Clicker = training???

ORIGINAL: nfowler
**Content Removed - Personal Attack**

What distinction are you making between "method" and "methodology"?

Most of your posts are about tips for handling one issue, be it leash aggression or fears, but they all seem to be about getting through the moment.
 
Working with a methodology is like a belief system that means that everything you do comes from that belief system. It's not a thing where you're trying out actions--it's actions that stem from beliefs.

my dog responds neutrally to the corrections I give her, and she moves on to find a better solution

That's what I see in most dogs, too. Lucy doesn't "shut down" or "give up" when given a correction. She tries something she knows is OK or just looks to me to tell her what's OK. Getting rolled by an angry cow didn't stop her from helping us get the cows back in. She just learned to stay further off the calves. If a kick to the chest won't shut her down, I don't think an "uh-uh" or even a leash correction would come close. But I have seen other dogs that are greatly affected by minor corrections. My dad's visla simply melts if my dad simply says "Oh Hayley" in a disappointed voice. All dogs are different. What shuts one down is just feedback or information to another.

Thanks for your feedback, you have a keen eye!

I would call myself a newbie for a lot of reasons, but not that one! []

I am a newbie at dogs, but not at teaching. I#%92m a college professor of art and theory, and have worked at teaching for 20 years in a variety of contexts including Jr. High science and math, art workshops for disabled students at museums and for at-risk families in housing developments, and as a mentor with MA Ed students and college art faculty. (hey, Tina, here#%92s more resume! [])

The most important thing I can do as a teacher is make learning accessible. It#%92s not my job to tell students what to learn, rather how to learn. As a teacher, I am an expert in teaching. I teach my students to be experts in a “methodology” of their making. I trust them to learn what is valuable to them. This builds life long learners.

You#%92re quite right, I don#%92t push beliefs! I don't consider that teaching, I consider it proselytizing. I advocate for self-aware discernment in making choices that produce desired outcomes. When I teach my art students, I don#%92t tell them what to believe, or what#%92s important about art, or what they should produce and why. I teach them about the world of art - its economies, hierarchies, and cultural positions. I show them a field of art practices, and help them understand their forms and implications. I guide them to recognize their own personal values then develop an artistic practice in which those values flourish. I never teach them what values they should have. That would be disrespectful.

You#%92ve rightly noticed that I often describe how to try somethings. Partly it#%92s because, as a newbie, I have a fresh memory of what#%92s hard to grasp in the beginning. Things like timing, gesture, attitude, tone of voice, remembering to just observe, to reflect. Some old farts have been working with dogs for so long that they can#%92t connect with what#%92s happening in the eyes of a newbie, even if that newbie is standing right in front of them fumbling with the leash. I have fresh memories of the difference between people throwing unexplained concepts and book titles at me, and others taking the time to explain *what to actually try to do.* (This is one reason why CM is so popular, he can see through newbie eyes and teach for that perspective.)

I like to slow down process, and describe it in steps is that makes things real and useable. Instead of just telling someone what the finished product should look like, detailed description of process gives building blocks for personal practice. (I could show you a finished quilt and you could reproduce it, or I could teach you about quilting and you could design and produce a beautiful piece, with my support.)

Notice how some people here don#%92t really read other#%92s posts and often give the same pat answers (the methodology)? That isn#%92t very generous, it doesn#%92t really offer help, it just makes the poster feel important.

I don#%92t use teaching to make myself feel important. That#%92s why I#%92m good at it! The pain in the a** meta-conversations I initiate here on the forum aren#%92t much different than the ones I initiate in my seminars. They#%92re good for us, they wake us up and keep us from pouring words on each other in our sleep. I#%92m notorious, among my students for “teaching my teaching“, for revealing the process of indoctrination, and as ”an island of art“ in a sea if ideology. I could dumb down what I do, since this is a public forum, but I happen to think that the infamous JQP is as dumb or as smart as ”we“ deign to treat “them.” I prefer to raise people up rather than put them down. You#%92ll notice my most testy posts are in response to bigotry, intolerance, and statusizing.

Offering a hand to help is kind, being willing to let go makes it generous, too.

I hope I am in the right place to ask a couple questions...I am VERY new to the clicker..only a couple days...My question.. do I say the command that I want my dog to do along with the click....And one more...do I click as she is doing the command or once she has compleated the command

i can tell you how we were taught in clicker training lessons....

click as soon as the command is completed. ie.. as soon as the dog sits click and treat. at least in the beginning. you can draw it out longer to get a longer sit once they learn the command.

also, when we began we would lure our dog into a position, and click and say "good sit" for example.

Here's some recent discussion of verbal cues:http://forum.dog.com/asp/tm.asp?m=357267 . I hope that's helpful!

As far as when to click, it depends on where you are in the develpoment of the behavior. In the beginning, you basically want to click the dog when he has commited to try. So, if he commits to doing a down, click as he goes down. (if you wait till he's down, you might miss your chance to click if he pops up real fast.) Once he's got that, hold off and don't click till he's down flat. Once he's got that, don't click till he holds it for a few seconds. Etc.

Another example, when I taught my dog weave, at first I clicked when she was heading between my legs, then I clicked as she was under my legs, then not until she finished through. I didn't add the word "weave" till she was solid going all the way though without pause.

Hope you're having fun! []

Thank you so much for the replys..it helps alot

ixas_girl explained what i was trying to say in a much better way.... somedays i suck at communication! []

lol, cyclefiend ... you were mindful enough to mention the lure, which I totally forgot! Hoorah for team efforts!

Do you still do clicker training? For fun, obedience, sports?

sadly, i have not been actively training either of our dogs lately. they loved it though, and still do the basics sit, down, etc for treats and ice cubes.

i need to start working more with sydney though. i would like for him to be less jumpy and excitedly out of control when we have visitors. plus i would like to try some agility with him. more for the exercise than anything else.

somedays i suck at communication!

..

You did just fine and I thankyou very much

Ixas_girl...Thanks for that link..Very informative I think I have got it down now

Well, you either join the belief system or you don't. I know you "question everything but join nothing," as I see by your signature, and that's your choice. Trying to explain a methodology by giving out action items and then defending them is not only inaccurate but unproductive, too. How can a reqader possibly get the whole picture? Especially when it's filtered by writing? Filtered by the author trying to express him/herself and his/her actual experiences with training methodologies. (I'm a former professor of writing so I know exactly what you're saying about seminars, teaching, etc.)
 
You want to know how effective the crossovers have found it to be? Great. We can tell you that and we have experience to fall back on--from both methodologies (Koehler/traditional and clicker). Defending each clicker step and trying to hold big discussions that weave into all sorts of areas while maintaining the integrity of the posts just doesn't seem to help these threads go anywhere.
 
I guess, in closing, I will say this: I act as I believe and I believe as I act.
 

Trying to explain a methodology by giving out action items and then defending them is not only inaccurate but unproductive, too.

Thanks for putting your finger on this for me, Nfowler. Well put. I think a lot of these discussions get bogged down in a kind of "gotcha relatavism" that depends upon dicing up posts into the tiniest contestable bits.

This nattering privileges the act of arguing over the content (meaning) of the argument.

Gotta love my fast-finger typo though, on "reader." Woo hoo, Nancy.