Recruitment and selection law for local government employers - Page 245 |
Previous | 245 of 464 | Next |
|
small (250x250 max)
medium (500x500 max)
Large
Extra Large
large ( > 500x500)
Full Resolution
All (PDF)
|
This page
All
|
Chapter 6: Written Examinations | 229
What many local government and community college employers fail to realize about scored testing is that the content of the test is not the only aspect of the process that they must validate. If they are going to hire or promote people based on their rank order in testing results, the employer must have the test validated for that use. The employer must also validate the cutoff score that it proposes to use if there is one score above which applicants will proceed with the interviewing process and below which applicants are automatically rejected. It is possible for a test to be valid for use on a pass/fail basis linked to a particular score but not to be valid for use with rank ordering.41
The Uniform Guidelines provide that rank ordering should be used only if it can be shown that “a higher score . . . is likely to result in better job performance. Where a selection procedure supported solely or primarily by content validity is used to rank job candidates, the selection procedure should measure those aspects of performance which differentiate among levels of job performance.”42 This makes sense because if test scores do not vary directly with job performance, ranking the candidates on the basis of their scores will not select better employees. The relationship between higher scores and better job performance may be inferred except where the test scores reveal a disparate racial impact.43
The Uniform Guidelines state that a cutoff score “should normally be set so as to be reasonable and consistent with normal expectations of acceptable proficiency within the work force.”44 This also makes sense because a cutoff score unrelated to job performance would lead to the rejection of
41. See 29 C.F.R. § 1607.5(G). See also, e.g., Guardians Ass’n, 630 F.2d at 99–101 (the city used the results of the exam to compile a rank ordering of applicants and then selected a passing score sufficient to generate the required number of potential trainees, neither of which uses was properly validated). See also 1 Barbara Lindemann & Paul Grossman, Employment Discrimination Law 213 n.254 (4th ed. 2007) (“Employers wanting to rely exclusively on scored tests as a selection device have a dilemma if test results cannot be used for rank-ordering or as a cutoff. Employers either can continue to use rank-ordering or cutoffs and be prepared to validate such use, or they can alter their practice, using test results as one of several factors in the selection process, for instance, in conjunction with a subjection evaluation.”).
42. See 29 C.F.R. § 1607.14(C)(9).
43. See Guardians Ass’n of New York City Police Dep’t, Inc. v. Civil Serv. Comm’n of City of New York, 630 F.2d 79, 99–100 (2d Cir. 1980).
44. See 29 C.F.R. § 1607.5(H); Bew v. City of Chicago, 252 F.3d 891, 894–95 (7th Cir. 2001).
Object Description
Description
| Title | Recruitment and selection law for local government employers - Page 245 |
| Full Text | Chapter 6: Written Examinations | 229 What many local government and community college employers fail to realize about scored testing is that the content of the test is not the only aspect of the process that they must validate. If they are going to hire or promote people based on their rank order in testing results, the employer must have the test validated for that use. The employer must also validate the cutoff score that it proposes to use if there is one score above which applicants will proceed with the interviewing process and below which applicants are automatically rejected. It is possible for a test to be valid for use on a pass/fail basis linked to a particular score but not to be valid for use with rank ordering.41 The Uniform Guidelines provide that rank ordering should be used only if it can be shown that “a higher score . . . is likely to result in better job performance. Where a selection procedure supported solely or primarily by content validity is used to rank job candidates, the selection procedure should measure those aspects of performance which differentiate among levels of job performance.”42 This makes sense because if test scores do not vary directly with job performance, ranking the candidates on the basis of their scores will not select better employees. The relationship between higher scores and better job performance may be inferred except where the test scores reveal a disparate racial impact.43 The Uniform Guidelines state that a cutoff score “should normally be set so as to be reasonable and consistent with normal expectations of acceptable proficiency within the work force.”44 This also makes sense because a cutoff score unrelated to job performance would lead to the rejection of 41. See 29 C.F.R. § 1607.5(G). See also, e.g., Guardians Ass’n, 630 F.2d at 99–101 (the city used the results of the exam to compile a rank ordering of applicants and then selected a passing score sufficient to generate the required number of potential trainees, neither of which uses was properly validated). See also 1 Barbara Lindemann & Paul Grossman, Employment Discrimination Law 213 n.254 (4th ed. 2007) (“Employers wanting to rely exclusively on scored tests as a selection device have a dilemma if test results cannot be used for rank-ordering or as a cutoff. Employers either can continue to use rank-ordering or cutoffs and be prepared to validate such use, or they can alter their practice, using test results as one of several factors in the selection process, for instance, in conjunction with a subjection evaluation.”). 42. See 29 C.F.R. § 1607.14(C)(9). 43. See Guardians Ass’n of New York City Police Dep’t, Inc. v. Civil Serv. Comm’n of City of New York, 630 F.2d 79, 99–100 (2d Cir. 1980). 44. See 29 C.F.R. § 1607.5(H); Bew v. City of Chicago, 252 F.3d 891, 894–95 (7th Cir. 2001). |
