In my opinion you have already been certified by your clients and your insurance carrier. They have already judged you qualified and capable of performing your duties. They have put their assets and reputation on the line, secure in the knowledge you are not likely to let them down. You have already proven yourself to them.

Maybe I am just misunderstanding the term "certify" I thougt it meant to verify, endorse, or attest. It just seems to me that your clients and insurance carrier have already endorsed and attested to your being an abstractor. Your clients do this each time they trust you with one of their orders. If NALTEA expects the clients and carriers to accept their certification shouldn't NALTEA accept the certification of the clients and carriers?

I am in favor of continuing education. I look forward to taking some of the classes that may be offered by NALTEA. I object only to a test to certify that I am qualified to do the work I have been doing for the past 15 years. I just don't think any test can offer greater certification and endorsement than satisfied clients and E&O carriers. 

I would like to see the education committee focus on developing courses that might expand the services we can competently offer. Maybe in commercial property searches, LandMan (mineral rights) searches or technology. 

Just my opinion.