Recently I read through a list of games where many trainers had contributed ideas. I read through and I was amazed at what was listed. Some had more rules than game and some had elaborate set ups. Others seemed like something students would love but I couldn’t understand what they would be getting out of the experience.
In December there is always a flurry of emails asking about games to play at end-of-the-year parties for dog clubs. Many dog trainers like to use games in classes (especially on the last week of class or near holidays). 4-H type programs like to use games as part of the teaching/training process, kids love games, right? Many agility organizations have ‘games’ based off of strategy, choices, and/or points.
Are games a good use of class time? Are they adding to the learning experience? I haven’t been able to enjoy using games in class.
Dictionary.com lists a few definitions. The first is “an amusement or pastime.” The second is a physical product. The third is “a competitive activity involving skill, chance, or endurance on the part of two or more persons who play according to a set of rules, usually for their own amusement or for that of spectators.”
So what are the challenges with games?
Participants get caught up in the game and compromise good training skills (and good dog handler skills). I want my students to be thinking about good training at all times, in training sessions at class and at home, as well as maintaining the training in every day life. In an effort to do well in the game, many people will compromise good training. They may use less reinforcement than is appropriate for the current stage of training. They may fall back into habits of using extra cues or prompting. Some games have the dogs pushed to the point of making a mistake.
Example: In the advanced agility class, teams were doing long sequences. At one point I pulled out a timer. That one difference, racing against the clock, had teams letting their dog get up from stays without a release word! Normally in training the handlers would never let that happen and would go back and re-set the dog if the dog did get up. 
Ways around it: Make the training part of the criteria. If it’s a stay contest, let the people know they can only cue stay once and they can go back and feed 3 times, or that there’s a penalty if the dog does get up. It can take a lot of rules to re-structure this.
Many games test skills, not train anything new. Some testing is important for the instructor and student to monitor the training. Class time is limited. Is it a good use of time to explain the rules (sometimes complicated), set up, and facilitate an activity where there is not a lot of learning happening?
Example: “Leapfrog” game : Some teams are sit staying, another team weaves in and out. If a dog isn’t ready for this, there are a lot of errors and/or a lot of help to get through. This tests sitting, staying, and walking past other dogs. But what new things are the teams learning?
Ways around it: Set up games to start easier and then get harder. This may mean giving some teams very different criteria or grouping the class into similar skill levels.
It’s challenging to adapt the skills to the group. There are always teams that are more or less skilled at different tasks. If a team is too advanced, they will often ‘win’ and may be bored. If an activity is too hard, it will frustrate the people involved.
Example: In Simon-Says type games or play-until-you’re-out, those who are out of the game first are often the ones who most need more training time. They’re stuck doing nothing or practicing without direct instructor feedback.
Ways around it: Break up the class into smaller groups with similar skill level. Set up games/tests where students are competing against themselves not against each other. Or have teams competing against a set standard or a standard you give the team rather than each other. Example: Can you run the course faster? In 30 seconds can you get more sits with one cue only than you did last time? Feed 10 times on your way across.
Calling every exercise a game can take away the fun. I’ve been in some classes where everything was called a ‘game’. It was a little weird and it seemed like the instructor was trying a little too hard to make things ‘fun’.
Example: The walking game! The recall game! The stay game! The attention game!
Ways around it: Don’t call everything a game. Reserve it for only one or two activities per class – if that.
So now what? I don’t know. There are several game books and DVD’s available, written specifically for dog trainers. There are numerous ideas online too. Look through and evaluate the activities for your class objectives. 
I very rarely use games in classes. I can’t justify the use of time when we could get more accomplished with other training activities. There are enough ‘fun’ activities that use ‘good training practices’ that I find to be a better alternative.
Agility class is the exception. Advanced teams need to learn the games used in competition and other games can help the handlers learn strategy and to play to the strength of the current training level of the dog. Dogs run really fast for a short period and then do need to rest, so waiting isn’t wasting time.
All that said, I love playing games when I’m in class with my dog… if my dog is good at the games. I get competitive and love to look for the loopholes in the rules, find out the strategy needed to do well, and then compromise my good training to do well in the game. I know it’s not good for us!
2 Comments
Jamie Robinson · January 7, 2013 at 3:11 pm
There have been many different definitions and attempts at defining the term “game” but for the purposes of dog training, here is a definition that fits in the instructional setting as well as for life experiences.
A game is a challenge, created by the rules that govern it, bound by the cooperation between the players of the game who all have the same purposes, intentions and focus; all of which results in a quantifiable goal.
Just so we are all on the same page, I will also define the terms used in the definition.
Cooperation-To work together toward a common goal, justly and honestly. Cooperation implies the ability to engage in communication with understanding; to be honest about intentions and purposes and the rely of information; to do one’s rightful share of the work; to effectively perform one’s job and assist in the survival of the players until the goal is reached.
Players-As an adjective, to be “game” is someone who is eager and willing to do something new or challenging with the purpose of reaching a goal or creating something new. This person is a “player”. A game can have one player or multiples. These players can be working cooperatively or separately, even in conflict as a means to deter the other players from reaching the stated goal.
Quantifiable-Capable of being measured. For instance, if you were playing the game of 1-2-3-break which has the goal of the dog learning to stay in the position asked for until released, you could measure your progress with duration of stay, level of distractions, how many different environments the behavior is perfected in and the distance the handler can move away from the dog.
Challenge-A test of one’s abilities or resources in a demanding but stimulating undertaking. A challenge also invites the player to learn new things, refine already known behaviors and abilities, create new pathways and new worlds thus guaranteeing survival.
Rules-a rule is a statement explaining what someone can or cannot do in a particular system,game, or situation. The rules of the game are the structure that allows the goal to be reached. Rules create the boundaries, set the tone and make coorperation inevitable.
Goal-The end toward which an endeavor is directed; an objective. Having a goal is often what differentiates between play and a game. A game can have more than one goal. For instance, coming back to the 1-2-3-Break game, there are several goals – 1) learning to stay in one place 2) waiting for a release 3) creating self control in the face of distractions.
Purpose-The reason for which something is done or created or for which something exists. Each teaching game has a stated purpose, a reason why the game is being played.
Intention- a determination to act in a certain way; to have in mind a purpose or plan, to direct the mind, to aim. Without intention, we go nowhere. It is determination in the fullest sense, almost the need to move forward.
Focus-a central point, as of attraction, attention, or activity.
I use games, I don’t just call a training exercise a game. Each game I use is designed to teach a skill, not just allow the dog and human to have fun. For example dancing with your dog teaches the human how to have a loose leash and allows the dog to choose to be with the human over the environment. There are only two simple rules and everyone has fun learning how to LLW.
afmd7525 · January 7, 2013 at 3:57 pm
Thanks for sharing Jamie, it’s especially helpful that you defined ‘game’ so clearly. Your last part of the comment, “I use games, I don’t just call a training exercise a game. ” Do you also use “training exercises”? If so, what makes those things different than the games? For all of the games you use in classes, do you use the term ‘game’ when explaining the activity? I can’t tell you how much I -love- your focus on goals, purpose, and quantifiable pieces to the things you do in classes/lesson!
Comments are closed.