[IPAC-List] Passing points, a different question

[Dennis Doverspike]

I did not say they were not minimally competent, I said 10 to 20 percent
would not pass, basically for the same reasons as Lance gave.

The biggest reason, some sergeants in a typical department may not do
general duties. When we test for promotion from police officer to sergeant,
we realize that the new sergeant may be assigned to or rotated through a
range of duties. Therefore, we see it as acceptable to select for general
knowledge. But once they become a sergeant, many may eventually end up
assigned to very specialized duties. For example, parking, pr, detective,
human resources, training, etc. Because they are doing specialized duties,
their knowledge of general duties may be reduced. This is not unique to
police jobs. In many jobs we may test for more generalized knowledge, even
though after promotion individuals are eventually assigned to unique duties.

Second, in the real world, a proportion will not study or will not have time
to study. For example, a complaint in the past is that individuals on
undercover detective duty do not have time to study.

Third, someone may have a bad day. We all do. A person may become anxious
and freeze up on the test.

Fourth, for other reasons, some people may be temporarily performing at less
than 100% functioning. They may be sick. They may have suffered a head
injury. 

Fifth, in the situation you gave, some people will not want to be
lieutenants. It may mean lower pay, a bad shift, an assignment to a new
specialty etc. Therefore, they may not be motivated to perform well on the
test.

I would then agree with Lance's list.

So, I did not say 10-20% would not be competent. I said that 100% should
pass the test, but that 10-20% would not pass even though I might assume
that they are all competent.

Now, if we want to try to guess what percent might not be competent, that
would be another matter.

Dennis Doverspike, Ph.D., ABPP
Professor of Psychology
Director, Center for Organizational Research
Senior Fellow of the Institute for Life-Span Development and Gerontology
Psychology Department
University of Akron
Akron, Ohio  44325-4301
330-972-8372 (Office)
330-972-5174 (Office Fax)
ddoverspike at uakron.edu

The information is intended only for the person or entity to which it is
addressed and may contain confidential, privileged and/or a work product for
the sole use of the intended recipient.  No confidentiality or privilege is
waived or lost by any errant transmission. If you receive this message in
error, please destroy all copies of it and notify the sender. If the reader
of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that
any dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication is strictly
prohibited. In the case of E-mail or electronic transmission, immediately
delete it and all copies of it from your system and notify the sender.
E-mail and fax transmission cannot be guaranteed to be secure or error-free
as information could be intercepted, corrupted, lost, destroyed, arrive late
or incomplete, or contain viruses. 


-----Original Message-----
From: Joel Wiesen [mailto:wiesen at personnelselection.com] 
Sent: Tuesday, January 27, 2009 2:11 PM
To: Doverspike,Dennis; IPAC-List at ipacweb.org
Subject: Re: [IPAC-List] Passing points, a different question

Hi Dennis,

The Sergeants study because the promotional exam for Lieutenant is 
banded with the exam for Sgt.  The Lieut exam consists of the 
80-question exam for Sgt plus another 20-question section on more 
managerial topics.

Studying aside, why would you say that 10-20% of current Sgts are not 
even minimally competent, in the typical PD?

Thx

Joel




Dennis Doverspike wrote:

> Joel,

> 

> Your clarification makes the situation more confusing. I could see why

> incumbent Sergeants would take a new exam for Sergeant, as part of a

> concurrent study or pilot. But why would they study for one? What

motivation

> could there be for current, experienced Sergeants to study for a test for

a

> job they already have? Are you paying them to take the exam?

> 

> Sticking with your original question, in that situation, you would say

100%

> should pass the exam. As long as they are all competent and the criterion

> for passing is minimal competence to be a sergeant, which might be a big

> assumption. That is probably somewhat unrealistic, so you might adjust

that

> downward to 80-90% passing.

> 

> Dennis Doverspike, Ph.D., ABPP

> Professor of Psychology

> Director, Center for Organizational Research

> Senior Fellow of the Institute for Life-Span Development and Gerontology

> Psychology Department

> University of Akron

> Akron, Ohio  44325-4301

> 330-972-8372 (Office)

> 330-972-5174 (Office Fax)

> ddoverspike at uakron.edu

> 

> 

> -----Original Message-----

> From: ipac-list-bounces at ipacweb.org [mailto:ipac-list-bounces at ipacweb.org]

> On Behalf Of Joel Wiesen

> Sent: Tuesday, January 27, 2009 8:56 AM

> To: IPAC-List at ipacweb.org

> Subject: Re: [IPAC-List] Passing points, a different question

> 

> Hi,

> 

> Let me clarify the question.

> 

> It asks about a situation in which current, experienced, incumbent 

> Sergeants study for and take a new exam for Sergeant.

> 

> Thx.

> 

> Joel

> 

> 

> Joel Wiesen wrote:

>> What percent of experienced, incumbent municipal Police Sergeants would 

>> you expect to pass a typical, reasonable promotional written test for 

>> Sergeant (i.e., a test based on knowledges and abilities related to 

>> important/frequent tasks)?

>>

>> And what is the reasoning behind your estimate?

>>

>> Thx.

>>

>> Joel

>>

>>

>  >

>  > --

>  > Joel P. Wiesen, Ph.D., Director

>  > Applied Personnel Research

>  > 27 Judith Road

>  > Newton, MA 02459

>  > (617) 244-8859

>  > http://appliedpersonnelresearch.com

> 

> _______________________________________________________

> IPAC-List

> IPAC-List at ipacweb.org

> http://www.ipacweb.org/mailman/listinfo/ipac-list

> 

> 

>