|
��lumbers demonstrate I ' �
<br />ack of b�as
<br />in state's ofice-recr i �
<br />p u tment a enc
<br />g Y
<br />For some time I have read guest columns in
<br />tbe Star Tribune questioning the pap�r's "ob-
<br />jeciivity," and I have wondered about the
<br />validity of such criticism. Unfortunately, I
<br />recently had the chance to find out for
<br />myself.
<br />1 am exec�tive director to the Minnesota
<br />Police Recruitment S}•stem {MPRS), a gov-
<br />ernmental agency created to develop and
<br />administer "a valid and nondiscriminatory
<br />se;ectioa pracess for iaw enforcement agen-
<br />cies" in the state. About two years ago the
<br />MPR5 was sued by two African-Arr�rican
<br />applicants, who cbailenged the validity of the
<br />MPRS testing process_ Whiie this lawsuit has
<br />nol yet been fully resolved, the court has
<br />issued an interim order deciaring ai least part
<br />of our testing process to be unlawful.
<br />On Oct. 5, the day the court's order was
<br />released, our office was contacted for com-
<br />ment by three ielevision siations (Chanoels 4,
<br />5 and 11), by Minnesota PubGc Radio, and
<br />by the Pioneer Press. Our office was not
<br />ntacted by tbe Star Tribune. An article
<br />_aarding the court's order appeared in your
<br />paper the following day, however, quoting
<br />liberally the plaintifis' attorneys.
<br />An Oct. 13 editorial in the Star Tribune
<br />ac�used MPRS communities of "blatant
<br />bias_" Included in both this editorial and the
<br />previous news article were statistics on the
<br />hiring of African-American applicants in
<br />MPRS communities, which had been provid-
<br />ed ta the paper by the piaintiffs' attorneys.
<br />I subsequently discassed this matter with
<br />your "reader representative," noting (l) that
<br />we never had been contacted fer cor.lrnent,
<br />and (2) that statistics regarding the hiring of
<br />African-Americans are meaningfu] only when
<br />compared with statestics regarding the num-
<br />ber of Afncan-Americans who have applied
<br />or when compared with statistics regarding
<br />the hiring of w•hite applicants.
<br />For the record, the Star Tribune is correct
<br />that only six of about 937 officers in MPRS
<br />police departments are African-Americans.
<br />Dur records and records of these camsnuni-
<br />ties indicate that some 300 of these officers
<br />were hired before the MPRS was farmed or
<br />before that community joined MPRS. Thus,
<br />of ihe remaining 60Q to 650 ofTicers, about 1
<br />percent is African-American. No one would
<br />dispute that it wouid be advantageous to
<br />�� e a greater number of police otiicers who
<br />e Afrecan-American. However, one first
<br />should Iook at the nurnber of African-Ameri-
<br />can applicants. From i979 to 1943 the MPRS
<br />has tested 4,937 applicants. Of these, 47 have
<br />• ��
<br />been African-Americans. Thus, approximate-
<br />ly 1 percent of applicants to the MPRS have
<br />been African-American — exacdy the same
<br />perrentage as were hired.
<br />Anather way of looking at African-American
<br />hiring statistics is to compare them with
<br />hiring statistics for white appticants. During
<br />the abave period the hiring rate for white
<br />applicants was 14.Z percent (685 of 4,810).
<br />(This is a slightly larger number of white
<br />hirings tt�an the previaus statistic, as it in-
<br />cludes communities that no longer are part of
<br />the sysiem.) During the same period the
<br />hiring rate for black applicaRts was 12_8 per-
<br />cent (6 of 47). Thus, the biring rates for
<br />African-American and white applicants have
<br />been nearly equal.
<br />T'he quesiion may be raised, then, as to why a
<br />port�on of the MPRS testing process was
<br />found to be unlawfuE, if the ratio of African-
<br />Americans in MPRS departments is the same
<br />as the ratio of African-.4mer;can applicants,
<br />a�d if the hiring rate tor .4frican-Americans
<br />has been approxitnately the same as the hir-
<br />ing rate for whites. The answer relates to the
<br />judgments made by ihe MPRS communiiies
<br />when our ezamination �rocess was de-
<br />veloped.
<br />One of the t�sts in the MPRS examination
<br />process measures an applicant's reasoning
<br />ability. This is the pon�on of the process
<br />faund by the court to have the greatest ad-
<br />verse impact against African-.4mericans. As
<br />even a casual reader of psycho]og�caE iitera-
<br />ture is aware, howe�•er, racial and ethnic
<br />groups do not do equally well on cognitive
<br />tests_ The reasons for such differences are
<br />speculative, but the fact ihat �ch difTerences
<br />�
<br />cecur is not a measurement artifact.
<br />T6e dilernma which MPRS corr�munities, or
<br />any other employers, face is ( I) not to test far
<br />cognitive ability, even though thfs may be an
<br />importani job requirement; or (2) to test fdr
<br />cognitive ability, recogni2ing that s�ch a t�st
<br />may have adverse impact, but to make u� for
<br />this impaci in other gortions of the seEection
<br />process. .
<br />The first opt�on did not seem to be a respon-
<br />sibie alternative ta MPRS tommunities.
<br />(How mar►y citizens want their community to
<br />hire police officers who have not beer►
<br />scrcened for reasoning ability?) The second
<br />option clearly was more responsible, and this
<br />was the optibn which was chosen. In light qf
<br />the above data, it certainly would appear that
<br />MPRS communities have been suocessfu! in
<br />rnaking up for any adverse impact whic�=
<br />does occur in their testing processes. .
<br />Another requirement in this regard, of
<br />course, is to select a cognitive test that is
<br />professionally developed, widely ustd and
<br />predictive of job perfarmance. Independent
<br />research conducted both in 1987 and 1990
<br />showed ihat the test selected by the MPRS to
<br />measure reasoning ability is ihe most widely
<br />used test of this ability in the country. Re-
<br />search conducted by the MPRS itself has
<br />shown that this test is the single best predic-
<br />tor of a potice o�cer's job perFormance, for
<br />those port�ons of the scoring process in which
<br />it is used.
<br />No testing process is perfect, including fhe
<br />MPRS process. MPRS communities would
<br />be f:rst in line to make any changes in this
<br />process that would be equally predictive'of
<br />job perFormance, but which woUld have iess
<br />adverse impact against any protected class.
<br />O�r hope is that such a change may emerge
<br />in the remainder of the tria[ in this matter. :
<br />The MPRS was formed hy hanorable peop�e
<br />with honorable intentions. It was formed
<br />expressly for the purpose of producing a
<br />"valid and nondiscriminatory" testing proc-
<br />ess. To imply that this process was designed
<br />to screen out and/or to disqualify African-
<br />American candidates, w•ithout any attempt,to
<br />examine both sides of this issue, is mare than
<br />sloppy journalism, It is intellectually dishon-
<br />est a�d ethically irresponsible.
<br />IBrry 'I�hompson, :Ninneapolis. Executive di-
<br />rector, Minnesota Police Recrnitment Sys-
<br />tem.
<br />(Edilor's note.• The Oct 6 story sard lhar
<br />faxy�ers for MPRS could nor be reached jnr.
<br />cornment Ocr. 5.J � �.
<br />: ,
<br />
|