What an Animal Behaviorist Looks Like on Paper

Chuffy

MY bottom line:  If a person doesn't have an education, why not?  Don't they care about improving, learning?  HUMAN teachers go on development courses ALL THE TIME!  It's called CPD.  (Continued proffessional development)  Vets, doctors etc.... they all have to keep up to date with recent findings that affect their work.  I'd be astonished and put off if a person, not only hadn't got that education, but hadn't continued it.... was ignorant of, or dismissed out of hand, the recent findings that impacted their chosen field of work.

I agree, Chuffy.  Those that actually value their work will have the education, or at least put forth the effort to get it, to back up their experience.  Even Kenya's breeder, who is not technically a vet or a behaviorist, has attended some of the best seminars and travels to Germany and other parts of western Europe to study the breed. 

My aunt is a elementary school teacher and I don't know if this is a state or federal thing, but she is required to continue taking classes on teaching, education, and child development even if she's not getting a higher degree.  It's a requirement to keep her teaching credentials. 

I am a computer technician and I only have a BA degree, but I frequently attend training seminars outside of work and work through certifications that I don't really need, but why would I not get them?  Who would not want to stay on top of their field of interest? 

In every state, teachers are required to take a certain number of hours of professional development in order to stay certified. Even if you just graduated from college or graduate school. My husband was out of grad school for all of a year before he had to start taking professional development classes.

Whenever this topic comes up, I have to ask people who don't assign any value to education over experience, do you want someone teaching your children who has never taken a class in either the subject they are teaching or the practice of education? Who has never been certified? Who has never student-taught under a mentor teacher? Who has never been evaluated by his or her peers? No? Then why would that be okay when you're having a serious problem with a family member that has a mouth full of sharp knives? 

 Those of us who bother to become educated do not shed all of our experience and natural talent when we walk into a class or a seminar.

 Nor are we required to give it up when we earn a degree or diploma.  But, to hear some people, you would think that becoming educated means you abandon all the common sense god gave you.  I've never understood that line of reasoning.  Education and experience are not mutually exclusive.

spiritdogs

 Those of us who bother to become educated do not shed all of our experience and natural talent when we walk into a class or a seminar.

 Nor are we required to give it up when we earn a degree or diploma.  But, to hear some people, you would think that becoming educated means you abandon all the common sense god gave you.  I've never understood that line of reasoning.  Education and experience are not mutually exclusive.

It's just anti-intellectualism, Anne. I've spent my entire life around academics (my dad is a philosophy professor, most of my jobs have been in institutions of higher learning) and they are just like everyone else in the common sense department. Some of them have it, some of them don't, just like the rest of the population.

Neither of the links worked for me.

houndlove

It's just anti-intellectualism, Anne.

I don't think this is necessarily anti-intellectualism, although I'm sure that does exist. There are just 2 sides to this discussion. Experience and education go hand in hand and work best together. A piece of paper can't replace experience, but an education can be acquired in places other than a school room. Experience CAN be education. People can educate themselves.

The piece of paper means nothing. It's the education one gets in school (or elsewhere) that's represented by that piece of paper that's important. Would I choose someone with a piece of paper over someone with experience? Not unless that piece of paper represented something real. I would choose (and have chosen) the person who's done something over the person who has just learned about doing it. The piece of paper (and I have one) is great, but doesn't win over experience, for me.

ottoluv

A good education multiplies what you learned from experience by a factor of 100.

Oh, really? Where did you learn that little factoid?   

ottoluv

no one said the piece of paper was what was important

Actually many people are using the term "education" when I believe what they mean is "formal education" (the piece of paper). That's what I am trying to point out. An education can be gained anywhere.

ottoluv

And the thread is discussing education vs experience

And that's why I said:

Experience and education go hand in hand and work best together. Actually, I wasn't arguing with anyone (although I may disagree with someone). I was just giving my opinion. Is that OK?

Actually many people are using the term "education" when I believe what they mean is "formal education" (the piece of paper). That's what I am trying to point out. An education can be gained anywhere.

Technically, correct.  However, obtaining your "education" by emulating others whose education, formal or otherwise, is lacking, is tantamount to being uneducated.  So, it does matter where you obtain knowledge.  

 I doubt if any truly well-educated people would make the mistake of believing that someone who is educated in the field of psychology is somehow less well educated about learning, motivation, and operant conditioning as it applies to other mammals,  than someone who gets their information from a television show, but suddenly "knows" how dogs should be trained and managed.  The notion that, if someone has a degree in psychology, it follows that they don't really understand "dog psychology" is pretty funny when they have repeatedly told you that the education in psychology (which generally includes a semester or two on how to read scientific literature, too) was also earned while studying texts on dog behavior, attending seminars, getting a diploma, and doing an apprenticeship with a well regarded person, in addition to gaining experience every day in the field for years.  But, the anti-intellectualism takes over, and it's fine to demean the accomplishment of having done all of that because the formal degree is not in "dog psychology" (can anyone find an accredited college or university that offers such a degree?).  C'mon.  Who are we kidding here?  Those who wish to defend charlatans or "pseudo-docs" will always play the anti-intellectual card. 
 

mudpuppy

What's the excuse- "I already know it all so why should I study and get a degree"? If you had a dog problem that was serious enough that you needed to hire a behaviorist's help, would you hire someone with an attitude like that? not me.

The excuses --
College costs huge amounts of money
College takes huge amounts of time ~ time away from earning money that is spent spending money.
College isn't for everyone ~ Some people, especially people involved in physical labor, including those working with animals, find it very difficult to be in a classroom setting.
There are many trades that can be learned through apprenticeships without a classroom setting.

spiritdogs

I doubt if any truly well-educated people would make the mistake of believing that someone who is educated in the field of psychology is somehow less well educated about learning, motivation, and operant conditioning as it applies to other mammals,  than someone who gets their information from a television show

Oh, I get it now... so THAT's what the thread is really about. I see. You're getting pretty good at disguising anti-CM threads as just innocent discussions...   But I eventually catch on. I'm no dummy. LOL

spiritdogs

I doubt if any truly well-educated people would make the mistake of believing that someone who is educated in the field of psychology is somehow less well educated about learning, motivation, and operant conditioning as it applies to other mammals

I didn't read the rest of the thread, so I'm not sure what you're talking about.

spiritdogs

Those who wish to defend charlatans or "pseudo-docs" will always play the anti-intellectual card. 

Or else they're just defending someone they believe in instead of slamming him because he doesn't have the piece of paper. I certainly am not playing any cards... I like formal education. It's just not the be-all and end-all. I've known some highly formally-educated people (Engineering doctorates) who were just downright stupid.  

And I'm out!  

spiritdogs

There are some newly graduated dentists, and vets or behaviorists for that matter, that are really excellent.  Sure, they do get better with experience.

I know one of my vets (I go to a small vet clinic where there are only a few vets and I know them all quite well) was exceptional from the day she came out of vet college. And I had no problem having her treat my dogs, no questions asked, from the day she stepped out of the vet college. Compared to some of the other vets who have the "experience" but no new knowledge really, she was a breath of fresh air. We can talk about some recent contraversial issues that a lot of vets still deny - annual vaccines, different diets, homeopathic/herbal remedies, etc. Not to mention she is now working along somebody who I have the utmost respect for, who I have known since well, before I can remember having known him.

Having real life experience is great. But you know, I've had a lot of experience with dogs, and it STILL wasn't until I went to university that I learned some fundamental things about learning and motivation (ironically, it's also those things that most people here like to argue about *G*). You learn "why" certain things work as they do, why they do "not" work as they do, you can learn what other people in the world are studying and what other people are learning about animals, and you can learn from them.

Most of us no longer live in the days of "I learned from my grandfather, who learned from his grandfather, who learned from his". No, most people just one day decide they want to be an "expert" in dogs and hang up a shingle. That is the problem. The people of old times likely did know a heck of a lot about dogs, in many ways more than a lot of people today do (I watched the most fabulous show the other night on Salukis in their real, original homeland and how they were used to hunt game, and it showed these people in garb raising pups, and teaching them, and explaining how they choose 'suitable' hunters - it was fabulous, and I learned SO much from these "non-educated" experts) and it was documented to different degrees (at one time it was more of a cultural/family thing - but even then all the farmers or hunters or shepherds talked to each other and learned from one another. They didn't count on their own experience alone). So when you have people with, honestly, very little dog experience, deciding one day to start working with dogs, you have absolutely no idea if your "experience" is real, if it is what you think you are seeing. I have seen people who say their dog is "submissive" while the dog is laying on the floor in fear. Or the dog that is "aggressive" who simply is a happy-go-lucky dog with no manners. So it's easy to see why one should take caution with anybody who claims to know what they know on "experience" alone, rather than any form of historical education (the talk around the campfire with other nomads) or in today's society, through reading. Experience is essential, yes, but ideally there should be more to it than just that.

And that doesn't even mean you need a degree in such-and-such. While that's the route I decided to take, and would recommend to a lot of folks looking to learn more about this type of thing, you can learn in many other ways - books, DVD's, attending seminars is a huge one, apprenticing (although a good teacher would insist that some reading is also done), etc. I don't know very many successful dog people who have learned based solely on their own experience without the aid of anybody or anything else (well, okay I know a couple who claim to be successful....but it's laughable IMO).

FourIsCompany

Oh, I get it now... so THAT's what the thread is really about. I see. You're getting pretty good at disguising anti-CM threads as just innocent discussions...   But I eventually catch on. I'm no dummy. LOL

 Hee, hee!!! I knew  the real reason was from the OP. Of course no one else took the bait and mentioned CM so Anne had to. Too Funny!
 

Kim_MacMillan

I don't know very many successful dog people who have learned based solely on their own experience without the aid of anybody or anything else (well, okay I know a couple who claim to be successful....but it's laughable IMO).

I agree with that....but, also, there are people who claim to have studied so much that they can't see that several things have gone wrong with their own dogs.......they are just blind to that and find all kinds of excuses.......and that is also laughable......

houndlove

In every state, teachers are required to take a certain number of hours of professional development in order to stay certified. Even if you just graduated from college or graduate school. My husband was out of grad school for all of a year before he had to start taking professional development classes.

Do they have to take tests to prove that they are on top of their game.......I think not.....that has been one of the political issues here in our state.......