Hi... Really want to become a professional dog trainer but dont know how to go about it... I've herd that you don't actually have to have a recognised qualification, surely this isn't right.... Can.anybody point me in the right direction

Hi there,
I am doing a course at the moment through Compass Education:

http://www.compass-education.co.uk/opencart/Dog%20courses

I'm doing the Advanced Diploma in Canine Behaviour Management. I am really enjoying it but it's much tougher than some short courses I have done!

This particular one was recommended to me as it's recognised by some of the traning associations apparently.
Hope that helps

Have a look at the apdt website they have various courses and should be able to tell you what they would require. Aldo contact local training club and see if they would have you volunteer with some if their   classes even just helping with the adnib would give you experience

Bear in mind that it is quite rare for people to be able to make a living as a dog trainer, most do it just as a hobby. The few
that do manage will have a lot of hard work and poor pay and of course the income is never guaranteed. Many have to supplement the training with other dog services like walking and grooming.

I'm a nurse and only work.two days a week so it's not my main.income just extra for something I love

You are correct - you don't have to have any qualifications or indeed any experience whatsoever to be a dog trainer or behaviourist.  Which is utterly wrong IMO and something that needs to change, but that's a whole other thread!

There are many courses around - I studied behaviour and training at Bishop Burton college, the course is very well respected across the country and IIRC is accredited by the University of Hull.  It's distance learning but you have to go in four times a year (two weeks, two weekends).  However - the college itself is not well run and that did cause ructions while I was there and still is as far as I know!  So, pros and cons there.

COAPE do good courses I believe as do Compass, or Southampton Uni have a well established and very well respected degree course (or courses possibly, I never looked into it much).

Wherever you go though, check out the prospectus first: avoid anything that talks about being the pack leader or dominance, this is very outdated and disproven stuff but there are still a heck of a lot of people out there both using it in their work and teaching it to others.

Also make sure you learn about behaviour and body language - I do not believe it is possible these days to be a pure trainer, you must know about the behaviour side as well.  Not just to get the best results, but also to recognise when a dog is being 'naughty' due to stress or fear rather than just being a twerp ;-)

I'm in the northwest so really could do with something a bit nearer x

I suppose it depends where in the North West, but you could try contacting Reaseheath College in Cheshire.

Really want to become a professional dog trainer.......

I think you mean you wanna become a >commercial< dog trainer, is that correct?.

I've heard that you don't actually have to have a recognised qualification

You've heard right, there are no government or legal 'recognised' qualifications for either 'dog trainers' or 'dog behaviourists' - of course private interest groups may recognize this & that & their writings (especially if there is a commercial connection) may mislead people into thinking there is some kind of 'reserved title' but thats just sales talk, there are is no reserved titles in dog training or dog behaviourist.

In the CAWC report of 2012 or 2013 Prof Danielle Mills, Lincoln Uni, said graduates from unis in dog behaviourist related courses had only done about 5% of some kind of practice with dogs, but all those 'qualifications' (or any other) mean is that the graduate has passed the academic exams set & is qualified to say so, if you buy a train ticket to Blackpool your 'qualified' to travel by train to Blackpool.

So, really the 'word' qualified means very little and everything. What you (and many others) may misunderstand is the difference between the word "qualified" and whats formaly known in law as a reserved title, human medical doctors & quite a few other proffesions have reserved titles.

Check out what 'reserved titles' means at the link below, I think that might clear up any misunderstanding you may have

http://ecctis.co.uk/UK%20NCP/Individuals/Coming%20to%20the%20UK/Regulated%20Professions.aspx
.

Hi, check out the site for the Animal Behaviour Training Council. There are moves to regulate the industry and if such moves become law this is the body most likely to be the regulator. Currently a number of professional bodies as well as education providers have signed up to the organusation and a voluntary code of practice. By 2016 it is expected that the term behaviourist will only be applicable to those with a recognised level 6 qualification in animal behaviour and demonstrable practical experience, work will be assessed and supervised by one of the recignused professional bodies.

The term trainer will also be regulated and the website for the ABTC sets out qualifications and experience necessary. The site also lists education providers.

it is expected that the term behaviourist will only be applicable to those with a recognised level 6 qualification in animal behaviour and demonstrable practical experience

Ahhh yes, now thats easy to understand, thank you. It means a recognised level 6 animal behaviourist is a highly skilled professional, giving great value for money & leaving dog owner clients all happy little bunies...................

.........and all the other trainers & behaviourists are just a bunch of quacks ripping pet owners off, not much change then!?
.

I would say any trainer who employs the methods you'd prefer Hethspaw are not only ripping people off but damaging dog's lives.

A move towards a regulated industry will give people the reassurance that the trainer they're using is employing the most up to date, scientifically sound methods that get results (with hard work) that are reliable and free from force or pain. It would take a lot of the guesswork out of choosing a trainer.

That is why I want to see regulation. 

However I must admit, I'll be annoyed if it comes in with the requirement that people calling themselves behaviourists have level 6 qualifications or higher - my behaviour-specific qualification (3yr foundation degree) is level 5, my animal-specific qualification (BSc) is the same but I use force-free, scientifically up to date training methods and work hard to get the results me and the owners want.  I have considerable experience with very difficult dogs, and I specialise in aggression.  But if that requirement came in, I'd be unable to call myself a behaviourist - but that's exactly what I am.  I am not just a trainer, and I cannot afford to go back to college to get up to level 6 (much as I want to).

Nikita I always wish you lived near me! I have a great trainer but I think your experience sounds like you'd be able to really help me understand Nando better. He's not aggressive but often the advice you give to others makes perfect sense to me.

Do you want to become a trainer or a behaviorist? Me and my hubby work as trainers, it is our full time jobs. I do pet dog training classes (agility and obedience) and we both train working dogs (security/drugs/explo etc). I don't think I would earn enough from pet work to live on and we have recently taken on project managing a dog section for a security company to just make things a bit more 'comfortable'. As for qualifications, we have both got qualifications for training and working 'working dogs' but as for the pet stuff, I am working towards the KCAI but that's it. I have competed in Agility for about 6 years and trained in obedience on and off for about 8 but only just started to compete. I think you need to have some experience in your subject matter. I do have people contact me with behavior issues but I just politely tell them im not a behaviorist and so im not qualified to help them. (I probably could but its not worth the risk really-i have plenty of people who just want to socialise their dogs, teach them basic training or learn a new sport).

But if that requirement came in, I'd be unable to call myself a behaviourist

I think your jumping the gun far to fast -

I understand what your speculating about levels etc but as an educated guess I think what a gov MIGHT do is accept a vet (Im thinking of prof Mills) who also has various behavioural qualifications and maybe and 'reserved title' of something along the lines of >>>>'Clinical Animal Behaviourist'<<<< if that speculation is correct then it would not affect you or anyone else calling themselves a behaviourist & working.

Theres a whole world of difference between any animal behaving in a problematic way because of some internal biological 'something' and a perfectly healthy dog which has simply learned unwanted behavior because of any of the vast amount of varieties of environmental stimuli, including its interactions with owner, so on that basis 'Clinical Animal Behaviourst' may, or may not, be appointed as a reserved title.

I think your jumping the gun in your thinking.
.

Currently ABTC lists level 5 as an accredited animal behaviourist and level 6 as a clinical animal behaviourist. However, the aim is that by 2016 only level 6 will be entitled to use the word behaviourist. The thinking is that this gives those at level 5 time to catch up ie two years approx.

The ABTC website indicates qualifications/experience/selection criteria that will be required for all the various levels, including dog trainer http://www.abtcouncil.org.uk/

Currently ABTC lists level 5 as an accredited animal behaviourist and level 6 as a clinical animal behaviourist.

Yes, and quite right to so, these things only apply to those who pay the fee and become a member, but in the wider world  those who dont join are unaffected.
.

Nikita,

Yes, I do share your concern and it is unfortunate that those with a level 5 only may find themselves in a bit of a grey area in years to come.

HP Whatever the system it will have shortcomings but I would still rather have regulation than no regulation at all.

BTW it is not simply a case of paying your fee and you're on the list. You can only get onto the ABTC list  as a behaviourist by being a full member of UKRCB or APBC and in order to achieve that you need the qualifications, a demonstrable history of hands on with references, you must attend for interview and after that, your work is assessed and supervised for a year before you achieve full membership- assuming you don't fail. At that point you pay your fee and get added to the list.

HP Whatever the system it will have shortcomings but I would still rather have regulation than no regulation at all.

BTW it is not simply a case of paying your fee and you're on the list. You can only get onto the ABTC list  as a behaviourist by being a full member of UKRCB or APBC

My bemusment based on whats been said is still the terms 'Animal Behaviourist'/ or 'Canine Behaviourist' and terms such as those becoming a 'reserved' title.

I can't see those sort of terms becoming reserved titles in law because the terms simply imply someone who deals in some way with some animals behaviour which has no pathological origin, toilet training is manipulating a dogs behaviour, the person who does it may well be the dog owner but they are using 'behavioural' techniques to bring about the change.

Two critical things have so far been overlooked one is the fact that these qualifications are simply academic qualifications sold to students by uni's, if all of a sudden the people such as Nikita suddenly wake up one morning and without realising it find themselves breaking criminal law by working the same as they have since & maybe before uni & therefore criminalised for passing a uni previous course.

Needless to say this whole thing does not just involve those who pay for a degree course but those who have been selling it, ie the unis, if people like Nikita are to become criminalised for selling their services as a Behaviourist then where does that leave the unis who sold her and many others the courses in the first place.

Also, what seems to be overlooked is a the significant fact that any of these titles have to pass the house of lords scrutiny before there is any hope in law of making a new law 'Dog Behaviourist' as a reserved title.

Written at 3:30am because my wonderful dog heard foxes & decided it was time for us all to effing wake up!
.

Anything can affect behaviour including medical issues, in those cases a change in behaviour may be the first sign that something is awry- thyroid issues being a prime example. Aside from diagnosis and treatment by a vet the animal may need also long-term behaviour modification- think pica, stereotypical behaviour, coprophagia and so on. In cases where there is very serious separation anxiety, serious aggression, canine dementia, the CCAB may recommend prescription of certain drugs to the vet. They cannot do this without having studied pharmacology to a certain level- part of a level 6 degree for animal behaviour.

Those at level 6 will not just be dog behaviourists- they will have some experience of other (probably domestic) species, though they may choose to specialise in practice.

Finally, you cannot just buy a degree for this. You actually have to study for three years, have all your work marked and assessed and then you may be awarded the degree. The marking undergoes external verfication by a recognised government body.

Once you have your degree you then have to pursue membership of one of the two organisations I mentioned, and join as a student, having first passed your interview. Over the next year or so all your work is assessed and monitored. If after a minimum of a year you have satisfied the organisation as to the quality and standard of your work you may then progress to full membership, when, finally, you are eligible to appear on the ABTC list as a behaviourist. That is a minimum of 4 years study and hard graft. Just as one would expect with any professional title. The title is earned.

It is the unregulated situation we have now that causes problems. Yes, there are excellent people but there are also a lot of people who abuse the title of behaviourist.

Finally, you cannot just buy a degree for this. You actually have to study for three years, have all your work marked and assessed and then you may be awarded the degree. The marking undergoes external verfication by a recognised government body

I know what a degree is, Ive been to uni.

I did not mean they are just selling degrees at the uni kiosk, I meant they sell the course which educates you at an educational standard to pass the course requirements to get a degree = qualification

So to correct my last......, well, misdemeaner, unis are selling degrees for the total price of the full course, thats how uni admins & accountants etc make their salaries.
.

Over the next year or so all your work is assessed and monitored. If after a minimum of a year you have satisfied the organisation as to the quality and standard of your work you may then progress to full membership, when, finally, you are eligible to appear on the ABTC list as a behaviourist

I am a bit lost - I thought we were talking about a change in UK law for england and wales as to the word 'behaviorist' becoming a reserved title in law - I was not talking about who wants to join some association or other - so can you clarify which one of those things you are talking about?
.

>Two critical things have so far been overlooked one is the fact that these qualifications are simply academic qualifications sold to students by uni's,

You could say the same about medical doctors (as opposed to people with an academic doctorate) or vets, or lawyers ... all university courses have to be paid for, previously by grants and now by student loans.

HP,
If you read up about it you will see that govt is currently working with ABTC on regulation, so, yes any change in law- which as you correctly state must pass all the usual stages of new law, including HoL and Royal Assent, will indeed involve those organisations ie UKRCB, APBC, ABTC (and for trainers APDT). In a nutshell, once the law is written and passed, the regulator in law, will be the ABTC- they will decide who can use the term behaviourist. Hope that clarifies it for you.

You could say the same about medical doctors

I think medical doctors is a 7 year course to practice, no idea what it all entails.
.

If you read up about it you will see that govt is currently working with ABTC on regulation, so, yes any change in law- which as you correctly state must pass all the usual stages of new law, including HoL and Royal Assent, will indeed involve those organisations ie UKRCB, APBC, ABTC (and for trainers APDT). In a nutshell, once the law is written and passed, the regulator in law, will be the ABTC- they will decide who can use the term behaviourist. Hope that clarifies it for you.

Yes I understand that a lot better, thanks.

What I dont understand is, what happens to all these people who passed a degree course at various unis & have been using the title 'behaviourist' ever since, or guys like John Rogerson who seems to have only the KC accreditation, as do may others calling themselves behaviourists.

Its also of interest about what those people can call themselves, who are doing these courses now, after they finish a course.

John Rogerson
http://www.johnrogerson.com/aboutjohn.html
.

Okay, here's where it does get a bit tricky. If I have understood correctly those like John, who after all is a major and groundbreaking figure, will be afforded the title under a grandfather scheme- that is those who have been around long enough and have contributed to the field in a major way (John is obviously a huge and well respected figure), eminent, published and so forth, will take the title should they want it. Although it may seem a bit of a fudge I think it is fair enough really.

KCAI is interesting. To my knowledge their accreditation is not of level 6 standard. One would hope that for coherence they too would agree to work under the wing of the ABTC for the purposes of this area of legislation, however, one sometimes gets the impression that the KC feel they should be the regulator of all things dog. In this case I do not feel they are the right body to do that.

Please do not think I am gung-ho about regulation, there are bound to be problems and noses put out of joint but overall I do think it is the right way to go. I would not feel confident about the KC regulating this territory and I hope they behave responsibly instead of territorially.

one sometimes gets the impression that the KC feel they should be the regulator of all things dog. In this case I do not feel they are the right body to do that

Yes, the cats whiskers of the dogs world, so to speak.
.

Please do not think I am gung-ho about regulation, there are bound to be problems and noses put out of joint but overall I do think it is the right way to go.

I think there should be regulation of some kind but since this post I had not thought of the complications involved before, make no mistake the house of lords is certainly not an easy ride if it suspects some kind of manipulation for purposes beyond the superficial outline.
.

I hope KC act responsibly

Well, if you think they are getting a bit 'wayward' I suggest you bring in reinforcers

Warning About KC & COAPE Accreditation Courses