Reverse Discrimination Case

[lsfoster]

This particular test has not been used for years. That is one of the problems. It has not been used enough to norm the scores and determine weaknesses.

If you will read the OP, you will find that the problems you are assuming is not the problems they discovered with the test. And content validity is an issue. The test was not found to have problems with validity and reliability because African Americans scored lower. It was found to have problems with validity because of the way that particular items were weighted.

Try not to assume that which you don't know. It prevents you from understanding the issues.

No. Eligibility for promotion was decided based on test scores.

We have nothing that states what was in the exam, what types of things needed to be memorized, how important those are to the job, what other knowledge or ability was tested and how important those are, what was in the oral section as opposed to the written, how the test was administered, how it was evaluated, who interpreted the results, how long it had been used, what other factors went into determining promotions, or any information at all about the people who took it.

You have absolutely no more evidence than anyone else in this thread. You are assuming a whole lot, based on one sentence of an article that stated the opinion of a certain group.

If you would like to provide anything to back up your statements other than the one sentence you've referred to in that article, I'm sure we would all be interested to see them. Otherwise, I would advise that you don't give others advice you seem unwilling to follow yourself.

 

[jillio]

Presumably all the fire fighters were exposed to the same fire fighter training and used the same manuals and were under the same state laws and chain of command. There were no separate "black" or "white" rules for potential fire captains to follow. The flames they fight are no hotter for one race than another. So how does culture influence studying and memorizing the fire district's manual of operations?

Through the testing format and the weight given to certain items. The test was invalid for all the test takers, not just the black and Hispanic test takers. The lower scores obtained in those two populations is not the problem. That is just one of the results of having used an invalid testing instrument. The fact is, the test was found to have problems with validity in several areas. That means that high scores were inflated, as well. It is quite possible that those receiving the higher scores are not qualified for the position, because the test was not assessing qualifications to do the job. Everyone seems to be ignoring the fact that the test was found not to be testing for the skills necessary to do the job for which they were being tested. For any of the test takers.

The lack of understanding is evident even in the title of this thread. "Reverse discrimination" is a term used to describe discriminatory practices against the majority (white) population. If this were an issue of blacks being discriminated against, the word "reverse" is incorrect. And there truly is no such thing as "reverse discrimination." Discrimination is discrimination, period.

 

[lsfoster]

I have asked this question over and over, and none of the posters seem to be willing to answer it: "Would you be satisfied with the results of a test you took to decide your eligibility for promotion if it was not testing your ability to perform the job, but for instance, testing your ability to throw a ball? That is the issue at hand. That is what the Supreme Court will be asked to decide under Title VII.

I have already answered this. Obviously nobody would. But you are still arguing nonsensical extreme hypothetical situations. You would jump all over someone who tried to argue that gay marriage will lead to people marrying goats, but you're now using the exact same logic. I said before, I seriously doubt that the questions on this exam were about history, or art, or music. You don't know what they were, but you make up this situation where a promotion is based on throwing a ball. It's a pointless question which has nothing to do with this situation. It is absolutely not the issue at hand.

I also already mentioned that the fact that some group of psychologists thinks the memorization wasn't fair does not bolster your argument. If you want to argue extremes where I would be deemed mentally ill because I'm gay, you're only throwing those same psychologists under the bus by showing how completely invalid their opinion can be. I would expect more than this weak argument from you, jillio.

 

[jillio]

If that were true it would be impossible to grade any tests.

How does one "interpret" math calculations, chemistry formulas, and engineering tolerances? I want my pharmicist, fire fighter, pilot, bridge builder, and accountant to know the facts. I want the food handler at the buffet to know the time and temperature limits for each food item sitting out there, and to know how to measure those things.

There are many questions that do have cut and dry answers.

Those are not questions. Those are problems. And any mathemetician will tell you that no problem has only one solution. There are several ways to solve a problem.

The fact that many questions do not have cut and dried answers is part of the issue. That is exactly what makes some questions and answers culturally bound.

 

[naisho]

I have asked a firefighter who frequents the board to come on down and share his knowledge of what this preliminary test is all about.

Perhaps he can put out the fire in here as well.

 

[jillio]

I think what Jillio was trying to say is you can memorize an equation but it's possible that you wouldn't know how its applied. Something like that. Just because you know it, it doesn't mean you know how it's applied. However, I think the vice versa isn't true at all. You DO need to memorize in order to apply.

Exactly. And if you are taking a test for a calculus class, one has the right to expect that the test will be assessing their ability to solve caluclus problems, not grammar. That is what is at issue here.

 

[Cheri]

Perhaps he can put out the fire in here as well.

 

[jillio]

I have already answered this. Obviously nobody would. But you are still arguing nonsensical extreme hypothetical situations. You would jump all over someone who tried to argue that gay marriage will lead to people marrying goats, but you're now using the exact same logic. I said before, I seriously doubt that the questions on this exam were about history, or art, or music. You don't know what they were, but you make up this situation where a promotion is based on throwing a ball. It's a pointless question which has nothing to do with this situation. It is absolutely not the issue at hand.

I also already mentioned that the fact that some group of psychologists thinks the memorization wasn't fair does not bolster your argument. If you want to argue extremes where I would be deemed mentally ill because I'm gay, you're only throwing those same psychologists under the bus by showing how completely invalid their opinion can be. I would expect more than this weak argument from you, jillio.

Exactly. Nobody would. That is the whole point. If you don't want to be given invalid assessments, you cannot support invalid assessments for anyone else either. To do so is to be hypocritical. If you had read the article, and understood anything at all about test validity and reliability, you would already see that the problem with the test is that it is not testing what it is intended to test. There are very specific ways to determine this empirically. And the members of the Board of Industrial and Organizational Psychology are trained to do exactly this. It bolsters my argument because that is their domain. That is what they do. I am throwing no one under the bus. I am citing their expertise in determining reliability and validity. Obviously, you are misunderstanding based on your superficial comprehension of the issue, as well as your lack of knowledge regarding assessments. My argument only appears weak to you because of this lack of comprehension.

 

[jillio]

I have asked a firefighter who frequents the board to come on down and share his knowledge of what this preliminary test is all about.

Perhaps he can put out the fire in here as well.

Unless he took this particular test, his input will not be useful regarding this particular test. That is like asking someone who took a proficiency test in Oregon to comment on the proficency test taken by another student in Ohio. It is not the same test. Validity and reliability are determined per instrument.

We already know what the test is supposed to be about. It is supposed to be about assessing ones ability to perform a leadership position in an occupation in which he has already proven himself qualified. This test has been found not to do that accurately. By the experts in test construction, validity, and reliability. The Supreme Court will decide the implications under Title VII.

There is no fire in here. Just a great deal of misunderstanding regarding issues of reliabiliy and validity in assessment instruments.

 

[lsfoster]

Exactly. Nobody would. That is the whole point. If you don't want to be given invalid assessments, you cannot support invalid assessments for anyone else either. To do so is to be hypocritical. If you had read the article, and understood anything at all about test validity and reliability, you would already see that the problem with the test is that it is not testing what it is intended to test. There are very specific ways to determine this empirically. And the members of the Board of Industrial and Organizational Psychology are trained to do exactly this. It bolsters my argument because that is their domain. That is what they do. I am throwing no one under the bus. I am citing their expertise in determining reliability and validity. Obviously, you are misunderstanding based on your superficial comprehension of the issue, as well as your lack of knowledge regarding assessments. My argument only appears weak to you because of this lack of comprehension.

If you had read my post, you would see how there is absolutely no way that you can say that. None. Unless you have a copy of the test, and a secret history of intense knowledge of firefighting and the important aspects of it, please stop making statements that are clearly false. You want to argue that tests need to be valid. Fine. Nobody is saying they shouldn't be. But you keep throwing these statements around that you have absolutely no way to support.

Obviously you are misunderstanding based on your stubborn resistance to reading and interpreting anything anyone else posts, as well as your lack of any real knowledge about the exam being discussed. Your argument only appears strong to you because of this lack of comprehension.

Try this article and see how fair the situation seems.
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/10/us/10scotus.html?hp=&pagewanted=all

"But Donald Day, a representative of the International Association of Black Professional Fire Fighters, questioned the value of the New Haven test, which included written and oral components. “An individual’s ability to answer a multiple-choice exam,” Mr. Day told the city’s Civil Service Board, “does nothing but measure their ability to read and retain.”

There are more important values, he added. “Young black and Latino kids have every right,” he said, “to see black and Latino officers on those fire trucks that are riding through their community. They have every right to look for a role model.”

Yeah, knowing the information required to fight fires is definitely not the issue. If the test was supposed to give everyone a fair shot at having a role model of their particular race, then maybe you're right, jillio, this test was seriously flawed. :roll:

 

[jillio]

If you had read my post, you would see how there is absolutely no way that you can say that. None. Unless you have a copy of the test, and a secret history of intense knowledge of firefighting and the important aspects of it, please stop making statements that are clearly false. You want to argue that tests need to be valid. Fine. Nobody is saying they shouldn't be. But you keep throwing these statements around that you have absolutely no way to support.

Obviously you are misunderstanding based on your stubborn resistance to reading and interpreting anything anyone else posts, as well as your lack of any real knowledge about the exam being discussed. Your argument only appears strong to you because of this lack of comprehension.

Try this article and see how fair the situation seems.
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/10/us/10scotus.html?hp=&pagewanted=all

"But Donald Day, a representative of the International Association of Black Professional Fire Fighters, questioned the value of the New Haven test, which included written and oral components. “An individual’s ability to answer a multiple-choice exam,” Mr. Day told the city’s Civil Service Board, “does nothing but measure their ability to read and retain.”

There are more important values, he added. “Young black and Latino kids have every right,” he said, “to see black and Latino officers on those fire trucks that are riding through their community. They have every right to look for a role model.”

Yeah, knowing the information required to fight fires is definitely not the issue. If the test was supposed to give everyone a fair shot at having a role model of their particular race, then maybe you're right, jillio, this test was seriously flawed. :roll:

Why in the world would I need a copy of the test when the experts who are trained to determine reliability and validity have already reviewed the test and found the problems cited? I would use the same criteria for deciding reliability and validity as they use.

So, you think it's fair, in a test that has been found to be invalid as far as testing what it is intended to test, that the inflated scores are also used? You are failing to understand that in an invalid instrument, all scores are innacurate. Some will be artifically high, some will be artificially low. You are satisfied that the inflated scores will determine who is promoted? Good luck with that attitude, and I'd suggest that you hope to heck your house never catches fire.

You have just shown that your understanding of the issue is non-existent. It is not about blacks and Hispanics riding on fire trucks. All of these men were already fire fighters. They were already riding on fire trucks. All were working in a fire dept. They had already proven their ability to fight fires. This is not about that at all. It is about promotion to a job that requires specific skills. Skills that were not properly assessed in this test.

 

[lsfoster]

You have just shown that your understanding of the issue is non-existent. It is not about blacks and Hispanics riding on fire trucks. All of these men were already fire fighters. They were already riding on fire trucks. All were working in a fire dept. They had already proven their ability to fight fires. This is not about that at all. It is about promotion to a job that requires specific skills. Skills that were not properly assessed in this test.

If you don't like the quote, that's not my fault, jillio. That's what he said, not me. And that's exactly why I think this whole case is ridiculous.

And if you don't see how simply taking someone's opinion that the test was invalid without any actual knowledge of it yourself is a bad idea, then I can't really help you. What about their cultural interpretation of things? What about any actual information about what their conclusion was based on? Memorization? What about it? Why is it unfair? What were they required to memorize? How does that not show qualification?

If you're not interested in having an informed opinion, then I think I'm about done with this discussion. You haven't said anything new in the past two pages of posts, except to criticize and insult anyone who dared to question the fact that you make definitive statements with no evidence or information to back them up. I have never argued that tests should not be reliable or valid, all I've been saying is that there is currently no way to know if this one was. That seems to be either too hard a concept for you to grasp, or you've simply dug yourself in too far in this "the test was wrong!" hole and you refuse to back down. Either way, I'm becoming hugely uninterested in reading the same thing over and over again. Must be my lack of comprehension about the issues. :roll:

 

[jillio]

If you don't like the quote, that's not my fault, jillio. That's what he said, not me. And that's exactly why I think this whole case is ridiculous.

And if you don't see how simply taking someone's opinion that the test was invalid without any actual knowledge of it yourself is a bad idea, then I can't really help you. What about their cultural interpretation of things? What about any actual information about what their conclusion was based on? Memorization? What about it? Why is it unfair? What were they required to memorize? How does that not show qualification?

If you're not interested in having an informed opinion, then I think I'm about done with this discussion. You haven't said anything new in the past two pages of posts, except to criticize and insult anyone who dared to question the fact that you make definitive statements with no evidence or information to back them up. I have never argued that tests should not be reliable or valid, all I've been saying is that there is currently no way to know if this one was. That seems to be either too hard a concept for you to grasp, or you've simply dug yourself in too far in this "the test was wrong!" hole and you refuse to back down. Either way, I'm becoming hugely uninterested in reading the same thing over and over again. Must be my lack of comprehension about the issues. :roll:

A federal appeals court in New York upheld a lower court ruling dismissing the lawsuit. Two courts have already stated that the white firefighters who filed the lawsuit does not have a leg to stand on. Quite obviously, your argument doesn't either. Two courts have found the findings of the invalidity of the test to be accurrate.

I am neither criticizing nor insulting. I am educating you about issues that obviously, you have no knowledge, and that is the validity and reliability of testing instruments, and how that can affect the results. And how those implications are determined to be in compliance or not in compliance with Title VII.

Frankly, I'm not asking for your help in this. I already have the knowledge and education regarding the issue. I understand exactly what you are saying. I am simply telling you that you are failing to see the issue that has 2 courts already saying that the white firefighters do not have a case, and that the instrument was found to be invalid for the purposes for which it was intended. I have no doubt that the third court will find the same way. Why? Because the expert testimony regarding the assessment instrument is being given the proper weight and the actual issue is what is being decided. You have considered neither.

 

[rockin'robin]

The Supreme Court hears the case today....(Fox News...I posted it in Current Events).

 

[jillio]

The Supreme Court hears the case today....(Fox News...I posted it in Current Events).

Yep. And two courts have already dismissed the white firefighters suit. I have no doubt that the third court will do the same.

 

[Daredevel7]

Basically, Jillio has faith in the justice system while lsfoster doesn't in this specific case. Here's the ironic part: Siding with the justice system depends on the case and what your beliefs are.

 

[jillio]

Basically, Jillio has faith in the justice system while lsfoster doesn't in this specific case. Here's the ironic part: Siding with the justice system depends on the case and what your beliefs are.

It doesn't really have anything to do with my faith in the justice system. It is the fact that I have faith in those that have been trained to determine validity and reliability of instruments, that I don't want to be given an assessment for anything that is not valid and yields incorrect results, nor do I advocate it happening to anyone else. I deal with testing and assessment daily, and am quite familiar with the limitations that are possible. I will not use an instrument known to be invalid, and neither should anyone else. I will not use an instrument that has been normed for a population other than the the individual I am administering it to without taking that fact into consideration when the results are interpreted. I will not give an assessment to a person when that particular instrument has been shown to have questionable validity for the person being assessed. I will not make a decision regarding any form of placement on a test that does not have predictive validity. And if you, or anyone else were the person being assessed, I am sure that you would be grateful that care is being taken not to reach articially inflated or deflated scores, thus leading to incorrect results and decisions.

In this case, given the problems with validity that were documented by the professional, I only say that the court, in the first two trials, made the correct decision. Given that the same information is available to the Supreme Court, it would stand to reason that their decision will be the same as the two lower courts.

 

[Jiro]

this thread surely could use a little cooler -

 

[jillio]

this thread surely uses a little cooler -

I answer E. It depends on the test, and the test taker.

 

[Daredevel7]

Okay then, faith in the professionals that deal with the validity of tests.

Some of us know that tests can be interpreted in different ways. We just have a hard time seeing how something so technical can be misinterpreted.

However, like I said before, this test seems to be more about testing leadership skills (promotion) rather than technical firefighting skills. Testing for leadership skills is definitely left open for interpretation.