The critics of the test have been unable to answer these questions. This leads to the logical conclusion that the critics of the test, including the Judges who voted against the majority SCOTUS opinion, are only interested in a political agenda, and not what is fair and certainly not what the US Constitution demands (protection of EVERYONE’S Civil Rights, even a white guy with a disability).
Did anyone find out how many hours were spent studying by the Blacks who took the test and compared that to the people who passed it? Maybe the answer to what happened is there,
OR it may be here:
http://bit.ly/ZqD2c

Excellent questions. I am not sure but I do believe the exam was the only thing related to promotion, if not they were a big part of it since one could not be promoted if they didn’t achieve at least a threshold score that allowed them to pass.

The exam itself, which I did not see, has its main cognitive basis in reading comprehension and job knowledge. The reason for the differences in such tests between races is the subject of much debate. Some have even taken a stand that it is due to immutable factors in the cognitive structures of different races. Please understand that I do not take this view. We dont know the reason for sure but it seems to boil down to the fact that the less reading and the more real life interaction, the lower the adverse impact.

I dont think anyone can answer for sure the reason for the low pass rate for minorities. I havent seen the test itself so I cant comment on the technical aspects of it. At the city of New Orleans, while under an EEOC consent decree, we used a strategy called banding in which the standard error of measurement of the test was used to create groups of scores so as to force a normal distribution (i.e., bell curve) of scores. This technique assumed that all persons within a score “band” could be considered as having equal scores. This worked great for the tail ends of the bell curve but the middle of the curve had a huge number of folks and the city could then use its own judgment and fairness requirements to choose one person over the other. Race was the most common thing used to make these decisions. According to the EEOC and the government, this was OK. In reality it inevitably pissed off whomever was passed over. the complexities of this stuff tend to always leave someone feeling like they got the short end of the stick, just as with Affirmative Action programs that denied members of one race who were more qualified access to important things such as university admisions.

We live in an imperfect world and all we can do is continue to acknowledge the issue and try to find ways to manage it and eliminate it.

CB – I don’t believe the exam scores guaranteed a promotion, if that’s what you’re asking. I don’t believe the decision goes into detail about other factors, but perhaps one of the earlier decisions or filings does? Check out http://tinyurl.com/rdscotus. With respect to your last question/issue, “job related” knowledge was measured using source texts presumably dealing with firefighting. Minority candidates almost always score lower on cognitive-heavy exams and there are all kinds of theories about why. Check this out as an example: http://appliedpersonnelresearch.com/papers/adimpact.pdf

1. Was the exam 100% of the decision to promote?
2. If not, what other factors were considered?
3. Since this was a “cognitive” exam; what critical elements were being measured? Certainly not whether people can read.

My ultimate question is, “why such a high non-pass rate of non-white candidates?” What exactly were the questions that were most difficult to answer? Since the test was Valid–the other questions need to be addressed.

I don’t think its the “only thing” it does. What it also does is turn our attention away from the crux of the issue. The validation of the tests used in this case, developed at a cost of tens of thousands of dollars, wasn’t questioned. What was clearly questioned is the use of a standard “80%” mathematical formula that the federal government feels is the magic number that ultimately waves a bright red flag screaming “Sue me!”. This is THE reason that the city refused to acknowledge the results and this is THE reason the situation cannot be resolved. Reliable, valid, research-based testing versus the 80% math formula.

As my Statistics Professor told us in grad school, “Go figure.”

This decision changes nothing. Since the Griggs decision, adverse impact against a protected group (not necessarily a minority group) is illegal unless the employer can demonstrate the test was job-related and consistent with business necessity. This decision doesn’t change that. It also doesn’t imply anything about using–or not using–written tests. It doesn’t change a legal burden. The only thing it does, as you point out, is reiterate the importance of validation. And perhaps underscore how complex decisions regarding selection can be.

Let’s all remember that a written multiple-choice test is not the only kind of test. Anything you do to narrow down your candidate pool is a test. “To test or not to test”, that is not the question. “How to test”–ah, therein lies the rub.