Did they betray us? The Appraisal Foundation.

[NC Appraising]

BREAKING: AQB Third Exposure Draft Released

 

[Timothy Hogan]

In response did the betray us, the answer is not black & white, according to the data:
The reasons for the change, in summary. The degree requirement was adopted in 2004 and took effect in 2008, meant to bring analytical skill, writing skill, and general education into the profession. Testing showed it wasn't accomplishing that: the National Job Analysis surveyed roughly 3,600 appraisers and found that holding a degree did not predict better performance — appraisal-specific education, USPAP-compliant report writing ability, and exam results did. An independent research firm also organized 437 distinct arguments from 254 concept paper comments and concluded no compelling evidence connects college degrees to appraisal quality or public trust. The comment record also showed the requirement excluded capable people — experienced appraisers barred by a rule that postdated their entry, and qualified candidates without access to higher education.


What the AQB heard this round, and its response:

• "A degree supports professional standing." The AQB's reply: standing is a real interest but isn't what the Criteria are for — the Criteria set a floor tied to the work itself; standing is built above that floor by employers, clients, and professional designations, none of which this change restricts.
• "Does this lower the standard?" No — every applicant still completes all required education, passes the national exam, and demonstrates the required experience. Only the route changes, not the standard.
• "Are writing/analytical skills lost?" No — they're now taught directly rather than assumed. Report writing has dedicated required courses, the new analytics course covers the quantitative content, and the exam tests the results. The AQB notes the old rule let any degree, unrelated to real estate, satisfy the requirement without teaching any of the targeted skills.
• "Keep the degree just for Certified General?" Considered and rejected — the research findings held across both certified classifications, and Certified General's curriculum/exam are already the most demanding in the Criteria.
• "What about people who already met the degree requirement?" Nothing is taken from them — existing credentials stand, and a related degree still earns QE credit.

The AQB states this round produced no new evidence on the question, so it kept the proposal as-is.

 

[Bob Ipock]

Of course they did along with NCPAC., the NCAB and who knows how many others.

 

[timd354]

In response did the betray us, the answer is not black & white, according to the data:
The reasons for the change, in summary. The degree requirement was adopted in 2004 and took effect in 2008, meant to bring analytical skill, writing skill, and general education into the profession. Testing showed it wasn't accomplishing that: the National Job Analysis surveyed roughly 3,600 appraisers and found that holding a degree did not predict better performance — appraisal-specific education, USPAP-compliant report writing ability, and exam results did. An independent research firm also organized 437 distinct arguments from 254 concept paper comments and concluded no compelling evidence connects college degrees to appraisal quality or public trust. The comment record also showed the requirement excluded capable people — experienced appraisers barred by a rule that postdated their entry, and qualified candidates without access to higher education.


What the AQB heard this round, and its response:

• "A degree supports professional standing." The AQB's reply: standing is a real interest but isn't what the Criteria are for — the Criteria set a floor tied to the work itself; standing is built above that floor by employers, clients, and professional designations, none of which this change restricts.
• "Does this lower the standard?" No — every applicant still completes all required education, passes the national exam, and demonstrates the required experience. Only the route changes, not the standard.
• "Are writing/analytical skills lost?" No — they're now taught directly rather than assumed. Report writing has dedicated required courses, the new analytics course covers the quantitative content, and the exam tests the results. The AQB notes the old rule let any degree, unrelated to real estate, satisfy the requirement without teaching any of the targeted skills.
• "Keep the degree just for Certified General?" Considered and rejected — the research findings held across both certified classifications, and Certified General's curriculum/exam are already the most demanding in the Criteria.
• "What about people who already met the degree requirement?" Nothing is taken from them — existing credentials stand, and a related degree still earns QE credit.

The AQB states this round produced no new evidence on the question, so it kept the proposal as-is.

The AQB is not wrong about a general college degree having nothing to do with appraiser competence, especially if the degree is in some totally unrelated field such as sociology or art history, etc.

The only way to justify a college degree requirement to become a real estate appraiser would be to require a college degree in a field that is actually relevant to the profession such as math, statistics, architecture, engineering, accounting, finance, economics, data science, etc. Otherwise, a college degree requirement exists as just another artificial barrier designed to limit competition.

 

[gregb]

Tim, what is your opinion on a law degree’s relevance to appraisal?

 

[timd354]

Tim, what is your opinion on a law degree’s relevance to appraisal?

Since the appraisal of the market value of real estate involves specifically valuing the specific legal rights, interests and benefits inherent in the ownership of real estate, a law degree is obviously relevant to the profession of real estate appraisal.

 

[djd09]

why stop at college degree...no h.s. diploma is needed either...so not to limit competition...15th street is corrupt USPAP is useless

 

[djd09]

the problem is the shotgun marriage between the appraiser and the unethical stakeholders who they call partners....and low balling fees...they need some supply and demand lessons

 

[Airstream]

The number one reason for new people not entering the profession are the low fees by AMCs. I remember a person wanting me to train them and I simply said I don’t have enough work and second the fees aren’t high enough to split. He had a college degree.

 

[Zoe]

The number one reason for new people not entering the profession are the low fees by AMCs. I remember a person wanting me to train them and I simply said I don’t have enough work and second the fees aren’t high enough to split. He had a college degree.

At least a few in high places are looking at commingling of fees and have voiced they are not supporting commingling of fees any longer. Commingling of fees does nothing to promote the profession. It promotes fastest and cheapest. Competence is irrelative.

It is basically lying to the borrower, which is what truth in lending disclosures was supposed to prevent.