Should selling real estate require a college diploma? Below is a balanced look at the arguments for and against introducing a diploma for real estate licensing in Ontario, and why a middle path may be the most practical solution.
In Ontario today, real estate education is delivered as a pre-registration course rather than as a post-secondary credential. Applicants must have a high school diploma or equivalency, enroll with one of four approved providers, complete the program, pass exams and register with the Real Estate Council of Ontario (RECO). That pathway leads to course completion and registration, but not to a recognized college diploma, and because the program receives no direct provincial funding it is not eligible for the Ontario Student Assistance Program (OSAP).
This status quo has persisted for years, but recently instructors and some industry stakeholders have begun to propose replacing the current course with a recognized college diploma that would be OSAP-eligible and ideally include a practicum component. The proposal generally stops short of requiring a university degree: no Canadian jurisdiction requires a bachelor’s degree to work as a real estate agent, and a four-year degree would mainly screen for access to university rather than for practical sales or negotiating skills.
Quebec is the only province that currently licenses real estate through a recognized college credential, which allows students there to apply for provincial loans and bursaries. Elsewhere in Canada, licensing programs sit outside the student loan system.
The case for a diploma
Making real estate licensing a college diploma opens the door to financing. Because a recognized credential is eligible for student aid, candidates could use OSAP and similar supports to cover tuition and related costs. Ontario has already connected some professional training to OSAP through micro-credentials, and the administrative mechanisms exist to extend that support to a diploma program if policymakers choose to do so.
A diploma would also give the profession clearer standing. RECO already sets a uniform curriculum across providers, but a certificate of course completion lacks the recognition of a college transcript and credential. A diploma would produce a formally recognized record that banks, employers and other professions more readily understand. While it may not improve how the material is taught, it would place the qualification on the same footing as other regulated professions.
Introducing greater cost and time requirements could reduce turnover. A longer, more structured program and a practicum or supervised placements would deter people treating registration as a low-stakes side gig and help ensure new entrants are more committed. Requiring supervised first transactions or a practicum would place early deals under oversight rather than leaving inexperienced agents to manage clients’ major financial assets without guidance.
There are precedents that make such a change plausible. Quebec’s approach demonstrates that financing and credential recognition can work. Ontario itself has previously moved another occupation—paralegals—from an informal entry route to a mandatory accredited college diploma plus licensing exam. That shift has not produced widespread concerns about over-training among paralegals.
The case against a diploma
A diploma could raise barriers for people who rely on real estate as a pathway to professional income. The sector has long offered opportunities for career changers, newcomers to Canada and those without a university degree. A longer, more expensive program risks excluding these groups. OSAP eligibility mitigates some cost barriers, but it does not eliminate the time and financial commitment required.
Making the program OSAP-eligible also risks encouraging candidates to borrow to enter a commission-based industry with no guaranteed salary and a high early dropout rate. If the credential does not substantially increase the likelihood that new agents remain active beyond the first year or two, student loans could leave many entrants in debt after leaving the profession.
A diploma is an indirect solution to problems of competence and ethics. Ethical issues in real estate often relate to compensation structures, conflicts of interest and incentives, not merely to how many hours an individual spent in a classroom. If the objective is better on-the-job performance and client protection, targeted measures such as supervised articling or mandatory mentorship for early transactions may address the root problems more efficiently and at lower cost than a full diploma.
Higher academic requirements do not necessarily reduce attrition. British Columbia’s relatively demanding program and difficult exam have not eliminated high churn among agents; a tougher curriculum tends to select for exam-taking ability rather than long-term retention. Practical supervision and early-career supports are likelier to improve real-world competence and reduce premature exits.
Changing to a college-delivered credential would also shift control of the curriculum. Quebec’s model places curricular authority with the education ministry and its colleges. Transferring control in Ontario would move responsibility away from RECO, which has recently redesigned the current program to emphasize practice readiness from day one. That regulatory shift could trigger institutional resistance and a lengthy implementation process.
Summing it all up
The most balanced option appears to be a middle path: introduce an OSAP-eligible college diploma with a practicum component, modeled on Quebec’s approach and informed by Ontario’s prior experience with paralegal accreditation. This would raise the profession’s standing and expand financing options without elevating education requirements to a university degree. Crucially, the diploma should be paired with practical, supervised experience designed to improve retention and protect consumers.
However, a diploma is not a cure-all. It will not by itself resolve ethical or structural challenges such as compensation incentives, the impact of technology and AI on the market, or the evolving economics of the profession. Any reform should be honest about what a credential can and cannot achieve and mindful of who bears the cost of change. The industry’s key question is not simply whether a diploma would raise standing—because it probably would—but whether stakeholders are willing to accept the diploma’s limits and ensure new entrants receive effective, practical support in their early years.