*
I have to say I am loving the book so far. While it is not my goal to become a clicker trainer per say, it has some really great info and things I will be trying with my own dogs. For the record I use a combination of lure/reward and marker training without a clicker. The first tidbit I came away with is a much clearer understanding of the whole positive and negative punishment and positive and negative reinforcement terminology. Of course time will tell if it sticks in my brain. I know I have learned about it before (several times in fact) but it just never quite stays with me. I'm not sure knowing the terms are important as long as my training follows the principles of how dogs learn.
*
What has been a sticking point with me over the years is how so many positive trainers write articles using these terms for other trainers or even the average person. I will be the first to say it confuses the hell out of me and I am a positive trainer! I read an article recently in a breed magazine whose target audience is the average owner that was way over the top with it. I think they need to stop doing it or perhaps writing in plain english and using the terms as a sidebar. Example: (in parenthesis -this means positive punishment) I've read "Excel-erated learning" by Pamela Reid which explained and used the terms and all it did was confuse me further. (but it is still an EXCELLENT book on how dogs learn regardless of training methods BTW) If people can't understand the articles, how can they implement the training plan that is laid out in them?
*
I also liked how Gail mentions that with the rising popularity of positive methods some people have gone to far and now don't believe in saying no to their dogs for anything now. Positive does not equal permissive. At least it's not supposed to. This is a great point and may be why some compulsion trainers do not want to make a crossover. Not all positive trainers are good trainers either. There is a right way and a wrong way to use any method. We humans are masters at messing stuff up. Why else would there be warning labels like: "Don't use this hairdryer in the water". Seriously?
*
I also liked the history of dog training as she explained it. Check it out if you get a chance. It is quite enlightening.
*
My theory is that there are people who are compulsion trainers who resist the more positive training methods (proper compulsion uses praise which is positive) because mainly positive training takes more thought and can be harder for some people to do. Compulsion training is a mechanical thing with sort of a recipe. Recipes are easy to follow. If you do A and B and you get C. Compulsion training does work after all. I know when I made the switch it was tough. personally I see it as a "let's make the dog do it" vs "Let's make the dog want to do it". Yes compulsion can make them want to do it, but to me working to avoid a physical correction is not my first choice of motivation. I don't want to suppress my dog, I want to work with my dog. Besides, compulsion training isn't going to work on every dog. That method was originally designed for working dogs who were mentally tough after all.
*
For the record I have used the compulsion methods myself and still do on the rare occasion. Training is about the dog you have in front of you after all and you need to use the tools to best do the job. To me using compulsion isn't evil, it is just most times unnecessary if you know how to use the alternative. I think our knowledge of dogs has evolved and so should our methods. Unfortunately not all trainers have the desire to know about learning theory in dogs. They find following the recipe easier. To me knowing how dogs learn helps make my job easier. But that is just my opinion based on what I see in the training world. I say use what you know but continue to learn more. No matter what your method of choice you may be surprised at what you find out. If you choose compulsion make sure you are at least using it as fairly for the dog as possible. They are living breathing beings after all. Recipes don't always turn out as planned, especially if the ingredients resist the assimilation.
*
My person of the year award for continuing education goes to Ed Frawley. Even he admitted he learned something new. http://leerburg.com/markers.htm BraVO!!
ليست هناك تعليقات:
إرسال تعليق