• Welcome to the Chronicle Forums.
    Please complete your profile. The forums and the rest of www.chronofhorse.com has single sign-in, so your log in information for one will automatically work for the other. Disclaimer: The opinions expressed here are the views of the individual and do not necessarily reflect the views and opinions of The Chronicle of the Horse.

Announcement

Collapse

Forum rules and no-advertising policy

As a participant on this forum, it is your responsibility to know and follow our rules. Please read this message in its entirety.

Board Rules

1. You’re responsible for what you say.
As outlined in Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, The Chronicle of the Horse and its affiliates, as well Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd., the developers of vBulletin, are not legally responsible for statements made in the forums.

This is a public forum viewed by a wide spectrum of people, so please be mindful of what you say and who might be reading it—details of personal disputes are likely better handled privately. While posters are legally responsible for their statements, the moderators may in their discretion remove or edit posts that violate these rules. Users have the ability to modify or delete their own messages after posting, but administrators generally will not delete posts, threads or accounts upon request.

Outright inflammatory, vulgar, harassing, malicious or otherwise inappropriate statements and criminal charges unsubstantiated by a reputable news source or legal documentation will not be tolerated and will be dealt with at the discretion of the moderators.

2. Conversations in horse-related forums should be horse-related.
The forums are a wonderful source of information and support for members of the horse community. While it’s understandably tempting to share information or search for input on other topics upon which members might have a similar level of knowledge, members must maintain the focus on horses.

3. Keep conversations productive, on topic and civil.
Discussion and disagreement are inevitable and encouraged; personal insults, diatribes and sniping comments are unproductive and unacceptable. Whether a subject is light-hearted or serious, keep posts focused on the current topic and of general interest to other participants of that thread. Utilize the private message feature or personal email where appropriate to address side topics or personal issues not related to the topic at large.

4. No advertising in the discussion forums.
Posts in the discussion forums directly or indirectly advertising horses, jobs, items or services for sale or wanted will be removed at the discretion of the moderators. Use of the private messaging feature or email addresses obtained through users’ profiles for unsolicited advertising is not permitted.

Company representatives may participate in discussions and answer questions about their products or services, or suggest their products on recent threads if they fulfill the criteria of a query. False "testimonials" provided by company affiliates posing as general consumers are not appropriate, and self-promotion of sales, ad campaigns, etc. through the discussion forums is not allowed.

Paid advertising is available on our classifieds site and through the purchase of banner ads. The tightly monitored Giveaways forum permits free listings of genuinely free horses and items available or wanted (on a limited basis). Items offered for trade are not allowed.

Advertising Policy Specifics
When in doubt of whether something you want to post constitutes advertising, please contact a moderator privately in advance for further clarification. Refer to the following points for general guidelines:

Horses – Only general discussion about the buying, leasing, selling and pricing of horses is permitted. If the post contains, or links to, the type of specific information typically found in a sales or wanted ad, and it’s related to a horse for sale, regardless of who’s selling it, it doesn’t belong in the discussion forums.

Stallions – Board members may ask for suggestions on breeding stallion recommendations. Stallion owners may reply to such queries by suggesting their own stallions, only if their horse fits the specific criteria of the original poster. Excessive promotion of a stallion by its owner or related parties is not permitted and will be addressed at the discretion of the moderators.

Services – Members may use the forums to ask for general recommendations of trainers, barns, shippers, farriers, etc., and other members may answer those requests by suggesting themselves or their company, if their services fulfill the specific criteria of the original post. Members may not solicit other members for business if it is not in response to a direct, genuine query.

Products – While members may ask for general opinions and suggestions on equipment, trailers, trucks, etc., they may not list the specific attributes for which they are in the market, as such posts serve as wanted ads.

Event Announcements – Members may post one notification of an upcoming event that may be of interest to fellow members, if the original poster does not benefit financially from the event. Such threads may not be “bumped” excessively. Premium members may post their own notices in the Event Announcements forum.

Charities/Rescues – Announcements for charitable or fundraising events can only be made for 501(c)(3) tax-exempt organizations. Special exceptions may be made, at the moderators’ discretion and direction, for board-related events or fundraising activities in extraordinary circumstances.

Occasional posts regarding horses available for adoption through IRS-registered horse rescue or placement programs are permitted in the appropriate forums, but these threads may be limited at the discretion of the moderators. Individuals may not advertise or make announcements for horses in need of rescue, placement or adoption unless the horse is available through a recognized rescue or placement agency or government-run entity or the thread fits the criteria for and is located in the Giveaways forum.

5. Do not post copyrighted photographs unless you have purchased that photo and have permission to do so.

6. Respect other members.
As members are often passionate about their beliefs and intentions can easily be misinterpreted in this type of environment, try to explore or resolve the inevitable disagreements that arise in the course of threads calmly and rationally.

If you see a post that you feel violates the rules of the board, please click the “alert” button (exclamation point inside of a triangle) in the bottom left corner of the post, which will alert ONLY the moderators to the post in question. They will then take whatever action, or no action, as deemed appropriate for the situation at their discretion. Do not air grievances regarding other posters or the moderators in the discussion forums.

Please be advised that adding another user to your “Ignore” list via your User Control Panel can be a useful tactic, which blocks posts and private messages by members whose commentary you’d rather avoid reading.

7. We have the right to reproduce statements made in the forums.
The Chronicle of the Horse may copy, quote, link to or otherwise reproduce posts, or portions of posts, in print or online for advertising or editorial purposes, if attributed to their original authors, and by posting in this forum, you hereby grant to The Chronicle of the Horse a perpetual, non-exclusive license under copyright and other rights, to do so.

8. We reserve the right to enforce and amend the rules.
The moderators may delete, edit, move or close any post or thread at any time, or refrain from doing any of the foregoing, in their discretion, and may suspend or revoke a user’s membership privileges at any time to maintain adherence to the rules and the general spirit of the forum. These rules may be amended at any time to address the current needs of the board.

Please see our full Terms of Service and Privacy Policy for more information.

Thanks for being a part of the COTH forums!

(Revised 1/26/16)
See more
See less

AA's---what are your top 10 requests you want USDF to know about???

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #61
    Originally posted by SendenHorse View Post
    A better value for the money re: shows.
    Streamline paperwork to get new horses registered/AAs signed up for shows.
    As stated many times on this forum and the Breeding forum, if USEF and USDF weren't so flippin' OBSTINATE about this, they would be using a one-horse, one-number system, and that number would be used no matter what type of competition the horse showed in. It would have to be issued by USEF, but all organizations overseen by USEF - including USDF/USHJA/USEA - would accept the number, with no requirement for additional numbers/horse registration.

    The horse would get registered ONE TIME - with USEF - and USEF would issue a sheet of bar coded decals with the horse's info on it. To enter a horse in a competition, you simply peel off the decal and stick it on the entry sheet. Show manager scans the decal, and voila, your horse's info goes into the database for that show, and is there to be uploaded to USEF/USDF/USHJA/USEA with the show results.

    This will, of course, require cooperation among the various organizations - which will never happen in my lifetime - and will also require show managers to buy a bar code reader and use appropriate software to manage their show information - which many will grouse about - but the time and money savings down the road could be enormously beneficial for competitors, show managers, and the governing bodies.

    Yeah, it's a pipedream this will ever come to fruition, but it's the season for dreaming, anyway.

    Comment


    • #62
      Originally posted by Eclectic Horseman View Post
      Unfortunately, all instructors are not equally effective in their communication skills. Many get defensive and seem to feel that they are being challenged when they are asked questions, and don't handle it well. That's one reason that I believe that having a really good educator in an online course can be of tremendous value. Susan Jacoma's new online dressage instruction is a good example of how this can work. She simply posts to Youtube and her Facebook page and I don't believe that the costs are prohibitive.

      Great riders/trainers are not necessarily great educators. An online course with a great educator could be much cheaper for the participants and certainly better than an in person course with an instructor with only modest communication skills.
      The world does not have to be and "either/or" world.....it can be a "both/and" world....as in have BOTH the live forum AND the on-line forum.

      It would be win-win-win for all.....in the live session, auditors get to ask the pesky questions that the trainee-judges are dying to ask but are too afraid to do so for fear of not being passed/approved.

      The auditors get legitimate questions answered and clarified to help with their training.

      The on-line version becomes a permanent record of what was taught that can be re-played on demand. (now THIS might get some hackles up....a permanent record of what a USDF trainer said.....oh, my!)

      The point is that the L-judges training is already being held.....venue scheduled....trainer engaged.....materials compiled and paid for.....And by the simple stroke of the almighty pen, a policy decision can be made to allow auditors to be fully included in the L-program discussions. No cost to USDF and plenty of benefit to members!
      Do not confuse motion and progress. A rocking horse keeps moving but does not make any progress.
      Alfred A. Montapert

      Comment


      • #63
        Originally posted by pluvinel View Post
        The world does not have to be and "either/or" world.....it can be a "both/and" world....as in have BOTH the live forum AND the on-line forum.

        It would be win-win-win for all.....in the live session, auditors get to ask the pesky questions that the trainee-judges are dying to ask but are too afraid to do so for fear of not being passed/approved.

        The auditors get legitimate questions answered and clarified to help with their training.

        The on-line version becomes a permanent record of what was taught that can be re-played on demand. (now THIS might get some hackles up....a permanent record of what a USDF trainer said.....oh, my!)

        The point is that the L-judges training is already being held.....venue scheduled....trainer engaged.....materials compiled and paid for.....And by the simple stroke of the almighty pen, a policy decision can be made to allow auditors to be fully included in the L-program discussions. No cost to USDF and plenty of benefit to members!
        I agree. But I was talking about having some sort of an online course for instruction certification candidates. To bring down the expense of travel in addition to the course. Not to mention the fact that, YES, instruction done in this manner is permanent and may have a wide audience which hopefully would lead to better education and consistency.
        "Against stupidity the gods themselves contend in vain" ~Friedrich Schiller

        Comment


        • #64
          Originally posted by DownYonder View Post
          As stated many times on this forum and the Breeding forum, if USEF and USDF weren't so flippin' OBSTINATE about this, they would be using a one-horse, one-number system, and that number would be used no matter what type of competition the horse showed in.
          Yeah, it's a pipedream this will ever come to fruition, but it's the season for dreaming, anyway.
          It shouldn't be a pipe dream!!! I vaguely remember when all these horse numbers started, that for a while, USEF did accept USDF's number, or was it vice-versa? Then the number fest really started.

          Not only should it be one horse-one number, why not for riders too? If we have USEF membership, we can add-on for USDF (or USHJA or USEA or USCTA). Why does it take a rocket scientist to figure out all these darn numbers and memberships - and signing up for a show - holy moly! I've had very intelligent people call me, frustrated and confused as they attempt to fill out their first show entry. You need a trainer just to do that!

          Comment


          • #65
            Originally posted by poltroon View Post
            I audited a session of an "L" judge training session at one point. (About half the attendees were auditors, and we were in the back of the room behind the candidates.) I committed what apparently was a dramatic and almost unforgivable faux pas of asking a question (questions were allowed!) when I turned out not to be a candidate.
            The L Program is one of those educational programs that allows "Silent Auditors". They actually discuss that on their website - questions are not allowed except of the participants. I am not saying I agree or disagree with this concept - but the program packs a ton of information into a few weekends, and that is one way to ensure that they make it through the materials.

            I wonder if that was the L Program I went through - since I notice you were from Nor-Cal? In any of the programs that have "Participants" and "Auditors", the Participants are always placed closest to the faculty - I'm auditing the Instructor Certification program right now, and it is the same rules - we are further away, questions are limited to Participants, the focus is on the participants who have paid much more then the Auditors. But we are still getting a great educational event without spending very much.

            I will say - some of the Faculty are much better with questions then are others. Some are better teachers then others. In the L program, the questions became much more "free flowing" as we moved through the sessions and were less terrified

            I firmly believe all programs should be open to auditors - but also agree with the concept of keeping the program on track, which may mean limiting questions. Back to the FEI Conference - again, I think it should be open to all, but think it is OK that questions be limited (and perhaps front seating limited) to actual FEI TRAINERS.

            Comment


            • #66
              Originally posted by DownYonder View Post
              As stated many times on this forum and the Breeding forum, if USEF and USDF weren't so flippin' OBSTINATE about this, they would be using a one-horse, one-number system, and that number would be used no matter what type of competition the horse showed in. It would have to be issued by USEF, but all organizations overseen by USEF - including USDF/USHJA/USEA - would accept the number, with no requirement for additional numbers/horse registration.

              The horse would get registered ONE TIME - with USEF - and USEF would issue a sheet of bar coded decals with the horse's info on it. To enter a horse in a competition, you simply peel off the decal and stick it on the entry sheet. Show manager scans the decal, and voila, your horse's info goes into the database for that show, and is there to be uploaded to USEF/USDF/USHJA/USEA with the show results.

              This will, of course, require cooperation among the various organizations - which will never happen in my lifetime - and will also require show managers to buy a bar code reader and use appropriate software to manage their show information - which many will grouse about - but the time and money savings down the road could be enormously beneficial for competitors, show managers, and the governing bodies.

              Yeah, it's a pipedream this will ever come to fruition, but it's the season for dreaming, anyway.
              Again, that's really the beginning and the end of the problem! The reason this will never happen is because there are certain "special interest" groups whose business would suffer from the implementation of a one number/one horse system and they carry a lot of weight within the USHJA/USEA.

              Sad but true....
              Siegi Belz
              www.stalleuropa.com
              2007 KWPN-NA Breeder of the Year
              Dutch Warmbloods Made in the U. S. A.

              Comment


              • #67
                Originally posted by MysticOakRanch View Post
                The L Program is one of those educational programs that allows "Silent Auditors". They actually discuss that on their website - questions are not allowed except of the participants. I am not saying I agree or disagree with this concept - but the program packs a ton of information into a few weekends, and that is one way to ensure that they make it through the materials.
                ..............
                .............
                I firmly believe all programs should be open to auditors - but also agree with the concept of keeping the program on track, which may mean limiting questions. Back to the FEI Conference - again, I think it should be open to all, but think it is OK that questions be limited (and perhaps front seating limited) to actual FEI TRAINERS.
                I teach at the graduate level at a state university (besides my day job). Graduate instruction is best done thru the "Socratic method"....eg., discussion and debate to have students demonstrate their understanding and critical thinking.

                I have sat thru 3 L-programs. A lot is taught like undergraduate teaching where the professor stands and pontificates (lectures) and the students are expected to regurgitate.

                Dressage judges will be expected to make decisions to award scores very quickly. Being able to evaluate rides can be improved thru discussion with the instructor helping "guide" the debate.

                But, the students are afraid, so they self-censor. Auditors can help this by raising points without fear of retribution.

                As far as keeping the presentations running on-time, that can easily be done thru judicious "facilitation" of the discussion. Judges judge to rules. The rules are in the rule book. Compare what the video is showing vs what is stated in the rule book.

                But I do agree that to pull this off, it takes an instructor who is someone who enjoys debate and who does not get defensive.

                So, my suggestion to AADI.....by the stroke of the pen, open up ALL educational opportunities to all members. Treat the auditors with the same respect as others who are paying. The L-program can be priced into 2 parts.....the lecture part....same for all participants and the "examination" part where for an additional fee, those who are pursuing the "judge track" then pay extra for administration of the examinations and licensures/certifications.
                Do not confuse motion and progress. A rocking horse keeps moving but does not make any progress.
                Alfred A. Montapert

                Comment


                • #68
                  fwiw re: judges training - those folks i know who have advanced thru the ranks of judging have learned to "play the game" and shut up and do as the instructor wants - even if they dont buy into what is being taught - it is the only way to get your "pass" its political to a very high degree..... i am not sure this is the best way to teach/advance excellent judges....

                  Comment


                  • #69
                    thanks DownYonder-- nice to know its not just me who is confused about this issue.

                    Comment


                    • #70
                      Originally posted by pluvinel View Post
                      I have sat thru 3 L-programs. A lot is taught like undergraduate teaching where the professor stands and pontificates (lectures) and the students are expected to regurgitate.

                      Dressage judges will be expected to make decisions to award scores very quickly. Being able to evaluate rides can be improved thru discussion with the instructor helping "guide" the debate.

                      So, my suggestion to AADI.....by the stroke of the pen, open up ALL educational opportunities to all members. Treat the auditors with the same respect as others who are paying. The L-program can be priced into 2 parts.....the lecture part....same for all participants and the "examination" part where for an additional fee, those who are pursuing the "judge track" then pay extra for administration of the examinations and licensures/certifications.
                      L Program is divided into two parts - A - C is open to auditors, D sessions and Testing are for participants only - and it is a separate cost. To a point, I agree, personally, I think the judges learning program should encompass several more sessions, so there is more give and take. When I went through it, we actually had the option of doing some additional training sponsored by a couple of our CDS Chapters - including an additonal session on biomechanics, and a session that was more "Socratic", with anyone interested spending the day with a USDF L Faculty member who is a fabulous teacher. It was really just a round table discussion on the program - very useful, and relatively inexpensive.

                      I think of sessions A - C as undergraduate - it is lecture to try to cram as much information into our overloaded heads as possible. Then sessions D-1 and D-2 (which are closed to auditors) are much more information sharing back and forth. I'll admit, the entire process is very intimidating, but there was much more "give and take" during those D sessions - we even had the chance to question one of the examiner's judging results - and those of us who "questioned" those results actually prevailed. There is also more "one on one" time in these sessions, where one person may judge a portion of a test, then have discussion w/ the examiners. To be honest, most of us needed those 3 sessions of information overload to have meaningful activities in the D sessions. All who went through the D sessions were capable, had great education, many were advanced trainers and riders, but judging is a whole 'nother skill set.

                      I really do think of "L" as the undergraduate work. I scribed through an "r" testing - there was NO admission to the "r" education session however, that was for participants only, so I can't tell you if it became more of a open discussion or if it was more lecture. That is a whole 'nother can of worms - USEF also totes education, but you can't even audit their judge's programs!

                      I don't know what the answer is, I do sincerely believe there just isn't enough time built in for a lot of Q&A. And adding time means more cost - the program is already pretty expensive - it cost more then USDF Instructor Certification, and from a money earning standpoint, I can tell you, judging school shows is not a way to get rich quick Becoming a "r" is even worse - many of them work for free, just to try to get the experience they need to qualify for "R".

                      And - back to one of my AA wishes - I really wish USDF had a traveling road show, and the L program was provided in EVERY REGION at least every few years. I thought it was one of their better educational programs (after going through as auditor or participant: DSHB Judging Program, part way through Instructor Cert, and FEI Instructors).

                      Perhaps an answer to the Q&A - which is something I do professionally (I also "teach" for a living, although I do one-day workshops). There is never enough time for all the questions - I stick around "after hours" for a Q&A - so we still get done "on time" and those who are really interested can stay for some one-on-one questions and discussion. I don't know if the L Faculty would be open to that suggestion (it does mean you fly home LATE after completing the day - sometimes I don't get home until midnight!). And those who just want to stick with the schedule get their info and get home on time. Maybe that is a suggestion worth exploring.

                      Comment


                      • #71
                        Better awards! I was third at first level AA hoy and all I got was a flimsy stall plaque sponsored by my gmo. Thank you Neda.

                        Comment

                        Working...
                        X