Do you have an instructor or a trainer?

In the UK/Ireland it's an instructor that teaches you to ride, a trainer teaches the horse to be ridden. In the US and other places it's a trainer for both, usually. But terms differ everywhere.
 
Cortez said:
In the UK/Ireland it's an instructor that teaches you to ride, a trainer teaches the horse to be ridden. In the US and other places it's a trainer for both, usually. But terms differ everywhere.
Click to expand...

Interesting, I have never heard it categorised like that before :) My instructor/trainer teaches me AND my horse to improve - I thought that was the whole idea, that the horse cannot improve without the rider improving and vice versa?
 
I call mine, my trainer. I have no idea what the difference is but to me she 'trains' me and my horse, she doesn't just tell me what to do to get the results we want. She gives me tools in the box to ride and train my horse, not just when I'm in the saddle either, she looks at the whole picture. She doesn't dismiss the things I say but listens and takes into account that I know the horse as I deal with her every day so we work together to improve my horse and myself. She doesn't just see me for a lesson once a month, takes my money and that's it, she is at the end of the phone or email, asking how things are going and we work to a larger goal.
I consider her a friend as well but at the end of the day she knows her stuff and I respect her for it, if she tells me I need to do this, that and the other, I do.
Just my take on it, I would be interested to here other opinions on it :)
 
I have no idea what mine calls himself, I don't suspect he cares that much.

But in my head, I think of instructors as telling the rider what to do in a rote learning kind of way. I think of a trainer as being more like helping the rider to *learn* so they can work independently and continue to improve. Dunno. And then what about a coach??!
 
milliepops said:
I have no idea what mine calls himself, I don't suspect he cares that much.

But in my head, I think of instructors as telling the rider what to do in a rote learning kind of way. I think of a trainer as being more like helping the rider to *learn* so they can work independently and continue to improve. Dunno. And then what about a coach??!
Click to expand...

A coach is something fairly similar to a bus but posher :p
 
vam said:
I call mine, my trainer. I have no idea what the difference is but to me she 'trains' me and my horse, she doesn't just tell me what to do to get the results we want. She gives me tools in the box to ride and train my horse, not just when I'm in the saddle either, she looks at the whole picture. She doesn't dismiss the things I say but listens and takes into account that I know the horse as I deal with her every day so we work together to improve my horse and myself. She doesn't just see me for a lesson once a month, takes my money and that's it, she is at the end of the phone or email, asking how things are going and we work to a larger goal.
I consider her a friend as well but at the end of the day she knows her stuff and I respect her for it, if she tells me I need to do this, that and the other, I do.
Just my take on it, I would be interested to here other opinions on it :)
Click to expand...

That is really interesting :) I now have a trainer then.... woo hoo :D :D
 
No pretention here :)

Trainer has fewer syllables :D I do think coaching has different connotations to instructing though, joking aside. Does anyone know how the UKCC qualifications differ from the BHS instructor ones?
 
SpringArising said:
I always thought that saying trainer and coach was just a pretentious way of saying instructor. Don't know why but it makes me cringe!
Click to expand...

Instructor is nowadays considered to be an old fashioned and innappropriate term, as it implies someone who tells you what to do - so in most sports they are now called coaches, and those of us who slip up and call ourselves instructors get told off for it :) I've always thought that trainers were people who had racing yards, or those things you wear on your feet.
 
milliepops said:
No pretention here :)

Trainer has fewer syllables :D I do think coaching has different connotations to instructing though, joking aside. Does anyone know how the UKCC qualifications differ from the BHS instructor ones?
Click to expand...

In my experience as a RDA coach/UKCC point of view, (we don't have instructors anymore), the short answer is it comes down to how someone is taught to ride. Under UKCC, the onus is on the rider to earn from their own experience and mistakes, with a lot of focus on the mental/sports psychology side of things. Whereas a generic BHS lesson is about doing x,y,z in a structured lesson plan (see PTT exam).

Certainly from being taught by someone who is BHS by qualifications, her teaching method is far more along the lines of 'coaching'. I'm not 'instructed' in any way, it is a lot more fluid than that. The only way I can describe it is in my last lesson I was doing walk to canter transitions amongst other things. The premise being that because I know how to ride them, instructor was there to be a pair of eyes on the ground. She didn't give one instruction in the 20mins I was doing them, but she did give a lot of advice and opinion, both good and bad once I'd said what I thought of transition, horse, my position etc. You could argue a decent BHS lesson should do the same, but the PTT lesson plans don't allow for it. All my RDA lessons are done on coaching plans now, I have far greater flexibility in what can and should be achieved.

It probably sounds like a load of bull for a lot of people, especially when you start mentioning the UKCC feeds into the four stages of learning:

1. Unconscious Incompetence - "I don't know that I don't know how to do this." This is the stage of blissful ignorance before learning begins.

2. Conscious Incompetence - "I know that I don't know how to do this, yet." This is the most difficult stage, where learning begins, and where the most judgments against self are formed. This is also the stage that most people give up.

3. Conscious Competence - "I know that I know how to do this." This stage of learning is much easier than the second stage, but it is still a bit uncomfortable and self-conscious.

4. Unconscious Competence - "What, you say I did something well?" The final stage of learning a skill is when it has become a natural part of us; we don't have to think about it.
 
Last edited:
ETS: So by stage 3, teaching/instructing stops, and coaching starts. I think the UKCC has a place, whether alongside the BHS, or as part of the wider AI/II/I exams. The bottom line is that I believe the UKCC accepts each and every rider is different and you teach/instruct/coach what's in front of you, instead of sticking to the same boring box of ideas every time.
 
As an instructor of a none horsey variety in the RAF this is interesting. We all had to do a course that equates to a level 3 in education and training. I'm sure there are some far more qualified teachers onhere that can put me wrong so I stand to be corrected:

Instructor - imparts knowledge, teaches someone how to do a given task, is purely there to teach you how to do something.

Trainer - is a broader term. Can also be an instructor as well. Provides support and techniques to allow an individual to cope on their own going forward. Strictly speaking has wider role and should help "coach" people through issues, see what is holding them back so that they can improve.

Coach - generally works on performance issues and not the material itself. So doesn't necessarily teach you how to ride but helps you understand your mental barriers that are stalling your learning and helps you to get past them.

In reality these terms are interchangeable but those were the loose definitions that I was taught.
 
Abi90 said:
As an instructor of a none horsey variety in the RAF this is interesting. We all had to do a course that equates to a level 3 in education and training. I'm sure there are some far more qualified teachers onhere that can put me wrong so I stand to be corrected:

Instructor - imparts knowledge, teaches someone how to do a given task, is purely there to teach you how to do something.

Trainer - is a broader term. Can also be an instructor as well. Provides support and techniques to allow an individual to cope on their own going forward. Strictly speaking has wider role and should help "coach" people through issues, see what is holding them back so that they can improve.

Coach - generally works on performance issues and not the material itself. So doesn't necessarily teach you how to ride but helps you understand your mental barriers that are stalling your learning and helps you to get past them.

In reality these terms are interchangeable but those were the loose definitions that I was taught.
Click to expand...

Interesting. On an instinctive level this would be how I'd view the various types in the horse world too.
 
milliepops said:
Interesting. On an instinctive level this would be how I'd view the various types in the horse world too.
Click to expand...

I would see it as an instructor teaches you how to ride. Once you can ride you need a trainer to keep learning but also to push you past any issues you have yourself that isn't necessarily just to do with your riding.

In theory, you wouldn't even need to see a coach with your horse. You could be coached on the ground.

The more experienced you get the more you need of the coach half of the package rather than the instructor. Most coaches and trainers will be instructors too but not all instructors will be able to coach people.
 
milliepops said:
Interesting. On an instinctive level this would be how I'd view the various types in the horse world too.
Click to expand...

Abi90 said:
The more experienced you get the more you need of the coach half of the package rather than the instructor. Most coaches and trainers will be instructors too but not all instructors will be able to coach people.
Click to expand...

I'd agree with this. There's also another factor to consider and that's the ability, knowledge, and experience of said instructor/coach/trainer. I've been asked to seriously consider taking my ukcc 3 despite not having my AI, my own horse or competition experience...
 
Last edited:
Abi90 said:
I would see it as an instructor teaches you how to ride. Once you can ride you need a trainer to keep learning but also to push you past any issues you have yourself that isn't necessarily just to do with your riding.

In theory, you wouldn't even need to see a coach with your horse. You could be coached on the ground.

The more experienced you get the more you need of the coach half of the package rather than the instructor. Most coaches and trainers will be instructors too but not all instructors will be able to coach people.
Click to expand...

This is a helpful discussion because I know I've been picked up on here when I've used the word 'trainer' to describe the tuition I have, and I feel it definitely fits more into the trainer category now, but has had elements of coaching too.
I know a lot of the theory of what I'm trying to do. I think I'm fairly competent at the levels I'm training and competing at the moment, I enjoy experimenting and playing with stuff at home so I need support to help me identify the correct feel - and sports psychology/competition strategy type support to help me get the best out of my horse at a show.

I don't feel like any of that fits the traditional 'instructor' box very well.
 
I had a lesson the other day which I think would be a good example of coaching over instruction. My horse is nervous jumping, he wiggles and will run out or stop at any opportunity. He will jump for me because I know he's going to do that and how to ride him but we often end up jumping from a standstill and I wanted to work on that.

The guy taking the lesson said "You're riding everything correctly but you obviously expect him to stop and in doing so it's happening and you're reacting to it to get him over the fence. You now need to take a proactive stance and visualise there being no issues and gripping the situation from the start saying "right horse we're going to do this without issue".

So I did, he changed nothing specific about how I was riding. I was presenting the horse to the fence correctly and keeping him straight. The difference was my attitude, I took no nonsense before we even approached the grid and we ended up jumping a triple which he's never done before.

That to me is coaching. I was not told how to ride, or even had my riding corrected, but an improvement in my approach was made and had results. My mindset was half the problem not the horse or the my riding.
 
Lévrier;13448641 said:
Just pondering after I posted something on FB this morning - do you have an instructor or a trainer? And what is the difference? :)
Click to expand...

Well I am an instructor but I do have one who teaches me also

We also have a trainer who just rides and schools some of the horses so that is the difference one rides and teaches the other just rides and schools
 
Well I asked the question hoping for a bit of a discussion so thanks all, this is really interesting :)

I think my change in focus this year has moved me from being 'instructed' to 'trained' - previously over the years it has felt like I was being told what to do in a lesson and simply replicating that, which means I could not necessarily repeat the movement when schooling on my own as I had simply followed an instruction rather than thinking about what I was doing.

At last I am FINALLY thinking about how I am riding, the aids I am giving, the feel of the horse and the results I am achieving so it feels to me like I am being trained - my riding has improved hugely, and I can replicate what I get in lessons when I am schooling on my own. It helps to have a pretty amazing horse too..... :) :) :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top