How bad is the supervisor/trainee model #2?

[Wendy]

This is the second in a series of three polls. Please vote in all three.

All three are targeted at current trainees and people who have been supervised within the past 5+/- years. I am trying to get a fairly current idea of the Supervisor/trainee model and it's effectiveness (or lack). Please refrain from voting if you don't fit that description - but feel free to comment.

 

[Terrel L. Shields]

Obviously, your polls are flawed. There is a secret among the oldest appraisers. Many never had any significant supervision and are self-taught. If you went thru the lot I suspect you would find that the quality of those appraisers is pretty much the same as other, more supervised appraisers.

I had several supervisors - one in OK, 3 in AR. Some of those signed only a few reports. None signed years and years of EVERYTHING I did. In other words, in those early years, just prior to licensing and during the initial stages of licensing, I signed most work by myself. I would aver that those reports, on average, were as good as the reports that were under supervision and without a doubt better than some of the more fraudulent operators who were already "in the biz". One fellow in particular who recently surrendered his license apparently, was well known to hire women, train them minimally, then the only time he accompanied them on an inspection was when he wanted to hit on them. He went thru a lot of trainees. Every trainee that I knew who started with him told me that he created many of his comps. He was bumped from FHA years ago, but reportedly got back on but didn't create any more comps for FHA...but one of our forum members suggested that he still did that as recently as a year or two ago; and as best i can tell has never faced too serious sanction although I ran into him once when he said he'd quit appraising for a while (apparently at the request of the board however.)

 

[hastalavista]

Obviously, your polls are flawed. There is a secret among the oldest appraisers. Many never had any significant supervision and are self-taught.

Not that I'm among the oldest appraisers (not by a long shot) but don't you run the risk of loosing your decoder ring by revealing alleged truths?

 

[Terrel L. Shields]

Among appraisers I know who were in business prior to 1991, most were part time. They worked with other people but most were RE brokers and had done a lot of appraising as part of their brokerage. I know only a few who did not sell or broker real estate prior to 1991 even though some by that time were 100% appraising. Again, most have said that they worked with other appraisers often at the request of a client and most only had a part-time relationship at best.

I think this notion that a trainee should be slave to a "Mentor" for some extended period and be bound to them and them alone is a nonsensical method of "training" anyone. In this case, "training" means setting them on the railroad track. You only have one path, one fate and if you didn't pick the "right" mentor, you are screwed. Either you end up with the reputation of the mentor (bad) or worse, you end up under the scrutiny of the state without a clue why. If you use more than one you will see the variety of appraisers, styles, and, yes, ethics thereof.

 

[Greg Bell]

I took one of the first tests of 50 questions in 1992 or 1993.I was a RE Broker and did appraisals part time.No mentors no nothing.Took plenty of classes and learned by the seat of my pants , man , that's appraising.Appraising has completely changed as time rolls on and learning as you go is the best training for todays goofy stips.Yes I am still JUST licensed , however , I have many years and oodles of classes to take the certified test.eeeeek , another test at my age I may blow a vien.....Licensed appraisers unite..