Coaching/Instructing

What matters most?

  • BHS qualifications

  • UKCC qualifications

  • Degree, diploma, and riding, coaching, and management experience

  • Competition experience

  • Mindset coaching

  • Other

Results are only viewable after voting.
C

CC123

Active Member
Joined
4 August 2022
Messages
38
Visit site
Hey everyone,

Just wanted some insight from you all,

When you're looking for a coach/instructor, do you specifically prefer someone who is BHS/UKCC qualified, or would you also consider and be happy working with someone who holds a BSc Equine Performance Science degree alongside a Level 3 Extended Equine Management diploma with experience in coaching, riding and all aspects of management?

I'm really interested to hear what matters most to yous when choosing who to train with- is it qualifications, experience, results or a mix of everything?

Would be very happy to hear your thoughts! Thank you :)
 
It isn't qualifications sadly. I've found most BHS instructors can pull together a good lesson plan but I tend to find the actual riding a bit "push & pull". More leg, more contact etc.

My preference is to find someone whose riding style i respect, especially for flatwork. They may have BHS quals or may have other training (or none!)
 
Find someone where you think “i aspire to ride like them”
They would then need to be able to describe *how* to ride like them (not all who can ride, can teach)
I also like someone who can train me to think about what I’m feeling from the horse, and what I want to do to improve that. So someone who teaches me to think for myself.
 
For me Personal Recommendation > Qualifications.
Then it's how that person makes me feel. I'm not a confident rider & someone who can boost my confidence is crucial.
I use 2 instructors & both are very well qualified, but it was recommendations that drew me to them initially.
 
  • Like
Reactions: SEL
Personal recommendations or riding style for me, and then how they approach my horses. I have two pretty little part-bred Arabs who aren't big, talented sports horses and are never going to compete seriously against the purpose-bred warmbloods. If I get the slightest hint that someone isn't going to embrace them for what they are or will be dismissive of their type, that's an automatic no for me.

Also, my interview process includes whether my clever mare, Mimosa, likes them. She's an excellent judge of character and will be clear about who she likes. Miri, the other mare, just loves everybody. Her opinions can't be trusted 🤣

Luckily, our dressage and eventing coaches both adore my mares and seem to find just as much value in their progress as the horses they are coaching to go Grand Prix or 5*.
 
My coaches have a mix of qualifactions including none. They have serious competion experince
What they have in common is that they are good at breaking down what i need to do and explaining it in a way i understand. I need people who can build my confidence and push me without rushing it.
 
Absolutely none of that. I want:

* Philosophy/riding/coaching style. Preferably based in classical dressage, or understanding how (classical) dressage/flatwork works as a basis for further work. Someone who's fairly strict on fundamentals is fine (eg putting me on a lunge to work on my seat, or whatever). NOT (American) hunter style. Not a coach who moves me up to new things/skips fundamentals because they're afraid I'm getting bored. Not the "punish him/make him work if he's spooking at a corner" style. Doesn't think horses are "naughty."

* Pedagogy/coaching effectiveness. All the good coaches I've had have been able to suggest tiny changes that, once I figure them out, make a huge difference in how the horse is going. Doesn't have to be a "correct" or nice coaching style, just needs to help me improve. NO mindset coaching or confidence building or gentle teaching - it's great for people who want it, but for me it's a waste of time & money. I don't care if you CAN do that style, so long as you can recognize that I don't need it and skip it.

* Up to date on current science, or at least understands that we know a lot more than we used to. Eg understanding of how horses actually learn, understanding of clinical signs of pain without outright lameness, understanding of biomechanics and fitness, etc. Understands current info on how horses relate to each other and to humans (eg NOT "if he doesn't 'respect' you at all times then all is lost," doesn't force an exercise over and over & far beyond useful ability to learn just for the sake of "ending on a good note.")

I don't care about paperwork, or certifications, or what they've won, or if they have any education in coaching.
 
Someone who can see what is in front of them and is able to work with and improve the combination. The ability to explain the steps and the whys of things suits my style of learning.

Qualifications may have a framework but they became a lot less practical for me when all the book work became more important than the person being taught.
 
I have no idea if my trainers have qualifications or not.

When I was competing, I wanted people who had helped others compete to the level or above than I aspired to. They had to help me produce my horse rather than take over. They had to be trustworthy to be truthful. They had to give me info in bite sized pieces as this is how I learn better.

I now don't compete but still have lessons because it is fun. The person has to realise that I have no real ambition other then to feel the wind in my hair and have a smile on my face. I like someone to set the session up to be easy for me and my horse.

I like them to be insured. It shows a certain commitment and safety first approach. That said, I've never asked for proof!
 
Riding style and a personality that both me and my horse get on with. I like people who can think out side the box to achieve the end result. Also someone happy to hop on and ride the movement/transition/etc if what they are seeing from the ground is not what they are expecting from the instruction given. Most of all the sessions need to be pleasurable for both myself and the horse.
 
Regardless of the level of quals, and sorry but I would have to say I would be utterly underwhelmed by someone trying to tout a BSc Equine Performance Science degree alongside a Level 3 Extended Equine Management diploma as being relevant, absolutely no-one who declares:-

‘Whatever your horse offers you, do not be satisfied, always ask for MORE.’

Yes, really 🙄.
 
I have been lucky enough to have been taught by many excellent instructors, some qualified, most not, down the years. My longstanding (25 years) instructor has zero qualifications, but amazing ability to get inside both my pony's head and explain to him exactly what he needs to learn at each session, AND explain/demonstrate/encourage me to do likewise. Superb, just superb.
 
Tiddlypom said:
Regardless of the level of quals, and sorry but I would have to say I would be utterly underwhelmed by someone trying to tout a BSc Equine Performance Science degree alongside a Level 3 Extended Equine Management diploma as being relevant, absolutely no-one who declares:-

‘Whatever your horse offers you, do not be satisfied, always ask for MORE.’

Yes, really 🙄.
Click to expand...
Reminds me of the acquaintance who declared that she never rewarded her horse unless he went above and beyond her expectations, which left me wondering how the poor thing was supposed to work out what her expectations were...
 
I want a coach/ instructor who....

Puts horse welfare first
Turns up to start on time
Does not use their mobile phone during a session
Can improve my riding
Is capable of explaining to me how and why
Who fills the time I have paid for.

I know the last one is a little flexible, but when I teach I have a plan and if the horse is done before the end of the session then we will work on rider position or spend the remaining time discussing points to improve before the next session and answering any questions the client has.
 
I havw BHS qualifications. I have a MSc in applied equine science. They have informed my teaching over the years but do not define it.
The first day I taught a lesson after I got qualified, I realised I had learnt how to teach but I needed to spend the next umpteen years getting the experience to help communicate to both horse and rider.
Thirty years later, I talk less and listen more, both to the horse and the rider.
None of my paperwork has any relevance to that.

In terms of who I have chosen to train with, I have listened to those who can improve me and my horse, regardless of qualifications but based on experience
 
Depends what I’m looking for. I use both competition instructors with no teaching qualifications and BHS trained instructors with a comparable practical ability to myself.
 
I think the less experience you have as a coach and rider then the more relevant your qualifications become. If you’re looking to start out coaching and you don’t have a solid competition CV (or other experience in the industry) then yes it’s a good idea to get some qualifications, either BHS or UKCC. It shows potential clients that you have a basic standard of knowledge.
On the other hand, for a high level competitive rider who’s been coaching for years, qualifications aren’t why people are going to go to them for training.
 
I do agree with this, however I've seen/ paid for competition riders to teach and they may know their stuff horse wise, but don't always have the best people and teaching skills.
 
Have a read of the thread knocking about in the comp riders section about what people see as coaching and instruction...they can be quite different.

Having a CV can be useful for 'getting a foot in the door', but personally its not something I look for. Insurance on the other hand shows someone is actually serious, though ive never actually asked to see it either!

I've interviewed a fair few people to help me over the years on a number of different horses and as its me employing them I really do see it as an interview. Some have been qualified (high bhs and up to a masters degree for equine things in one case), some have had nothing but experience.

The list above of things that are good and what I look for is pretty much mine, but here is a list of some things that really put me off, of which i have experienced all of.

1, the lesson plan for the week instructor. Someone who has decided this week they are teaching this. Everyone on every horse gets the same exercises. That may be not what i feel like i need to work on, may not be right for the horse and honestly shows a lack of communication at best and a lack of knowledge at worse.
2, (often from the UKCC qualified people) The 'what goals are you aiming for?' coaches. Was pushed for comp level to go out at, will raise your score by 10% in xyz dressage test for you etc. Like they were looking to use me to boost their credentials almost. I found it annoying. An answer like 'straigtening the leg yeild' was not what they were looking for.
3, The 'that was amazing' people...there is a market for this for sure, but its not for me. I am not a brilliant rider, but I know a lot more than I can actually do, and I know good and bad. No qualifications in the world makes up for being able to work out your customer.
4, The direct oppostite to the above, the endless drilling of something with an aim for perfection. We arent going to get there today and my horse stopped caring about this 10 mins ago because he is bored to death!
5, the standing about chatting about something person. It might be 100% relevent, but my horse needs to be at least walking whilst we talk at any length.
6, the one who doesnt listen to my feedback and is able to think a bit outside the box. Yes, I fell off yesterday, I'm stiff as a board and my ankle is twice the size it should be, but the horse turns into a raving idiot if he isnt ridden, so can you please come up with something that allows us to work with this!

I could go on but I think the idea is there. :)
 
TheHairyOne said:
Have a read of the thread knocking about in the comp riders section about what people see as coaching and instruction...they can be quite different.

Having a CV can be useful for 'getting a foot in the door', but personally its not something I look for. Insurance on the other hand shows someone is actually serious, though ive never actually asked to see it either!

I've interviewed a fair few people to help me over the years on a number of different horses and as its me employing them I really do see it as an interview. Some have been qualified (high bhs and up to a masters degree for equine things in one case), some have had nothing but experience.

The list above of things that are good and what I look for is pretty much mine, but here is a list of some things that really put me off, of which i have experienced all of.

1, the lesson plan for the week instructor. Someone who has decided this week they are teaching this. Everyone on every horse gets the same exercises. That may be not what i feel like i need to work on, may not be right for the horse and honestly shows a lack of communication at best and a lack of knowledge at worse.
2, (often from the UKCC qualified people) The 'what goals are you aiming for?' coaches. Was pushed for comp level to go out at, will raise your score by 10% in xyz dressage test for you etc. Like they were looking to use me to boost their credentials almost. I found it annoying. An answer like 'straigtening the leg yeild' was not what they were looking for.
3, The 'that was amazing' people...there is a market for this for sure, but its not for me. I am not a brilliant rider, but I know a lot more than I can actually do, and I know good and bad. No qualifications in the world makes up for being able to work out your customer.
4, The direct oppostite to the above, the endless drilling of something with an aim for perfection. We arent going to get there today and my horse stopped caring about this 10 mins ago because he is bored to death!
5, the standing about chatting about something person. It might be 100% relevent, but my horse needs to be at least walking whilst we talk at any length.
6, the one who doesnt listen to my feedback and is able to think a bit outside the box. Yes, I fell off yesterday, I'm stiff as a board and my ankle is twice the size it should be, but the horse turns into a raving idiot if he isnt ridden, so can you please come up with something that allows us to work with this!

I could go on but I think the idea is there. :)
Click to expand...
I've had lessons of all of these people before.
Just to add
7. Takes nice pictures for instagram but doesnt improve anything
 
@TheHairyOne

I was gutted that an instructor (classically trained, no idea on quals) turned out to be someone who drilled exercises. Absolutely spot on with the horses weaker rein & why, but doing the same thing for 45 mins wasn't going to do anything other than make him sore. Couldn't get the pony to load for a week after that lesson he was so cross (& sore).

@daffy44 you're right. I don't give first aid a thought but that's my bad. I know with the riding club we have to use instructors / facilities which tick that box, but on a personal level it isn't something I've ever thought about.
 
Just in response to a few points.

I feel that my BHS qualifications gave me a good start for being an instructor. It taught me to plan my lessons, the importance of a introduction to horse and rider and that has stayed with me. Ok, sometimes the lesson plan gets thrown out once we start! , but I can still have a basic plan!

TheHairyOne said:
Have a read of the thread knocking about in the comp riders section about what people see as coaching and instruction...they can be quite different.

Having a CV can be useful for 'getting a foot in the door', but personally its not something I look for. Insurance on the other hand shows someone is actually serious, though ive never actually asked to see it either!

I've interviewed a fair few people to help me over the years on a number of different horses and as its me employing them I really do see it as an interview. Some have been qualified (high bhs and up to a masters degree for equine things in one case), some have had nothing but experience.

The list above of things that are good and what I look for is pretty much mine, but here is a list of some things that really put me off, of which i have experienced all of.

1, the lesson plan for the week instructor. Someone who has decided this week they are teaching this. Everyone on every horse gets the same exercises. That may be not what i feel like i need to work on, may not be right for the horse and honestly shows a lack of communication at best and a lack of knowledge at worse.
2, (often from the UKCC qualified people) The 'what goals are you aiming for?' coaches. Was pushed for comp level to go out at, will raise your score by 10% in xyz dressage test for you etc. Like they were looking to use me to boost their credentials almost. I found it annoying. An answer like 'straigtening the leg yeild' was not what they were looking for.
3, The 'that was amazing' people...there is a market for this for sure, but its not for me. I am not a brilliant rider, but I know a lot more than I can actually do, and I know good and bad. No qualifications in the world makes up for being able to work out your customer.
Click to expand...
1. When I worked at big equestrian centres
I would have a day plan for all the group lessons. Ie. This week we are working on control. For the beginners this might be weaving in and out of cones, the mediums would learn about how and when to use half halts and the advanced would work on lengthening and shortening strides.
So one plan, adapted to all levels.

2. I always ask clients what they are aiming for because it's no good doing a gymnastic jumping lesson for someone who wants to learn lateral movements! I need to know!

3. Uuughh I hate those types! I try to tell it like it is. For example I might say
That wasn't great was it? Why do you think that went wrong? Let's try it with more outside leg.
People don't pay me to lie to them!
 
  • Like
Reactions: SEL
I want someone experienced and horse friendly, with a good understanding of biomechanics and a willingness to make training enjoyable for both me and my horse. If I try someone and my horse doesn't enjoy the experience, I don't go back. In my experience, people who are promoted as being very much 'horse first' sometimes aren't.
 
moosea said:
1. When I worked at big equestrian centres
I would have a day plan for all the group lessons. Ie. This week we are working on control. For the beginners this might be weaving in and out of cones, the mediums would learn about how and when to use half halts and the advanced would work on lengthening and shortening strides.
So one plan, adapted to all levels.
Click to expand...

I think group lessons at big centres are a totally different kettle of fish and I admire anyone who can work with 3 plus people and get them all focusing and improving and getting something out of it! And in that environment i cant see how it could function without a plan as you dont want to be moving things around all the time if for example a jump course is laid out, but someone wants to do a dressage test...

I was ranting about private 1 to 1 instruction.

And good point about 1st aid and it never crosses my mind. 95% of the time I ride on my own so just having someone there is an improvement.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top