This is the second post in a series of posts about pending legislation involving Licensed Home Inspectors in Washington State, that should be of interest to all parties involved in the sale of real estate in the State. The first post dealt with Senate Bill 5644 regarding mold. This post will talk about a second provision of Senate Bill 5644 which would require the Fundamentals of Home Inspection training course to be available both as an on-line course and as live instruction. As an educator I can testify to the difficulties inherent in attempting to teach a “fundamentals” courses on-line. While it may be possible to justify on-line training for some professions, the job we must do as home inspectors is a very visual and tactile profession that often requires all of the senses in making the best evaluations of properties being inspected. The reasons being given for allowing this course on-line is due to supposed hardships for people in remote areas of the state to travel to get the training. While it may be unfortunate that there may be additional costs for some to travel to get training, this would not likely be any different than it would be to get professional training for many other professions. Being a newly licensed profession, the free market place also has not had time to create services where needed around the state---it likely will in the future if deemed economically practical. Given that the number of hours of training to become a home inspector is so MINIMAL as it now stands, it does not make any sense to me to dumb it down any further. In the future, when the number of hours of training are equivalent to a 2 or 4 year degree it will be highly likely that at least some of those hours will be able to be adequately accomplished on-line. Until that day comes it is important to not mess with the “minimum standard” we are currently at. The Fundamentals of Home Inspection course at Bellingham Technical College, which I teach part of, has had many students that have traveled across the state to take our course and they all, when polled, agree that it would not be possible to do what we do in terms of training on-line. Another thing to consider is that if current education providers were required to do both methods of instructions we might just loose some of those providers of education completely---thus reducing the currently few options that exist for training. Perhaps it is time to allow doctors to do their residency on-line. Other Important Bills: Senate Bill 6433 Senate Bill 6434 Charles Buell
Currently the Fundamentals of Home Inspection course can only be taught in a classroom setting with live instruction.
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Click on the Rose 
to check out: AHA!---A Forum of Landmark Proportions---your Group
PS, for those of you that are new to my blog (or for some other "unexplained" reason have never noticed)
all pictures and smiley-face inserts (emoticons) (when I use them) have messages that show up when you point at them with your cursor.
My WORDLESS WEDNESDAY pictures and some selected POEMS & STORIES.
While I realize that technology has expanded to the on-line classroom setting, nothing compares to the live hands on training for an industry like yours.
As an example, sure you can watch a tutorial on parachuting. But until you actually jump out of that plane, all you have is book knowledge....Good luck ith that!
The U.S. Department of Education disagrees with you. They concluded:
“On average, students in online learning conditions performed better than those receiving face-to-face instruction.”
If this bill passed, would there still be the requirement for "shadowing"? If so, I see no problem with offering the training online. You'd still be required to have the "field" training but could to the paperwork/homework/testing online.
Craig, so true.
Kevin, I am not going to argue with you about the validity of on-line education. In fact, I have read that article that you linked above and see nothing in it that does not support what I say about the Home Inspector Fundamentals training. While the headlines of the study are "attractive" when you dig into it there is more about it that supports face-to-face education for the beginning inspector than it would support distance learning. In fact I said in the end of my post that when this is a real profession requiring a two or 4 year degree, then tons of on-line courses would be practical, feasible, etc. There is currently nothing available on-line that could provide what face to face education does in terms of training beginning inspectors to a minimum level of competency. Don't get me started about "field training." As it currently now stands----field training is not training at all unless it is done by supervised trainers whose job it is to train. Doing ride alongs without input from the licensed inspector that is allowing the ride along is not "training" in my opinion. The "fly-on-the-wall" approach to training is not training at all.
Not looking for an argument, just pointing out another view from a credible source. However, I can certainly understand why you would be opposed to this legislation and want to discredit the department's findings since you benefit financially from the current "bricks and mortar" exclusivity.
Kevin, I guess that would all depend on how you define "benefit financially." If you mean that I make half of what I make inspecting----I guess you would be correct :)
I don't disagree with the fact that the field training should be more than a simple shadowing but you'll never convince me that preping for the NHIE absolutely has to be done in a classroom. Afterall, that's the whole point of the required classroom education right, preping to pass the NHIE?
For the most part I have to agree with Charles. I use on-line education a great deal for CE Credits, but the basics can't just come from a book or an online course. The only way on-line can work effectively is if it is backed with on the field training and if the student is really interesting in home inspections as a career and not a quick way to earn an extra buck. The on the field training has to be performed with an inspector who is actually there to teach, not just to provide for ride along or mentoring services.
Kevin, where does the notion that Home Inspection Training is "prep" for the NHIE come from?
Suesan, thanks---great to see you.
Your post caught my eye right away because it a subject I feel very strong about. Here in Pa an inspector can just go online, take a test and get certified Friday and work on Monday. No formal training, no field training, nothing. The results have not been great and the mistakes made have been both numerous and expensive.
Charles-Do you disagree?
Suesan-You state you agree with Charles, however, part of you're statement says otherwise. You say "online education can work effectively if backed with on the field training". I believe the field training requirement won't go anywhere, just that the classroom education can be taken online. Correct me if I'm wrong, Charles.
Suesan, I think for those of us that want to see what we do as something more than walking around with a flashlight, screwdriver and check-list, this is a no-brainer. The disconnect I think comes from the notion that it really does not take much education to carry a flashlight and a screwdriver. If we are to elevate what we do to a real profession the rinky-dink 100 and 200 hour courses to become an inspector are going to have to transform into 2 and 4 year degree programs. Of course doing the whole thing on-line helps to hold us back and maintain current low levels of service to the public.
Kevin it is my understanding that the purpose of the Fundamentals of Home Inspection Course (at least at BTC) is to train people to become entry level home inspectors.
I recommend that you ask anyone that has taken our course at BTC whether they think that the course can be done on-line. I would argue that anyone that has gone away to a school for home inspector training and came away from it feeling that they could have done it all on line probably took a relatively mediocre course:)
Kevin - I believe I said that for CE Credits (Continuing Education Credits) online was great. I also said that when backed up with field training it can be effective, but I did state that field training had to be performed with an inspector who was there to train, not one that's there providing a ride along or mentoring. I should also mention that my idea of field training is at least 1 year.
So, if the standards are "minimal" wouldn't that make them to code?
Jay----pretty close:) In 20 years this whole discussion will seem very odd I think:)
IMHO, anyone reading your posts about things you have spotted while inspecting would understand you can't get that kind of depth of knowledge and assessment without a lot of live, on-the-spot training. Sure, someon can look at a picture (that was taken to illustrate the problem to begin with), but go inspect a house and see those things? No way! I hope you (plural, as in all in WA) can keep this idiotic bill from being passed....
Oh please! PLEASE tell me that the inspector conducting a Buyer's inspection for a client hasn't been either "certified" or "trained" by sitting in front of a computer taking online classes! Not only do effective, accurate, and thorough inspections require book learnin' of local building codes, practices, etc., they require a full sensory evaluation. How many times have you walked into a "smell" and known something was wrong. Can't see it. Have a bit of trouble passing it along via the Internet too, I'd say.
Good inspectors are gold in my business. Truly gold. They make or break a transaction. I may use online learning for some of my CE credits yearly, but knowledge of the real estate code of ethics, or contract law, or form changes, etc. aren't particularly hands-on subjects. But want to try to learn how to effectively market, negotiate, stage, do listing presentations, etc.? Not too effective, I'd say.
Shoshana, I will be working hard to see that it doesn't come to pass
Gabrielle, this is especially important at "entrance level"----I know for one, I am glad the person that cut my hair got all their training on-line----oh and my massage practitioner and acupuncturist too:)
Would this bill eliminate the requirement for field training?
Just for the record, the bulk of the training we do at BTC, to train students to become inspectors has to do with teaching inspection, not how to prep for the test. However, that said, as far as I know all of our students have passed the state test, both components, when the class is complete. There are certainly parts of training that can be done online, generally the non hands-on material. But we have had a number of students in class, who had online training. If you handed them a piece of siding, they did not know OSB from cedar from cement to asbestos cement.
Kevin, no---and it doesn't create field "training" either.
Steve, yes, I know what you mean.
Training home inspection online? Kinda like learning how to drive online as well.
Carla's post sums it up. Some of the laws and rules can be taught to newbies online, not the nuts and bolts. That takes seeing, touching and feeling.
Carla, that would be a good one---put them in a simulator and let them go----a some point they have to leave the simulator and actually drive---or inspect as the case might be.
Steve, for sure.
We have had licensing here in CT since 2000. The formal training requirement in my opinion is way under minimum. It consists of a week course. The field training is weak as well. Many inspectors look to take on newbies for the income. Very few newbs actually get good mentoring and training. I have talked with members of our licensing board concerning the in field training requirements, but I feel no one is really listening. The only requirement for a "trainer" is to have a license.
In classroom training coupled with field training by a qualified instructor is essential. An online course would in no way be complete enough to give someone starting out the knowledge to inspect homes.
James the "trainer" here only has to be a Licensed home inspector. In other words a newbie inspector with a license and absolutely no inpsections under their belt is "qualified" to sign off on the field training of others meeting licensing requirements----I expect this will get "revisited" pretty quickly----one would hope:)
What a shame it is that you can refer to a "licensed" home inspector that has "absolutely no inspections under their belt". Something is wrong here.
Kevin, it may be a shame but it is better than it used to be----where they had no training either:) And of course we are talking "paid" inspections---they do at least have the field training and reports associated with that training.