The training club that I belong to had a CGC test tonight for the basic obedience class (or anyone who wanted to enter their dogs) after my advanced class tonight. I hung around just to watch some of it. OMG!!! They had 2 instructors, one of who was doing the sit, lay down, stay and come portions - no problem. The other gal was doing "greeting a friendly stranger" "accepting a petting" and "accepting light grooming" She sat in a chair and the dogs came up to her, jumped all over her, and she was laughing and telling them to sit and giving them commmands while the owners stood by not saying anything to their dogs or trying to get control of them! Now I must say that I'm not sure yet whether she actually passed these dogs, but it would have appeared that she did. I will find out later. But the fact that she was sitting in a chair was wrong from the start. The rules for each item are clearly stated, and that wasn't it. I actually had to leave because I couldn't stand to watch anymore. I want to say something to somebody in the club, but unfortunately the gal in the chair is the president of the club and my instructor had a dog in the test. I haven't been a member that long and don't want to cause trouble, but this reallyh troubled me. I felt guilty that Emilu got to retry something twice in her test and she was passed - but this was much worse. Do you think I should say something and to who?
That's a toughie. I have seen a lot of inequality when it comes to CGC tests. Can you ask if it is always done that way, or something like *I'm really glad the tester didn't sit and laugh like that when Emilu took the test, 'cause she may not have passed. Is the test always conducted that way?* (whether or not you believe that to be the case). It might signal to teh testers that you were aware that the test was not being conducted to a standard without being confrontational.
I agree...the CGC tests are not standardized although they should be. I've seen some very tough tests and some that were a piece of cake. I like Karen's idea. It's non confrontational but gets your point across.
When my trainer ran her CGC's, she made a point of saying her big thing was to check for aggression. In some of the exercises, she did not penalize dogs for being extra sniffy and curious, as long as they weren't acting like a nuicance. Like mine all wore training collars during theirs, and that's apparently also a no-no.
Then again this is just a certificate, not a title. I suppose if the AKC turned it into an official title, they would be more strict on the rules.
I do think that most testers will be harder on a dog that shows signs of aggression than one that is overly friendly. Now, if it were a TDI test as well, then that would be different.
UCDX GRCH Dunn's Marsh Caleb of Waltona UDX3, OM3, RAE Canadian UD, RE
FallRiver's Micah of Waltona GN RAE, Canadian CD, RN
As an AKC CGC Evaluator, I can tell you that the AKC does want the test to be as standardized as possible. There are guidelines for evaluators to follow in passing dogs. You can write to the AKC and tell them about what transpired at this test. They probably will question the evaluator, and may even revoke the evaluator's status.
When Moose got his CGC the evaluator told me that the AKC was coming out to review her process because she had a passing % of something like 95% of her dogs - and she really followed the book. Her tests were always followed by a class so I expect that is why it was so high - she was very good. But it does show that they do monitor it.
Sharon, loved by Moose & Sky
oh wow! i thought the dog had to be more behaved than that to pass (as in jumping would very nearly have you fail).
Charlie (foster) and Rocky
Besides all the jumping, I think the thing that bothered me the most was that she was sitting down to do all three excercises. I don't have the CGC regs in front of me right now, but I know they state that the 2 people are standing, and the dog "doesn't go toward the evaluater". It also seemed like they should be done as three separate "events" and not all as one (greeting a friendly stranger, accepting a petting, and light grooming). I think they should at least do the stations how the regs state them. I understand that how each evaluator judges how friendly is "too friendly" could vary.