search
RECO Logo
hamburger icon
search
Consumers
Things you need to know Make sure your real estate agent is registered Information for buyers Information for sellers Your deposit is protected
Agents and Brokerages
TRESA Explained RECO Bulletins RECO Spotlight Videos RECO tool for sharing RECO Information Guide and forms Becoming a real estate agent Becoming a real estate broker Info for real estate agents Info for brokerages Insurance Fee schedule Moving to Ontario?
Learners
About real estate education in Ontario Education requirements Becoming a real estate agent Becoming a real estate broker Post-registration education for agents Examinations Brokerage staff compliance training Continuing education (CE) Updates More information
Enforcement
About RECO’s complaints process Submitting a complaint After submitting a complaint If you are the subject of a complaint Inquiring about the number of offers on a property Enforcement activities
News
Events
About
What we do Performance measures Governance Our team Advisory councils
Contact Agent/Brokerage Search MyWeb Login Submit a Complaint RECO Information Guide
Home Learners Examinations Exam Misconduct Policy

Effective Date: August 1, 2025
Approved by: Registrar, TRESA

1. Introduction

The exam process is a crucial component of RECO’s registration education programs. These programs are maintained by RECO and delivered in partnership with multiple education delivery designates and a centralized assessment service provider (ASP). The exams that are part of the registration education programs as well as the Interprovincial Challenge Exam are designed to assess the knowledge and competency required to practice real estate in compliance with the Trust in Real Estate Services Act, 2002 (TRESA) and its associated regulations. Any form of exam misconduct compromises the credibility of the profession and poses a risk to consumers who rely on registrants to act with integrity and provide trustworthy guidance.

In support of its mission to promote a safe and informed real estate market for consumers in Ontario, RECO is committed to upholding the security and integrity of the exam process. This is a key priority for RECO in the oversight of the registration education programs. Exam security is a complex issue that cannot be addressed through a single measure. Instead, it requires a comprehensive security framework with various components that help prevent, deter, detect and respond to any security incidents. A robust exam security program, including a strict exam misconduct policy, allows RECO to have confidence that the individuals who successfully complete the exams have the necessary knowledge to become registered.

2. Purpose

To maintain fairness and public confidence, RECO has established a strict exam misconduct policy. The policy defines the roles and responsibilities of RECO, education delivery designates, the ASP, and learners in maintaining the security and integrity of the exam process. It describes prohibited behaviours that are in breach of the learner code of conduct before, during, and after the exam process, describes the investigation process, and specifies the possible sanctions resulting from the investigation process.

3. Definitions

A complete list of definitions used in this policy begins on page 10.

4. Application

  1. This policy applies to all parties involved in RECO’s exams, including education delivery designates, their staff, contractors, and faculty, the ASP and their staff, contractors, and proctors, as well as learners who take exams.
  2. RECO’s exams are offered in-person, at test centres located throughout the province of Ontario, and virtually, via online proctored sessions. This policy applies to all exams, whether administered in-person or virtually.
  3. The option to take exams virtually is a privilege granted by RECO. Taking an exam virtually is not a learner’s right. RECO may withdraw a learner’s virtual exam privileges at any time, in its sole discretion.

5. Roles and responsibilities

  1. RECO has the following responsibilities in relation to exam misconduct:
    1. Upholding exam integrity, by establishing and maintaining the exam security program, including this exam misconduct policy.
    2. Providing oversight to the ASP and education delivery designates to align their processes and practices, and to support the enforcement of the exam security program, including this exam misconduct policy.
    3. Investigating instances of suspected exam misconduct, ensuring due process is followed, and determining and enforcing appropriate sanctions.
  2. Education delivery designates have the following responsibilities in relation to exam misconduct:
    1. Promoting a culture of academic integrity among learners, faculty, and staff.
    2. Informing learners, faculty, and staff regarding program policies, the learner code of conduct, exam rules, expectations, rights, and responsibilities.
    3. Reporting any suspected exam misconduct to RECO.
    4. Supporting RECO in investigating suspected cases of exam misconduct.
    5. Supporting RECO in the enforcement of sanctions on learners who have committed exam misconduct.
  3. The ASP has the following responsibilities in relation to exam misconduct:
    1. Upholding the security and integrity of the exam process by implementing policies and procedures aimed at the prevention of exam misconduct and other types of security breaches.
    2. Deterring actions that could pose a risk to the security and integrity of the exam process.
    3. Detecting exam security breaches and exam misconduct incidents and responding appropriately.
    4. Informing learners regarding exam policies, the learner code of conduct, exam rules, expectations, rights, and responsibilities.
    5. Conducting forensic analyses on exam data and reporting any suspicious activity to RECO.
    6. Reporting any suspected exam misconduct to RECO.
    7. Supporting RECO in investigating suspected cases of exam misconduct.
    8. Supporting RECO in the enforcement of sanctions on learners who have committed exam misconduct.
  4. Learners have the following responsibilities in relation to exam misconduct:
    1. Familiarizing themselves with the exam misconduct policy, the learner code of conduct, as well as exam rules communicated by the ASP prior to the exam.
    2. Following the exam rules and not engaging in any form of exam misconduct as defined by this policy or any other behaviours that compromise exam integrity.
    3. Reporting any instances of exam misconduct they may observe or otherwise become aware of to their education delivery designate, the ASP or RECO.

6. Definitions of exam misconduct

  1. Exam misconduct is defined as any behavior by the learner before, during, and after an exam that undermines the integrity of the exam process or gives an unfair advantage to a learner. Examples of exam misconduct include, without limitation: 
    1. Cheating: using unauthorized materials, tools, aids, or devices, including, but not limited to, notes, books, software, artificial intelligence, or electronic devices during the exam.
    2. Collusion: two or more learners working together in a dishonest or secretive way to cheat or gain an unfair advantage during an exam. Examples of collusion include, but are not limited to, two or more learners agreeing to share answers during an exam or one learner helping another to complete the exam.
    3. Disruptive behaviour: any actions that disturb other learners or otherwise disrupt the exam process, such as loud talking, using inappropriate language, or refusing to follow proctor instructions.
    4. Exam theft: gaining unauthorized access to or unauthorized sharing of exam materials. It involves stealing, copying, or leaking exam content through actions such as hacking to get exam questions, taking photos of exam questions, sharing and/or selling exam questions online or through other means. All exam content is the exclusive property of RECO, is protected by intellectual property laws, and shall not be copied, reproduced, shared, distributed, or disclosed in any form, whether in whole or in part.
    5. Facilitating exam misconduct: any action that facilitates acts that are considered exam misconduct as defined in this policy. Facilitating exam misconduct is also considered exam misconduct.
    6. Failure to follow instructions: disregarding specific exam rules or instructions provided by proctors or in exam materials, or disregarding instructions and direction issued by RECO to maintain exam integrity.
    7. Fraudulent behaviour: providing false or misleading information regarding a learner’s identity, eligibility to take the exam, exam results, or any other relevant details.
    8. Impersonation: taking an exam on behalf of someone else.
    9. Organized cheating: planned, structured effort to cheat, involving multiple people or tools. This type of cheating is a coordinated, large-scale effort with deliberate planning.
    10. Tampering with exam materials: altering or falsifying exam papers, answer sheets, or electronic records.

7. Sanctions for exam misconduct

  1. In all instances where RECO determines, on a balance of probabilities, and in its sole discretion, that exam misconduct has taken place, the learner(s) involved will be subject to disciplinary action in the form of sanctions. Sanctions will be determined by RECO considering, without limitation, the following factors:
    1. Severity of exam misconduct: the more serious the exam misconduct, in terms of nature, extent and impact, the more severe the sanctions.
    2. Recidivism: learners who engage in exam misconduct repeatedly are subject to more severe sanctions than first-time offenders.
    3. Learner attitude: RECO may consider less severe sanctions in cases where learners provide a full and frank admission of having engaged in exam misconduct, show genuine remorse and provide information that can assist RECO and the ASP in improving exam security measures in future.  
  2. Sanctions for exam misconduct include, without limitation:
    1. Grade of zero on the exam. The exam attempt will be counted towards the two allowed exam attempts per course;
    2. Requirement to take all future exams in person at a test centre;
    3. Written warning;
    4. Requirement to retake the course corresponding to the exam where the exam misconduct occurred, at the learner’s expense;
    5. Notation on the learner’s RECO record and the education record with the education delivery designate;
    6. Suspension from the registration education programs for a period determined by RECO. The learner will not be permitted to register in any registration education program courses, with any education delivery designate, and will not receive credit for any work attempted during the suspension;
    7. Rescinding of certificate of completion, in the case of learners who are found guilty of exam misconduct after having completed the program and having received a certificate of completion;
    8. Revocation of RECO registration for registrants retroactively found to have engaged in exam misconduct while completing their mandatory registration education. 
  3. Sanctions are not mutually exclusive and RECO may apply multiple sanctions to one incident of exam misconduct, depending on the specific circumstances and the severity of the offence, in its sole discretion.
  4. Learners sanctioned for exam misconduct will be subject to additional requirements before they can register with RECO.
  5. The learner’s exam misconduct sanction history may be considered by the Registrar in the decision of whether to grant registration.

8. Detecting and assessing instances of suspected exam misconduct

  1. RECO’s assessment services department will promptly assess every instance of suspected exam misconduct from all sources, review the available information, and determine whether a full investigation is warranted.

9. Exam proctoring

  1. All RECO exams, whether completed virtually or in-person, are invigilated by proctors trained to detect exam misconduct. Proctors are responsible for ensuring that learners follow all exam rules established by RECO.
  2. Proctors have the authority to enforce exam rules, the code of conduct, and the exam misconduct policy, issue warnings to learners who fail to follow proctor instructions and terminate an exam if they determine that the integrity of the exam process has been compromised or is at risk of being compromised.

10. Whistleblowing

  1. Whistleblowing is a crucial component of the exam security program and contributes to upholding the integrity of the exam process by:
    1. Protecting learners: whistleblowing helps uncover harmful practices that can affect students’ safety, well-being, and learning.
    2. Promoting fairness and integrity: whistleblowing helps stop cheating or dishonesty that could impact other learners.
    3. Encouraging a culture of honesty: when people know they can safely speak up, this builds trust. Staff and learners are more likely to report issues early, before they grow into bigger problems. 
  2. Any person, including but not limited to learners, facilitators, faculty, or staff, who becomes aware of suspected exam misconduct as defined in this policy, must report this information immediately using one of the reporting mechanisms listed below:
    1. Contact their education delivery designate
    2. Contact the ASP
    3. Contact RECO  
  3. Providing contact information at the time of the whistleblower report can help the investigation and is strongly encouraged. RECO is committed to treating the identity and contact information of all whistleblowers with the strictest confidence and this information will be shared only on a need-to-know basis with RECO staff members directly involved in investigating the matter.
  4. Persons with knowledge of an incident that threatens the integrity of the exam process also have the option of reporting it anonymously.
  5. Every whistleblower report will be assessed by RECO’s assessment services department as per section 8 of this policy.

11. Nullification of exam results

  1. RECO retains the authority to void or nullify any exam result to protect the integrity of its exams. This authority may be exercised at RECO’s discretion when credible evidence suggests an exam result is invalid due to exam misconduct or irregularity. The authority to nullify exams is intended to ensure public confidence in the integrity of RECO’s exams, and to uphold high professional standards for registrants in Ontario.
  2. Grounds for exam nullification include, without limitation:
    1. Testing irregularities: Significant anomalies or irregular patterns in exam results that cast doubt on their validity. This can include, without limitation, unusual answer patterns, statistically improbable similarities in response patterns, or drastic score jumps between attempts. Such irregularities may trigger result invalidation even without direct proof of deliberate exam misconduct, if the integrity of the score is in question.
    2. Exam misconduct: Any form of cheating or exam misconduct, as defined in this policy, before, during, or after the exam. This includes, but is not limited to, copying answers, using unauthorized materials or electronic devices, obtaining or providing unauthorized help, or violating exam rules and proctor instructions.
    3. Rule or policy violations: Any other breach of exam rules, the code of conduct or RECO policies before, during and after the exam. This includes disruptive, fraudulent, or unprofessional behavior at the test center, failure to adhere to proctor instructions, or leaving the exam station without authorization (except in an emergency).
       
  3. The above grounds are not exhaustive. RECO reserves the right to nullify results for any other circumstance that compromises exam integrity, including incidents discovered after the exam administration.
  4. RECO will promptly inform learners whose exam results have been nullified.
  5. A nullified exam attempt might not count towards the maximum number of allowed exam attempts. Learners whose exam results have been nullified might be entitled to re-book the exam at their own expense, provided they are otherwise eligible to do so.
  6. Learners whose exam results have been nullified must complete all future exams in person at a test centre location.

12. Exam misconduct investigations

  1. RECO is committed to ensuring that all investigations into suspected cases of exam misconduct are conducted following the principles of impartiality and fairness.
  2. In cases where RECO’s assessment services department determines that a suspected case of exam misconduct merits a formal investigation, as a result of the assessment conducted as per section 8 of this policy, they will take the following actions promptly:
    1. Place the learner’s account on hold. Learners whose account has been placed on hold cannot complete courses, withdraw from a course, enroll in exams, transfer to or enroll in registration education with another education delivery designate while the case is under investigation.
    2. Notify the learner in writing of the alleged offence and ongoing investigation.
    3. Initiate a formal investigation, taking all necessary steps to secure evidence and any other necessary documentation. 
  3. RECO’s assessment services department will contact the learner to inform them of the alleged offences and the basis for the allegations. The learner will have an opportunity to respond to the allegations, either in writing or during a meeting to be scheduled between RECO’s assessment services department and the learner, where deemed appropriate and feasible.
  4. The supervisor of the assessment services department will receive a copy of the investigation report and the learner’s response, as well as a summary of the discussion during the meeting with the learner. The supervisor of the assessment services department will review the documentation and:
    1. Determine if misconduct has occurred on a balance of probabilities.
    2. If it is determined that exam misconduct has occurred:
      1. assign appropriate sanctions in accordance with section 7 of this policy;
      2. provide a decision letter to the learner outlining the findings of the investigation and the reasons for the decision, and communicating to the learner their right to appeal;
      3. provide a copy of the decision letter to the learner’s education delivery designate and the ASP for enforcement, if applicable.
    3. If it is determined that exam misconduct has not occurred:
      1. have all restrictions removed from the learner’s account;
      2. notify the learner and their respective education delivery designate accordingly. 
  5. If the supervisor of the assessment services department becomes involved in the investigation process, the actions under 12.iv will be completed by the manager of the education operations department at RECO.

13. Escalation of exam misconduct investigations

  1. Internal escalation: In cases where exam misconduct investigations reveal suspected involvement of RECO registrants in the exam misconduct incident, matters may be escalated to RECO’s compliance division for further investigation and action.
  2. Escalation to law enforcement: Serious cases of exam misconduct, such as exam theft or organized cheating, may also constitute criminal offences. Where RECO believes an instance of suspected exam misconduct may constitute a criminal offence, RECO may report the matter to the relevant law enforcement agency.

14. Retroactive investigations

  1. There is no time limitation on RECO’s ability to investigate and issue sanctions for exam misconduct. Retroactive investigations may be triggered, without limitation, by forensic data, whistleblower reports, details revealed during investigations of incident reports.
  2. In cases where, as a result of a retroactive investigation, it is determined that a learner who has since completed the program had previously engaged in exam misconduct while enrolled in the program, RECO may direct the education delivery designate to rescind the learner’s certificate of completion.
  3. In cases where, as a result of a retroactive investigation, it is determined that a learner who has since become a RECO registrant had previously engaged in exam misconduct while enrolled in the program, the Registrar may revoke the registrant’s registration.

15. Appeals

  1. The learner may appeal RECO’s decision within 10 business days from the date of the decision letter referenced in section 12.iv.b.2 above, following the procedure outlined in the decision letter.
  2. The appeal must meet at least one of the following criteria to be successful:
    1. The learner presents new evidence that can be substantiated and could exonerate or mitigate the responsibility of the learner with respect to the exam misconduct;
    2. The learner presents evidence of procedural error in the investigation and sanction process. 
  3. Appeals that do not meet any of the criteria listed in section 15.ii above will be dismissed.
  4. Appeals that meet at least one of the criteria listed in section 15.ii above will be reviewed by a person appointed by the Registrar for this purpose,  who will review all the relevant documentation pertaining to the case, and any additional evidence submitted as part of the appeal, and decide on one of the following courses of action:
    1. Rescind the sanctions;
    2. Make appropriate adjustments to the sanctions;
    3. Require that the matter be reconsidered by the supervisor of the assessment services department, in light of any new evidence that requires deliberation. 
  5. The outcome of the appeal will be communicated to the learner as soon as possible, taking into account the specific circumstances of the case and the nature of the appeal.

16. Re-admission to the program following a suspension

  1. Learners who have been suspended from the program as a result of exam misconduct may apply for re-admission only after the end of their suspension period following the re-admission procedure at their respective education delivery designate.
  2. To be eligible for re-admission, learners must meet the following criteria, and any additional requirements set by their education delivery designate:
    1. Completed serving all suspension periods imposed as sanctions for exam misconduct;
    2. Be within the period allowed to complete the respective program (24 months for salesperson program and 12 months for broker program). Learners who have passed the deadline for completing the program are not eligible for re-admission. They may apply for an education equivalency assessment to RECO or restart the program. 
  3. Learners returning to the program after a suspension period may apply for a transfer to another education delivery designate only if they have been re-admitted to the program, provided they meet all other transfer requirements as published by the respective education delivery designates.
  4. Learners enrolled in the program pursuant to an education equivalency assessment decision issued by RECO and who are sanctioned for exam misconduct are not permitted to continue with their current education equivalency assessment decision and will not be re-admitted to the program. Learners in this category may apply for another education equivalency assessment or re-start the program after the suspension period.

17. Data retention

  1. Information related to exam misconduct investigations, including all evidence and statements collected, will be retained by RECO indefinitely.

18. Policy review

  1. This policy will be reviewed annually and updated as required to ensure continued relevance and effectiveness in addressing exam misconduct to protect the integrity and security of RECO’s exams.

Definitions

“Assessment services department”: department at RECO responsible for overseeing exam operations, security, investigating and responding to instances of exam misconduct.

“Assessment service provider” (ASP): provider of professional assessment services that has been designated by RECO to develop and administer exams that are part of the real estate registration education programs on its behalf. As of 2025, RECO’s designated ASP is Meazure Learning.

“Balance of probabilities”: a standard of proof according to which a claim is considered proven if it is more likely than not to be true, requiring a degree of certainty greater than 50%.

“Education delivery designate”: a post-secondary education institution that has been designated by RECO to deliver the registration education programs on its behalf.

“Exam nullification”: declaring an exam result invalid or void due to irregularities or issues that could compromise the fairness and integrity of the exam process.

“Exam process”: all the procedures, practices, and activities that happen before, during and after an exam, and are part of or connected to administering RECO’s exams.

“Learner account hold”: temporary blocking of learner access to the program (the learning management system and exam booking platform) while an exam misconduct investigation is in progress.

“Learner code of conduct”: policy document that outlines the rules, principles and guidelines that learners are expected to follow before, during and after taking an exam to uphold the fairness and integrity of the exam process.

“Sanction”: a penalty or disciplinary action imposed on a learner who is found to have engaged in exam misconduct.

“Whistleblowing”: reporting wrongdoing or unethical behaviour instances a person may become aware of to someone who can take action.