I do not use this forum to sell my services. I am here because it is to my advantage to be hear and learn something new or at least think about “old’ topics and maybe glean better sight. Not unlike the no professionals who are here on this forum.
The question was asked in another post to explain foundation training and while I won’t post my entire program because I don’t think ed made this forum for self promotion I will post in general my thoughts on general foundation work and training methods which I think is consistent with the goals of this discussion group.
As with all training, the goal of foundation work is to raise a dog that is highly motivated, strong and confident. Some dogs, because of their nature, will be more difficult to train than others yet a consistent application of a technique that is built on previously learned lessons is the fastest and most productive. It is consistent to the dog and so nothing new just a new level. The dog takes this a sign of confidence from his leader and because he is a social pack animal expects a little order (rules) in the family.
I challenge people to take the time and learn the mechanics of any exercise so they at least have a chance to be successful from the beginning. A trainer needs to know in their mind, the picture of what “the best” looks like. By having a mental picture of your goal you are more likely to hold a higher standard and not gloss-over small but important steps needed to achieve the goal of excellence. Knowing that how we train our dogs in the begging is how they tend to be for the rest of their lives.
I first stress the building of the relationship and trust between the dog and the owner. This means the dog learns about the value of rewards and that “GOOD” actually means GREAT JOB while the owner learns about proper timing in general.
I then change up the program by focusing on consistent performance as far as Sit and Down commands are concerned. The dog, because they now know about the value of obtaining a reward, will relate it to their performance. Once the dog knows about rewards and how to get them he or she will accept them with full understanding and relate it to something they did.
The dog trained in such a way, quickly advances to consistent performance with ONE command only. Even though I paired the reward condition with an exercise that required (compelled) the dog to do it, his attitude toward his work or me does not suffer.
I create an “assumption” on the dogs part that I will continue in compulsive sequence of three times in a row before he is given a chance to “win the race” for the execution of the command given.
This means the dog gets a Command – Correction – Praise and Reward in successive order 3 times in a row before I give him a chance to show what he has “learned.” He is ALWAYS praised and rewarded immediately upon reaching the correct basic position.
The race is my correction vs. him avoiding it… or so he thinks. His reward illustrates the better path of complying with my command.
I say he thinks this because he does not know it was his “freebie” chance. Dogs can’t do math especially addition and fractions.
Since I was not trying to correct him again; I created and artificial but HUGE WINNING window of opportunity. When a dog is given a good and clear choice between a desirable thing and an undesirable thing, they take the desirable almost exclusively. You got to love dogs for being the ultimate opportunist. They are truthful to their desires so they are predictable.
As long as he uses this window of opportunity to win and be rewarded he will receive NO further correction for that command as long as he does it on one command after the freebie.
If I want to increase his speed, I do it positively by withholding a primary motivational reward and offer only praise and maybe a pat. I do it in short sessions and place the dog away when they want to the reward the most regardless if I achieved the desired speed during that session…it will come.
Again the golden rule of my training is consistent performance. If the dog fails to respond to one command only the sequence is repeated. This is more efficient then every other or a variable correction practice where the owner ‘sometimes’ requires the dog to do it if they are not to lazy to follow up right then.
I know many “Humane” people will scream how “unfair” it is to correct three times in a row. I say to them it is more cruel to drag the training out in such a way that he will receive 10 times the corrections from an ‘every other time’ trainer or worse yet the if the poor dog knows only positive training and then is subjected to a new found willfulness and resolve through force without having any frame of discipline before.
When we talk about adding a correction to achieve the consistency and control over the dog, many owners are discouraged because their once happy worker starts to lag and show other signs of stress. To them is obvious compulsive training “did” to their dog’s working attitude. In reality it is not the force of will alone that makes the dog loose working attitude
Most dogs respond with resistance, anxiety and sometimes fear because your new resolve seems contrary to your past relationship. The dog’s attitude invariably suffers from the change in ideologies and so people refusing to look at the old wheel in a new way think they messed up the dog because they used a correction.
It is not the correction alone that did the damage to the dog’s working attitude. It is a combination of poor timing, poorly delivered and overly hard corrections that are inconsistently (lacking rules and structure) applied combined with lack of foundations in reward learning on the owner’s part and how to sufficiently reward the dog.
How often you see people train using the positive motivator almost exclusively then to decide they want more exact performance? Quite often actually.
With these methods you become Dr. Jekle and Mr. Hyde to your dog. Congratulations for scaring the hell out of him and breaking his trust because you changed the rules.
Many people advocate haphazard compulsion techniques that actually DOES force the dog into almost submission because of poor timing and the amount of force they think they need. After all their dog is being as their dog is VERY resistant to “force methods”.
Is it any wonder most dogs’ attitude suffers when changing from a positive only/non controlling training system to one that now forces the higher expectations?
It is no mystery or new wheel it is just common dog sense.
I have discovered that persistent and predictable methods that are not harsh corrections as much as tenacious annoyances will get the dog in motion to avoid it again. A hard motivational correction should only be used to extinguish a behavior. When the dog is trying to learn the last thing it needs is to GUESS what behavior you are trying to extinguish. Extinguishing a behavior is a timing issue as much as a force issue and is not appropriate or teaching obedience.
When we talk about adding a correction to achieve the consistency and control over the dog, many owners are discouraged because their once happy worker starts to lag and show other signs of stress. To them is obvious compulsive training “did” to their dog’s working attitude. In reality it is not the force of will alone that makes the dog loose working attitude.
A firm and snappy pop-pop-pop of the leash that is well timed is better, in the end, then a full force Jerk and/or pull with a dog who already believes he has the ability to get a motivational reward by moving in a direction I have compelled him to move. (Goes back to the foundation training)
Often people get caught up in the molding phase of a behavior and allow too much time to pass before they demand consistent performance. If you teach the dog about rewards without pairing an obedience command you can move past the molding/shaping phase within a FEW DAYS not weeks or months for most dogs.
This is for the “Positive only” Motivational Trainer…
While I have known and used operant methods long before “the click” wave hit the populace (as did anyone who studied behavioral psychology) and I know I can teach the dog and almost any animal to perform by targeting with a reward it is motivated for. I also know can “correct” improper performance by withholding a reward.
After knowing how I train and knowing I practice, in part, some operant method principles; the main questions people (especially positive only operant methodologist locked in clicker kingdom) will have are:
1. Why then don’t we all train this way since we know it can teach the dog to sit and down without force?
2. If you know about this why then don’t you use operant conditioning exclusively?
Go to the clicker training area pn this forum and find my answers.
My Foundation Training Subjects (obedience)
· Teaching Basic Obedience Introduction
· Teaching Developing Eye Contact
· Teaching Eye Focus
· Teaching About Collar and Leash Restraint
· Teaching No Leash Pulling & Handler Attention Skills
· Teaching Informal Motivational Recall
· Teaching "SIT"
· Teaching "SIT--STAY"
· Teaching "Resistance Sit"
· Teaching "Climb"
· Teaching "Climb to Heel Position"
· Teaching "DOWN"
· Teaching "DOWN--STAY"
· Teaching "Resistance Down"
A dog teaches a boy fidelity, perseverance, and to turn around three times before lying down. - Robert Benchley
In order to really enjoy a dog, one doesn't merely try to train him to be semi-human. The point of it is to open oneself to the possibility of becoming partly a dog. - Edward Hoagland
Page 1 of 1 1
Top
Previous Topic
Index
Next Topic
