[IPAC-List] Pass points for employment tests and the Standards foreducational and psychological testing

[Patrick McCoy]

Wise words Bryan!!
 
René, you might wish to take a look at the following Chapter if you
haven't already done so.  
 

Cizek,G.J. (2006). Standard Testing. In S.M. Downing and T.M. Haladyna
(Eds. Handbook of Test Development. Mahwah, N.J.:LEA (pp.225-258).
 
It is loaded with good content.
 
Cizek also has a book on the topic if you want a longer treatment.
 
Pat McCoy
Ottawa, Canada



>>> "Bryan Baldwin" <Bryan.Baldwin at doj.ca.gov> 2010/07/28 3:40 PM >>>

The key to your question (or is it the answer) lies with "in the
absence
of factors that would suggest discriminatory effect or intent."  To
some
extent then this is the age-old "if a tree falls in the forest..."
question, but looking at cases that have been brought against
employers
(e.g., SEPTA, City of Chicago), courts have not looked particularly
fondly upon employers that have set cut-scores based purely on
administrative convenience.

Can you set pass points based on number of positions to fill?  Sure. 
You could also set it based on the fact that 85 is your favorite
number.
Is this a problem?  Probably, from purely a utility perspective if it
wasn't set in a job-related fashion.  Could it be a problem legally? 
Absolutely, if it has adverse impact and you can't provide the related
evidence.


Bryan Baldwin
Staff Services Manager II
California Department of Justice
Division of Administrative Support
Personnel Programs
(916) 322-5446


>>> "Shekerjian, Rene" <Rene.Shekerjian at cs.state.ny.us> 7/28/2010

11:58
AM >>>
The Standards seem to say that pass points can be set for employment
tests based solely on the number of positions to be filled (4.19 and
4.20). Based on things I have heard and read, I have the feeling that
that is not how things have played out over the years. 

Is it really that simple for employment tests? (Gets ready to duck.)
Of
course, I mean in the absence of factors that would suggest
discriminatory effect or intent.

I would appreciate any thoughts you would care to share on this issue.

Thanks,

René

René Shekerjian | Testing Services Division | NYS Department of Civil
Service 
==============================================================

_______________________________________________________
IPAC-List
IPAC-List at ipacweb.org 
http://www.ipacweb.org/mailman/listinfo/ipac-list


CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This communication with its contents may
contain
confidential and/or legally privileged information. It is solely for
the
use of the intended recipient(s). Unauthorized interception, review,
use
or disclosure is prohibited and may violate applicable laws including
the Electronic Communications Privacy Act. If you are not the intended
recipient, please contact the sender and destroy all copies of the
communication.
_______________________________________________________
IPAC-List
IPAC-List at ipacweb.org
http://www.ipacweb.org/mailman/listinfo/ipac-list


>

This e-mail message is intended for the named recipient(s) and may
contain information that is privileged, confidential and/or exempt from
disclosure under applicable law. Unauthorized disclosure, copying or
re-transmission is prohibited. If you are not a named recipient or not
authorized by the named recipient(s), or if you have received this
e-mail in error, then please notify the sender immediately and delete
the message and any copies.
 >
Ce courriel est destiné exclusivement au destinataire mentionné en titre
et peut contenir de l'information privilégiée, confidentielle ou
soustraite à la communication aux termes des lois applicables. Toute
divulgation non autorisée, toute reproduction ou réacheminement est
interdit. Si vous n'êtes pas le destinataire de ce courriel, ou n'êtes
pas autorisé par le destinataire visé, ou encore, si vous l'avez reçu
par erreur, veuillez le mentionner immédiatement à l'expéditeur et
supprimer le courriel et les copies.