Do we undervalue skills in the horse world?

teapot said:
However it was always seen as the lowest all around level to get to (over the PTT/Stage 2 coach), and never the ceiling of knowledge and training.
Click to expand...

I'm inclined to agree with the previous posters' comments on this because while what you say here is absolutely true, and it's completely fair that you need to differentiate between a S3 rider / instructor and a S5 one, that isn't how a lot of AI / S3 trained riders / trainers market themselves in the real world.

I've argued on here before with a couple of old school AI-level instructors who absolutely did not see or describe themselves as "the lowest all round level to get to", and I've certainly met many similar AIs in the real world (and I do mean AI - because all these people qualified long before 2015). I do appreciate that's a very difficult thing for the BHS to control in practice, without a significant and public re-brand of what the role of an S3 level instructor should be.

I also think it's a completely reasonable and important point to make on threads like these because, even if the new specification is much improved, the old style exams were pretty poor, and the quality of an AI is not necessarily high at all. People do need to be aware of that when choosing trainers for themselves or their horses, and I don't think valuing BHS education is necessarily related to being prepared to pay a fair price for services.
 
I wonder if the BSH instructor exams were designed to fit with what skills were required to work in a riding school and teach on riding school horses in a time where freelance instructors were less of a thing. Some coaches may only have experience of working with riding school horses when they do their exams as not everyone is privileged enough to have had their own horse.
 
JFTDWS said:
I'm inclined to agree with the previous posters' comments on this because while what you say here is absolutely true, and it's completely fair that you need to differentiate between a S3 rider / instructor and a S5 one, that isn't how a lot of AI / S3 trained riders / trainers market themselves in the real world.

I've argued on here before with a couple of old school AI-level instructors who absolutely did not see or describe themselves as "the lowest all round level to get to", and I've certainly met many similar AIs in the real world (and I do mean AI - because all these people qualified long before 2015). I do appreciate that's a very difficult thing for the BHS to control in practice, without a significant and public re-brand of what the role of an S3 level instructor should be.

I also think it's a completely reasonable and important point to make on threads like these because, even if the new specification is much improved, the old style exams were pretty poor, and the quality of an AI is not necessarily high at all. People do need to be aware of that when choosing trainers for themselves or their horses, and I don't think valuing BHS education is necessarily related to being prepared to pay a fair price for services.
Click to expand...

I do agree actually, and if I was looking for someone to back a young horse, I wouldn’t be looking at qualifications at all. I’d be looking at experience and knowledge of how to educate a horse in the real world for the individual horse’s needs with a dose of common sense along the way.


I just raised it because as always someone refers back to ‘blame the BHS/the AIs I know are crap/therefore there’s no knowledge and skill anywhere else’. Whereas the system beyond the AI/Stage 3 is actually not half bad! For those wanting more, CPD (the training and clinics available for members of the F&I association is very very good for example), and better exams are in place. The gulf between Stage 3 and the next levels is quite something though, and maybe that’s why there’s such bottoming out of people at that level… On the trusting the system bit I think people should be doing their own research if looking for professional help. I'm not sure it's a good idea to solely rely on an assumption x level equates to the specific knowledge and experience needed either - that's running the risk of setting both a human and a horse up for failure imho, and that leads nicely back to putting the right value on the right person needed for the individual horse.
 
Last edited:
I think there's a wider social thing about people who will do the 'no silly prices' thing when they're looking for tradespeople or other services, with little concept of the value of the skills, time, and materials those people provide.

At the same time, people will spend disproportionate amounts of money on crap because of particular branding or marketing, and won't stop to think about the actual quality of what they're paying for. Which also applies in the horse world.
 
Ambers Echo said:
Discussion on FB about a person paying £1000 a month for producing a horse. Comments that she is being 'robbed'.

Another discussion on a separate thread on here that £250 a week for backing a horse is 'too expensive'.

I don't think £250 week is expensive at all! If the horse is sent away that is full livery. My dog carer who takes dogs into her own home charges £25 a day which is perfectly standard. = £175 a week. And dogs require a lot less work! And a LOT LOT LOT less space. Yes they need a walk each day but go out in group. No mucking out.

Then presumably each horse is worked for about an hour 5 days a week and requires skilled education with some added risks for the trainer. So that's 5 hours work a week on average. £250 a week minus the full livery fee, values your trainer's expertise at about £15 an hour.

Breeders can't make money breeding allrounders (what everyone actually wants) because no-one will pay what it costs to get them to 3, 4 or 5 healthy and calm. Producers can't make money starting horses to be safe, calm, educated with a great foundation (again what everyone wants). No wonder so many horses are broken young and/or with significant behavioural problems! In my view, dross sells because it's cheaper, but those horses break younger and are less temperamentally sound. And not enough money is spent on training for both horse and rider. Thoughts?
Click to expand...
Definitely agree
 
Equestrian is effectively a subsidised hobby and has been for years. That’s the issue.
We are used to cheap horses, cheap events, cheap livery etc
Producing young horses is a dangerous game as well even if you know what you are doing and very good at it because horses are horses and even with outstanding foundations things can go wrong. Especially with sharp athletic ones so rightfully it needs to be paid for.
Everyone also thinks they are better than they are hence why I know a few riding schools who won’t cater for adults as they learn to ride and just go and buy a horse with zero clue so not worth the riding schools time.
I don’t think there is an answer. I do think the bin end of horse ownership will get priced out though.
 
LEC said:
Equestrian is effectively a subsidised hobby and has been for years. That’s the issue.

I don’t think there is an answer. I do think the bin end of horse ownership will get priced out though.
Click to expand...
This is very true but the 'bin end' of ownership isn't a homogeneous mass. For every numpty (well, for every few numpties) there's a sympathetic and possibly quite skilled person giving their horse as natural a life as they can manage on rented land and it will be a shame to see them lumped in with the rest when those who can afford horses can often be seen putting more pressure on them to get something out of their investment than is seemly. Such is life, I suppose.
 
Whilst I agree with your general point, OP, I'm not so sure that there is no mucking out involved in dog-boarding!
I think you - and the neighbours - would soon notice if there wasn't any and tbh, it's less pleasant than the mucking out involved in horse-boarding. It also usually involves a lot of water and disinfectant.
 
LEC said:
Equestrian is effectively a subsidised hobby and has been for years. That’s the issue.
We are used to cheap horses, cheap events, cheap livery etc
Producing young horses is a dangerous game as well even if you know what you are doing and very good at it because horses are horses and even with outstanding foundations things can go wrong. Especially with sharp athletic ones so rightfully it needs to be paid for.
Everyone also thinks they are better than they are hence why I know a few riding schools who won’t cater for adults as they learn to ride and just go and buy a horse with zero clue so not worth the riding schools time.
I don’t think there is an answer. I do think the bin end of horse ownership will get priced out though.
Click to expand...
I think that stance from an RS is not particularly helpful. Now those novice adults have even less education and access to support and learning from people with (I assume) the right experience and skills.

Which leads on to another issue on people's willingness to pay for decent quality RS. I feel torn on it because of course it's about ability to pay as well and certainly my non horsey parents took the cheaper option at one stage of my childhood. I'm grateful for that time but it didn't really teach me good riding or horse care. My dad did clock this eventually and helped me find a better quality RS to go to.
 
Ambers Echo said:
Discussion on FB about a person paying £1000 a month for producing a horse. Comments that she is being 'robbed'.

Another discussion on a separate thread on here that £250 a week for backing a horse is 'too expensive'.

I don't think £250 week is expensive at all! If the horse is sent away that is full livery. My dog carer who takes dogs into her own home charges £25 a day which is perfectly standard. = £175 a week. And dogs require a lot less work! And a LOT LOT LOT less space. Yes they need a walk each day but go out in group. No mucking out.

Then presumably each horse is worked for about an hour 5 days a week and requires skilled education with some added risks for the trainer. So that's 5 hours work a week on average. £250 a week minus the full livery fee, values your trainer's expertise at about £15 an hour.

Breeders can't make money breeding allrounders (what everyone actually wants) because no-one will pay what it costs to get them to 3, 4 or 5 healthy and calm. Producers can't make money starting horses to be safe, calm, educated with a great foundation (again what everyone wants). No wonder so many horses are broken young and/or with significant behavioural problems! In my view, dross sells because it's cheaper, but those horses break younger and are less temperamentally sound. And not enough money is spent on training for both horse and rider. Thoughts?
Click to expand...

So how was it done in the past? Back when there were plenty of ordinary horses of a sensible size that most people could safely handle & ride?
 
marmalade76 said:
So how was it done in the past? Back when there were plenty of ordinary horses of a sensible size that most people could safely handle & ride?
Click to expand...

I do think there's a massive problem with the competitiveness of equestrianism now. I'm not sure if that's your point, but I'm basing this off your second sentence.

So many people seem to want a big, flash horse to move up the levels, and big, flash horses these days are often a very different kettle of fish to ride and handle. I'm not sure that's good for horses or owners. I have a lot of concerns about high end sport horse breeding (in terms of both soundness and temperament), but when you couple that with a "normal" budget, it can get disastrous for horse and rider really quickly.

I think if a lot of people were more sensible in their requirements, and more old fashioned horses were available, the lower training budgets would be less of an issue. I've backed and broken a fair few native types, but I would need serious professional help, and a much larger budget, with a lot of modern warmblood types (I mean, I'd need a rider - I couldn't ride one side of one probably!). That's not to say that cobs and natives are always easy and warmbloods are always sharp, but there are general trends, and a sharp native is unlikely to be on the same scale as a sharp sports horse.
 
marmalade76 said:
So how was it done in the past? Back when there were plenty of ordinary horses of a sensible size that most people could safely handle & ride?
Click to expand...
Perhaps it's to do with land to keep horses on being more readily available, and also the lower cost of living and housing giving ordinary middle and working class people enough disposable income to fund a hobby.
 
Last edited:
JFTDWS said:
I do think there's a massive problem with the competitiveness of equestrianism now. I'm not sure if that's your point, but I'm basing this off your second sentence.

So many people seem to want a big, flash horse to move up the levels, and big, flash horses these days are often a very different kettle of fish to ride and handle. I'm not sure that's good for horses or owners. I have a lot of concerns about high end sport horse breeding (in terms of both soundness and temperament), but when you couple that with a "normal" budget, it can get disastrous for horse and rider really quickly.

I think if a lot of people were more sensible in their requirements, and more old fashioned horses were available, the lower training budgets would be less of an issue. I've backed and broken a fair few native types, but I would need serious professional help, and a much larger budget, with a lot of modern warmblood types (I mean, I'd need a rider - I couldn't ride one side of one probably!). That's not to say that cobs and natives are always easy and warmbloods are always sharp, but there are general trends, and a sharp native is unlikely to be on the same scale as a
Click to expand...

Agreed, but I also think there are as many, if not more horse owners who have no interest in competing.

Lower numbers of "ordinary" horses has been a thing for a few years now, land prices might have something to do with it but it has been going on long before the cost of living shot up.
 
teapot said:
Please go read the latest exam structures and syllabi before bemoaning an exam system that has changed drastically since around 2015 (and yes, I have parts of the Stage 5/BHSI under the new system). I’ve said this before on here and will say it again - the backbone of the Stage 4 and the Stage 5 exams are about training and educating a range of horses including youngsters, especially at the Stage 5/BHSI, plus the lunging and long reining element. I am fairly sure for the Stage 5 ride/BHSI you have to produce some form of written outline of how you’ve brought on a young horse, and then defend it in the exam. An old colleague of mine bought a youngster to specifically do so.

I do agree the Stage 3/old AI could potentially include more. However it was always seen as the lowest all around level to get to (over the PTT/Stage 2 coach), and never the ceiling of knowledge and training. How would you propose changing the Stage 3 to effectively a higher standard - there are Stage 3 riders around who probably wouldn’t be best suited to a green 4 year old, and how do you differentiate between the 3 and the 4/5? There is also only some much you can do in an exam situation at a exam centre too. Also worth noting that the BHS has reduced the jumping height for Stage 3 from Jan 25 onwards as, accordingly to the email I received, jumping those heights does not accurately reflect the nature of what is expected from a Stage 3 rider/groom/coach on a day to day basis, based on feedback given to the BHS.


On people not valuing, skills, training and subsequently education - no they don’t. Everything is chronically undervalued in the industry. It’s why in part so many people see the AI/Stage 3 as the be all and end all, when in fact it’s the actual start of the process 🙄
Click to expand...

That's good to hear its changed and the further qualifications are more well rounded and focused on skilled training. I guess the problem is that the average 'qualified instructor' who will usually just have a BHSAI or similar will be called upon by novice owners with horses who have behavioural problems or are young, and the instructor is expected to help them solve their issues. Which isn't an unreasonable request from a client of a 'qualified instructor' but the qualification doesn't set up someone with the skill set to manage this at all.

Maybe stage 3 level should be reclassified as 'BHS Stage 3 Groom' and the name 'qualified instructor' should be reserved for the people who have taken Stage 4 and 5 and actually have the skills to deal with the problems that clients present them.

I am actually grateful that we have a robust education system for instructors in the UK, the standards are so much higher than in the US (taught there for a few years) where there are no qualifications and anyone can brand themselves as an instructor and standards in some places are terrifyingly low.

But you do have to raise a question when the skills being taught don't actually set up someone for the job they are going to go and do. It is quite misleading, and for the average novice horse owner they have no idea what the BHS qualifications are about and expect their 'qualified professional' to be the fount of all knowledge- which they are not. I don't think that it sets people up for success and the bar for being able to go out and teach and train and call yourself 'qualified' in something should be higher.

I think the reason that the BHS system gets such a bashing is because its advertised to be and 'should' be the gold standard, and it isnt. If they raised the standards and only passed truly competent horsemen then becoming qualified might hold more weight and become more aspirational.

(edited, a lot, sorry :)
 
Last edited:
emilylou said:
Thats good to hear its changed and the further qualifications are more well rounded and focused on skilled training. I guess the problem is that the average 'qualified instructor' which will usually just have a BHSAI or similar will be called upon by novice owners with horses who have behavioural problems , or are young and the instructor is expected to help them solve their issues. Which isn't an unreasonable request but the qualification doesn't set up someone to do this at all.

Maybe stage 3 level should be reclassified as 'BHS Stage 3 Groom' and the name 'qualified instructor' should be reserved for the people who have taken Stage 4 and 5 and actually have the skills to deal with the problems that clients present them.
Click to expand...

I mean, the name already did that: Assistant Instructor - which should have meant only qualified to coach under supervision (i.e. in an RS, starting novices, where a more experienced instructor is also employed, but not necessarily present in every lesson, and is essentially responsible for the AI).

The trouble is that most AI's market themselves as fully qualified independent instructors, and a lot of equestrians don't appreciate the significance of the A in AI.


(eta: the BHS doesn't have the means to prevent AIs working independently, and I don't think that would be a good thing if they did - I wouldn't want to see a monopoly on horse training held by any single body, and many talented trainers don't have any qualifications or only have the AI/S3. The difference is that they usually have some evidence of that to their name - competition record, historic experience or training, horses or riders they've trained out in the real world demonstrating they can do it. It's not easy for a novice to differentiate between the two types of AI, and it's not something that could be reasonably prevented by regulation. It's a complicated issue and I am definitely complaining without presenting solutions!)
 
Last edited:
teapot said:
Please go read the latest exam structures and syllabi before bemoaning an exam system that has changed drastically since around 2015 (and yes, I have parts of the Stage 5/BHSI under the new system). I’ve said this before on here and will say it again - the backbone of the Stage 4 and the Stage 5 exams are about training and educating a range of horses including youngsters, especially at the Stage 5/BHSI, plus the lunging and long reining element. I am fairly sure for the Stage 5 ride/BHSI you have to produce some form of written outline of how you’ve brought on a young horse, and then defend it in the exam. An old colleague of mine bought a youngster to specifically do so.

I do agree the Stage 3/old AI could potentially include more. However it was always seen as the lowest all around level to get to (over the PTT/Stage 2 coach), and never the ceiling of knowledge and training. How would you propose changing the Stage 3 to effectively a higher standard - there are Stage 3 riders around who probably wouldn’t be best suited to a green 4 year old, and how do you differentiate between the 3 and the 4/5? There is also only some much you can do in an exam situation at a exam centre too. Also worth noting that the BHS has reduced the jumping height for Stage 3 from Jan 25 onwards as, accordingly to the email I received, jumping those heights does not accurately reflect the nature of what is expected from a Stage 3 rider/groom/coach on a day to day basis, based on feedback given to the BHS.


On people not valuing, skills, training and subsequently education - no they don’t. Everything is chronically undervalued in the industry. It’s why in part so many people see the AI/Stage 3 as the be all and end all, when in fact it’s the actual start of the process 🙄
Click to expand...
By you get to Stage 4 and 5 its really to late, because those people are perhaps already teaching, and also advising others.
I have not a an exam to my name in horse care, I did go on a Stage 3 course just to find out if I had any huge gaps in knowledge just because it was at the local equestrian college, and I came away with WTF was going on, because the rest of the people were earning a living from horses and I knew more than them. Most of the information could be found in a classic book about equation and horse management.
I come from a profession where your knowledge base should be above you competence, and even if you are never going to practice a particular speciality you should know where to find information and advice backed up by evidence.
I learnt how to back and train a horse from books, some of the older people on here will have backed their own ponies as children. I was twelve when I was given a pony to back and then to be sold on, I would do it on my own after school. As it was a dealers yard if it wasn't right it came back, the next time I would see that pony was often at a local show. Now times have changed, but I do believe its not above the intelligence of most adults to at least try and understand the training process, if only to understand their lack of competence and know when someone else is not competent, and it's even more important if that is your profession.
Its a long time since I have paid for a lesson, but I have watched an awful lot over the years, and honestly I would say 98% of them were given by the standard of the old AI, so that's the reality the majority of people who are being taught to ride by people who have incomplete knowledge even if they have a BHS qualification. Some of the worst lessons I have seen were BHSI and above.
You like to think you get what you pay for, but in its a difficult for the rider/owner to asses what they level of competence they are likely to get for their money, and the BHS have done nothing IMO to help.
 
Its not the fault of the BHS, any system that has progressive levels has to start somewhere, and I dont doubt that once people get to stages 4 and 5 it requires a lot from them, the problem is an awful lot of people get to AI/S 3 and stop. I think the AI does what it was probably designed to do, enable people to teach basic riding school lessons on riding school horses, the problems arise when the AI believes themselves to be fully qualified and go out in the real world and encounter issues they have not been trained to deal with, such as backing young, sensitive horses.
 
ester said:
And once you are an AI you’re likely in the sort of job that’s not providing £ to access future training in most cases.
Click to expand...

Being an AI did used to give you access to cheap training through the TTT (if you were in their area, I think), which did clinics with some fairly big name classical trainers. But as with so many such ideas, it was small scale when it existed, and (afaik) no longer does.
 
JFTDWS said:
Being an AI did used to give you access to cheap training through the TTT (if you were in their area, I think), which did clinics with some fairly big name classical trainers. But as with so many such ideas, it was small scale when it existed, and (afaik) no longer does.
Click to expand...

TTT stopped years ago, can't remember why though.

I do think there's a generational/society issue here too more widely about how people value training and education though. It's all about the short term, rather than investing in the long term, which may explain horses' training and education can be lacking too. When I sat on a feedback panel for the BHSI/Stable Managers, there was a younger Stage 4 coach there who said 'why do we need to bother to know x, we can just google it if we need to'...
 
Last edited:
teapot said:
TTT stopped years ago, can't remember why though.

I do think there's a generational/society issue here too more widely about how people value training and education though. It's all about the short term, rather than investing in the long term, which may explain horses' training and education can be be lacking too. When I sat on a feedback panel for the BHSI/Stable Managers, there was a younger Stage 4 coach there who said 'why do we need to bother to know x, we can just google it if we need to'...
Click to expand...

I have a vague recollection that the site of the clinics was sold? I don't remember - I only went to watch a few clinics down there probably 10-15 years ago.

As for the second para - yea. Depressing, really.
 
Agree with pretty much everything. But the old saying is very true. Fools breed horses for wisemen to buy

There is no money in breeding allrounders, no one wants to pay what it costs to get them at a level of training they require. Lets be honest it costs the same to raise an allrounder that it does a competition bred WB.
Its always been that way, and i cant see it changing. Im on a FB chat group ( dont know how i got added ) and the prices people are willing to pay is scary. Latest one was whats out there for £200 ... I sent a photo of a stuffed toy.
I see dealers asking for unbacked youngsters offering low fours. ( which basically means £1500) they want pretty / sound and RC type for that. But they will do you a favour by taking them off your hands then and there.
As for the training costs, thats where it really hurts. But as i was discussing the other day, would i want to back a horse for £250 per week, er no thank you. I dont see that as expensive at all. You get lots of young kids advertising their 'skills' for much less. Wouldnt touch with a barge pole. I value experience and will pay for that
 
To a degree, no pun intended, the devaluing of equine education was made worse by equine colleges which were paid for course attendees and was not that bothered about providing people who were capable of caring for never mind teaching someone else to care for or ride a horse. My friend used to have equine students come and ask if they could help, she said some couldn't even catch a pony in the field properly. It was seen as a cheap way to get training quickly, but because of H&S and educational adjustment, the yards were not geared to a profession where you can not work 9-5, you work long hours and if you are not competent at most things its a fail. So just good enough became accepted. They train in a unreal situation, get a qualification, and go out to train others,with the idea that yards open at 9, and you get weekends off, with long holidays.
The BHS has muddied the waters because most people have no idea how competent the 'trainer' is supposed to be. From the list below how do you decide who is capable of backing and training a horse.

BHS qualifications and Stages | The British Horse Society

Browse through our directory of world-leading qualifications to begin or further develop your equestrian career.
www.bhs.org.uk www.bhs.org.uk
 
honetpot said:
To a degree, no pun intended, the devaluing of equine education was made worse by equine colleges which were paid for course attendees and was not that bothered about providing people who were capable of caring for never mind teaching someone else to care for or ride a horse. My friend used to have equine students come and ask if they could help, she said some couldn't even catch a pony in the field properly. It was seen as a cheap way to get training quickly, but because of H&S and educational adjustment, the yards were not geared to a profession where you can not work 9-5, you work long hours and if you are not competent at most things its a fail. So just good enough became accepted. They train in a unreal situation, get a qualification, and go out to train others,with the idea that yards open at 9, and you get weekends off, with long holidays.
The BHS has muddied the waters because most people have no idea how competent the 'trainer' is supposed to be. From the list below how do you decide who is capable of backing and training a horse.

BHS qualifications and Stages | The British Horse Society

Browse through our directory of world-leading qualifications to begin or further develop your equestrian career.
www.bhs.org.uk www.bhs.org.uk
Click to expand...
You become a coach with a stage 2 now???

What is coaching 4 all as opposed to coaching?
 
Red-1 said:
You become a coach with a stage 2 now???

What is coaching 4 all as opposed to coaching?
Click to expand...

Not quite - Stage 2 coach is the old PTT exam and was always needed. It was take your Stage 3 Care/Ride, PTT and log 500hrs to get your full AI. Whereas now, you have to take the Stage 2 AND Stage 3 coach exams plus everything else to become a fully fledged Stage 3 Coach, and able to join the APC list etc.


Coaching 4 All is a new thing in addition which appears to be about inclusivity, diversity, and mental health. More info here https://www.bhs.org.uk/media/yl2mqpo5/bhs-coaching4all-specification-081123.pdf
 
Last edited:
In the days when AI was an accepted starting qualification people had a better understanding of horses and the easiest way to secure a qualification, if you couldn’t afford to pay for the training was as a working pupil at whichever establishment you could find. Although many had a ‘rough deal’ there was usually plenty of opportunity to ride a variety of horses as well as do whatever needed doing. The hours were often gruesome with little time off but you would have been fit and up to the job or would have gone somewhere else. The actual ‘hands on’ content in many educational establishments now whether equine based or basic uni is very limited and usually amo7nts to hours rather than months. There’s obviously value in being able to teach and to understand the learning process and that’s why some people are excellent teachers rather than performers. Health & safety is a large component of most things these days and the reasons for doing something need to be considered alongside the risk. One of the reasons skills are undervalued is because people don’t have sufficient knowledge to work out what’s valuable.
 
I did the Stage 3 Teach course with the idea that I could sometimes offer some additonal support to people on camps. But the course really did not give me what I was after - it was almost entirely safety focused. which is fine - a coach being able to get people onto a horse in a safe way is important. But it's not enough! Plus lesson planning and timing, but again that was not really anything more than: have a plan and pay attention to time so you can execute the plan. And the plan was around structure & content but not SKILL. So I could structure a decent jump lesson, but that does not mean I had any skill (really) in helping a combination progress beyond the very, VERY basic things like being straight on the approach, not being left behind, having the horse on the aids, horse not rushing etc.

So really not much use outside of a riding school. People on their own horses really do want any coach at any level to have some sort of an 'eye' for what it happening with both horse & rider, with ability to make corrections in the moment that are more subtle than anything I learned.

I have a group lesson once a week now with a BHS Stage 5 instructor. She often gets us to do a few simple school exercies one at a time and asks us to comment on and score each rider. Then she gives her feedback. I have learned so much more about what to 'see' from her, than the BHS lessons taught me. .

I did really enjoy my own lessons at Ingestre - taught by the more senior instructors. They wre brilliant. But the lessons/courses to get you to pass the stages and teaching exams were nowhere near as useful to me either as a rider or as a wannabe instructor. So I have given up on trying to progress through the stages now.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top