I have written on the topic of course provision before (see: The erosion of quality education and Ofqual regulated qualifications v Accreditation from Ofqual regulated body) because it is a complicated subject and there is so much misinformation out there that many people are being drawn in and convinced to part with large sums of money for something that will eventually not live up to the promises being made.

As we progress towards regulation of animal training and behaviour services getting the right education is becoming more and more important or you could be wasting a lot of time and money on something that is not going to be acceptable when it comes. Some will tell you that regulation will never happen but the government is actively discussing it now and will be working to achieving it within this parliamentary term.  

So what will regulation mean in terms of course provision? There are several factors to consider but the most important is whether the course covers all the requirements of a given role (trainer or behaviourist for example) at the right level and in sufficient depth. It is possible for a course to cover some of the requirements but if it is essentially not in sufficient detail or examine all the required topics satisfactorily it will not be acceptable.

I am now frequently asked about Ofqual qualifications because they are ‘recognised’ but you have to understand what this means because it is undoubtedly not what you would assume to be the case. Ofqual recognition says that the course is provided at a given level and written to an educational standard, it is NOT saying that its content meets an industry standard in any way. Ofqual cannot and never will regulate the animal training and behaviour sector so when you are told it is a regulated qualification it only refers to academic characteristics NOT what value that provision has in the workplace. That will be determined solely by an industry regulator.

While I am on the topic of Ofqual and misinformation there is a mistaken belief that an Ofqual regulated qualification is somehow a superior product than one accredited by an Ofqual regulated Awarding Body, this is not the case as they have both been through the same rigorous process of approval. Once again I say what is more important when comparing such courses is the content, the level and the total learning hours required to complete it. I recently had someone saying they had done a level 5 Ofqual regulated programme with someone else and now wanted to undertake a level 6 course but on investigation it was discovered that the level 5 she had completed had less than a quarter of the content required and therefor did not provide a suitable basis for progression. The real difference is that Ofqual regulated qualifications belong to Ofqual not the writers, unlike the alternative that remains the intellectual property of the provider.

So who will be the industry regulator? Currently there are a few groups that seem to offer some form of voluntary regulation but only one that comes close to having the infrastructure, policies and procedures in place to carry out the role for the whole sector. One absolute requirement of government is that such a regulator would be UKAS accredited, something that ABTC has had in preparation for two years and is being assessed for right now. It is highly unlikely that any other potential candidates are likely to achieve such accreditation.