Sentences worth pondering, from coverage of the U.S. Department of Justice’s employment-practices suit against Baltimore County: “The exams tested reading, grammar, logic and other skills that the suit alleges are not related to the job of being a police officer or police cadet.” Critics take heart, however: “County Executive Johnny Olszewski Jr. issued a statement saying the police department has discontinued the test.” [Pamela Wood and Wilborn P. Nobles III, Baltimore Sun]
17 Comments
We’s dont neid know edumacation.
While I can agree with reading and grammar skills being optional, I disagree about logic. I’d be far more nervous about armed law enforcement absent of logic skills. The news is full of reports of arrests of suspects with illogical motives. I’d like those people screened out before they get a gun and a badge.
As for the test being “racist”, I’d like to see at least one test question that fits that category before accepting racism as the explanation.
As for the test being “racist”, I’d like to see at least one test question that fits that category before accepting racism as the explanation.
I would assume this is a disparate impact issue. The individual questions are likely fine, but the fact that the test weeds out more of one demographic than another is the concern.
I would argue that if a person can’t read at a specific level and doesn’t understand grammar and the construction of the written word, they are limited in their understanding of 1) the law, 2) court decisions that affect their job and 3) policies procedures (including the updating of those policies and procedures.)
There is a slight issue in commenting on this, in that none of us have seen the test. We do not know what that level is. The article makes it sound like basic literacy, but for all we know it could be much more difficult. Similarly, the bar for “logic” tests goes very, very high.
Thinking more about this, if the test were designed to weed out weaker applicants, it may well be designed to require higher levels of proficiency than would be expected for most police officer – higher than what is actually needed for the job.
Unfortunately we can only speculate, because what is public knowledge is quite limited in specifics.
The problem is that the test is being deemed “defective” or whatever term you want to use because of the disparity in pass / fail rates – not because of the questions themselves. The DOJ complaint doesn’t address actual questions either.
From the complaint:
14. Since January 1, 2013, Baltimore County has administered and used at least three different versions of the written exam in the hiring process for BCPD entry-level police officer and police cadet positions. Each version was developed by the Office of Human Resources of the Baltimore County Government.
15. Baltimore County administered and used one version of the written exam from 2009 to 2013 (“2009 Exam”). The 2009 Exam consisted of 85 questions divided into components identified as reading comprehension (15 questions), vocabulary (15 questions), spelling (20 questions), grammar (15 questions), and logical order/sequencing (20 questions). Applicants who scored 75% or higher on the 2009 Exam were eligible to continue in BCPD’s selection process.
16. From 2009 to 2013, African American applicants passed the 2009 Exam at a lower rate than white applicants passed the 2009 Exam. This difference between the pass rates of white and African American applicants on the 2009 Exam is statistically significant.
17. Baltimore County administered and used a different version of the written exam in 2014 (“2014 Exam”). The 2014 Exam was 100 questions and comprised of two parts. Part I included a note-taking/observation skills section requiring a candidate to review a photograph and answer 15 questions about the photograph. Part II was 85 questions divided into components identified as reading comprehension (15 questions), logical ordering (20 questions), writing skill/grammar (30 questions), and interpretation of data (20 questions). Applicants who scored 70% or higher on the 2014 Exam were eligible to continue in BCPD’s selection process.
18. African American applicants passed the 2014 Exam at a lower rate than white applicants passed the 2014 Exam. This difference between the pass rates of white and African American applicants on the 2014 Exam is statistically significant.
19. Baltimore County began administering and using a different version of the written exam in 2015 (“2015 Exam”). The 2015 Exam is identical to the 2014 Exam except that Part I of the exam contains different questions and photographs; Part II of the exam is the same. Applicants who scored 70% or higher on the 2015 Exam were eligible to continue in BCPD’s selection process.
20. Between 2015 and 2016, African American applicants passed the 2015 Exam at a lower rate than white applicants passed the 2015 Exam. This difference between the pass rates of white and African American applicants on the 2015 Exam is statistically significant.
Source: https://www.justice.gov/opa/press-release/file/1198001/download
The DOJ isn’t making the claim about the level of the questions or the level of competency. You won’t find that claim anywhere in the complaint. They are simply saying that because there is a disparity in the pass fail rate, questions on logic, reading and grammar are not job related.
I am recalling the individual who applied to be a police officer somewhere in New England and was denied the job because he was “too smart” and may have found the job “too boring” for his superior intellect. These tests cut both ways.
It was in Connecticut. The case was Jordan v. City of New London. Same town you may remember from Kelo v. City of New London fame.
The Jordan case sticks out in my mind, because it gets brought up again and again, across the Internet, to make the claim that police departments routinely screen out high IQ applicants. Every time someone does, I ask them to provide citations of it ever happening to anyone besides Robert Jordan, and to date no one has been able to provide anything. It both amuses and irritates me that all these years later, “it happened once” still gets universalized in some corners of the Internet (looking at you, reddit).
I cannot imagine a rational decision-maker at a police department, or any employer for that matter, actually denying someone a job because they are “too smart.”
My guess is that this was the post-decision rationale that the department used to justify not hiring the applicant because of his race, his personality, some personal prejudice against him, or some other reason.
In the Jordan case, prospective officers were given a Wonderlic test, an intelligence and problem solving test. The department only selected people who scored in the middle range, excluding both the lowest and the highest scorers. Why they wouldn’t select the highest scorers? Don’t know, but evidently (in 1996, remember) that hiring standard was consistently applied and “people who score high on Wonderlic tests” isn’t a protected class, so… no luck for Mr. Jordan.
Police Officers must have good reading and grammar skills. They write police reports about incidents they investigate. These become legal documents for trials. A poorly written report can result in dismissal or loss of a case.
So maybe these skills are not necessary for being a beat cop.
But what happens when after a few years experience they start to look for advancement into positions within the department that depend upon reading, grammar, and logic? There will be a group of unpromotables, and that group will appear to be more african-american. In this instance the bias will not be due to disparate impact at the time of promotion, but rather be a delayed impact of having established disparate qualifications at the time the rookie class was hired.
The belief that reading, grammar, and logic are not necessary skills for a police officer explains a lot about the insane doctrine of qualified immunity. If cops are illiterate morons, they can hardly be expected to understand and apply the constitution.
A total absence of judgment is an asset for any law enforcement officer.
OK…actually found the Jordan case…my guess is that Jordan was really denied employment either because of his race or his age (he was 46, even I think that is too old for a police recruit), but he just did not have enough proof for the court.
The City’s claim that it rejected him because he is intelligent was clever…”smarts” is not a protected class under discrimination law (unless , I guess,you are so unintelligent as to have a disability).
While it has been a long time since I wrote about this, my recollection is that employers for some jobs (not limited to police) began screening out persons with very high IQ scores because they had less favorable experience with them as hires, particularly on retention. Whether because they got bored with the work, or because they got better offers from elsewhere, the highest IQ scorers didn’t tend to stick around as long which can be a problem since it requires time and expense to train a new recruit.
That’s a completely different question, of course, from whether an employer has reason to prefer higher over lower scorers on logic tests when it comes to the other side of the distribution, where issues of risk and performance are quite different.
[…] Sentences worth pondering, from coverage of the U.S. Department of Justice’s employment-practices suit against Baltimore County: “The exams tested reading, grammar, logic and other skills that the suit alleges are not related to the job of being a police officer or police cadet.” Critics take heart, however: “County Executive Johnny Olszewski Jr. issued a statement saying the police department has discontinued the test.” [Pamela Wood and Wilborn P. Nobles III, Baltimore Sun] (cross-posted from Overlawyered) […]