[IPAC-List] Measurement education

Partain, Steven C. Steven.Partain at tvfr.com
Fri Oct 26 15:49:06 EDT 2012

Thanks, everyone, for providing so many insightful comments and tips--these will truly affect how I guide our practices moving forward. Above all, it's nice to know I'm not alone in the wilderness on such things!

Steven Partain
HR Manager
Human Resources
Tualatin Valley Fire & Rescue
11945 SW 70th Avenue, Tigard, Oregon 97223
Ph. 503-259-1292

-----Original Message-----
From: ipac-list-bounces at ipacweb.org [mailto:ipac-list-bounces at ipacweb.org] On Behalf Of Michael McDaniel (WSF)
Sent: Friday, October 26, 2012 10:42 AM
To: Mark Hammer
Cc: IPAC-List at ipacweb.org
Subject: Re: [IPAC-List] Measurement education

I wish I had seen this exchange a few years ago when I helped write a book chapter on criticisms of employment testing. You can a copy here:

Best wishes,

Mike McDaniel

On Fri, Oct 26, 2012 at 11:50 AM, Mark Hammer <Mark.Hammer at psc-cfp.gc.ca>wrote:

> 1) You're right about that, Jeff. Nice to see some chatter for a

> change!


> 2) Great comments all round. I like David's examples.


> 3) When people are promoted, they move to a different role, not simply

> a higher standard of behaviour. When supervisors think they see

> appropriate potential in certain candidates that goes "under-endorsed"

> by test results, their working assumption is that the test is the

> problem, their focus being on false positives, which they treat as

> false alarms (pardon the firefighting pun). But that assumption is

> based on what they believe they have already seen from some

> candidates, and have not seen YET from others.


> Not to suggest that the tests lack validity, but people can surprise

> you. They can rise to the occasion, when placed in a role they may

> not have had before. Do the particular tests predict that well? I

> don't know, but the managers in this instance may well be treating the

> surprising ranking of some individuals on the selection tests as false

> *positives*, neglecting that their informal observation of those same

> candidates may well be a false *negative*.


> It may well be that the tests are inappropriately chosen or weighted,

> that the conceptual space being considered for the job is much larger

> than what the assessment tools measure, that there is bias in managers'

> beliefs or perceptions of some candidates. It could be a lot of things.

> All should be considered, including the possibility that the tests

> are able to identify things that managers have not yet seen.


> Mark Hammer

> Ottawa


> >

> 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.



> _______________________________________________________

> IPAC-List

> IPAC-List at ipacweb.org

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



*Ten Free Employment Tests Per Month*

Michael A. McDaniel, Ph.D.
Work Skills First, Inc.
Voice: 804-277-9730
E-Mail: McDaniel at WorkSkillsFirst.com
IPAC-List at ipacweb.org

More information about the IPAC-List mailing list