State of Wisconsin I Educational Approval Board 201 West Washington Avenue, 3'd Floor Madison, Wisconsin 53703 Scott Walker Governor Phone: (608) 266-1996 Fax: (608) 264-8477 eabmail@eab.wisconsin.gov David C. Dies Executive Secretary Certified Mail 7003 0500 0002·0038 7827 May 5, 2014 Delores Lillge, Director WisconsinSchool ofProfessional Pet Grooming W359 N5920 Brown Street· Suite 102 Oconomowoc, WI 53066 Dear Ms. Lillge: The Educational Approval Board (EAB)r~cently received three student complaints from Ruby Abendroth, Joseph Wilke, and Deanna Tobak (attached) concerning problems and issues with their education and training at the Wisconsin School of Professional Pet Grooming, Inc. (WSPPG). Ms. Tobak:'s complaint also included a detailed ap.d comprehensive WSPPG "Student Questionnaire/Evaluation" which you required she submit so she could receive her "Certificate of Achievement" from the WSPPG. As part of its investigation ofthese compiaints, the EAB also interviewed Samantha Wetzel, who was the WSPPG receptionist for the first one-half of these complainants' program but did not return to the WSPPG in January 2014 after the school's winter break. · · The complainants began their program on October 21, 2013 and were scheduled to graduate on March 14, 2014. On March 14 you informed Ms. Abendroth and Mr. Wilke they failed the program and offered them no recourse or plan to complete the program. You also informed Ms. Tobak: she needed to make-up four eight-hour days at a cost of $320 above the tuition already paid and complete the WSPPG "Student Questionnaire/Evaluation" so she could graduate and receive her "Certificate of Achievement". In reviewing the written complaints and in interviews with each complainant and with Ms. Wetzel, the EAB identified the following problems/issues with the WSPPG"s education and training program: . . • The WSPPG's Enrollment Agreement states under "Requirements for Graduation" that students "must complete the minimum number of laboratory projects·per subject group: Smooth Coated breeds, Longhair. Part Coated .breeds, Short Coated breeds, Long Coated breeds (10 projects); mixed breeds (10 projects); Scissored breeds (10 projects); Spaniels and Setters (10projects); and terriers (Hi projects)." . While the WSPPG is supposed to demonstrate for students the grooming techniques for the above majm breeds of dogs, complainants indicated Ms. Lillge only provided one, hands-on demonstration: bathing a dog. The WSPPG expected students. -in laboratory to groom dogs simply by using written instructions from. the student grooming manual. • The WSPPG' s program includes one hour of classroom instruction at the beginning of the day on Monday, Wednesday, and Friday. The complainants reported Ms. Lillge often left the classroom eab.state. wi. us Delores Lillge, Director Wisconsin School ofProfessional Pet.Grooming May 5, 2014 Page2 to check-in dogs, answer the phone, and attend to administrative matters, especially after there was no receptionist from January 12 to the end of the program on March 14. • The WSPPG's program has students groom one dog in the morning and one dog in the afternoon:. All complainants and Ms. Wetzel reported there were days when students had no dogs to· groom, days when students shared a dog, and days when students had to groom three to four dogs because WSPPG had overbooked the number of dogs to be groomed for the students enrolled. The WSPPG's catalog states.the program has students groom two dogs per day. Complainants stated the WSPPG should be responsible to have other staff available to groom the dogs it books beyond the required number per day for students enrolled. • During a typical day of dog grooming laboratory time of morning and· afternoon, complainants and Ms. Wetzel estimated Ms. Lillge was present on the Lab floor observing, instructing, and mentoring students about 50% of the time. Complainants stated a grooming instructor should be on the Lab floor 100% of the time students are practicing grooming dogs. The complainants reported if they had a grooming· question/problem, they regularly had to secure their dog client safely and go find Ms. Lillge. • Since the laboratory grooming counts as 1/6 of a student's final grade, the WSPPG completes a "Laboratory Assessment" form for each dog a student grooms and uses a 0-4 scale for each grooming category assessed thereby producing a total score for every dog a student grooms. Complainants and Ms. Wetzel reported Ms. Lillge did not complete the "Laboratory Assessment" form when a .student completed grooming a dog so students were not given immediate feedback and a grade on their grooming technique and performance. Complainants and Ms. Wetzel reported Ms. Lillge would complete all the student's "Laboratory Assessment" forms on Fridays and share them with students once every two weeks for an hour during 'Progress Reporting" time so students could read them and tum them in for their student files. • Complainants and Ms. Wetzel reported Ms. Lillge routinely favored sonie "star" students with better grades, grooming assignments and praise. For students who needed more help academically and assistance with hands-on grooming, Ms. Lillge often treated them more harshly in her comments and assigned the "bad" .dogs, the most troublesome and problematic to groom which often resulted in lower grades for these students. • Part of the WSPPG's .program during weeks 13-16 is a front-office "Internship" as the receptionist. The WSPPG "Receptionist's Handbook" states: "Handouts detailing the various receptionist procedures are provided to perform the various duties correctly and efficiently. The receptionist will also calculate and grade the students' performance in customer relations and office procedures." Because there was no receptionist at the WSPPG from January 20 through the end of the complainants' program on March 14, the WSPPG allegedly had students doing the work of a fulltime position, in violation of federal labor law. Further, complainants reported Ms. Lillge's grading of the weekly "Student Internship Evaluation" form was inconsistent and often biased. Delores Lillge, Director Wisconsin School of Professional Pet Grooming May 5, 2014 Page3 • Complainants reported the WSPPG' s curriculum was outdated and did not meet current industry standards and practices. Complainants also report much of the WSPPGs equipment was old, needed repair, and/or _was broken. • Complainants and.Ms. Wetzel reported Ms. Lillge's grading of the students' dog grooming was inconsistent, vindictive, ..biased, and unfair. One complainant provided the EAB a documented · example where Ms. Lillge gave a· student low grooming scores on a dog the student didn't even touch. • Complainants reported Ms. Lillge gave "zero" grades for all academic, internship, and grooming work·. a student missed with ·no option to make-up that work. ·This grading practice of using "zeros" as punishment' "the tyranny of zero" has a substantial negative effect on a student's Grade Point Average (GPA). · • Complainants reported Ms. Lillge did not allow students to retake a failed test or to make up work missed. Complainants also report the WSPPG did not place them on Academic Probation and with student and-instructor designed Academic Success Plan as EAB directed be the WSPPG practice for Satisfactory Academic Progress in the attached December 16, 2008's letter resulting from the Joy Anderson complaint. • Complainants and Ms. Wetzel reported Ms. Lillge's comments to students were regularly harsh, critical, demeaning, and belittling. One complainant who is disabled was called "a dummy" on a number of occasions in the grooming area.with other students present. Complainants and Ms. Wetzel reported it was not uncommon for Ms. Lillge's harsh, demeaning criticism and personal attacks to cause students and employees to cry. Complainants contend Ms. Lillge's abusive language and behavior towards students caused them significant stress, created a negative environment of fear, and impeded their ability to be successful at pet grooming. • One complainant was disabled f).nd attended the WSPPG through funding from the Department of Vocational Rehabilitation. This complainant reports the WSPPG provided no "reasonable accommodations" like more time to take tests, and extra attention and supervision for groo:J;Iling practice. The WSPPG provided this disabled student no · individual plan or academic accommodations which would have provided a pathway to a successful program completion. This complainant passed the final exam but was not given the opportunity to attempt the_practical grooming final of three dogs. This complain?nt also reported Ms. Lillge constantly asked. him to drop out of the program after completing 60% of the program so no refund was possible. ·· • One complainant came to the WSPPG after March 14 to malce-up hours by grooming dogs so the complainant could receive her "Certificate of Achievement". No dogs were available to groom so Ms. Lillge told her to leave. The complainant stated she would stay and complete hei· make-up · hours. Ms. Lillge's response was to call the 'police aricrhave ·ihe complainant removed from the '" '· ' school. Delores Lillge, Director . Wisconsin School of Professional Pet Grooming May 5, 2014 Page4 Summary All of the problems/issues at the WSPPG identified by the complainants and Ms. Wetzel have been identified previously by the EAB in the attached letters of November 3, 2008, and May 28, 2009. Past history has shown when the WSPPG does not have a full-time laboratory/grooming instructor and a fulltime receptionist, the WSPPG does not function well for students. Clearly, with you as the only WSPPG employee as administrator, instructor and receptionist, it appears the complainants simply did not get the education and training promised by the WSPPG. Moreover, the EAB is concerned the WSPPG failed to provide reasonable accommodations for the disabled student you chose to emoll and failed in your legal and moral responsibilities to that disabled student. For all the complainants you did not provide a supportive and encouraging pathway for their success as entry-level pet groomers. Your insistence of holding students to "Show Grooming" standards does not fit current industry standards and expectations for entry-level pet groomers. That three students in a class of four (one being disabled) failed to graduate raises serious concerns about yoirr program delivery, and teaching methods and style. Given the significant problems/issues the complainants identified, the Educational Approval Board hereby directs the Wisconsin School of Professional Pet Grooming, Inc. to address the issues identified by the complainants and to suggest how the complaints should be resolved, including refunds. Your written reply with substantiating documentation must be received by the EAB at the end of the business day on May 14,2014. Should you have any questions/concerns, contact me at 608.266.1354. c. Suzanne Walter, D Joseph Wilke Ruby Abendroth Deanna Tobak Attachments: 3 Student Complaints EAB Letters: November 3, 2008 and May 28,2009 Anderson Complaint with EAB Letter: December 16; 2008 PJS:bsj mm: or Wlsnonim Ewwmum AwmALEuLnn za1waerJLsu-nam AVENUE :"Fman Warsaw, WI 5311:; (908) "$1996 COMPLAINT FORM Ms. sxau "so (7) Full" 5A5 ml men. 021123 Under Win Admin. (.'nde EAB um (21, lhe Anpmval Baird (EAB) the authority in involving EA approved Ichuals. Every EAEipr-mvsd school has a in mm can-plums, Below a complaint is filed with me EAB, ma must anempt In rasnlv- ma runner wim school. If me mamr cannot b- mama, a may he "ltd the EAB. must be flied wilmn nub year, A mmnlaillt a mum must he filud wlmin om yfir 41f me mdom's m: recondad dam of Natl-:0: under Wisconsin's Open Rlcards Law, Wis. Slam. Ch. 15, aamplalnls will yon-Hilly be (Valiant: for "Wall I'lquesl {ram I member am" public lilo! 548 his MM 1 m5 mummymm: Are (cl-wen) ynu a mhann Ye: No YES. (he hllawlng infamlallon: usmmemmnumm. Frugal": 44-14 1345 If ND, malt-ms yDur mm ma schunl 12.9,, anhml molar, eta): 1. What in; ma warms ml led mums mmplainl'l Spear, pem'nvm 63'23' mama. paid' nalanm mm, mm scale lnvaiveu' mm any docurmrlilfilan mm will holy describe an pmhlam ml aumnum enzyme": and! as . - ugmd tnrollmem Went. school catalog. loan pip-1!, a: compandencn. 3311.152. (All,er Salaam>> Ema; Spun/9% auxst cut o-Ww datumwd-filaw 1WD.wa ngmmok 41> J. (Sci/lad comm"). COMPLAINT FORM Page 1 of2 EAE 3.01 (Rev. 02/12) 2. How have yo1,1 attem!Jted to resolve the complaint with tha school? 3. How would you like to see the complaint resolved? For example, seeking a refund of tuition, additional training, etc. ~ \~ Cc.SL-- V e-+e.voL-{IL C.. e.-- J.~- ll.M'L-:~.,~· ~j·,,:~:.':::¢~-~:fi. ~'·p~T~Q~:.;; : ·: ..-:.~;. _,:.~·;: : ·i~!\_:_;: : ;!: ,~.:~~~\.}::~~:. :;_:;::,:.ii·::f/:_:;,;;;{:::i.~::~;;_:\C ./:·/;~;-~~::::;:~\: I hereby c~ttify that I am thlil named complainant and that the above statlilm~nts are complaint and the information provided wi/1 be shared with tiJe :;;choal. true. I understand that this Date: Date Complaint Rc:oelveo: I:;AB Consultant Aesignad; Date Complaint Closed: Disposition: COMPLAINT FORM Page 2 of 2 Form EAB 3.01 (Rev. 02/12) -- ~~- --------~-~- -- -----------~------~ -------- --- Prepared by: Deanna Tobak, completed on 4-23-14 Answer to question #3. How would you like .to see the complaint resolved? For example, seeking a refund of tuition, additional training, etc. 1. Receive my "Certificate of Achievement", in which I met all the requirements listed in the school catalog and program guide. 2. The understanding that I owe the WSPPG no additional financial obligations. 3. Have my GPA reflect 3.72 in which it was at on my graduation day {3-14-14). 4. I request proofthat there fs no police record relating tQ me on the,date of 3~18-14. If there is1 I demand that it be rescinded along with proof of that. 5, There should never be a poor reference given regarding myself and others who don't deserve the same. If an individual contacts the WSPPG for a reference, I expect that the facts of grades and dates attended be given without any interjection of personal opinions, feelings1 thoughts, or any of the same negative information be relayed. I expect professionalism to the highest degree. 6. There should be no blacklisting or retalie..a-A. . . IL-.Il"-- In xour opinion, .ha5 the course curriculum sufficiently covered all topics ln order to prepare you to bec:;:ome a pro~esslonal pet groomer? please explam. (Please mclode:-any:subjeGts.,.you..t~et·may need to added/ c:hanged,· or deleted from present curriculum). · .·.:.: .. ': . , Did your instructol" dedic~te.en.o.\.lgh time. Md.assistance. to you to. hejp.you ·;s.utc.~.ed'Tn 'tt)e :P.:~~9r.ajrt'? .:·.pr~~S.~ .e:.<¢..1~k(. .......... Dq you feel ~s If your instructor was-readily ?'!Vailable for Q.$Ststance and to answ~r questtons7 Please eXplain. . .... Do you fee! c~nfident, that the ~our8e ~urriculum has preparsd you to enter the pet grooming industry? Please eXp(ain. ..... . ': OOMO ,: •,. : . ~~ : ·<: . : . . · ... •,' . ···: : .. ·........ ·.. · .. . . ~:·· .......- Pl~ase rate' your instrf.Jctor in the following areas; cl$ssroom Competency (Knowledge of theory) · ·A. ixceliim( ·.':c.:.A;;~~~·g,e·.~ B. Good' · D. ".·. · .. · · .... :.. · ·.. '.. :· ...... ··roar· .... ,. · ... :., · . :.: . .'.:;, ··.·= ,,;".::·.:.,., Do you feel th(;)t the learning ·envlronm.ent met the differer:1t needs of students ·and provided eru;::ou·rag~ment:Jor:-alJ:.:st):Jdents:-to· be· successful?. . ~abor.G~tQry Competency (knowledge of pet' grooming) B.. Agree · A. Excellent B, .~ood A. str~·n9fY'·~.d~ee · . L·D.ls~gre~· ·.. · ·' .·,. · D. Strongly Disagree C. Average D. Poor Professlon.al Appearance and Dress Please explain. A. Excellent · B. ~ood c, Average D. Poor Ccmmunlcatlon Skills (appropriate and A. Excel len( · B. Good Do you feel the rate of progress in the course was: A. Too Fast B. loo Slow· c, At -a Good Rote profession~!) c.' A~~ra~e ·· . . · ··· · · ·.....;· · . ·. . . D. Poor Motivation (challenged me to achieve ·exc~llence) A. Excellent B. Good c. Average D. PQQr FlnaiQuesliOnn;1ireF ~b091m~doclsludent~n~scholll Student Questionnaire I Final Survey Name: Deanna Tobak Date: 4-23-14 The Professional Pet Grooming Course 1. Has the training you received been what you expected? Please explain. No. I expected to be treated and trained like l:.l student by a~ of experienced professionals with a genuine concern forthe advancement of each student as stated in the student course book. Not bossed around, bullied, pressured, disrespected, and used as an employee by one , instructor. I expected a professional, positive, learning atmosphere with equality. l expected to receive the minimum quota of certain dogs to groom before given the hands- on test, which counted for 1/6~ of my grade. I expected to be graded in a timely manner in my presence. What did happen was we were told what was not done to the instructor's liking, but this information was not documented on our daily worksheets until a later time. This time frame could be anywhere from one hour later or even, in many cases~ not at all. We were given a period of time often minutes to look at.ourworksheets every ten days, which we were also supposed to receive a progress report, and recall what dogs were what. With the fact that our daily laboratory work also counts as 1/6th of our grade, 1find this, as well as many other situations, a very dishonest and crooked way of conducting a business. The course book also states that we would be given demonstrations. We had Q..[!g demonstration of how to bathe a dog. I did not expect the negative treatment, lack of staffing support, outdated, broken, and lack of equipment. I didn't expect the requisition of additional financing, lack of one-on-one instruction (lack of instruction all together), failure of adequate grooming clients, discouraging criticism, lies, unethical grading procedures, false accusations, ~istreatment of animals, defamation of character, and public ridicule. My class certainly did not receive the education that was explained in the student course book, pamphlet, or on-line. We did not receive what we signed up for and paid for. I believe that this is also true with other classes. 2. In your opinion. has the ~;;ourse curriculum sufficiently covered all topics in order to grepare you to become a professional pet groomer? Please exglain. {Please include any subjects you feel may need to be added, changed. or deleted from present curriculum). In my opinion, parts ofthe ct..~rriculum could have been beneficial, to some, had it been covered adequately in a classroom setting wlthout constant interruption due to lack of staff support. The topics of lecture subjects chosen were 1 in some cases important, but the implementations of actual instroction of lecture subjects were poor. I question the relevance and necessity of having to memorize the breed groups (according to AKC's guidelines) and coat types. One question I still have today is what breeds are double coated and not recommended to be clipped. lhe class involved read the weekly content, and then we have a test on it. There was a severe lack of understanding by all of the students on most of the subjects. One of my major complaints is the necessity of learning the school's booking requirement of clients in this setting and being subjected to being grading poorly because of this unused application in any other grooming industry. Not to mention, not being appropriately trained by an individual who understands the booking procedure. It was also unnecessary to b.e under constant ridicule for not understanding this procedure which was not even dearly written anywhere. It was comparable to reading a c::omputer manual and being able to program the computer in a short amount of time while five people are waiting to ose it. The receptionist working for the school when I started quit during my enrollment. A new receptionist started and quit the very same day for this reason. In order for our class to receive our classroom lectures without interruption we needed to have a receptionist; so I took it upon myself to contact a former student to inquire her if she'd be interested In helping us out. She agreed to kindly help with the understanding that another employee was to be hired and trained as soon as possible. The act of finding another employee was dismissed by the Director, so this previous student also walked away leaving us short staffed. This lack of filling the position was disrespectful to the students that were not receiving their paid for education. I also found the entire internship grading system extremely unfair with a set-up- to- fail atmosphere. The grading for this section is totally left to the opinion of the instructor. There is no clear right answer. If you answer one way, it could be answered the opposite way. It was extremely frustrating and a convenient way fur grading students poorly. The blggest waste of time was having students write out customer cards on tiny paper to file In personal file boxes only to be thrown out. This cut into grooming laboratory time, which was already very limited. 3. Do yoo feel confident. that the course curriculum has prepared you to enter the 11et grooming industry? Please explain. No. I feel that I have no idea what the typical pet owners/costomers want or expect. The main focus ofthe program was ushow Grooming" procedures. This was also misleading due to the fact that the school's name is "Wisconsin School of Professional Pet Grooming". In the class I attended, the students were under the impression that we were going to bE! taught the common practices of pet grooming. None of us had intentions of pursuing a career in the art of "Show Grooming". I believe that to be true of everyone else attending this school. Professional "Show Groomers" tend to become "M~ster's", or "Expert's" in grooming one specific breed of dog for the sole purpose of competing in Conformation Shows; and typically work for very few or one client for whom they are employed. Again, we were graded according to "Show Grooming'' standards, and never were instructed on what the pet owners would be happy with. We were never allowed to receive feedback from the customers. It was top secret. Now we are all left wondering If we meet customer's expectations. 4. Do you feel that the learning environment met the different needs of students and provided encouragement for all students to be successful? A. Strongly agree, 13. Agree. C. Disagree, and D. Strongly Disagree. Please explain. p, Strongly Disagree. We had a physically challenged student in our class, as well as the d:.~ss following ours. In both cases, there was a lack of special consideration in making sure all of their needs were met. In all of the cases, with of all the students, there was a total lack of instruction. We were assigned a dog, had to flip open the manual that the Director wrote, and follow the instructions with no supervision or instruction. If we failed to follow, miss, or not understand one of the instructions; we were tormented and criticized in front of everyone for not being able to read. There was never any type of encouragement given to any student while I attended the class. It was all fault finding. Most times students were so cut down that they would ''forget it, it don't even cry, or develop an attitude of pay to try". I personally was treated slightly better in some aspects. The Director did help me lift some dogs for a period of two days when I had some back issues. I also did receive some encouragement from the Director when she asked me to work for her as an instructor. Then she told me that I was an·exceptional student and showed concern for the other students helping them to succeed. I expressed my concerns that I would not be good enough because my grades state differently. She informed me that she grades tough to show room for improvement. I explained that if a student is performing well, their grades should reflect that. The fact is that their grades determine whether they graduate. 5. Do you feel the rate of progress in the course was: A. Too Fast. B. Too Slow. and c. at a Good ~ B. Too Slow. It did not help at all that many days we did not have dogs to groom or we had to share dogs. This really made the course drag out forever and we did not receive the training that we paid for, It was really frustrating for us to commute to school and attempt to find ways to occupy ourselves for 8 Yz hours a day. In my opinion, there is no reason for the course to be so long and dragged out. I also find it extremely unfair that the students are expected to be on time and punch a time card and be held financially responsible for being tardy or absent, considering the numerous times that the instructor was tardy and absent. The instructor's tardiness cut into our classroom time that we were paying for. 1also am being held financially responsible fur her absences. She closed the school for four days (which I paid for), and created a lack 32 hours that I need to complete her request for 600 hours needed for graduation. 6. lnstructor(s) Primary Instructor: Delores Lillge Do you feel the instructor expressed a genuine interest in helping you to reach your professional goal? Please explain. No. I feel that she only did what she absolutely needed to do to make it "look goodu. I am convinced that her only intention was to collect the money. She showed no genuine concern for anyone or their goals. This is especially true when the refund policy expires. At that point in tfme; the bullying behavior from her really ramps up to full force. The students are in a position of making it this far with no point of return. Dropping the class at this time would leave a person in an all~for-nothing position. 7. Did your instructor dedicate enough tim!:! and assistance to you to help you succeed in the program? Please explain. My instructor didn't dedicate any time to any of the students and certainly didn't assist us with anything unless we asked. Then it was like we were a major inconvenience to her. It was horrifying to ask her a question knowing that the response was going to be anything but kind. 8. Do you feel as ifvour .instructor was readily available for assistance and to answer questions? Please explain. My instructor was very seldom around. The very few times she was around, she wasn't paying any attention to what any oftha students were doing. lnsteadr she was grooming a dog, doing paperwork, or just walking through to use the restroom. Whenever we needed her1 w~ needed to look for her. There were several instances that were rather crucial when she wasn't on the floor. Once a dog was cut pretty badl the other, a dog passed out in the tub. Near the end of the course, I was requesting some information on my grades thus far and some clarity on the grading procedures. She was always too busy to find the tlme to discuss actual school related questions. One time she actually angrily sent me away when she was having a discussion with a student about the weather in Florida. l feel that discussing school issues would trump the weather in Florida, but once again, we were denied dear answers. 9. Please rate your instructor in the following areas: A. Excellent. B. Good. C. Average, and D. Poor. Classroom Competency: 0. Poor. ------ ---- ---~-~~- ~------- ------ It didn't seem that she was all that educated in the areas of the subjectst merely reading them off of paper. Laboratory Competency: c. Average to D. Poot. She admitted herself that she Is only an average groomer. I also gave here poor rating due to lack of knowledge used in the industry currently by instructional groomers. I wonder when she last attended a seminar, trade show, or read a book, or watched a video. I actually received a bad grade for following a procedure used in the industry and published by a well-known groomer in a nationally published book. Professional Appearance and Dress: C. Average Appearance was as one would expect in the industry. Would have given good rating, except often times she would greet customers without her smock on but, would chew us out for doing the same. Communication Skills: D. Poor For someone representing a school atmosphere, there was a total lack of judgment and professionalism when choosing how to address and help students learn. She was very negative and demeaning with everyone she came into contact with, including the clients. She has an attitude of "the world owes her". All of the students would agree that she is crude, nasty, unhelpful, demeaning, and greedy. Her choice of words and implementation is over the top, and not at all what you would e:xpect of someone in the position of teaching students. Motivation: D. Poor She did challenge me in the aspect of trying to respect her. It is very difficult to respect someone that has no respect for anyone or any animal. It is clearly visible that she doesn't even like dogs, and the dogs don't like her. As far as motivating the students to become all that they can be, she tries to use fear to control. if we knew that we would have to teach ourselves, we would have gone about other means of education. All she did was discourage people by finding fault in everything they did. I can only imagine how exhausting it is to chase people around to criticize their every move. There was nothing about this experience that was enjoyable. This Is supposed to be positive time in people's lives to learn a new skill. ---------- -- ----------------------- The Student lnternshlp 10. Do you feel that the Internship Program is a necessary part of the course curriculum, and helped you in preparing for a professional career? Please explain. Absolutely Not!!! Discussion about how to ask for what customers want or expect of your grooming setvices, yes. As far as scheduling her appointments the ridiculous way she does, soliciting/ harassing customers, marlaging her filing system, cleaning her reception area, preparing sympathy cards, decorating her shop, sharpening her pencils, cutting paper, making reminder calls, answering her phone calls, collecting her money and balancing her cash drawer, cleaning cages, cleaning pet debris outside, making making copies, pulling next day's client cards and up worksheets, vacuuming, mopping, dusting, checking in and out pets; Absolutely Not! 1did not fill out an application to be her employee/ receptlonlst. I feel strongly, that it is just another way to use us as her employees. 11. Do you feel there were aspects gertalning to customer relations that would have been an additional benefit to you if taught during the Internship Program? Please explain. If anything, we should have been taught more about products currently available on the market today. This would allow us to be able to converse with clients about problems they are experiencing with their pets. The Facilities 12. Do you feel that the facility has provided a comfortable and professional environment for your educ~;~tion? Please comment. The facility was very small and crowded. There was not enough room to even place our books on the table for classroom lecture. The video machine did not work most of the time. The videos were from the 1970's and no longer represent the industry today. Several times we ran out of mixed shampoo for the baths, paper towels, and cotton balls. There was no means to get a large dog into the tub except to use two or more people. Same for on the force air dry table. The holding cages were aged1 broken in places1 or broke. It was difficult to vacuum up pet hair when the vacuum would blow hair from hiding places into the area you just did. There was no back up equipment. We had one force air dryer burn up and then we had to share just one instead of having two. This created even more issues than there already were with time constraints. We were down to one dryer for two weeks. At least two of the grooming tables need to be repaired. For the first eight weeks of school, l had a table that wobbled uncontrollably, and Joe had one that wouldn't lock into position. The two tables in the dryer rooms are also not locking, and the one in the large bathing room will not lower. These issues were all addressed to Delores and nothing was done, we were treated like complainers. Additional Comments 13. At the end of the course, do you feel confident grooming dogs of each breed t;ype with little or no supervision? Please explain. No, 1don't feel that we were given enough of a variety. i never had a Setter to groom. I would have liked to have more ofthe following breeds also; Bichons, Schnauzers, otherTerr.iers, Spaniels, Poodles. t would have also liked to have a few more dogs getting different head styles done to them. Most were "Even All over" head styles. Can I groom these dogs? Yes, with instructions in front of me. Once again back to training myself. 14. Did the educational program provide you with all the necessary tools to become a professional f!et groomer? Please explain. No, 1didn't e:xpect it to. In my opinion, a professional at anything comes with experience. I feel that it takes years in the business to become a professional. I thought that I was go[ng to be taught by professionals. I feel that it has been a long time that Delores Lillge has been removed from the industry without updating her knowledge, and feel that individuals attending this course are paying for something that they are not receiving. 15. What part of your education at WSPPG was the most challenging? Remaining professional while there, it is hard to be taken advantage of and not having the means to do anything about it. It Is exhausting to be around such negativity. It is unethical to grade students poorly on dogs that they never even touched. It is unethical to grade students poorly for following the instructions that she wrote. At a point half-way through the course, the instructor told us that we do not have to pre-groom some dogs, but nowhere Is it dearly stated which dogs this pertains to. My question is does it really matter? It makes no difference if you pre-groom a dog or not; all of the steps will be completed in the end. It does not affect the final outcome. It is really challenging not being able to tell someone that you're on to them. It's hard when you don't have the authority to tell them what you really think. It's hard to hide your feelings when you know that someone is a fake, a fraud, and a thief. I believe people should be held accountable for their actions; especially when they take advantage of others. This setting of a so"called school is very financially rewarding for the Director, considering each student is paying a tuition cast of$80.00 per day; along with grooming services they perform equaling on average $80.00 per day. That is a $160.00 profit per student per day. Not to mention, the many tips that the customers give with the impression that this money is given to the students. This also is not true; lt again is added to the profit of the school's Director. This practice, in my opinion, is theft. It is also hard to watch someone mistreating an animal and not being able to stop it. 16. bayou feel confident that your education at WSPPG will help you have a successful career as a professionalQet groomer? Please explain. ~---- ··--- ---- I feel that the money I wasted on this scam would have better spent in advertising, acquiring up to date publications (books, tapes, videos, etc ... ), purchasing equipment, supplies, and attendance at seminars/trade shows. After all, we all taught ourselves anyway. I expected to get some valuable lnformatkm and Instruction out of this course. This education only left me searching elsewhere for answers. 17. Did the educational program meet you expectations? Not In even the slightest. I expected to be treated in a professional manner. I expected the animals to be treated in a professional manner. I expected to be trained by professionals. I was misled, lied to, and lied about. When I showed up for class on a make~up day, I was told to leave because I was not needed there anymore that week. J was told by Delores that only one student could do makeft up days at a time. I told her that is a lie, beceuse Caitlin and Candace made up days together, along with Samantha and Kirsten. I explained that I need to be there to fulfill the requirements of 600 hours of the course and that I had an obligation to fulfill. I was later called out of the video room by Delores to be escorted out of the building by two law enforcement officers. I was given a letter stating that J was argumentative and disruptive and that it would not be tolerated. That is a lie!!! She didn't want me there because she didn't have enough dogs scheduled that week to maxlmlze her profit1 and only needed one student to perform the receptionist duties. J was not allowed back until Stephanie was done with her four make-up days. Please take into account that Stephanie couldn't be there on Monday, so I was able to come to school that day (one day ofthe week). One of my largest pet peeves is being lied about. I find this over- the- top unprofessional. Due to the fact that Delores fails to hire a receptionist, it is rather convenient to use the students as employees. I was informed that the receptionist position pays $12.oo per hour. In order to continue my schooling, I had to agree with Delores to do everything that she tells me to do. I told her that I was not comfortable grading other student's papers and I don't feel that I should be forced to do that anymore. I also told her that it was putting me in a position that 1 wasn't comfortable with, and the other students didn't appreciate lt. Her response was; "tough; that's too bad; no one complained to me". On my make- up days, I was told to do receptionist duties, be an instructor, and groom dogs. I wonder what someone in the workforce would have been compensated for this work. I was treated with the up-most disrespect. I am certain that Delores is treating me especially harsh since I turned down her offer to be her instructor (employee) prior to my finishing this course and receiving my certificate. Now I am being blackmailed. I cannot receive my "Certificate of Achievement" until! fill out thls survey (which is not mandatory; or a requirement of the course). I was informed by Delores that my certificate was not even done on my last day of cless, but all other students have received their certificates · on the last day of class before walking out of the door. I refused to fill out the survey if I could not be honest, and felt that my honesty would be used against me in acquiring my certificate. Past practice of this Director, regarding her retaliation would leave me to believe nothing any different. I was taught that If you have nothing good to say, say nothing at all. I also am being forced to send a cashier's check for the amount of $320.00. which I am in total disagreement that I owe. All of this to receive what I already paid for and was promised contractually. 18. Were you satisfied with the school? I could not get out of there, and away from her, fast enough l I hate the 'filet that it is being allowed of a school to take advantage of so many. ihis practice, in my opinion, needs to stop immediately, This school is not delivering the materials that it is claiming. It is seriously a fraud. The managing of this school is not being held accountable for its actions. It seems that no one can make a stand to get this under control. This school is not being governed to ensure that students are receiving what they are promised and pay for. 19. What is your overall opinion of ynur education at WSPPG? My honest overall opinion ofthe education that I received at WSPPG is that I never in my llfe wasted so much time and money. I feel that I didn't learn anything that I already didn't know. I just was able to practice running a clipper over the fur of an animal. I am glad that 1went through this experience; because I will make it very well known to do your research before getting scammed. I w()uld strongly encourage anyone to seek th~ir education elsewhere. I truly wish that I knew then what I know now. When it is in writing what you can expect from this school for the amount of money you have to pay, I consider that to be a legal and binding contract. For the same reason as if a student fails to pay. There are so many complaints; there is just not enough time to explain each one in detail. 20. Wo11ld you recommend WSPPG to other people interested in becoming a professional pet groomer? Please explain. Not even with a gun held to my head. The only way ever possible would be if Delores Ullge had no affiliation with the school in no means. The idea of the school itself is not a bad idea, if implemented properly and not for such a maximum profit. The subjects chosen to cover I believe could be beneficial for students who have no knowledge of animals; for most students entering this profession, It Is common knowledge. The reason for poor test scores was directly due to the fact of the memorization of the breed groups and coat types. This distracted students from studying the important materials outlined in the student course book, pamphlet, and on~ line. The whole school and experience that students endure !s completely and utterly destroyed due to one person. Delores Lillge. Thank you for the opportunity to be honest. Deanna iobak 4/23/2014 Jle.tLA.~~ --tM . Jv &J:_ STATE OF WISCONSIN inoculqmjeam 201 W551 wish Avenue}