my job, in a sense, is my case study.
I am given 10 weeks to train 4 dogs (same age, breed, similar upbringing) the same behaviors / responses, including obedience and guidework. the dogs are worked (trained) 2x daily 5 days a week and they are tested at week 3 and week 8, then ultimately in class when they're paired with a visually impaired client & once that client returns to their home environment.
primary method of training is operant conditioning / clicker, but as each dog is different - their temperament and learning curve dictates your specific approach. the basic functions of a guide dog is to travel in a relatively straight line from point A to point B while avoiding obstacles and stopping at changes in elevation. in addition to these basic functions there are advanced lessons such as miscellaneous targeting (doors, chairs, hand rails, push buttons), traffic responses, sidewalkless techniques, etc.
the lessons are spread out as to not overwhelm the dogs, cause boredom, or progress too quickly - with the idea of retaining the information, reliability, generalization, and confidence. traffic training for instance is taught in stages, 3 sessions total, at week 4, 5 and 8.
each dog thinks and works a little differently - a couple samples of how each of my current 4 approach the same situation (curbs for example as the concept is pretty simple)
P - i get rewarded at curbs, let me find as many as possible
H - i stop at curbs otherwise Fodder trips and stumbles and that startles me
V - i stop at curbs because Fodder asked me to
also V - I'm still going straight, check! i moved to the left of that person, check! i didn't get distracted by that dog, check! i moved to the right of that dumpster, check! yay, the curb! finally the curb!
N - i stop at curbs because when i don't Fodder gives me a collar correction
because of these differences - i see it all over their learning. i did the same routes initially, patterning and clicking / rewarding each dog at the same points..... P was the most straight forward to train, she got it, there was an investment, some self motivation (ie fewer sessions). H received the same lessons, however the concept didn't sink in until i provided some consequences (same # of sessions, more repetition within the session). V had to develop a relationship, some trust, rapport, etc - for 3 weeks he had good routes then awful routes then good routes then awful routes then excellent routes and on and on. occasionally I'd skip a lesson with him as he has lower confidence, is slower to process but has the most willing nature (supports less is more theory) N needed a more traditional approach - corrections were introduced sooner - giving him the answer was not enough motivation for it to carry over and override his other interest and his natural drive to "just go" w/o thinking much. his sessions were the same but taught in a different manner.
in the end, as of yesterday, they all proved to have accurate and reliable curbwork as they passed their final guidework testing with a clumbsy blindfolded Fodder
so, not sure if that interests you at all... but it's what I've got.