No College Degree for Cert Generals or Residential Appraisers

[gregb]

Some boast about academic qualifications-

Bert Craytor, Data Mining & Statistical Software Engineer - Python, R, C/C#/C++, ...

Residual Constraint Approach (RCA)

This paper describes the new Residual Constraint Approach (RCA), used to achieve higher accuracy appraisals of residential property through the use of R/earth (MARS) and value contribution related constraints. Additions for accuracy

doi.org

 

[George Hatch]

The problem with QE is you can’t make QE too difficult or in depth and then expect people with a limited academic résumé and of below average intelligence to go in and master the material. This stuff is all related. Either you want high-quality individuals or you don’t. If you don’t, you can’t make QE be too complex.

And this isn’t a knock on any group of people. It just is what it is.

You're still talking about a problem at the QE, experience requirements and testing. Specifically the content, saying it's too lenient or superficial in depth.

I'll take it a step further and point out that MOST of the technical questions involve some aspect of the fundamentals. They were exposed to those fundamentals and the demonstrated that exposure in the testing for the course and the license, but then went on to not exercise those skills in their day to day.

How about the one where a noob walks into a sweatshop and gets told to forget everything in their course, THIS is how we do it IRL? I got told that when I started and I ended up eventually having to overcome some bad habits later on. And I know I'm not the only one.

When we review an appraisal and see errors of fact about the subject attributes or about the comparability of the comps then how do we go about attributing that to lack of education or QE instead of simple laziness and expediency?

 

[J Grant]

Qualifying ed for sure. It's a shame so many on this very forum do not appear to know or understand the basics and certainly CE is too concerned with DEI to concentrating upon reinforcing basic techniques and methods. Seriously, I don't know many residential appraises who know the basics of income techniques for all but the simplest GRM or rent survey.

Many do master the material when they are mentored properly, and I know my learning curve was difficult until I was actually doing appraising and able to apply those techniques side by side with learning. That's why my library of textbooks and papers was extensive. I frequently went to the books to verify and support my techniques.

People who are either unable to or unwilling to learn how to conceptualize and reason will not benefit more from QE.

That is why most professions, and higher/officer ranks in the military and law enforcement, want a college degree and academic credits in the humanities ( which teach reasoning and ethics in the broad sense ). These professions and higher responsibilities within rank fields do NOT simply want more technical or skill teaching. Advanced skills and technical knowledge are valuable, of course, but without being able to apply them, they can be worthless or even dangerous in the wrong hands.

An education barrier to entry at least levels the field with regard to who the people entering are, if they have the discipline and focus to pass academic courses. Which does not mean there are not plenty of smart people who do not get a degree, but getting a degree at least shows a level of focus and determination to stick it out for four years and pass exams.

The military has a minimum IQ/aptitude test to enter ( they do not call it that, it is called the ASVAB). I took it last year online for fun - I got a 90%. It is a form of screening to keep the morons out. Appraisal has no such exam and it badly needs it.

 

[George Hatch]

The military (in particular) tests for trainability. They don't want to spend resources trying to train someone who can't learn the material. They do it to save money.

Most occupations don't screen for trainability. An applicant either passes or fails the training, usually at their own expense. All the waste is on the individual, not the school. Lots of people attend and graduate from law school without ever passing the bar, even after multiple attempts.

Speaking of the pass rates for the licensing exam, we have a matched pair that we can compare for the before/after of requiring a 4yr degree.

The results from 1999-2001. Prior to requiring any college credits or degree. Cumulative pass for the SL/CR was ~75% when including the retests.


The latest results for the 2024 testing. We can speculate that the tests are harder now than they were before, but it's apparent that the have-college applicants aren't doing significantly better than the mix of haves/have-nots from 20 years ago.

Kindly note the distinction between anecdotes vs quantifiable stats, even if those stats are just limited to test results where the applicant is graded on QE content they already passed.

 

[J Grant]

The military (in particular) tests for trainability. They don't want to spend resources trying to train someone who can't learn the material. They do it to save money.

Most occupations don't screen for trainability. An applicant either passes or fails the training, usually at their own expense. All the waste is on the individual, not the school. Lots of people attend and graduate from law school without ever passing the bar, even after multiple attempts.

Speaking of the pass rates for the licensing exam, we have a matched pair that we can compare for the before/after of requiring a 4yr degree.

The results from 1999-2001. Prior to requiring any college credits or degree. Cumulative pass for the SL/CR was ~75% when including the retests.
View attachment 106741

The latest results for the 2024 testing. We can speculate that the tests are harder now than they were before, but it's apparent that the have-college applicants aren't doing significantly better than the mix of haves/have-nots from 20 years ago.


View attachment 106742

The ASVB is ALSO a screening test because if a person who is of low level of intelligence will not pass.

In addition, training for a skill set within the military, or appraisal, is not enough for higher-level responsibility. That is why the military and law enforcement want college in addition to officer training material for officer-level and higher ranks. Appraisal and, sad to say, residential appraisal has a high level of responsibility considering a busy appraiser values hundreds of millions of dollars of property a year, and the American economy is tied to the housing market. But the profiteers want the lower-level folks in the profession because they are more easily manipulated and will bid lower to get work.

College would screen some folks out who simply do not belong in the appraisal. The clueless posts here indicate that. The horrendous reports I have seen indicate it.

 

[TerryRohrer]

The military (in particular) tests for trainability. They don't want to spend resources trying to train someone who can't learn the material. They do it to save money.

Most occupations don't screen for trainability. An applicant either passes or fails the training, usually at their own expense. All the waste is on the individual, not the school. Lots of people attend and graduate from law school without ever passing the bar, even after multiple attempts.

Speaking of the pass rates for the licensing exam, we have a matched pair that we can compare for the before/after of requiring a 4yr degree.

The results from 1999-2001. Prior to requiring any college credits or degree. Cumulative pass for the SL/CR was ~75% when including the retests.
View attachment 106741

The latest results for the 2024 testing. We can speculate that the tests are harder now than they were before, but it's apparent that the have-college applicants aren't doing significantly better than the mix of haves/have-nots from 20 years ago.

Kindly note the distinction between anecdotes vs quantifiable stats, even if those stats are just limited to test results where the applicant is graded on QE content they already passed.


View attachment 106742

That is more an illustration of the farcical validity of matched-pair analysis than of the effectiveness of college education on appraisal qualifications (even with a significant, albeit unknown, difference identified).

 

[George Hatch]

College would screen some folks out who simply do not belong in the appraisal. The clueless posts here indicate that. The horrendous reports I have seen indicate it.

1. Having watched you over the years I would venture to attribute virtually all of your higher appraisal-related functioning being the result of your exposure to the discussions on this forum. Same with most of us to one degree or another. But what it does speak to is the effect of repeated exposure and repeated consideration of these topics as opposed to the idea that your education is what enabled you to reach deeper in your reasoning.

2. I invite you to consider the difference between genuinely never learning what to do vs previously learned but never practiced or refined.

 

[George Hatch]

That is more an illustration of the farcical validity of matched-pair analysis than of the effectiveness of college education on appraisal qualifications (even with a significant, albeit unknown, difference identified).

The variable is whether or not the test is more difficult to pass now than is was then. In any case, the have-college applicants are still not hitting the 100% pass so that speaks to the point that the QE and testing are so superficial that stupid/slow people are getting in. And that's the reason bad appraisals are bad.

We have all seen AI-designated appraisers put out bad appraisal reports. Not unreasonable in the conclusions by a little, but by a lot. (I'm not singling them out, I'm just referring to the level of QE and experience and academic competency those designations demonstrate).

They're not common on the whole , but it does happen from time to time. I don't know about you but I never attribute the failure of those appraisals to a lack of appraiser competency or training or education. I attribute it to people not working to their demonstrated competency, for whatever reason.

 

[Dublin ohio]

Seriously, I don't know many residential appraises who know the basics of income techniques for all but the simplest GRM or rent survey.

True, but being bored to tears with typical residential QE. I took some commercial classes on income. Income cap, dcf. Have actually used them for additional support on a couple of weird 4 family appraisals. Had one "reviewer" tell me that I couldn't use a cap rate for a 4 family property because it was a residential appraisal When I asked him why, the silence was deafening.

 

[J Grant]

1. Having watched you over the years I would venture to attribute virtually all of your higher appraisal-related functioning being the result of your exposure to the discussions on this forum. Same with most of us to one degree or another. But what it does speak to is the effect of repeated exposure and repeated consideration of these topics as opposed to the idea that your education is what enabled you to reach deeper in your reasoning.

2. I invite you to consider the difference between genuinely never learning what to do vs previously learned but never practiced.

Sorry, but as much as exposure on this board has helped me, I had a certain grasp of the fundamentals from day one, and there are people on this board who ask the same clueless questions over the years and have not seemed to learn anyting. I can at least admit to my mistakes here or elsewhere- we all strive to learn continually, but certain fundamentals or applying them seem beyond the reach os some who manage to memorize enough rote material to pass a state license test.]