Instructor Training Courses?

[Herr Rottweiler]

Not sure exactly what you mean here but where do you draw the line? Would it be OK if I jabbed my dog with an electric cattle prod if he didn't turn left when I wanted him too? A piece of equipment used incorrectly can inflict pain, too many instructors who use such equipment have no idea how it's meant to be used. I see so many dog owners who don't even know

that a slip chain has to be fitted a certain way, they have them on upside down and drag their dogs around on them choking the poor creatures half to death . I might add that the reasons for training a certain way were discussed in my Delta classes, the theory and practice was covered in great detail.

This is not flaming neither is it threatning, it's more based on education. Would it be ok if I belted you in the head with a cricket bat for not agreeing with what I think is right? The obvious answer is, most definately not! So hopefully that should answer your question. See this is the interesting side of the argument, what do we consider to be cruel?

I have a few things I consider cruel.

Starvation,

Isolation,

Stupidity

Anthropomorphism

I had a private lesson with a young lady about 6 years ago and she was mortified with her dog and her prior trainer because she believes it was the trainers fault why her dog killed and ate the cat. I asked her why she came to that conclusion and she explained to me that her trainer only believed in positive measures and if her dog didn't behave then she should with hold the dogs food. She couldn't get the dog to stop so she didn't feed it for 1 week so it ate the cat.

Obviously, a gross misinterpritation on a silly persons behalf but none the less, another person not understanding how to use what they have been given. Mind you, I managed to fix the behaviour in 1 lesson with some sensibly applied positive punishment, convinced her to keep the dog and not do silly things like that again. Amen

[Rom]

I love that story HR - found it was highly relevant to a group of people I was working with at the time

I agree.....I don't often enough question the source of someones knowledge....

Have a similar story. Can't remember where it comes from

A Mum cooks excellent roasts and brags that she uses the methods that her grandmother taught her. One of the steps involves slicing a chunk off the end of the roast b4 you cook it...twas assumed that it helped the flavours of the basting absorb until grandma was asked.....she cut the chunk off the end cuz the roast wouldn't fit into her baking dish

[fido666]

This is not flaming neither is it threatning, it's more based on education. Would it be ok if I belted you in the head with a cricket bat for not agreeing with what I think is right? The obvious answer is, most definately not! So hopefully that should answer your question. See this is the interesting side of the argument, what do we consider to be cruel?

I have a few things I consider cruel.

Starvation,

Isolation,

Stupidity

Anthropomorphism

I had a private lesson with a young lady about 6 years ago and she was mortified with her dog and her prior trainer because she believes it was the trainers fault why her dog killed and ate the cat. I asked her why she came to that conclusion and she explained to me that her trainer only believed in positive measures and if her dog didn't behave then she should with hold the dogs food. She couldn't get the dog to stop so she didn't feed it for 1 week so it ate the cat.

Obviously, a gross misinterpritation on a silly persons behalf but none the less, another person not understanding how to use what they have been given. Mind you, I managed to fix the behaviour in 1 lesson with some sensibly applied positive punishment, convinced her to keep the dog and not do silly things like that again. Amen

Hi HR,

I was specifically referring to your statement

I applaude people's right to chose what they want to use.

, that's open to a very liberal interpretation isn't it? I'm also not sure how Anthropomorphism (Attribution of human motivation, characteristics, or behavior to inanimate objects, animals, or natural phenomena) relates to cruelty, suppose I must just be thick .

That person with the cat eating dog you mentioned probably did not speak to her instructor about the ongoing problem, without knowing the circumstances I won't comment further. I have used both positive and negative methods in different training situations so please don't think I'm biased either way.

Cheers,

Corine

[Herr Rottweiler]

No I don't think you're biased and please don't be put off from having your point of view. It's as valid as everyone elses

[petmezz]

I haven't done NDTF so won't say that it's better or worse than Delta, so why do NDTF people insist on critiquing Delta all the time? I'm not talking about positive vs negative methods here, just how the 2 courses compare in delivery and content. When someone here who has done both courses can relay their experiences I might be convinced which is better, until then I will reserve judgement.

Note: The author has done the Delta Intensive but has deferred her studies for personal reasons. I found the instructors and tutors to be very knowledgable and helpful. I have looked into NDTF also, still trying to decide which way to go.

hi fiddo

my persional fealings is if a course refuses to teach one section of the behavioure modification matrix then the course is not to standed. i have been through a basic training course with some one (a profesional behaviorast working in the feald) who has done the delta course, they refused to look at +P and -P and to even explaine what it is. at one point they mentioned a check by a check chaine was a -P realy got me confused for about a week, as i needed to pass their test as well as the NDTF the 2 different groups where teaching different interpratations about the same thing. you can trust NDTF to tell it how it is weather you like it or not. their have been times whear what was being tought didn't appeal to me ie chech chains, but i can now use one if it was needed. to creddit Delta the course i did was with people trained by delta operating an obediance club, whear i wish to instruct not by DELTA directly.

Not sure exactly what you mean here but where do you draw the line? Would it be OK if I jabbed my dog with an electric cattle prod if he didn't turn left when I wanted him too? A piece of equipment used incorrectly can inflict pain, too many instructors who use such equipment have no idea how it's meant to be used. I see so many dog owners who don't even know

that a slip chain has to be fitted a certain way, they have them on upside down and drag their dogs around on them choking the poor creatures half to death . I might add that the reasons for training a certain way were discussed in my Delta classes, the theory and practice was covered in great detail.

this is whear NDTF is good, they train students in most training equipment, under supervision. they go through on how to explane to people about fitting the equipment, if you can't use the pece of equipment they will help you with it.

i will also point out that NDTF discorages the use of excessive punishment. the aim for the instructors is to see happy dogs willing to work, not dogs working through fear of being punished. however the methods used by students is totally up to the student from what i have seen.

Please don't flame me guys, I'm not bagging NDTF here but I sense a very anti-Delta bias in the crowd tonight which isn't balanced or fair.

Cheers,

Corine

i hope it didn't come across as flaming you, it wasn't ment in that way.

[haven]

Please don't flame me guys, I'm not bagging NDTF here but I sense a very anti-Delta bias in the crowd tonight which isn't balanced or fair.

No flaming here Corrine, but i would like to point out that no-one has knocked Delta, they have merely expressed an opinion for a more balanced education.

To the OP and anyone else interested in doing either course, I would also suggest a forum search as this topic has come up many times. I'd weigh myself in on the side of the NDTF as I always have, but in fairness I should point out that I am now working for the NDTF and that no, I have not done the Delta course although I wouldn't mind if I felt the cost was equal to what i stood to gain now that i have done the NDTF and various other courses/seminars.

[Staff'n'Toller]

my persional fealings is if a course refuses to teach one section of the behavioure modification matrix then the course is not to standed. i have been through a basic training course with some one (a profesional behaviorast working in the feald) who has done the delta course, they refused to look at +P and -P and to even explaine what it is.

That person sounds confused, delta is not 'purely positive', and from what I can remember most of us regulars on the training forum agreed that we couldn't find such a thing through our internet research, I can also remember that somebody asked Melissa Alexander's email discussion group 'Clicker Solutions', and received replies from at least 5 of the regular posters on there agreeing that there is really no such thing. This person needs to go and relearn the definitions of +P, -P, +R, -R.

Delta's slogan is 'first do no harm' so their emphasis lies heavily on promoting the dog-human bond, using pets as therapy and to promote wellbeing, and to create good citizens- both dog and human. They are big fans of Operant Conditioning, they do cover the theory of the 'behaviour matrix' as you call it, and the texts that are recommended are general dog learning textbooks, so the theoretical knowledge is available to anyone who cares to read the suggested texts.

At the intensive we were shown a prong collar, and given the reasons why they are not a chosen piece of equipment, I certainly wasn't told straight out it was 'because they were cruel' I felt I was given an informed answer. A large part of the answer was that dogs who were displaying fear aggression or anxiety were often fitted with one when the 'trainer' didn't have the ability to read the dogs' body language. Regardless of my personal experience with them, it is a moot point because they are prohibited in Vic anyway.

I had a private lesson with a young lady about 6 years ago and she was mortified with her dog and her prior trainer because she believes it was the trainers fault why her dog killed and ate the cat. I asked her why she came to that conclusion and she explained to me that her trainer only believed in positive measures and if her dog didn't behave then she should with hold the dogs food. She couldn't get the dog to stop so she didn't feed it for 1 week so it ate the cat.

I think you and I would both agree, HR, that this is a worst possible scenario from a lack of information and instruction on a trainers behalf. Delta do not advocate starving, with holding meals or bribery with food.

I feel that people are also misinformed or presumptuous about the conditions on using Operant Conditioning only when completing the Cert IV course. You need to demonstrate that you understand fully, and can apply Operant Conditioning techniques on dogs in training situations. You do need to use positive reinforcement during the course and show a preference for it when completing submissions, but regardless of your private views, you walk out with a Certificate IV in Dog Behavioural Training if you satisfy the requirements- just the same as the NDTF course I'd imagine.

I think where people become confused is that you can complete the course, then walk away, or you can apply for Delta Society accreditation if you run a training organisation and you agree to foster Delta values and follow their code of ethics. Application is available to all Cert IV graduates on completion of the course if they satisfy the above- but it's not compulsory.

ETA: The advice I would give to the OP is to gain a student prospectus for both courses, and make an informed decision from there.

Cheers,

Mel.

Edited July 18, 2006 by Staff'n'Toller

[Denis Carthy]

Herr Rotweiller

I personally found some of the people within Delta to frown upon people who don't agree with their methodology

Denis

Dont know anything about either courses 'cause Im in UK. I do know if anything at all is not open to critisism then it can never progress, not in a day, or a week or century or ever.

[Rom]

Gidday Fido,

I am seeing lots of lovely comments here about the NDTF course being better than Delta but how many of the posters can speak from direct experience of both?

As a person who has done neither course, I can't say that one is better than the other, but they are different, and that is apparent from their respective websites. It would depend on the individuals goals as to which would suit them better.

There are two Delta trained instructors at one of the agility clubs I attend, and initially I was keen to do the Delta course and would still be doing it if I hadn't realised that there was an alternative where I could get accreditation.

so why do NDTF people insist on critiquing Delta all the time?

My intention was not to critique Delta, but merely to point out the reasons why I'm choosing NDTF. So please accept my apologies on this count.

When someone here who has done both courses can relay their experiences I might be convinced which is better, until then I will reserve judgement.

Finances and time constraints will only allow me to do one at a time but would still consider doing Delta if I found that my knowledge was lacking down the track.

Would it be OK if I jabbed my dog with an electric cattle prod if he didn't turn left when I wanted him too?

In most instances I would have to say definitely not. I generally would not consider not turning left when requested a behavioural issue, more a training issue. In some cases it could possibly be a medical issue. But I won't rule out the possibility that there may arise a circumstance where a dog that doesn't turn left in a particular situation and places either the dog or its handler in peril.

However, if a dog has been able to self reward by ignoring you, and it places the value of its self reward higher than any reward that you can give it and also finds any negatives that you can apply acceptable consequences of its actions in view of the high value it has placed on its self reward, where do you go next? Whether we like it or not, there are times when the old -P,+P,-R,+R break down and do not serve the situation, and for many dogs in this situation the alternative is PTS.

As an example, a friend of mine (who should never be a foster carer cuz she can't bare to give up any animal she fosters ) has 5 dogs. They live on acreage and the dogs have a 1.5 acre fenced in house yard. The acreage borders the Bruce Hwy. The surrounding properties are horse and cattle properties and there have been issues with wild dogs attacking livestock. The 5th of my friends adoptees is a notorious escape artist and over the course of time despite all measures and continual repairs, the 5th taught the original 4 how to get out and keep persisting cuz sooner or later you'll find a way. In the long term, my friend did not consider chaining or confining the dogs to runs an acceptable solution...she likes them to have some freedom, some have toileting issues, some are working breeds and she was often away all day. No matter what she did, the dogs continued to get out...they had a total ball flushing hares and quails, swimming in dams, rolling in and eating horse or cow pooh. There was no reward or punishment she could dish out that could change their mind about how fun getting out was. But there was heaps of potential danger out there, getting hit on the highway, being shot by an owner of livestock that is worried about losing more stock..so an adversive was used....we ran a hot wire (electric fence) around the bottom of the house fence. The thing is, the dog that started all the shenanigans never come into contact with the wire...little smarty pants stood back and saw the others get hit and figured that he wasn't going within a meter of that fence! Thing is, the hot wire isn't even turned on any more, but we now have 5 dogs that will not leave that yard unless they are on the lead or in the car.

A piece of equipment used incorrectly can inflict pain, too many instructors who use such equipment have no idea how it's meant to be used. I see so many dog owners who don't even know that a slip chain has to be fitted a certain way, they have them on upside down and drag their dogs around on them choking the poor creatures half to death .

Thats absolutely right Fido, and the very reason why people should be educated on there correct use. I think that any outlet that sells check or slip chains should at least be required to also be able to give informed instruction on their use. Having said that despite some of the training issues I've had with my girl, there is no way on this sweet earth that I would ever use a check chain on her. I hate the bl@@dy things!

Cheryl

[leopuppy04]

Well I was going to stay quiet but can't help myself . I am seeing lots of lovely comments here about the NDTF course being better than Delta but how many of the posters can speak from direct experience of both?

Hi Fido,

Please don't take this post as a flame in anyway

Ok, I have not done both courses but I have worked with Delta/ Kintala accredited instructors as well as considering myself quite well-versed with the Delta course. On top of that, as stated previously, I'm working through the NDTF course now. I don't think that we are critiquing Delta but merely speaking from experience of the NDTF course. If someone, like you were to post up great things about Delta to help squeak in her decision, we aren't going to say you are wrong, or flame you, as all squeak asked was for personal opinions on each course and why we chose one over the other. Also keep in mind that as previously stated, I do a lot of 'motivational' training, which would lean me in the way of Delta instructors. SOME instructors (and I do not by any means mean all are like this!) turn their nose up when they hear what course I am doing, so perhaps there is misunderstanding on both parts? I think both courses are out for the interest of the dogs, NDTF is not out to slam a dog back into shape millitary style (i'm not saying you implied this) and likewise maybe Delta does not condone the use of check chains etc. What each individual trainer chooses is a choice done by them through what they have learnt through the course. I think on the whole, in terms of content and delivery, both courses offer great detail into dog behaviour and training and if you compare the two you will find that a lot will overlap. Likewise, Delta probably covers just as much as NDTF regarding +P/-P & +R/-R. I don't know however if Delta allows you personal experience on each training tool as NDTF does. NB: this does not mean that we scar the dogs for life *g* - all the dogs leave our sessions with tails wagging

I don't think HR was saying that people from Delta or NDTF can't make their own decisions but rather saying that each to its own, they need to make decisions based on their personal experience/ what they have seen (good and bad) rather than simply going by heresay.

Like you have said - I have seen also what you have seen with check chains as well as people walking their dogs (check chain on the right way) going "heel, check, heel, check, HEEL, CHECK!" I see far too much of that to ever want to warrant me using one and handing it out to every client, but I will use one if I feel there is an absolute need - thats JMHO.

Please don't flame me guys, I'm not bagging NDTF here but I sense a very anti-Delta bias in the crowd tonight which isn't balanced or fair.

I hope this wasnt seen as a flame in anyway, but yes, perhaps there is an anti-Delta bias previously stated, but I'm not anti-Delta, I just chose to do NDTF and am not upset by my decision, although issues have been presented that I don't agree with (everyones entitled to their own opinion right?!). I think the anti-Delta is only because people who have undergone the Delta course have not posted, only people who have done the NDTF course and are happy with it have posted. I doubt anyone who wasn't happy would have publicly posted but rather PM'd Squeak

[haven]

regardless of your private views, you walk out with a Certificate IV in Dog Behavioural Training

Actually you get a Certificate IV in Companion Animal Services and if you were to mislead students to believe otherwise you would be in breach of the AQTF standards.

Edited July 19, 2006 by haven

[Nekhbet]

Go to both and grab a course outline or talk with the instructors ...

I have seen some really interesting people come out of both courses - you have to look at them and think "well you can lead a horse to water ..." hence I dont take one trainer to be a perfect example of what the course has to offer.

[Erny]

Herr Rotweiller

I personally found some of the people within Delta to frown upon people who don't agree with their methodology

Denis

Dont know anything about either courses 'cause Im in UK. I do know if anything at all is not open to critisism then it can never progress, not in a day, or a week or century or ever.

Hi Denis

I agree - it is good to debate, criticise (in this case) training methods and explain why, just as it is good for the other people's POV to be equally debated and supported. But what HR means by his quote is not the he knows of some people within Delta to frown upon methodologies they don't support/use (which is their choice), but literally look down on the people who do use them.

One Delta person here on DOL accused NDTF trained people as being snobs. It is this type of "look down on" that I believe HR refers to and is, of course, unneccessary and irrelevant to the rights and/or wrongs of dog training beliefs.

[Jeff Jones]

at the intensive we were shown a prong collar, and given the reasons why they are not a chosen piece of equipment, I certainly wasn't told straight out it was 'because they were cruel' I felt I was given an informed answer. A large part of the answer was that dogs who were displaying fear aggression or anxiety were often fitted with one when the 'trainer' didn't have the ability to read the dogs' body language. Regardless of my personal experience with them, it is a moot point because they are prohibited in Vic anyway

you werent told straight out that they were cruel, but they did use a poor example of how a un-qualified trainer would use a prong on gaining compliance through violence.

regardless of your private views, you walk out with a Certificate IV in Dog Behavioural Training

thats good if your only doing it for the certificate but i fail to see how thats going to help you train your dog

[Staff'n'Toller]

you werent told straight out that they were cruel, but they did use a poor example of how a un-qualified trainer would use a prong on gaining compliance through violence.

No, actually, it was a good example of a well known trainer getting it wrong. The prong collar was given to the Vet Behaviourist after the dog in question ended up at her Behavioural Counseling Clinic, after being fitted with one by the previous trainer who misdiagnosed the dogs issues! Where exactly did I suggest any evidence of violence exactly? Were you at this years intensive? You seem to be making alot of assumptions there.

thats good if your only doing it for the certificate but i fail to see how thats going to help you train your dog

You don't seem to have any idea what training courses are actually for....

Also what are your qualifications? I see you pop up from time to time to have a rant, but when I look for an introduction on you I can't seem to find one??

Mel.

Edited July 19, 2006 by Staff'n'Toller

[haven]

In fairness tho Staff'n'toller, the example you gave has everything to do with the competency of the trainer (or lack thereof) than the piece of the equipment itself.

I see as many (if not more) problems created or excacerbated by inadvertant or inapprpriate use of a reinforcer as I do a punisher.

If a trainer is taught to be competent in the use of either then neither is a problem.

[Kavik]

I have obviously done the NDTF course as it shows under my avatar.

I thoroughly enjoyed the course, although it will be different now than I went through as I did it a while ago now.

The psychology section was excellent, and I got to meet a great bunch of people some of whom I have remained in contact with and continue to train or discuss training with.

Through them I met Diesel's breeder and discovered security and Schutzhund training and the world of working GSDs and some great Rotties as well, as I got to meet a lot of security guards. Coming from a pet obedience with a goal to compete in obedience and agility, this opened my eyes to a whole world of dog training I had not even knew existed. It is through them that I first learned anything about prey drive, although I am still learning how to use it correctly.

I liked the fact that we were shown all the different equipment including trying it on ourselves. Although this is not entirely a debate on equipment I was one of the ones who was at first horrified by pinch collars, but changed my mind when I tried it on myself. Being a very small person, I could see how they could be useful.

I also like that NDTF have other courses available such as scent detection etc.

Edit to make sense.

Edited July 19, 2006 by Kavik

[squeak]

Many thanks to everyone who has responded to my initial question. And hats off to everyone for keeping it civil. I guess when I first posted the question, I feared that it might become a 'flame war'. I'm more than happy for people to discuss equipment as well as anything else here... I'm just here to learn.

[petmezz]

my persional fealings is if a course refuses to teach one section of the behavioure modification matrix then the course is not to standed. i have been through a basic training course with some one (a profesional behaviorast working in the feald) who has done the delta course, they refused to look at +P and -P and to even explaine what it is.

That person sounds confused, delta is not 'purely positive', and from what I can remember most of us regulars on the training forum agreed that we couldn't find such a thing through our internet research, I can also remember that somebody asked Melissa Alexander's email discussion group 'Clicker Solutions', and received replies from at least 5 of the regular posters on there agreeing that there is really no such thing. This person needs to go and relearn the definitions of +P, -P, +R, -R.

Delta's slogan is 'first do no harm' so their emphasis lies heavily on promoting the dog-human bond, using pets as therapy and to promote wellbeing, and to create good citizens- both dog and human. They are big fans of Operant Conditioning, they do cover the theory of the 'behaviour matrix' as you call it, and the texts that are recommended are general dog learning textbooks, so the theoretical knowledge is available to anyone who cares to read the suggested texts.

Mel.

thanks Mel for the info, it certanly has cleared up my understanding of Delta a bit for me. when i mentioned what i was tought it was from people who have been through the Delta course, and are now training people to be instrutors at their obediance club, their for they can choose what they teach and not teach. they are delta acreddited. i gess i relade what they where doing directly to Delta as an organisation.

you have just made me more interested in doing the delta course to thanks.

[Staff'n'Toller]

my persional fealings is if a course refuses to teach one section of the behavioure modification matrix then the course is not to standed. i have been through a basic training course with some one (a profesional behaviorast working in the feald) who has done the delta course, they refused to look at +P and -P and to even explaine what it is.

That person sounds confused, delta is not 'purely positive', and from what I can remember most of us regulars on the training forum agreed that we couldn't find such a thing through our internet research, I can also remember that somebody asked Melissa Alexander's email discussion group 'Clicker Solutions', and received replies from at least 5 of the regular posters on there agreeing that there is really no such thing. This person needs to go and relearn the definitions of +P, -P, +R, -R.

Delta's slogan is 'first do no harm' so their emphasis lies heavily on promoting the dog-human bond, using pets as therapy and to promote wellbeing, and to create good citizens- both dog and human. They are big fans of Operant Conditioning, they do cover the theory of the 'behaviour matrix' as you call it, and the texts that are recommended are general dog learning textbooks, so the theoretical knowledge is available to anyone who cares to read the suggested texts.

Mel.

thanks Mel for the info, it certanly has cleared up my understanding of Delta a bit for me. when i mentioned what i was tought it was from people who have been through the Delta course, and are now training people to be instrutors at their obediance club, their for they can choose what they teach and not teach. they are delta acreddited. i gess i relade what they where doing directly to Delta as an organisation.

you have just made me more interested in doing the delta course to thanks.

No probs! I should add that I would find it concerning if more than a few graduates of the delta course were getting their definitions mixed up...if it were only a few then you might conclude that it was the learner, not necessarily the lecturer or content of the lecture, but when more than a few people are getting it wrong and are in different clubs/delta groups/States...then that is concerning. :D

I have said before and still sustain, if you don't have a lot of dog handling experience (other than your own dogs) then NDTF is great because you need to do a number of hours working dogs at the Boarding & Training Kennels. I'm in a different position with my prior course and dog handling experience. They are both great courses, you just need to find the one that's right for you. Would actually be a lot easier for me to do the NDTF course proximity wise, but I chose Delta for my own personal reasons and training goals.

Mel.