Sorry for the late update! I wanted to follow up about my meeting with the dean of Humber College Real Estate Program.

 Proctortrack:

Humber reluctantly acknowledged the numerous issues associated with Proctortrack. They admitted that there has been an overwhelming amount of problems and acknowledged the frustrations surrounding its use. Although they claimed to be expanding their test writing partnership facilities, it remains uncertain how effective this expansion will be in resolving the existing problems. Despite the abundance of reported issues, Humber grudgingly admitted that there have been more successful exam administrations than failures with Proctortrack. However, it is clear that the inconsistencies and dissatisfaction surrounding Proctortrack persist, as I took the opportunity to express my concerns and shared stories from others who have also faced difficulties.

Exam Structure:

During our conversation, Humber defended their decision to prohibit exam review, citing concerns over the exams' integrity. They acknowledged the rampant selling of exam questions but failed to provide a satisfactory explanation for the absence of exam review. While the benefits of exam review and community learning were discussed, Humber reluctantly admitted that no other certified program in any trade allows question review, thereby disregarding the potential advantages it may offer. Furthermore, Humber justified the limitation of only allowing two attempts per course fee as a means to combat question farming, despite the fact that it places an undue financial burden on students who are forced to retake failed exams. This disregard for the financial strain placed on students further highlights Humber's indifference towards their concerns.

In regards to the language used in the exams, Humber's response was disheartening. They openly admitted that the exam questions are intentionally designed to deceive and trick students, with the purpose of limiting the number of individuals entering the field. This revelation further underscores the lack of transparency and fairness within the examination process.

When discussing the resolution of these issues, Humber's response was less than reassuring. They claimed that enacting change requires the cooperation of multiple organizations, including RECO, the Ontario government, and Humber itself. However, their apparent reliance on external factors instead of taking direct responsibility for addressing the problems only deepens the frustration felt by students.

Overall, the conversation with Humber regarding these issues was overwhelmingly negative. While they reluctantly acknowledged the problems with Proctortrack and the exam structure, their responses lacked a genuine commitment to resolving the issues at hand. It is disheartening to witness the disregard for student concerns and the lack of accountability demonstrated by Humber.