Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

What questions are racially discrimatory for a firemans test?

Are you black?
If no, we can tell that you're not a burn victim.
If yes, we can't.
Yes = you fail.

As if there is a question like that.

If you want to compare the proportions of different races in the population, it's worth visiting the US Census Bureau website.

You have officially crossed into the land of oversimplification Emperors Faithful.

Is an orange comparable to an apple? Yes
Because an orange is a fruit (FACEPALM FOR EF)

Does money grow on trees? Yes
Because money is made of paper (FACEPALM FOR EF)

Etc... Etc... Etc...

I was trying to argue that you can't ask a racist question in a test like that without it being picked up in court. The questions weren't racist were they? The court case was becuase it was felt that not promoting black people DESPITE their failure to pass was racist.

P.S. Aussie money is different so NAH!

Emperors Faithful wrote:I was trying to argue that you can't ask a racist question in a test like that without it being picked up in court. The questions weren't racist were they? The court case was becuase it was felt that not promoting black people DESPITE their failure to pass was racist.

P.S. Aussie money is different so NAH!

Hmm... plastic money, could that be why you get charged so much more for everything? (Wrex gets pelted with rotten fruit!)

http://goaustralia.about.com/od/practicalinformation/a/ausmoney.htm

(continue to pelt Wrex with rotten fruit...then switch to vegetables for a break)

Emperors Faithful wrote:What questions are racially discrimatory for a firemans test?

Are you black?
If no, we can tell that you're not a burn victim.
If yes, we can't.
Yes = you fail.

As if there is a question like that.

No, there isn't a question as blatantly obvious as that. I've explained several times now that it isn't just about questions that obviously and directly racist, but about questions that assess abilities that aren't relevant to the job and that might be more present in one ethnic group and less in another. As I've given in a example several times now, multiple choice frequently tests abstract thought. Abstract thought isn't needed in a lot of jobs, and the positions here may well have been such jobs. It is often the case that black people attend inner city schools, where education isn't as good, and so the kind abstract thinking needed to do well in certain types of multiple choice tests aren't as well developed.

Which means that if you hold a mutiple choice test where that kind of thinking is very important, but it is for a job where that kind of thinking isn't needed at all, you have a test that may not be racist by design, but may be racist in effect.

It isn't a complicated idea to grasp, and the fact that I've had to repeat it for you several times can only be explained that you are ignoring anything that stops you making silly little comments. So cut it out, read what people are saying and maybe you'll come away from this thread a little better informed.

I was trying to argue that you can't ask a racist question in a test like that without it being picked up in court. The questions weren't racist were they? The court case was becuase it was felt that not promoting black people DESPITE their failure to pass was racist.

No, the court case wasn't about that. It was about the level of evidence needed to decide a test was racist. New Haven had taken a racially discrepant result as sufficient evidence, but the Supreme Court said that wasn't enough by itself, further study had to be undertaken to establish the test had been racist. Which is a reasonable verdict, and one that I agree with, but it has to be understood how subjective this issue is.

The answer isn't simple, despite your efforts to pretend otherwise.

P.S. Aussie money is different so NAH!

Did you ever watch Space Above and Beyond?

As I've given in a example several times now, multiple choice frequently tests abstract thought. Abstract thought isn't needed in a lot of jobs, and the positions here may well have been such jobs. It is often the case that black people attend inner city schools, where education isn't as good, and so the kind abstract thinking needed to do well in certain types of multiple choice tests aren't as well developed

But it is a nice thing to know in a job whether or not they have abstract thinking.
Besides not all black people come from innercity. Beside i dont buy into that stuff that if you come from a bad school system thst means you cant do well.
you make school what you make it.

garret wrote:Besides not all black people come from innercity.

Please read what is written. He didn't say all black Americans are inner city, he wrote most are in the inner city. This is a true statement. Even if they don't there are also a myriad of studies that show that black kids in suburbs often don't do as well on standardized tests yet are not fundamentally less intelligent than their white and asian counter parts. The problem is the testing is aimed at certain concepts that are not as emphasized often times within certain groups, black or white. Understanding this helps makes the situation better much more than plugging ones ears and refusing to look at the evidence because they want to believe a certain thing. Many kids used to be torn down becuase they were thought to be stupid but then we learned what dyslexia is and have made leaps in getting these kids to do better by understanding their needs are a little different. This isn't that much different in some ways. Dooming them to live in shame because the system isn't considering other factors is disingenuous and cruel outlook, especially considering we understand things like institutional bias, unearned privilege, and economic conditions play a role in the education process.

The selection process most fire departments took to avoid this was to never use a written test when you could test the actual task.

Don't give a written test when you can evaluate the person really doing it.

As I remember it the decision the supreme court nominee had was not whether the test and the subsequent actions taken by the city was discriminatory (all agreed it had) but if the city could be sued for its actions and she decided that prior case law by a higher court had already answered that question.

Her decision is now moot since the supreme court has offered an opinion with a different view that will allow the fireman to refile and will likely succeed this time.

IF she had sided with the firemen with the older superior court view she would have be marked as a activist judge so instead a Latin judge is being called a racist.

Only in America could we have gone this route with out violence, it is a good country to live in, better than any other I have seen.

@Sebster: Sorry if I seemed to be ignoring your posts but I thought you were saying that putting abstract questions in a test was racist. What would you define as an abstract multiple-choice question? One that is racist by design? As I believe you (or someone else) said, this is not about being the average firefighter, this about a higher post. Someone who could be in command of directing the firefightnig forces of a whole district or suburb or whatever. This post could very well call for abstract questions, in order to test how the person would react to a vareity of different situations. One cannot afford to be too careful when choosing who is going to be responsible for such an important task, where lives and homes and families are at stake.

@NeedleofInquiry:
1) As I said, this was about higher posistions, not the average firefighter who you could easily evaluate through drills and such.
2)WTF is this about a Latin Judge?
3) Your patriotism, while admirable, borders on the fringes of being jingoisitc.

Any job can be tested to task. If it can not be tested to task then you surely can not provide a written test for it anyway.

Latino is what I meant, typos happen.

Jingoism is defined in the Oxford English Dictionary as "extreme patriotism in the form of aggressive foreign policy

I am not in favor of extreme action against other countries unless we are at war with them, in that case i cheerfully admit given the choice of sending a team in to kill someone where we might lose one or more team members or "Nuking it from orbit" as one movie put it, I am all for the method that causes the least risk to our guys. In the main, unless some one is invading our borders, and I do not mean illegals, I am for letting other countries handle thier problems without our help or troops. In my experience every country we have gone into has come out worse for the wear.

garret wrote:

As I've given in a example several times now, multiple choice frequently tests abstract thought. Abstract thought isn't needed in a lot of jobs, and the positions here may well have been such jobs. It is often the case that black people attend inner city schools, where education isn't as good, and so the kind abstract thinking needed to do well in certain types of multiple choice tests aren't as well developed

But it is a nice thing to know in a job whether or not they have abstract thinking.
Besides not all black people come from innercity. Beside i dont buy into that stuff that if you come from a bad school system thst means you cant do well.
you make school what you make it.

Because up to date, books, desks, and chalk don't mean anything right? Yes, all schools are created equal in the U.S. people that send their kids to private schools are just throwing their money away... right??? C'mon man, your environment determines what you are capable of learning. If I don't have the books and more importantly the time to teach a whole class SOMEONE is going to miss out. Out of 100 teachers that I have been in a class with, only one has the capabilities required of a public school teacher. It is just too much work for most people, not to mention all of the angry parents that want their kid to have the best schooling the state can provide. At the end of the day U.S. public schools are mid-range quality AT BEST, and most kids just want to leave school and never return... ever.

Kids flunk in private schools too wrexasur, though probably a little less commonly. Schools is DEFINITELY what you make it. The enviroment has an effect yes, but essentially, the best people make the best of thier given situations. In most cases (bar forieng invasion or some massive governmental screw-up) a lot of people can only blame themselves for thier predicament. If the guys wanted to pass, they should hav e studied harder.

@NeedleofInquiry:
1) The job of the common fireman could easily be evaluated through a task, and also possible at higher levels. But it is much easier to ask in an exam "How would you go about organizing the defense of the western suburbs in the case of a bushfire?", rather than test each and everyone of the exam(..ees?) through an actual procedure of getting the whole city riled up and organized for an imaginary bushfire.

2) I meant, WTF does the judge being LATINO or whatever having anything to do with this?

3) ...That is the wierdest justification I have heard to date. You're so...proud. It's really quite sickening that you would claim America to be the voice of reason in these times.

The Firefighter exam is made up of both a written portion and a hands on portion.

Once you reach the White/Red hat level its less hands on and more directing others actions from that point. A written test is the best way to test ones knowledge at this point.

And please... I came from friggin Idaho, which while I was going to school was ranked in the mid 40's out of 50 for public school funding/teacher pay. I applied myself and was one of 37 people that year to Graduate from my Highschool.

Dont sit their and try to say that school ISNT what you make of it. You can have the most craptastic school on earth and if you really apply yourself you can get a quality education.

feth Ive seen schools in Iraq with NOTHING and the damn 6th graders could speak multiple languages and know a hell of alot more then I did at that age.

Wrexasaur takes a deep breath and exits thread to avoid de-railing the discussion.

garret wrote:But it is a nice thing to know in a job whether or not they have abstract thinking.

But, as I've been saying all the way through, it depends on whether the ability being tested is relevant to the job at hand. For instance, if you were making applicants arm wrestle to test their strength you'd be favouring the test towards men over women. This would be acceptable if the job was for warehouse stocker or something where strength matters to the job, but not acceptable if was a position as a lawyer or something else where strength was not a factor.

Now, in the case at hand New Haven saw there was a discrepancy and rejected the test based only on that. It isn't clear whether the criteria that led to the black candidates doing poorly was relevant to the job because the research wasn't done (which, incidentally, was the key point the Supreme Court made).

Besides not all black people come from innercity. Beside i dont buy into that stuff that if you come from a bad school system thst means you cant do well.
you make school what you make it.

That's great advice for any individual, because it is in the best interests of each kid to make whatever they can of their situation, and not make excuses. But you're absolutely, 100% kidding yourself if you think that kids in some schools don't have it easier than kids in other schools, and that doesn't affect their final results. So while exceptionally gifted and hard working kids will still rise above, the average kid in your average suburban school is going to come out ahead of the average kid in the average inner city school. When you look at that at a societal level, you have to recognise the impacts it has on different socio-economic classes, and how the filters down into an impact on ethnic groups.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

NeedleOfInquiry wrote:Only in America could we have gone this route with out violence, it is a good country to live in, better than any other I have seen.

What? You think that only in America could you have a legal dispute without it descending into violence? You really need to get out more.

jp400 wrote:
Once you reach the White/Red hat level its less hands on and more directing others actions from that point. A written test is the best way to test ones knowledge at this point.

This. There simply comes a point where physical testing cannot reasonably approximate actual practice.

@sebster: I think you mean this WOULD be acceptable where strength matters to the job.

P.S. Thankyou! He DOES need to get out more.

That's great advice for any individual, because it is in the best interests of each kid to make whatever they can of their situation, and not make excuses. But you're absolutely, 100% kidding yourself if you think that kids in some schools don't have it easier than kids in other schools, and that doesn't affect their final results. So while exceptionally gifted and hard working kids will still rise above, the average kid in your average suburban school is going to come out ahead of the average kid in the average inner city school. When you look at that at a societal level, you have to recognise the impacts it has on different socio-economic classes, and how the filters down into an impact on ethnic groups.

IM not say its easier.
Im say ing that you can still laern if you apply yourself.

I agree with garret. What school you go to does not entirely define you. You can always make the best if it.

Emperors Faithful wrote:@sebster: I think you mean this WOULD be acceptable where strength matters to the job.

Cheers, my typo made my point somewhat incoherent. Thanks for the heads up.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

dogma wrote:This. There simply comes a point where physical testing cannot reasonably approximate actual practice.

I find it bizarre that there's a test for that level of management at all. Once you get past basic technical work, every position over here is based on resume, references and interview.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

garret wrote:IM not say its easier.
Im say ing that you can still laern if you apply yourself.

Yes, you can still learn. Yes, exceptional kids do rise above.

But that has nothing to do with the issue here. Because we aren't talking about a specific individual, we're talking about populations. In general, an inner city school will not provide the same quality of education as a suburban school. So, in general, the populations that attend those inner city schools will not develop their skill sets to the same level as the populations that attend suburban schools.

In each case there will still be exceptionally good and exceptionally poor students, but most will fall somewhere in between. They are the people we're talking about, the large majority of kids that make up the middle, when it is noted that different social groups tend towards better and poorer performances in certain kinds of testing.

But we're not talking about kids who don't go to a public school being discriminated. (In fact one of the guys to pass was actually hispanic soooo...) This was about guys OF A CERTAIN COLOUR being discriminated. Of the guys to pass some,most or even all could have come from public schools.

If 16 white guys from private schools passed and the rest of the white guys from public schools failed, do you think there would be this amount of ruckus? No, but since some of those who failed are a different colour suddenly it's all racist.

Emperors Faithful wrote:But we're not talking about kids who don't go to a public school being discriminated. (In fact one of the guys to pass was actually hispanic soooo...) This was about guys OF A CERTAIN COLOUR being discriminated. Of the guys to pass some,most or even all could have come from public schools.

If 16 white guys from private schools passed and the rest of the white guys from public schools failed, do you think there would be this amount of ruckus? No, but since some of those who failed are a different colour suddenly it's all racist.

Yeah, it's true that if the test favoured a group on non-racial grounds this wouldn't have been noticed. And maybe that test would have been bad and unfair too, because it rewarded skills that aren't relevant to the job or maybe not, we don't know if that's the case in this example, let alone in the private school hypothetical. But there are limits to what the courts can do, how far they can look into business practices. The courts have decided poor selection criteria that favours a race is worth looking into, while poor selection that favours a socio-economic group is not.

Given history, I don't think that's an unreasonable priority.

This was an exam for Lts and Capts. While their educational background may have some effect on it, the (reported) ability to have practice exams to review and study beforehand shouldn't be ignored either.

But, I also don't know all the details of the case. Personally, it sounds more like affirmative action gone awry than racially biased.

Deadshane1 wrote:I hate this planet.

QFT.

sebster wrote:
I find it bizarre that there's a test for that level of management at all. Once you get past basic technical work, every position over here is based on resume, references and interview.

Standardized testing has become more popular in the course of promotion and hiring as a means of avoiding discrimination suits. The idea being that a test can provide an objective (or mostly objective) measure of a targets potential, which can then be used to easily explain why 1 person was hired while another was not. Obviously the method is far from fool proof.

dogma wrote:Standardized testing has become more popular in the course of promotion and hiring as a means of avoiding discrimination suits. The idea being that a test can provide an objective (or mostly objective) measure of a targets potential, which can then be used to easily explain why 1 person was hired while another was not. Obviously the method is far from fool proof.

I wonder if this case will discourage the practice?

What is really needed is a test of some sort that anyone can pass.

Wait a minute,....

That would be stupid.

Zip Napalm wrote:What is really needed is a test of some sort that anyone can pass.

Wait a minute,....

That would be stupid.

LoL