billvon 3,078 #76 June 30, 2009 >How is flashing a picture of a mal and expecting them to react correctly biased? Now you are starting to understand! Cool. Flashing a picture of a mal and expecting them to react correctly would be an unbiased test. Saying "you look up and see a ball of shit, tell me what you would do" would be an example of a biased test. >They either know the material or they don't. Correct! And an unbiased test will reveal that. A biased test (say, towards english speakers) will not. Thank you for demonstrating my point. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rehmwa 2 #77 June 30, 2009 QuoteNow you are starting to understand! Cool. how patronizing it's been clear all along that Ron understood and you were being obtuse ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,078 #78 June 30, 2009 >it's been clear all along that Ron understood . . . . . . and was just being obstinate for the sake of baiting me? Fair enough, but odd that you'd consider me to be the patronizing one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #79 June 30, 2009 Quote>How is flashing a picture of a mal and expecting them to react correctly biased? Now you are starting to understand! Cool. Flashing a picture of a mal and expecting them to react correctly would be an unbiased test. Saying "you look up and see a ball of shit, tell me what you would do" would be an example of a biased test. >They either know the material or they don't. Correct! And an unbiased test will reveal that. A biased test (say, towards english speakers) will not. Thank you for demonstrating my point. Now you just have to prove that New Haven's test was biased.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SpeedRacer 1 #80 June 30, 2009 I'm still having a hard time understanding how a test on fire-fighting procedures could have a racial bias to its questions. Speed Racer -------------------------------------------------- Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Andy9o8 2 #81 June 30, 2009 QuoteI'm still having a hard time understanding how a test on fire-fighting procedures could have a racial bias to its questions. Simple. Question #14, dealing with the odor of various kinds of smoke, asked, "Odors are often very potent memory triggers. While driving down the street, you smell smoke, and its odor immediately conjures up a warm childhood memory of watching Ozzie and Harriet re-runs. Which building is most likely on fire?" A much higher percentage of Caucasians, than others, got the right answer: "The local Wonder Bread factory." Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rehmwa 2 #82 June 30, 2009 Quote Quote >How is flashing a picture of a mal and expecting them to react correctly biased? Now you are starting to understand! Cool. Flashing a picture of a mal and expecting them to react correctly would be an unbiased test. Saying "you look up and see a ball of shit, tell me what you would do" would be an example of a biased test. >They either know the material or they don't. Correct! And an unbiased test will reveal that. A biased test (say, towards english speakers) will not. Thank you for demonstrating my point. Now you just have to prove that New Haven's test was biased. no he doesn't, it's not the test that matters, only the results...... ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Broke 0 #83 June 30, 2009 If a Dyslexic firefighter can spend every waking hour when he wasn't working to study for the test and pass, then why couldn't a black firefighter do the same? I would assume that a good portion of the people who failed the test didn't even bother to study for it. Unless you are going to say the test was so biased that even a Dyslexic white man could pass it.Divot your source for all things Hillbilly. Anvil Brother 84 SCR 14192 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
futuredivot 0 #84 June 30, 2009 Nah, he was just pointing out that you were pulling crap from left field and trying to prove your position with non relevant examples. "Because the grass was green" is not and never will be the correct answer to "4+4="You are only as strong as the prey you devour Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
redlegphi 0 #85 June 30, 2009 QuoteQuote>How is flashing a picture of a mal and expecting them to react correctly biased? Now you are starting to understand! Cool. Flashing a picture of a mal and expecting them to react correctly would be an unbiased test. Saying "you look up and see a ball of shit, tell me what you would do" would be an example of a biased test. >They either know the material or they don't. Correct! And an unbiased test will reveal that. A biased test (say, towards english speakers) will not. Thank you for demonstrating my point. Now you just have to prove that New Haven's test was biased. No, he doesn't. Griggs v. Duke Power held that it doesn't matter if the test is biased (either intentionally or unintentionally). All that matters is: 1) The test produced results with a significant racial disparity AND 2) The racial disparity was caused by elements of the test which don't directly test the applicants ability to do the job. In this case, people who went before the CSB brought up that the written portion of the test doesn't test the actual job of a LT or CPT nearly as well as the oral portion. They also pointed out that nearby Bridgeport used a test that had the oral portion weighted heavier and that that resulted in less of a racial disparity and a better testing of the actual skills required. This is what led the CSB to decide to not validate the test, which led to the lawsuit. Which then led to the majority of the Supreme Court inventing a new standard out of whole cloth and then deciding the case based on that previously unknown standard. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,078 #86 June 30, 2009 >Now you just have to prove that New Haven's test was biased. I never claimed it was. I've never seen it, so I don't know. The skydiving example was an example of how a test CAN be biased, which is what ParaFrog asked. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ron 10 #87 June 30, 2009 QuoteNow you are starting to understand! Cool. #1. I am not three. Stop acting like it. #2. That was my point all along... you are just being difficult to be difficult. QuoteCorrect! And an unbiased test will reveal that. A biased test (say, towards english speakers) will not. Thank you for demonstrating my point. See #2 above. Maybe you should reread all my posts twice before you jump to a conclusion next time? And the fact that others have said you are doing it should say something....."No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
GeorgiaDon 379 #88 June 30, 2009 QuoteI'm still having a hard time understanding how a test on fire-fighting procedures could have a racial bias to its questions. I haven't seen the actual test, I don't even know if it's available online (a google search brings up a million articles that refer to the test, but not the test itself as far as I have been able to find). Anyway I'm not a firefighter and couldn't judge that aspect of the test. So what follows is my speculation. One of the articles mentioned that the "written" portion of the test consisted of 100 multiple choice questions. My experience with such tests, both taking them and making them up for the classes I teach, is that some of the choices will be way out, but some will be very close to the one correct answer. Commonly at least some questions will be deliberately "tricky", so that distinguishing the right answer will depend on careful reading and parsing the specific meaning of the language of the possible answers. It's very easy to set a test where the score will depend as much on vocabulary and reading skills as it does on knowledge of the subject material. That's why I personally dislike multiple choice tests and much prefer a format where students have to write out an answer. Oral or written exams are harder to unintentionally bias, since the questions are usually more straightforward, and the examinee speaks or writes their response directly instead of having to choose from amongst several very similar, deliberately confusing answers. Another advantage of the oral exam is that there is opportunity for back-and-forth, so the examiner can always ask follow-up questions to make sure they can assess whether or not the examinee has the knowledge the question is directed towards. In the case in question, New Haven weighted the "written" (actually multiple choice) test most heavily, and nearly Bridgeport weights the oral exam more heavily, and Bridgeport seems not to have problems with "minority" candidates being unable to meet the criteria for promotion. Reading and writing skills are influenced by education, and school performance is influenced by factors like class size, teacher quality, and teaching materials, all of which are influenced by finances. Given that most school districts are funded mainly from the local property tax base, it's not unreasonable to suggest that, on average, people who graduate from schools in poor districts may have a harder time with tests that indirectly measure vocabulary skills, compared to people who go to better-off schools with smaller class sizes, more personal attention, and more up-to-date teaching methodologies and materials. Since average income and education in the USA still correlate with race (although the variances are huge), it's not impossible that, on average, people from some racial groups might have a harder time with certain test designs than people from other racial groups. Cultural practices such as speaking dialects like "ebonics", with non-standard word and grammar usage, might exacerbate the problem. Don_____________________________________ Tolerance is the cost we must pay for our adventure in liberty. (Dworkin, 1996) “Education is not filling a bucket, but lighting a fire.” (Yeats) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
grimmie 186 #89 June 30, 2009 All very valid points. However ALL applicants have to pass a written test to get hired. There are also a list of study materials each firefighter has access to before the test. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
TomAiello 26 #90 June 30, 2009 QuoteI'm still having a hard time understanding how a test on fire-fighting procedures could have a racial bias to its questions. It didn't. And no one is saying that it did. Even the dissent doesn't claim the test was biased--just that it didn't meet the social engineering targets.-- Tom Aiello Tom@SnakeRiverBASE.com SnakeRiverBASE.com Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
redlegphi 0 #91 June 30, 2009 QuoteQuoteI'm still having a hard time understanding how a test on fire-fighting procedures could have a racial bias to its questions. It didn't. And no one is saying that it did. Even the dissent doesn't claim the test was biased--just that it didn't meet the social engineering targets, I don't know why I bother, but once again, not true. The dissent makes no mention of social engineering targets. It's based largely around precedent. I'm beginning to think that you're just saying this over and over to cause my post count to go up. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
TomAiello 26 #92 June 30, 2009 QuoteQuoteQuoteI'm still having a hard time understanding how a test on fire-fighting procedures could have a racial bias to its questions. It didn't. And no one is saying that it did. Even the dissent doesn't claim the test was biased--just that it didn't meet the social engineering targets, I don't know why I bother, but once again, not true. The dissent makes no mention of social engineering targets. It's based largely around precedent. I'm beginning to think that you're just saying this over and over to cause my post count to go up. If you could show me part of the dissent that says there was a bias in the test, that would help. From your latest post: Quote1) The test produced results with a significant racial disparity AND 2) The racial disparity was caused by elements of the test which don't directly test the applicants ability to do the job. That says nothing at all about bias in the test. It tacitly admits that there was _no bias_. We're saying the same thing. The decision is based on disparate results, even when the test is unbiased. Of course the dissent doesn't call them social engineering targets. They use politically correct language, as do you, referring to the desired results as "racially balanced" or other vaguely defined terms, all of which amount to the same thing: a racial quota that was targeted, and failing to meet the quota the--totally fair--results must be discarded.-- Tom Aiello Tom@SnakeRiverBASE.com SnakeRiverBASE.com Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
redlegphi 0 #93 June 30, 2009 As I've said several times, the presence of any bias in the test is irrelevant. The law is (or at least, was) fairly clear. The test must directly test the ability of the applicant to perform the job. If it doesn't and it results in a racial disparity, even if there is no clear bias in the test, the test is invalid. This has nothing to do with social engineering. If you check out the Griggs v. Duke Power case, you'll note that the justices had a very good reason for putting this provision in place. Companies were attempting to get around the 1964 Civil Rights Act by imposing arbitrary requirements for jobs and promotions. The requirements they'd pick would be ones that would heavily favor white candidates (in Griggs, a high school diploma). Obviously, this was companies trying to violate the Civil Rights Act, so the Supreme Court closed that loop hole. They also found in Griggs that the intent of the company was irrelevant. Which means that all of the talk of bias in the test and the intent of the test-makers is completely irrelevant to this case. So I don't know why it's continuously brought up as if it matters. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
TomAiello 26 #94 July 1, 2009 QuoteAs I've said several times, the presence of any bias in the test is irrelevant. Right. Which is exactly my point. The minority believed that an absence of bias in the test wasn't relevant. The majority held that it was relevant, and that without bias in the test, the results were fair, regardless of whether they clove to some preconceived notions of racial balance. The idea that a totally fair process must be discarded because it doesn't give the result you want is practically the definition of social engineering.-- Tom Aiello Tom@SnakeRiverBASE.com SnakeRiverBASE.com Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
redlegphi 0 #95 July 1, 2009 QuoteQuoteAs I've said several times, the presence of any bias in the test is irrelevant. Right. Which is exactly my point. The minority believed that an absence of bias in the test wasn't relevant. The majority held that it was relevant, and that without bias in the test, the results were fair, regardless of whether they clove to some preconceived notions of racial balance. The idea that a totally fair process must be discarded because it doesn't give the result you want is practically the definition of social engineering. Point being that it can be an unbiased test and still not be a totally fair process, as was illustrated in Griggs. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
