There seems to be a force getting ready to attack on line courses. You might be the target. Your on line courses are great but they are cutting into competing association revenue. I resigned the summit commitee today. I do not know how to help other than keeping you informed and Boyett does a good job of that.
John is correct…see the 4th bullet under #2 above in post #9.
John Cahill writes:
If these other associations in Texas are wondering why InterNACHI has more members than all of them combined, they should try what InterNACHI did and begin offering free TREC-approved courses and free membership benefits and free business success tools. We’d welcome some manly competition. But no… instead we hear them cry:
Mommy, Mommy, I mean TREC, stop approving all of InterNACHI’s free, online and online video courses. Harm inspectors. Harm consumers. We don’t care. No one with any brains will pay to join our crappy, little association unless you harm everyone by prohibiting InterNACHI from giving away all their TREC-approved education and membership benefits and business success tools for free. Waaahhh! Ooops, I pooped my diapers Mommy!
John C…you will appreciate this. I was at today’s TREC Strategic Planning meeting in Austin. The discussion came around to E&O (not brought up by any inspector however) and one lady stood up and said (paraphrasing) “My name is Susan Suchansoe and as a sponsoring broker I wonder why we are not required to carry E&O like inspectors do”. You could have heard a pin drop…Comm Eckstrum was there and Adm Oldmixon was running the show of course. There was the usual pro/con discussion afterwards but I thought it very interesting that a broker would bring it up and be for mandated E&O.
BTW, I will not be sharing the E&O Position Statement with the others at the Summit meeting. It’s dead for now.
Another BTW…where did your earlier posts go?
Just to keep Texas inspectors informed, here’s Adm Oldmixon’s cover letter to those of us that attended Tuesday Inspector Summit:
That must have been funny. It is the only effective way to go after E&O. Organize the inspectors to visit the legislators and promote E&O for real estate agents. It could cause an interesting reaction. TAR will only save inspectors if it is saving TAR. Not a criticism . . a fact. Organise the grass roots; then go talk to TAR to give em an option. Same thing could work with limit of liability. If there is a trial going on now it is possible TAR contributed to the judges campaign. A limit of inspector liability protects TAR very significantly. I post this openly because I know they are reading it. (Think about it guys)
I think others agree with your E&O position but the meeting was kind of an unintentional presentation of poorly thought out suggestions and poor priorities. The problems documented have little affect on inspectors and more affect on educational providers. TREC can do nothing about Realtor relationships. The next meeting should reconsider the biggest problem . . . . the SoP and E&O. TREC can nothing about E&O; only TAR can.
I deleted other posts because they were too critical of TREC. Oldmixon and Ecstrum are trying to help. I found the meeting frustrating. I had to correct “you know who” continued intentional misrepresentations and everyone sat on the chair like a corpse. Until they rise and slap the insanity down nothing will happen. I also smell hidden agendas all over the place. My concerns are so far from those (or the understanding) of the group that my contributions are not worth it. I became angy at inspectors and not TAR or TREC. That is why I deleted posts and resigned. I can accomplish more via www.soprfi.com
My wife told me men are just little boys who cry for mommy. I showed her this and she is still on the floor laughing. Now I have to take her to dinner.
wah wah wah.
Funny as heck Nick.
Sure sounds like someone has in their agenda to gain ground be exerting influence and control over the certification and education process.
I was unaware that there was a perceived issue with the existing state exam or that we collectively felt we would benefit by signing onto a national exam… Seems like a blatant run on iNACHI with the statements regarding the ineffectiveness of online training. I would like to see someone produce documentation to that effect based on assessment / interviews of persons who have completed the online courses. There is a place for both. Classroom training can be (I say “can be” not IS) more effective. But the accessibility of online training easily trumps the classroom only argument.
Thanks again Mike for keeping us posted. Unfortunately I have little faith that the associations will get past their fractious bickering and self-promoting to be able to work together for the benefit of the industry.
Hi Chuck,
The exam subject came up because the pass rate is about 26% with a pass score of 80. TREC asks “If the score was lowered to 75 then the pass rate would go up to 58%.” That is how it all started. TREC has a point. The questions that beg:
1 - Is the Texas test too hard? Is 80 too high?
2 - Are the schools teaching properly?
3 - The schools don’t get to see the test; is it fair to expect them to teach without knowing. (I do not mind teaching the test).
4 - Is the national test more balanced than Texas?
5 - Does Texas have the money to maintain the test? (its all volunteer work now)
6 - Should the test be open book (the IRC is)
Its really not about ASHI or NACHI at all. Its about the integrity of the test, fairness to the schools and students and proper learning verification.
TPREIA asked that qualification for real estate agent continuing education be made easier to qualify for trade associations. That could be unfair to the schools who did the hard work to become qualifed. TPREIA could simply ask the local realtor board to sponsor the class (they do it for me all the time) but then the non profit TPREIA would have to revenue share with the local board. (follow the money trail).
Here’s the underlying issue. The 1st time Pass Rate for the Texas Professional level exam is about 34% and 50% for the RE Inspector exam. Now, it can be argued that the pass rates are low because the test is too difficult, the education is lacking or the students are stupid. Personally, I think it is predominately due to last choice but that’s just me. Now, the TAC requires that a school must show a Pass Rate of 55% for their students or their accreditation will not be renewed. So, there’s a gap…students not passing the exam and schools in jeopardy of losing their license to teach. The proposed solution that has been floated is to lower the exam pass threshold from 80% for Prof Inspectors exam to 75%. TREC research indicates that would bring the Pass Rate up enough to keep schools from losing their income stream, oops, I mean accreditation. There’s no mention of doing a better job of screening unqualified applicants up front nor improving the education (that’s a long term solution).
OK, so John and I responded with much the same info. Pick & choose. 
Sheesh, next thing they will do is pass a law that says we have to find 55% of the defects. How can I do that driving down the street!:mrgreen:
I dunno, mebe the skools aught to screan the studnts fer moren funds an a hartbeet afore they take em in and gragiate em.
When I went to school, about 70% of the class had no business being licensed, so that pass rate seems about right to me. I don’t understand why the choices have to be to dumb down the test or dumb down the passing score. I wouldn’t want to hire an inspector who couldn’t pass that test. I am OK with the state giving the schools a test prep guide. Seemed like the school I attended had a pretty good handle on what was in the test.
That 70% was about my experience as well. Of the 30 that started my class only 13 of us finished and took the exam. I think around 8 finally got their license. (I did pass 1st try…just to be clear :D).
Regarding the online education topic, one thing that is not clear to me just yet is just what on-line education may be in the cross-hairs. Will it be Core or CE courses. Remember INACHI is not a player (yet) in the Core education area. I think we only have one Core course approved…all the others are CE. It really was not clear to me whether the focus might be on both or not. That’s tbd.
Chuck requests: