Reverse Discrimination Case

[jillio]

You have no way of knowing what the test checked for. You don't know what was asked, or how the answers were evaluated and interpreted. Again, you are just discounting the exam without knowing anything about it. I'm not supporting anything. I'm not supporting the firefighters complaining on either side, I'm not supporting the test, I'm not supporting any culture over any other. What I'm saying is that you're trying to have your cake and eat it to.

Culture can affect interpretation. You're the one that's been saying that this whole time. My point is that if you believe that, then this can make someone less qualified for a certain position. I'm not talking about how they score on an exam, I'm talking about how qualified they are in general, exam or no exam.

Nor do you. But the Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology does, and they have determined that there were problems with the validity in more than one area of the test, and have stated such in a brief. The Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology reviewed the testing instrument after the city officials determined that the test had potential flaws. Those suspected potential flaws were then confirmed. The firefighters were not denied promotion based on their culture. That is another issue altogether. They were denied promotion based on test scores. The testing instrument was not valid, and therefore, they were denied promotion based on invalid test scores. Their qualifications were never tested, nor considered outside of the invalid test scores.

It was questioned as to how the test could be biased for or agianst a certain population. I simply explained how a test could be determined to be valid or invalid based on accepted criterion. You simply don't want to accept the fact that an instrument can be biased for or against a certain population, and therefore are continuing to argue a point that is not even involved: how culture affects qualifications. It is not, nor has it ever been an issue of how culture affects qualification. It is an issue of how an invalid testing instrument is yeilding innacurrate predictions regarding who is or is not capable of performing the job duties as specified.

 

[jillio]

This debate is doomed to keep going around in circles.

You don't know the questions on the test and whether they were open to interpretation or not.

If you don't know the information required to get the job then you shouldn't have the job, plain and simple. You may be a great firefighter and a great leader but if you don't know things like the proper radio codes, names, functions, and properties of certain chemicals, and the specs on the equipment then you just shouldn't be in charge. This is essential information.

Don't give people a crutch. 60% of the test was about memorization, memorization of information that is crucial to performing the job. If you don't have it memorized then you shouldn't be in a position where you are responsible for knowing it.

Could you imagine if doctors didn't have to memorize specific things because apparently memorization is for white people only? "He's bleeding from the, oh what's it called, the veiny thing near the liver. I forget exactly what drug to give in a situation like this. I'll go ask a white person, they're good at memorizing, maybe they'll know."

Your brand of racism is the worst kind, you don't even realize that you're doing it.

But we do know this:
Sources of bias included that the written section measured memorization rather than actual skills needed for the jobs; giving too much weight to the written section; and lack of testing for leadership in emergency conditions, according to a brief filed by officers of the Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology.

The test was biased and it was not valid. Period. It did not test what it should have tested for given the specific duties of the job.

Given your screen name, one can assume you are a cook. So, tell me this: would you feel that you had been assessed appropriately for a job if you were given a test that actually tested your ability to drive instead of testing your ability to cook a hamburger? I doubt seriously that you would. So your points are all moot.

You don't know that 60% of the test was about memorization. It was stated that the instrument was testing the ability to memorize, not the ability to lead. This job was a leadership position.

I would expect that when a doctor takes the medical boards for licensure, that the instument be testing his medical knowledge, not his knowledge on how to mix a cocktail. That is the whole point. You seem to be missing it. Likewise, would you be satisfied with a doctor who failed to consider that the medical test he just gave you yields different results based on whether it is given to a man or a woman, and thus diagnosed you with an illness you do not have based on gender differences that he failed to consider when the results were interpreted? That is exactly what you are claiming should be done.

There is not a racist bone in my body. Obviously, your knowledge regarding racism is as lacking as your knowledge of what does or does not constitute a reliable and valid testing instrument. Your debate skills are lacking considerably as well. I would suggest that you spend some time increasing your skills and knowledge on all 3 topics prior to attempting to incorporate personal insult into your arguments.

 

[jillio]

Exactly how I feel, Chef. These kinds of situations also end up creating more racism. My dad was at a seminar once, and the guy was basically saying that they made some med school entrance exams easier so that they could have a more diverse pool of applicants to choose from. All he could think was that they're basically telling you, "Hey, if you go see a doctor, and he's a minority, there's this much of a chance that he only got in because we lowered our standards." There would be no reason to think that if they didn't, which means that their actions create this doubt in your mind.

I think that giving people a crutch, as you said, is not only offensive to the people you do it to, since it's like saying they couldn't do it without the crutch, but it also makes other people question whether they did need the crutch. All in all, not a good solution as far as I can see.

So you would be satisfied with an instrument that declared you mentally ill simply because the instrument given shows a bias against the the type of answers that would be given by someone who is homosexual? You failed to answer that question in the previous post. Would you accept that label based on a single testing instrument that has been shown to have questionable validity when used for homosexuals?

Would you be willing to forego a promotion that tested not for your skills as a leader, but for your ability to perform completely unrelated to the job? Would you be willing to not be hired at all based on the results of a personality profile that was biased against homosexuals and therefore indicated that you had a personality disorder? Given your penchant for argument, I doubt seriously that you would accept that situation for yourself at all. But, given the fact that you fail to understand validity and reliablity and how they can be compromised when an assessment not normed for a particular population is given, you probably wouldn't even realize that you had been labeled and denied based on an innacurrate test score.

Likewise, making an instrument culturally relevent is not making it "easier". That is where you are making your fatal mistake in judgement. Your ethnocentrism is getting in your way of seeing the situation for what it is. Nor does a culturally relevent test result in lowered standards. In fact, altering a testing instrument to remove cultural bias (and that would include bias against gender and sexual preference as well) does not alter standards at all. The standards for acceptance remain the same. Nor does it lead to the situation of acceptance guaranteeing graduation. Nor of being able to pass the boards necessary for licensure. It simply creates greater opportunity for all. Your father's conclusion was reached through erroneous logic.

 

[lsfoster]

Nor do you. But the Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology does, and they have determined that there were problems with the validity in more than one area of the test, and have stated such in a brief. The Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology reviewed the testing instrument after the city officials determined that the test had potential flaws. Those suspected potential flaws were then confirmed. The firefighters were not denied promotion based on their culture. That is another issue altogether. They were denied promotion based on test scores. The testing instrument was not valid, and therefore, they were denied promotion based on invalid test scores. Their qualifications were never tested, nor considered outside of the invalid test scores.

It was questioned as to how the test could be biased for or agianst a certain population. I simply explained how a test could be determined to be valid or invalid based on accepted criterion. You simply don't want to accept the fact that an instrument can be biased for or against a certain population, and therefore are continuing to argue a point that is not even involved: how culture affects qualifications. It is not, nor has it ever been an issue of how culture affects qualification. It is an issue of how an invalid testing instrument is yeilding innacurrate predictions regarding who is or is not capable of performing the job duties as specified.

You don't seem to be reading the articles very closely. The city didn't throw out the results because they felt the test wasn't reliable, they threw out the results because no black firefighters would have been promoted. Period. When they were then sued by the men who did well and should have been promoted, the other firefighters then started the argument about whether or not the test was reliable. Look at quotes from the city about their decision. They looked at the results, decided that they would probably face a court case either way, and decided to go one way. The reliability of the test did not factor in at all until they were sued.

Also, I never brought up the issue of culture. The only reason I'm discussing it at all is because you are trying to say that it can affect someone's interpretation of things in only one specific situation, and you don't seem to understand how that's clearly not true. If you didn't insist on maintaining two different positions on the same topic, the discussion would have ended long ago.

So you would be satisfied with an instrument that declared you mentally ill simply because the instrument given shows a bias against the the type of answers that would be given by someone who is homosexual? You failed to answer that question in the previous post. Would you accept that label based on a single testing instrument that has been shown to have questionable validity when used for homosexuals?

Would you be willing to forego a promotion that tested not for your skills as a leader, but for your ability to perform completely unrelated to the job? Would you be willing to not be hired at all based on the results of a personality profile that was biased against homosexuals and therefore indicated that you had a personality disorder? Given your penchant for argument, I doubt seriously that you would accept that situation for yourself at all. But, given the fact that you fail to understand validity and reliablity and how they can be compromised when an assessment not normed for a particular population is given, you probably wouldn't even realize that you had been labeled and denied based on an innacurrate test score.

Likewise, making an instrument culturally relevent is not making it "easier". That is where you are making your fatal mistake in judgement. Your ethnocentrism is getting in your way of seeing the situation for what it is. Nor does a culturally relevent test result in lowered standards. In fact, altering a testing instrument to remove cultural bias (and that would include bias against gender and sexual preference as well) does not alter standards at all. The standards for acceptance remain the same. Nor does it lead to the situation of acceptance guaranteeing graduation. Nor of being able to pass the boards necessary for licensure. It simply creates greater opportunity for all. Your father's conclusion was reached through erroneous logic.

First of all, you're arguing hypothetical extremes, and you know it. I very much doubt that the firefighters exam asked them about art history, or fashion, which are the type of examples you are giving. Would I accept a test that deemed me mentally ill because I'm gay? Of course not. But that doesn't bolster your case very much, since there are plenty in the psychological community who would still believe that and interpret results from a variety of tests to say that. Therefore the fact that some board somewhere decided that memorization was unfair does not necessarily put a period at the end of the sentence. Maybe their cultural interpretation of the situation is simply different from someone else's. Who's to say?

Also, if you're going to start throwing around insults about who knows how to debate, or who knows what about what topic, it might be best if you stopped assuming things when you made your arguments. I didn't say that they made their tests "culturally relevant", I said they made it easier. They did. They very explicitly lowered the standards so that more people would pass, and they would have a pool with more minorities to draw from. This was not some "conclusion" my father came to, it's what they were plainly told.

As far as I'm concerned, this is just another example of the fact that America is unwilling to admit that there is any difference between people. Culture, age, gender, whatever, the fact is, some people are better at things, some people are smarter, some people are more educated. The answer is not to somehow make everything "fair", that's the exact same thinking behind NCLB, which you seem to disagree with. If you were raised in a certain cultural way that makes it harder for you to memorize something, and you want a job that involves a large amount of memorization, then maybe you don't get the promotion you want. That's life. It doesn't mean that the whole system should change and pretend that the memorization doesn't matter. But that's exactly what we do. We "leave no child behind", and claim that everyone can do just as well as everyone else. It's a total lie, though, and often the only way to make tests say that is to lower standards.

 

[jillio]

You don't seem to be reading the articles very closely. The city didn't throw out the results because they felt the test wasn't reliable, they threw out the results because no black firefighters would have been promoted. Period. When they were then sued by the men who did well and should have been promoted, the other firefighters then started the argument about whether or not the test was reliable. Look at quotes from the city about their decision. They looked at the results, decided that they would probably face a court case either way, and decided to go one way. The reliability of the test did not factor in at all until they were sued.

Also, I never brought up the issue of culture. The only reason I'm discussing it at all is because you are trying to say that it can affect someone's interpretation of things in only one specific situation, and you don't seem to understand how that's clearly not true. If you didn't insist on maintaining two different positions on the same topic, the discussion would have ended long ago.



First of all, you're arguing hypothetical extremes, and you know it. I very much doubt that the firefighters exam asked them about art history, or fashion, which are the type of examples you are giving. Would I accept a test that deemed me mentally ill because I'm gay? Of course not. But that doesn't bolster your case very much, since there are plenty in the psychological community who would still believe that and interpret results from a variety of tests to say that. Therefore the fact that some board somewhere decided that memorization was unfair does not necessarily put a period at the end of the sentence. Maybe their cultural interpretation of the situation is simply different from someone else's. Who's to say?

Also, if you're going to start throwing around insults about who knows how to debate, or who knows what about what topic, it might be best if you stopped assuming things when you made your arguments. I didn't say that they made their tests "culturally relevant", I said they made it easier. They did. They very explicitly lowered the standards so that more people would pass, and they would have a pool with more minorities to draw from. This was not some "conclusion" my father came to, it's what they were plainly told.

As far as I'm concerned, this is just another example of the fact that America is unwilling to admit that there is any difference between people. Culture, age, gender, whatever, the fact is, some people are better at things, some people are smarter, some people are more educated. The answer is not to somehow make everything "fair", that's the exact same thinking behind NCLB, which you seem to disagree with. If you were raised in a certain cultural way that makes it harder for you to memorize something, and you want a job that involves a large amount of memorization, then maybe you don't get the promotion you want. That's life. It doesn't mean that the whole system should change and pretend that the memorization doesn't matter. But that's exactly what we do. We "leave no child behind", and claim that everyone can do just as well as everyone else. It's a total lie, though, and often the only way to make tests say that is to lower standards.

Firstly, it is not I that am not reading very carefully. No black firefighters were eligible for promotion based on the test scores. That raised questions regarding the validity of the test. Problems with validity were confirmed by a professional board. The test was not valid because it did not test for those skills that were related to the job being tested for, either in Black firefighters or white firefighters.

And being fair has absolutely nothing to do with NCLB. You might want to check out NCLB a bit closer. If that were so, all schools would be using a nationally certified isnstrument for their testing. Every state uses a different test.

No one is saying change the whole system in this case. What they are saying is, "If you are going to decide eligibility for promotion based on a single test score, you need to be certain that the test is assessing skills pertinent to the job performance, and not something else entirely." You keep closing your eyes to the point. And you keep closing your eyes to the questions you have been asked, as well, in order to argue a point that has absolutely nothing to do with the issue.

You might also want to learn a bit about TitleVII, as that is the legal principle on which the entire case is based.

Of course some people do some things better than others. The question is not that at all. The question is, did the test assess the ability to perform those things that need to be done for the job? A valid test will answer the question of who is better able to perform the skills necessary to do the job. An invalid test is not able to make that determination.

 

[lsfoster]

Firstly, it is not I that am not reading very carefully. No black firefighters were eligible for promotion based on the test scores. That raised questions regarding the validity of the test. Problems with validity were confirmed by a professional board. The test was not valid because it did not test for those skills that were related to the job being tested for, either in Black firefighters or white firefighters.

No, it didn't. It raised the issue of the city worrying about being sued. Here are a few quotes from the articles:
"None of the black firefighters scored well enough for an immediate promotion. As a result, the city threw out the test results."
Firefighters Claim Reverse Discrimination - ABC News
"He seemed concerned that New Haven, Conn., scuttled the test after it learned that no African Americans and only two Hispanic firefighters were likely to be promoted based on the results."
"The case ... pits white firefighters, ... against the city over its decision to scrap a promotion exam because no African-Americans and only two Hispanic firefighters were likely to be made lieutenants or captains based on the results."
Reverse bias? Justices hear firefighter suit - Race & ethnicity- msnbc.com
The city did not throw out the test, they threw out the results for just that one time, because no black firefighters would have been promoted. The reason that the exam is being investigated now is because the others sued, and they had to find a reason that they threw out the results.

Also, we still have absolutely not concrete evidence of what the exam did or did not test.

I'm not closing my eyes to anything. The point is that this would never have been an issue if only black firefighters had been promoted. If there are other questions that you feel I haven't answered, I would be more than happy to answer them.

I'm not going to bother getting into an argument about NCLB, since we'll probably run around in the same circles, but I'm entitled to my opinion about it the same way you're entitled to yours.

 

[jillio]

No, it didn't. It raised the issue of the city worrying about being sued. Here are a few quotes from the articles:
"None of the black firefighters scored well enough for an immediate promotion. As a result, the city threw out the test results."
Firefighters Claim Reverse Discrimination - ABC News
"He seemed concerned that New Haven, Conn., scuttled the test after it learned that no African Americans and only two Hispanic firefighters were likely to be promoted based on the results."
"The case ... pits white firefighters, ... against the city over its decision to scrap a promotion exam because no African-Americans and only two Hispanic firefighters were likely to be made lieutenants or captains based on the results."
Reverse bias? Justices hear firefighter suit - Race & ethnicity- msnbc.com
The city did not throw out the test, they threw out the results for just that one time, because no black firefighters would have been promoted. The reason that the exam is being investigated now is because the others sued, and they had to find a reason that they threw out the results.

Also, we still have absolutely not concrete evidence of what the exam did or did not test.

I'm not closing my eyes to anything. The point is that this would never have been an issue if only black firefighters had been promoted. If there are other questions that you feel I haven't answered, I would be more than happy to answer them.

I'm not going to bother getting into an argument about NCLB, since we'll probably run around in the same circles, but I'm entitled to my opinion about it the same way you're entitled to yours.

We have the opinion of professionals who are trained specifically to determine validity and reliability of assessment instruments, but evidently that isn't good enough for you.

There are numerous questions that you haven't answered, that have been specifically asked. All you need do is scroll back to find them. But it doesn't suprise me that you won't answer them. That, in and of itself, is an answer.

How do you know it would not have been an issue if only black firefighters had been promoted? In fact, there would have been quite a bit of protest, I would imagine, about the cultural bias of the test from the caucasion firefighters.

And you are still missing the whole point. If you are going to use a single test score to decide promotion, you better make damn sure it tests for the skills pertinent to the job. This one has been found not to, and the specific reasons have been cited. And when they say that it did not test for the skills necessary to do the job in question, that applies to both black firefighters and white firefighters.

 

[Chef]

This test has been in use for how many years and has worked perfectly well in determining who should be promoted up to this point, it is only when no African-Americans would have received a promotiont that it became an issue.

You're basing your assumption that the test is flawed on the OPINION of the ISOP. If you know much about psychology you know that it is far from an exact science for one. Secondly, who is better qualified to make a test to determine what a firefighter needs to know, a fire department or a psychologist? Honestly, who are they to say what information is more important for a fireman to know or not know? I'm sure that they are experts in their field, just as a fireman must be an expert in theirs.

They feel that the test is flawed simply because it is a standardized multiple choice test! They don't give a hoot about the content of the test, they disagree with it being used simply because it is a standardized test which overall African-Americans tend to score lower on.

Try not to resort to insults, it is childish and only hurts your argument.

 

[Reba]

Actually, they don't need to memorize such. They need to be able to apply such. Memorization does not test for ability to apply.

How can they apply them accurately if they don't have the correct facts, figures and formulas that they need memorized?

 

[Daredevel7]

How can they apply them accurately if they don't have the correct facts, figures and formulas that they need memorized?

I think what Jillio was trying to say is you can memorize an equation but it's possible that you wouldn't know how its applied. Something like that. Just because you know it, it doesn't mean you know how it's applied. However, I think the vice versa isn't true at all. You DO need to memorize in order to apply.

 

[Reba]

All questions have room for interpretation.

If that were true it would be impossible to grade any tests.

How does one "interpret" math calculations, chemistry formulas, and engineering tolerances? I want my pharmicist, fire fighter, pilot, bridge builder, and accountant to know the facts. I want the food handler at the buffet to know the time and temperature limits for each food item sitting out there, and to know how to measure those things.

There are many questions that do have cut and dry answers.

 

[Reba]

Specific answers are dependent upon interpretation of the question, and interpretation of the question is culturally bound. Just because an answer has been determined to be "correct" from one perspective does not mean that it is necessarily correct from another standpoint. Little room for interpretation means that there is still room for interpretation. And interpretation of the question is not the only factor involved. Scores and the meaning of those scores must also be interpreted, and unless it is done from a culturally relative perspective, the results are biased to a degree.

And according to the brief, the Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology found problems with the validity of this particular test. They identified specific areas that compromised the validity.

Presumably all the fire fighters were exposed to the same fire fighter training and used the same manuals and were under the same state laws and chain of command. There were no separate "black" or "white" rules for potential fire captains to follow. The flames they fight are no hotter for one race than another. So how does culture influence studying and memorizing the fire district's manual of operations?

 

[Cheri]

Those are great examples, November Gypsy, and rockin'robin. An alternate format in the test for the one person would have resulted in very different scores and would be a much more accurate representation of his knowledge and ability. In the second situation, you might have an individual that would score, overall, very low on an IQ test because of the low score he would receive on the verbal portion of the test, but if given a non-verbal, his high kinesthetic intelligence would increase his score significantly.

This is true for all tests and assessments, not just IQ tests. For example, if some depression inventories are given to a certain population, they will appear to be depressed fromthe score they get. But when one looks at the way the questions are phrased, it is evident that the person is not depressed, but responding to the questions from their own cultural understanding of what is being asked. That is why it is so important to consider culture and language when interpreting results, and to make sure that the test you are giving remains reliable and valid cross-culturally.

I totally agree.

I know there's a lot of people do so well on tests that they performed other than answering questions on a test as they may not understand the questions that are being asked.

 

[Reba]

...And to decide whether someone is eligible for a promotion based on a single test score is just as absurd.

In the case of the fire fighters, didn't they also have interviews and graded performance reviews?

 

[Cheri]

Presumably all the fire fighters were exposed to the same fire fighter training and used the same manuals and were under the same state laws and chain of command. There were no separate "black" or "white" rules for potential fire captains to follow. The flames they fight are no hotter for one race than another. So how does culture influence studying and memorizing the fire district's manual of operations?

Nobody can determined what type of questions are being asked on a state exam, once they take the state exam, they might have trouble understanding what is being asked in order to give a correct answer to that question.

As you know, For an example some deaf uses words differently as sign language may be their primary language and English as their second, or English as their primary language and sign language as their second. They have different communication strategies, as in writing strategies. The important key is to find out which works best for each individual or culture

At the BMV, We are required to take a vision and written test before being granted a driving permit, They offer a sign language video for the deaf and hard of hearing as an optional. I'm not sure if all state offer that, but my state does. It gives deaf and hard of hearing the equal opportunity to understand what is being asked on a written exam.

 

[Daredevel7]

People keep using deaf people as examples. But are you saying that deaf and black people have the same type of "deviation" from hearing world communication? Should we offer "black people speak" version?

Since people keep thinking of deaf people, here is a good example of a test. Let's say that there is a written test, but it has the option of a test in ASL. How would you feel if people said "It discriminates the culture of deaf people who were raised in the hearing world. It doesn't have PSE or SEE version." Should we make a PSE/ SEE version too?

 

[jillio]

This test has been in use for how many years and has worked perfectly well in determining who should be promoted up to this point, it is only when no African-Americans would have received a promotiont that it became an issue.

You're basing your assumption that the test is flawed on the OPINION of the ISOP. If you know much about psychology you know that it is far from an exact science for one. Secondly, who is better qualified to make a test to determine what a firefighter needs to know, a fire department or a psychologist? Honestly, who are they to say what information is more important for a fireman to know or not know? I'm sure that they are experts in their field, just as a fireman must be an expert in theirs.

They feel that the test is flawed simply because it is a standardized multiple choice test! They don't give a hoot about the content of the test, they disagree with it being used simply because it is a standardized test which overall African-Americans tend to score lower on.

Try not to resort to insults, it is childish and only hurts your argument.

This particular test has not been used for years. That is one of the problems. It has not been used enough to norm the scores and determine weaknesses.

If you will read the OP, you will find that the problems you are assuming is not the problems they discovered with the test. And content validity is an issue. The test was not found to have problems with validity and reliability because African Americans scored lower. It was found to have problems with validity because of the way that particular items were weighted.

Try not to assume that which you don't know. It prevents you from understanding the issues.

 

[jillio]

In the case of the fire fighters, didn't they also have interviews and graded performance reviews?

No. Eligibility for promotion was decided based on test scores.

 

[jillio]

Nobody can determined what type of questions are being asked on a state exam, once they take the state exam, they might have trouble understanding what is being asked in order to give a correct answer to that question.

As you know, For an example some deaf uses words differently as sign language may be their primary language and English as their second, or English as their primary language and sign language as their second. They have different communication strategies, as in writing strategies. The important key is to find out which works best for each individual or culture

At the BMV, We are required to take a vision and written test before being granted a driving permit, They offer a sign language video for the deaf and hard of hearing as an optional. I'm not sure if all state offer that, but my state does. It gives deaf and hard of hearing the equal opportunity to understand what is being asked on a written exam.

Exactly, Cheri. That was a very good example of how some tests are not appropriate for some populations.

 

[jillio]

People keep using deaf people as examples. But are you saying that deaf and black people have the same type of "deviation" from hearing world communication? Should we offer "black people speak" version?

Since people keep thinking of deaf people, here is a good example of a test. Let's say that there is a written test, but it has the option of a test in ASL. How would you feel if people said "It discriminates the culture of deaf people who were raised in the hearing world. It doesn't have PSE or SEE version." Should we make a PSE/ SEE version too?

No population will show the same pattern of deviation in scores. And in this case, in particular, it is not a matter of language. In this case, the test was found to have validity problems because of the way that items were weighted. It did not test what it was intended to test, and that would apply to anyone who took the test. High scores are just as innacurrate as low scores in predictive validity when the test is not testing what it is intended to test.

When a deaf student in the mainstream takes a test, they are granted testing accommodations when requested. The most often used accommodation is testing in an alternate location, in an alternate format. That would include a signed version of the test. If the individual requests ASL, the test is signed in ASL. If the individual requests PSE, it is signed in PSE. If the individual requests SEE, the test is signed in SEE.

People seem to insist on arguing this from a racial standpoint, when that is not the issue at all. The issue is that the test was found to have problems with validity and therefore, did not produce accurate scores for what it was intended to test for anyone who took it. One of the results of the test not being valid was that blacks and Hispanics scored lower. That, however, is not the basic problem. The basic problem is one of a flawed assessment instrument that did not test accurately for anyone who took it. People are too focused on the symptoms that are evident through the lack of validity than on the problems with the test.

I have asked this question over and over, and none of the posters seem to be willing to answer it: "Would you be satisfied with the results of a test you took to decide your eligibility for promotion if it was not testing your ability to perform the job, but for instance, testing your ability to throw a ball? That is the issue at hand. That is what the Supreme Court will be asked to decide under Title VII.