Hepe wrote:it's very important to ask what people expect out of the course/training if you want to give them their moneys worth
Yes. The ability to adjust to different learner needs/wants. The ability to adjust to different human learning styles (e.g. some people can take more or less "directness"). The ability to deliver an empirical approach based on just do it A, then B then C to one, or explain the underlying theory to another student. The insight of when to push and "lean on" the learner, and when to comfort and reassure. The ability to vary the approach that works for the teacher...and suggest different approaches likely to work for the different trainer personality/dog combos.
I guess what I'm getting at is, being personally highly expert in a field is not necessarily (and very often not) the same as being an effective teacher of the subject. I have met some international experts in various fields of medicine who could not teach to save their lives. That's not to say that one shouldn't look for some evidence that the trainer can "do it" as well as "teach it", but the "personally do it" / "teach others to do it" correlation is not as strong as believed.
Another other slant on this is what you mean by "pro" ? Anyone who makes a living by doing it is a "pro". In itself, that implies no particular qualification or standard of excellence. Doing it for the money can require compromises on standards and personal integrity. I've done work on "hobbies" which when successful morphed into "pro" paid work, and stuff I loved became stuff I hated.
Sorry, on re-reading this sounds like I'm splitting hairs. But be clear in your head whether (A) you love training gundogs yourself and want a job that will give space for that to happen, or (B) love teaching people on a subject you are passionate about. There are plenty of times that doing a not particularly beloved and unrelated "earner" job, gives money and life space for a passion.