[IPAC-List] Seeking copy of Test 21

[Joel Wiesen]

Thank you for the correction, Dennis, and for the detail, Lance.

Now, does anyone have a copy of the test?

Joel


- -
Joel P. Wiesen, Ph.D., Director
Applied Personnel Research
62 Candlewood Road
Scarsdale, NY 10583-6040
http://www.linkedin.com/in/joelwiesen
(617) 244-8859
http://appliedpersonnelresearch.com




On 4/10/18 2:30 PM, Dennis Doverspike wrote:
> My recollection is that this case is usually used to support content 
> validity.  Because the SC specifically said you do not need to have a 
> statistical relationship between the test and job performance to prove 
> job relatedness.  Job relatedness can be demonstrated in other ways 
> than a strict correlation between the test and performance on the job.
>
> Dennis
>
> On Tue, Apr 10, 2018 at 2:24 PM, Dennis Doverspike 
> <dennisdoverspike at gmail.com <mailto:dennisdoverspike at gmail.com>> wrote:
>
>     Joel,
>
>     I just read through Gutman's book, the Supreme Court decisions, as
>     well as my own now declining memory related to the case - and all
>     reach a conclusion the opposite of yours. That is, if I am correct
>     in my interpretation of all three - they supported the use of Test
>     21. So Test 21 was not struck down, it was specifically found to
>     be valid. From the SC case,
>
>         2. Statutory standards similar to those obtaining under Title
>         VII were also satisfied here. The District Court's conclusion
>         that Test 21 was directly related to the requirements of the
>         police training program and that a positive relationship
>         between the test and that program was sufficient to validate
>         the test (wholly aside from its possible relationship to
>         actual performance as a police officer) is fully supported on
>         the record in this case, and no remand to establish further
>         validation is appropriate. Pp. 248-252. 
>
>     /
>     /
>
>
>     On Tue, Apr 10, 2018 at 11:28 AM, Joel Wiesen
>     <jwiesen at appliedpersonnelresearch.com
>     <mailto:jwiesen at appliedpersonnelresearch.com>> wrote:
>
>         Test 21 was struck down in Washington v Davis in 1976.  (It
>         had been used to select DC police officers.)
>
>         The test was in the court record.
>
>         I am seeking a copy of Test 21.
>
>         Thanks.
>
>         Joel
>
>
>
>         -- 
>         Joel P. Wiesen, Ph.D., Director
>         Applied Personnel Research
>         62 Candlewood Road
>         Scarsdale, NY 10583-6040
>         http://www.linkedin.com/in/joelwiesen
>         <http://www.linkedin.com/in/joelwiesen>
>         (617) 244-8859
>         http://appliedpersonnelresearch.com
>         <http://appliedpersonnelresearch.com>
>
>
>
>
>         Note: This e-mail and any attachments may contain confidential
>         and/or legally privileged information. Please do not forward
>         any contents without permission. If you have received this
>         message in error please destroy all copies, completely remove
>         it from your computer, and notify the sender. Thank you.
>
>         _______________________________________________________
>         IPAC-List
>         IPAC-List at ipacweb.org <mailto:IPAC-List at ipacweb.org>
>         https://pairlist9.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/ipac-list
>         <https://pairlist9.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/ipac-list>
>
>
>
>
>     -- 
>     Dennis Doverspike, PhD., ABPP
>     dennisdoverspike at gmail.com <mailto:dennisdoverspike at gmail.com>
>
>     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.
>
>
>
>
> -- 
> Dennis Doverspike, PhD., ABPP
> dennisdoverspike at gmail.com <mailto:dennisdoverspike at gmail.com>
>
> 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.
>