Just curious about trainees

[Cowboy Steve]

George - Excellent points, I couldn't agree more. Reducing the number of trainees under one's supervision is the only possible way new folks are going to receive any quality training before being turned loose to appraise on their own.

 

[Metamorphic]

If you have a problem with the AQBs criteria then you should take it up with them. In the meantime, the current system is the one you've got to deal with, so deal with it.

Sorry, I thought this was the "Improving the Profession" forum.

I don't know about you, but I'm pretty sure the problem with the profession isn't the trainees. Seems like there are real problems with the way trainees are trained. And real problems with the way the ongoing competency and ethical behavior of working appraisers is monitored. When you consider that every incompetent unethical yahoo that's every been certified to appraise is also a trainer the problem is nicely defined. Proposing that if you just require trainees to expose themselves to the incompetent unethical yahoos for a few more thousand hours you'll be able to fix the profession is foolishness. That's like saying if you just put a little more data into the AVM it will become a substitute for human judgment.

You've also got to make sure that choosing an appraisal profession has an appropriate reward for the amount of education and training required.

Currently they're requiring an 2-year degree and another couple years of working for no/low pay. If you're going to put people through a training process that's nearly a 4-year program there's going to have to be an appropriate reward there; equivalent to a 4 year degree. At this point there's not. A California AL has no where near the geographic or career field transferability that BS/BA has (with a bachelors, even if you're not working in that field it still carries weight with potential employers), and the earning potential is not that much different. The problem is compounded by the fact that there's no student loans or other financial aids for the would be appraiser. Not to mention the distinct lack of hot young coeds.

There's always the temptation to let sleeping dogs lie, particularly when you have already paid the dues to join the club. But given the current problems in the industry, it seems likely there may be changes coming. Isn't it better for working appraisers to be a part of that change rather than letting some misguided bureaucrat or politician make up something stupid. Isn't it better to take the lead on this? Seems like if you approached a state congressman right now with some ideas for a bill to revamp the training and monitoring of appraisers, they'd jump at the chance to take up the initiative because it would get them a lot of headlines because the news would jump at the chance to report a new angle on the mortgage crisis.

My ideas for the bill?

Requiring trainees to serve more hours without requiring competent ethical trainers is foolish. There needs to be a qualification to be a trainer. Not every pilot is a flight instructor, not every every geologist is a professor. Not every appraiser should be a trainer.

Until you've established the quality of your appraising trainers, hours should be taken out of the 2000 hour field training and put into the classroom portion of the qual. A class where throughout the semester you do 3 or 4 mock appraisals of real properties with full field inspections and comps, with a real instructor would be a very valuable first step. Its just flat wrong that you can get AT without ever measuring a house or filling out a URAR on your computer screen. A class like that would also go a long way to making trainees attractive to a potential trainer since they know they're not starting from absolute zero.

I'm not really sure how you monitor the competence and ethics of the working appraisers. It seems that at the end of the day somebody in a position of authority has to look at a not-cherry picked sample of each appraisers work and make sure it passes muster. I know in aviation you fly with a specially trained and certified Designated Examiner when you get your initial license and each time you up grade your license. You also have to fly with and get signed off by a Certified Flight Instructor every other year. That might be a good model. Alternately, you might have a state clearing house for appraisals where every appraisal eventually makes it into a data base where desk reviewers could select randomly for review.

 

[Terrel L. Shields]

Seems like there are real problems with the way trainees are trained.

true enough

you might have a state clearing house for appraisals where every appraisal eventually makes it into a data base where desk reviewers could select randomly for review

logistics is impossible and the fees appraisers get will not support fees that would cover the expense.

You are correct that the training system is pitiful and that it makes the job of finding a competent mentor difficult if not completely random and on the other hand the created liability makes taking on a trainee wholly unprofitable.

 

[George Hatch]

Make no mistake - I don't consider trainees to be "the problem"; the problem really is with some of the supervisors. That's why cutting those people down to size isn't intended to be a punitive measure to trainees - it's aimed squarely at those substandard supervisors. To the extent a trainee does consider that a punitive step they can only get there if they think that they should have the right to train under a substandard performer regardless of the damage it does to the profession. If that's their attitude then it's going to be difficult to find a lot of support for that.

I also don't advocate adding more experience requirements.

As for the academic requirements, I am of two minds on that. On the one hand I've read a lot of appraisal reports where I could swear the person writing the report doesn't speak English nor do they possess even the most rudimentary critical thinking skills. On the other hand, there are lots of people who never spent 5 minutes on a college campus but who can do everything they need to do in an appraisal assignment - including writing a great report.

In the states that have a State Licensed Real Property Appraiser category in their licensing programs - which is most of them - the additional academic requirements are not a barrier to entry to the profession. The academic requirements only pertain to the Certified levels of licensure.

In most states a high school diploma or GED is still sufficient for qualification as a fully licensed appraiser; and many people will still be able to make a living as an appraiser without ever stepping foot on a college campus. They just won't be qualified to supervise trainees or accept complicated appraisal assignments until they rack up those 7 college level courses and the additional qualifying appraisal courses. I don't think it's too much to ask.

There are a few states that have chosen to not offer the State Licensed Real Property Appraiser licensing level, as is their perogative under federal and state law. Maybe they'll change their minds at some point, but if they don't the "barrier to entry" in those states is one imposed by that state, not by the AQB.

If you stick with this profession then you won't always be a trainee. There's a big difference in capabilities between most 2,000 hour graduates and those appraisers who have racked up 10,000 hours. Some of you guys just can't see it because you literally have no clue as to what you don't know. I can practically guarantee that by the time you get five years in this business most of you will have a lot more respect for the experience requirements and a lot less respect for the concept of the "fully qualified trainee". Based on what I know about appraising, limiting practicum hours to 50% of the experience requirements is entirely reasonable. The difference between my opinion and your's is that I've been there and i know what I'm talking about.

 

[Stone]

Some of you guys just can't see it because you literally have no clue as to what you don't know. I can practically guarantee that by the time you get five years in this business most of you will have a lot more respect for the experience requirements and a lot less respect for the concept of the "fully qualified trainee".

Boy, isn't that the truth. Funny how many people change their minds about some of these types of things after they've actually been doing it for some time.

This job seems to be fairly simple once you get a bit of knowledge and experience. The funny thing is, after some more time in, most people realize just what George noted: They had no idea what they didn't know.

I believe that most people, to varying degrees, do get that concept fairly quickly. It doesn't mean they aren't confident with what they are doing or where they are at. It just means that they realize there is more to learn. That is the key to this field, IMO. It really is one of those fields where you can keep learning new stuff on a regular basis.

FTR - I have for some time guessed that the ultra-confident, "fully qualified trainees" who post here tend to over-state their hands a bit. I doubt that most of them are quite as in your face to their actual supervisors as they like to play at here. If so, I doubt a few of them would be employed long, even by family or friends. For some, I believe this is a place where they can come and show the certifieds just how much smarter, faster and more energetic they are than the good 'ol boys who have the audacity to expect them to spend some time learning before truly entering the field.

Of course, a few of them have had trainee status for a long time, so I could be wrong.

 

[PropertyEconomics]

Sorry, I thought this was the "Improving the Profession" forum.

I don't know about you, but I'm pretty sure the problem with the profession isn't the trainees. Seems like there are real problems with the way trainees are trained. And real problems with the way the ongoing competency and ethical behavior of working appraisers is monitored. When you consider that every incompetent unethical yahoo that's every been certified to appraise is also a trainer the problem is nicely defined. Proposing that if you just require trainees to expose themselves to the incompetent unethical yahoos for a few more thousand hours you'll be able to fix the profession is foolishness. That's like saying if you just put a little more data into the AVM it will become a substitute for human judgment.

You've also got to make sure that choosing an appraisal profession has an appropriate reward for the amount of education and training required.

Currently they're requiring an 2-year degree and another couple years of working for no/low pay. If you're going to put people through a training process that's nearly a 4-year program there's going to have to be an appropriate reward there; equivalent to a 4 year degree. At this point there's not. A California AL has no where near the geographic or career field transferability that BS/BA has (with a bachelors, even if you're not working in that field it still carries weight with potential employers), and the earning potential is not that much different. The problem is compounded by the fact that there's no student loans or other financial aids for the would be appraiser. Not to mention the distinct lack of hot young coeds.

There's always the temptation to let sleeping dogs lie, particularly when you have already paid the dues to join the club. But given the current problems in the industry, it seems likely there may be changes coming. Isn't it better for working appraisers to be a part of that change rather than letting some misguided bureaucrat or politician make up something stupid. Isn't it better to take the lead on this? Seems like if you approached a state congressman right now with some ideas for a bill to revamp the training and monitoring of appraisers, they'd jump at the chance to take up the initiative because it would get them a lot of headlines because the news would jump at the chance to report a new angle on the mortgage crisis.

My ideas for the bill?

Requiring trainees to serve more hours without requiring competent ethical trainers is foolish. There needs to be a qualification to be a trainer. Not every pilot is a flight instructor, not every every geologist is a professor. Not every appraiser should be a trainer.

Until you've established the quality of your appraising trainers, hours should be taken out of the 2000 hour field training and put into the classroom portion of the qual. A class where throughout the semester you do 3 or 4 mock appraisals of real properties with full field inspections and comps, with a real instructor would be a very valuable first step. Its just flat wrong that you can get AT without ever measuring a house or filling out a URAR on your computer screen. A class like that would also go a long way to making trainees attractive to a potential trainer since they know they're not starting from absolute zero.

I'm not really sure how you monitor the competence and ethics of the working appraisers. It seems that at the end of the day somebody in a position of authority has to look at a not-cherry picked sample of each appraisers work and make sure it passes muster. I know in aviation you fly with a specially trained and certified Designated Examiner when you get your initial license and each time you up grade your license. You also have to fly with and get signed off by a Certified Flight Instructor every other year. That might be a good model. Alternately, you might have a state clearing house for appraisals where every appraisal eventually makes it into a data base where desk reviewers could select randomly for review.

I think you prove many points. The primary of which is you are another newbie that thinks we should do things your way. Its why I dont have trainees. Im as ethical as they come ... and you wont tell me how to do my business. Plain and simple. Wanna learn ... listen. Wanna treat everyone like crap ... good luck to you.
I have a four year degree and another degree behind that, now that is really working for FREE .. I didnt get paid to go to school but I did it to make myself better. I agree with Mr Hatch .. if you dont like how the system is take it up with the ASB ... they are the ones that can make the changes ... as for me .... Im gonna continue to not train cause I dont want the headaches of listening to blah blah blah.

 

[Hamlet]

It is almost like a teenager or 20 somethings...they always believe they know more than their parents until they get married, have a mortgage and kids. WOW, mom and dad really did know what they are talking about...

 

[Cowboy Steve]

Wow! Has this thread turned condescending. Now every trainee is being compared to a "teenager or 20 somethings that think they know more than their parents".

At 47, and a trainee, I don't know whether I should consider that a compliment or put down. Don't lump all trainees together please, and folks won't be tempted to lump all licensed and certs into the "stuffed shirt, know-it-all crowd". Thanks in advance.

 

[RustNeverSleeps]

I believe that most people, to varying degrees, do get that concept fairly quickly. It doesn't mean they aren't confident with what they are doing or where they are at. It just means that they realize there is more to learn. That is the key to this field, IMO. It really is one of those fields where you can keep learning new stuff on a regular basis.

That is what I like about appraising. The days fly by and I am always learning something new.

 

[Hamlet]

Wow! Has this thread turned condescending. Now every trainee is being compared to a "teenager or 20 somethings that think they know more than their parents".

At 47, and a trainee, I don't know whether I should consider that a compliment or put down. Don't lump all trainees together please, and folks won't be tempted to lump all licensed and certs into the "stuffed shirt, know-it-all crowd". Thanks in advance.

Sorry if you were offended by my comments. I haven't been licensed very lonng and I still consider myself a newbie and I am still working towards my certification. I still feel that those who are beginning in this profession and believe that they can change the world without having real life experience behind them in this profession are comparable to teenagers.