science says it's untrue,

So why did you hire them in the first place Corvus? No due diligence? It's hard for the average punter to sort the wheat from the chaff, but it shouldn't be hard for any afficienado of training to find what suits them just by asking a few questions of the trainer in question. The average punter who is sold a load of codswallop I feel sorry for, but how come you didn't know better? It's very disillusioning for me that some who claims to know so much hired such a trainer.

Oh, I'm sorry, I missed the bit where I was born a training afficionado with an accurate sense of what the average trainer knows. It's not me that thinks highly of myself, I see, but others that think too highly of me! That, I will laugh at. Never fear, I can, I think, assuage your feelings of disheartenment. I actually WAS the average punter when I first went looking for a trainer. I'd just got my first puppy on my own and naively expected that I could walk into any professional trainer's classroom and they'd be able to help me with things like unwanted behaviour chains. I was very sad when I found out this was not the case, even if one picks an accredited trainer. I don't think it's unreasonable to expect any professional trainer to know more than I did 3 years ago. Now, I don't know. I don't think so, but apparently using my knowledge as the "bare minimum" yardstick is a claim to "know so much". I will assume that means I know too much and just burst someone's bubble. Hopefully only one, because the day is only half finished and I had plans for the other one. ;)

[JulesP]

Oh, I'm sorry, I missed the bit where I was born a training afficionado with an accurate sense of what the average trainer knows. It's not me that thinks highly of myself, I see, but others that think too highly of me! That, I will laugh at. :D Never fear, I can, I think, assuage your feelings of disheartenment. I actually WAS the average punter when I first went looking for a trainer. I'd just got my first puppy on my own and naively expected that I could walk into any professional trainer's classroom and they'd be able to help me with things like unwanted behaviour chains. I was very sad when I found out this was not the case, even if one picks an accredited trainer. I don't think it's unreasonable to expect any professional trainer to know more than I did 3 years ago. Now, I don't know. I don't think so, but apparently using my knowledge as the "bare minimum" yardstick is a claim to "know so much". I will assume that means I know too much and just burst someone's bubble. Hopefully only one, because the day is only half finished and I had plans for the other one.

Corvus I am interested to know whether this experience was with a dog school (volunteer instructors, low fee) or was with a paid instructor?

I did a fairly intensive course to teach at my dog school but the whole course was about obedience training. We did theory and how to teach people too but it was all geared at obedience. Not at behavior stuff. I often get asked some pretty curly behavior questions and can usually have a good crack at an answer. These questions are usually asked after the class too btw. But I don't think I am there to tell a student how to stop the dog bringing snails into the house (for instance!!).

I certainly never rocked up to dog school thinking I was going to get behavior help. The only time I needed that I went to a private instructor (he was good, no issues there).

If it is dog school you are talking about I wonder if people have unrealistic expectations of what is going to happen at dog school.

[corvus]

Corvus I am interested to know whether this experience was with a dog school (volunteer instructors, low fee) or was with a paid instructor?

Paid instructor.

I certainly never rocked up to dog school thinking I was going to get behavior help.

I didn't. During the course of the class I discovered my puppy thought "down" meant "sit, then down" or something like that. I was like "Look at that! A behaviour chain! Now what?" Instructor was like "Yes, a behaviour chain! Well, just keep doing what you're doing."

If it is dog school you are talking about I wonder if people have unrealistic expectations of what is going to happen at dog school.

Do you think it's unrealistic to expect a professional trainer to know what to do about an unwanted behaviour chain? Or any similar problem that might come up in class? I've paid three different professional trainers for classes over the last few years and found I couldn't talk on equal terms with any of them. I didn't want to discuss behaviour problems, just things like what's a reward and what's a punishment and what quadrant we're using. Volunteer instructors at my current club are a different matter. But that's agility. I gather agility kind of demands a pretty good understanding of learning theory and motivation.

[Zug Zug]

JulesP I think your post raises an interesting question.

I certainly never rocked up to dog school thinking I was going to get behavior help.

When I think back to when I first signed up, actually I did expect behavioural instruction when I went to dog school. And yes it was a volunteer situation, with low fees. I am now an instructor at that school, and people ask me behavioural questions all the time. (Today it was: my dog barks a lot when we're out in public together, but not at home)

These can be very difficult questions to respond to in class, or after class.

But I actually feel that, even as a volunteer instructor, I have an obligation to try and find some answers/help for these people. If not from me, perhaps from one of the other instructors or in some other way.

When I originally signed up, it was because of my dog's DA issues. She is still quite anxious and dog aggressive, many years later. It something that worries me actually - I don't try to counsel people with DA dogs because I was never able to overcome this problem in my dog - we have other instructors who are very good at helping people with these issues thankfully.

[Staff'n'Toller]

Do you think it's unrealistic to expect a professional trainer to know what to do about an unwanted behaviour chain? Or any similar problem that might come up in class? I've paid three different professional trainers for classes over the last few years and found I couldn't talk on equal terms with any of them. I didn't want to discuss behaviour problems, just things like what's a reward and what's a punishment and what quadrant we're using. Volunteer instructors at my current club are a different matter. But that's agility. I gather agility kind of demands a pretty good understanding of learning theory and motivation.

Any qualified instructor, NDTF, Delta or otherwise would have been able to discuss these easily with you. The same goes for most volunteer-staffed large clubs that run here, as JulesP says they run their own theory courses.

I can only think that you chose very badly 3 times, or that you assumed the trainers were dumb at the time.

Clients want results, and fairly quickly, they want some theory behind what they are doing but dog handling is by nature a very hands-on thing. You are happy to read 10 books on the subject, I have trouble getting my clients to open their training manual of 20 pages. That's why you have trouble here Corvus, you are in academia. We are mostly all service providers.

[mita]

That's why you have trouble here Corvus, you are in academia. We are mostly all service providers.

Some people in academia teach service providers.

Depends, tho' on what the service is... and the level of complexity required to carry it out.

So, it's a case of what a person needs to know to do what the service hopes to achieve.

For basic training of dogs, given the dogs don't deviate far from what can be expected around the average range, it's necessary to have a good basic knowledge of dog learning & behaviour. And not necessarily an in-depth, wide-ranging knowledge of current research & the academic literature.

Though that gradually 'trickles' down, because it gives the service provider more insight into what they're doing & maybe suggests some different strategies.

But for marked behavioral problems, more dipping into the research/knowledge- base can be called for. That, to me, goes with a service provided by a dog behaviorist.

Honestly, tho', in real life, it's a bit of a mixture. Some trainers have a basic knowledge which does fine for puppies/dogs for whom that is enough.

Others also have a deeper range of references for what they do. And that can help with dogs who need something more than the basic.

Also maybe clients will seek out a trainer (or behaviorist) that speaks more to the level they're familiar with, themselves. Like Corvus was wanting something more complex than the basic.

Just my opinion, but I think the terms dog trainer & dog behaviorist should relate to slightly different practices. Bit like the difference between a counsellor & a psychologist. Or between a teacher & a specialist teacher. One digs more deeply into the technical details of a specified problem .

Edited March 20, 2011 by mita

[corvus]

I can only think that you chose very badly 3 times, or that you assumed the trainers were dumb at the time.

Or maybe I just hit a brick wall because of what the trainers were expecting from me? I almost never talk about learning theory to people's faces. If someone struck up a conversation with me about learning theory, I would let them lead it and assume they knew nothing they didn't bring up themselves. Occasionally I have asked if they have heard of something I think is very relevant to the conversation and introduce it that way. I tend to go into training classes with my head down and trying to say as little as possible. IME trainers don't like it when I ask a theoretical question or question whether something they have directed me to do is rewarding like they tell me it is. I imagine they are used to dumbing it down in the extreme and assuming no one knows more about theory than they do. If I ask a theoretical question quietly after class, they may well assume that I have read a couple of books or websites and think I know it all but am still leagues behind them and won't understand a technical answer, leaving me feeling like I've wasted my time.

I am definitely still trying to figure out how to talk to trainers. I do a lot of pussyfooting, carefully dropping in terms and trying to gauge if I've lost them or if they think I'm being patronising. They are professionals after all, and I am not. This time 'round it has been easier. I think having enthusiastic trainers that enjoy talking about theory helps a lot. And maybe I'm getting better at artfully letting them know I'm on top of the theory without sounding like I'm questioning their professional integrity.

[bedazzledx2]

I gather agility kind of demands a pretty good understanding of learning theory and motivation.

Corvus thats just so not true...sorry mate but I couldn't let that one go!! It is true that agility has moved on much faster than obedience in the main and that in order to compete in the higher levels, the agility community have embraced better teaching methods. Its a bit hard to train agility on a lead and choke chains are not permitted due to safety concerns. An e collar is certainly not the way to go so people have become better trainers using motivational methods rather than aversives.

This is not to say that obedience shouldn't demand the same if not more understanding of learning theory and motivation...it should demand more as obedience is not generally as inherently rewarding to the dog as agility is. in other words agility is an easier gig for the handler to motivate the dog. (Of course there is enormous skill required to train agility well which people have embraced)

Learning theory rocks

Edited March 20, 2011 by bedazzledx2

[corvus]

I gather agility kind of demands a pretty good understanding of learning theory and motivation.

Corvus thats just so not true...sorry mate but I couldn't let that one go!!

*clunk* That was the sound of my bright, idealistic little face falling, nay, crashing to the ground.

I've been lucky on that front so far, then. I had a club a good hour drive away recommended and have found them to be wonderful. I ran into my instructor at the APDT conference last year, and they go to the more specialised, training-centric ones I don't go to. It's been really enjoyable and has restored my faith in training classes.

[bedazzledx2]

I gather agility kind of demands a pretty good understanding of learning theory and motivation.

Corvus thats just so not true...sorry mate but I couldn't let that one go!!

*clunk* That was the sound of my bright, idealistic little face falling, nay, crashing to the ground.

I've been lucky on that front so far, then. I had a club a good hour drive away recommended and have found them to be wonderful. I ran into my instructor at the APDT conference last year, and they go to the more specialised, training-centric ones I don't go to. It's been really enjoyable and has restored my faith in training classes.

[Diva]

Oh, I'm sorry, I missed the bit where I was born a training afficionado with an accurate sense of what the average trainer knows. It's not me that thinks highly of myself, I see, but others that think too highly of me! That, I will laugh at. Never fear, I can, I think, assuage your feelings of disheartenment. I actually WAS the average punter when I first went looking for a trainer.

No, you weren't, not if you wanted to start a conversation about emotional conditioning and Premack.

If you had enough background to ask about establishing operations of your first trainer, you really could have been capable of choosing someone who could talk the language of theory. If you didn't ask the right questions three times before hiring, that's just weirdly ineffectual. And yes, it's disillusioning; not disheartening, that was your term for how you felt. My illusions of your nous are destroyed. My heart was never involved

and gives me a blank look when I start talking about reward frequency, emotional conditioning, the potential aversives of delivering the wrong reward, establishing operations, and Premack. I mean, come on.

Edited March 20, 2011 by Diva

[JulesP]

I think I get you a little bit more now Corvus. I come from a horse riding background. I loved dressage. And omg did I love talking and reading about the theory of horse training. You would love it I reckon. Horse people can talk and talk and talk about theory. I got so bogged down in the theory I couldn't ride at one stage because of all the conflicting ideas

So I can't ride and am doing dog stuff. Obedience was good but then I started doing agility. And Omg there was all this theory again!! It was so technical I loved it. Books, mags, dvds etc. You would love my clubs agility too, super technical and the instructors go to all the overseas instructors. Gosh they even use a whiteboard before lessons :D I haven't found anywhere that does obedience quite that way. I did have a Delta instructor who I loved talking to about training.

Perhaps your instructors were conscious of talking too much and wanted to get you doing. It was something that was drilled into us at my club - don't have them standing around too much whilst you talk. Perhaps they didn't want you to feel like you had wasted your money with too much talking and not enough doing.

Btw I told a new class about tricks yesterday and they all groaned and looked fairly pained.