crotchitymedic1986 Posted July 8, 2009 Posted July 8, 2009 OK, will try once again: 1. Standardized test are not objective, nor are they color or lower-socio-economically blind. As mentioned in a previous thread, a question like "saucer is to plate as wine goblet is to ________ ?" seems to be a fair question, unless you were a poor minority that has never seen a saucer or a wine goblet. 2. The national registry test did "fail" some unqualified applicants, but it also gave license to many who are not qualified. I would emotionally argue that the medics that passed their respective state tests in the 80s are far superior to medics that pass national registry today, but I can not back that up with fact. 3. I said base it on job performance, not supervisor opinion. If you are worth promoting, you should have a concrete record of accomplishment that you can point to. Unfortunately in EMS/Fire, we are typically too lazy (all races) to do any extracurricular projects until the promotional exam is mentioned, so all supervisors have to judge you on is a single "test" score. 4. I agree that I would rather not have incompetent supervisors, but I am sure you have also had supervisors who were great medics or firemen but were horrible managers. In your world can an EMT-I or Fireman supervise Paramedics ? Many departments have done this for years, and the EMT or non-medic obviously could not pass a Paramedic skills test -- so how do they manage ? Just because you know human anatomy and physiology backwards and forewards does not mean you can lead people. 5. I agree that the best person should be promoted regardless of age, sex, or race, but the current system in most departments discriminates against those of a lower socio-economic background (all races).
cosgrojo Posted July 8, 2009 Posted July 8, 2009 OK, will try once again: 1. Standardized test are not objective, nor are they color or lower-socio-economically blind. As mentioned in a previous thread, a question like "saucer is to plate as wine goblet is to ________ ?" seems to be a fair question, unless you were a poor minority that has never seen a saucer or a wine goblet. 2. The national registry test did "fail" some unqualified applicants, but it also gave license to many who are not qualified. I would emotionally argue that the medics that passed their respective state tests in the 80s are far superior to medics that pass national registry today, but I can not back that up with fact. 3. I said base it on job performance, not supervisor opinion. If you are worth promoting, you should have a concrete record of accomplishment that you can point to. Unfortunately in EMS/Fire, we are typically too lazy (all races) to do any extracurricular projects until the promotional exam is mentioned, so all supervisors have to judge you on is a single "test" score. 4. I agree that I would rather not have incompetent supervisors, but I am sure you have also had supervisors who were great medics or firemen but were horrible managers. In your world can an EMT-I or Fireman supervise Paramedics ? Many departments have done this for years, and the EMT or non-medic obviously could not pass a Paramedic skills test -- so how do they manage ? Just because you know human anatomy and physiology backwards and forewards does not mean you can lead people. 5. I agree that the best person should be promoted regardless of age, sex, or race, but the current system in most departments discriminates against those of a lower socio-economic background (all races). In order for discrimination to exist there needs to be intent. Are you saying that the test makers intentionally put the "wine goblet" question on the test because they know that you specifically do not know what a wine goblet is? You not having the experience of ever coming across a wine goblet may be unfortunate and disparate... but not discriminatory. I took the citizenship exam for the UK on the internet the other day and got 6 out of 24 correct... failing the exam. If I studied the material and boned up on UK government and society, I believe I could pass it. I do not think that the UK is discriminating against me though. If African Americans choose to prepare themselves for these tests, they should have as much of a chance as anyone else. We all know people who have passed tests that we are frightened to see on the road, but I do not believe that the test was in any way geared to allow those people to pass. Intentionally changing the tests to accomplish exactly that for minorities is unfair to everyone... especially minorities. There are so many reasons why incompetent people end up as supervisors and managers, and it is incredibly short sighted and naive to blame it all on racism. I believe that racism exists in some form in just about all walks of society... but racism just does not affect just blacks. I am a White guy who has been with the same service for 11 years. I have been a chair car driver, EMT, dispatcher (very short lived), auditor, have been trusted to run stations while supervisors and managers are away, I have a BS in Business Administration, I present myself with intelligence and respect, have an impeccable reputation as a partner and a provider... but have never been promoted. In fact when going for positions against people with far less impressive resumes, I have always come in last. None of my competitors have been of ethnic background... all whiteys like myself. People in positions of power are prejudiced about many things, not just race... and it is those peoples personal prejudice that is causing the good candidate being held down.
Dustdevil Posted July 8, 2009 Posted July 8, 2009 If you had been around in EMS 20 years ago, you would remember that the National Registry Exam was not the method of certification; each state had their own test. History FAIL. Either you haven't been around EMS as long as you let on, or else you've been asleep at the wheel the entire time.
WolfmanHarris Posted July 8, 2009 Posted July 8, 2009 1. Standardized test are not objective, nor are they color or lower-socio-economically blind. As mentioned in a previous thread, a question like "saucer is to plate as wine goblet is to ________ ?" seems to be a fair question, unless you were a poor minority that has never seen a saucer or a wine goblet. I'll disagree on semantics: standardized tests are objective in that there are right or wrong answers. I am willing to concede that worded using those types of references, that you have a point and that they may not necessarily be neutral. I can't remember whether it was this case or another FD one where the test was reportedly on fire department procedures, policies, etc. If a test is written such that it deals solely with the specific knowledge of a job, it seems this problem no longer exists. I'm not willing to concede that not having a cultural history of education should be considered here, as knowledge of the profession and basic literacy and critical thinking, must necessarily, be considered as a pre-requisite for a leadership position. Now in this case, I'm not arguing that this sort of test should be the only criteria, I just wanted to deal with the testing issue separately. 2. The national registry test did "fail" some unqualified applicants, but it also gave license to many who are not qualified. I would emotionally argue that the medics that passed their respective state tests in the 80s are far superior to medics that pass national registry today, but I can not back that up with fact. Can't speak to this. Have never dealt with NR. 3. I said base it on job performance, not supervisor opinion. If you are worth promoting, you should have a concrete record of accomplishment that you can point to. Unfortunately in EMS/Fire, we are typically too lazy (all races) to do any extracurricular projects until the promotional exam is mentioned, so all supervisors have to judge you on is a single "test" score. Criteria still needs to be established for scoring these accomplishments do they not? Otherwise it becomes a matter of who cooks their resume and sells themselves best, does it not? How do we judge quantity over quality without this? Is setting criteria for judging accomplishment race neutral? I misunderstood your point on accomplishments before, but I still think performance reviews must necessarily be included for any promotion, regardless of field. If we allow that innate racism exists and that it's impossible for a white supervisor to not have bias with regards to a black employee (not willing to grant that personally, but I will for the sake of this point) is any choice left but to disregard these records? Seems problematic. It appears to me that when the objective score of a test is removed, more problems of subjective evaluation are created then solved. Am I missing something here? 4. I agree that I would rather not have incompetent supervisors, but I am sure you have also had supervisors who were great medics or firemen but were horrible managers. In your world can an EMT-I or Fireman supervise Paramedics ? Many departments have done this for years, and the EMT or non-medic obviously could not pass a Paramedic skills test -- so how do they manage ? Just because you know human anatomy and physiology backwards and forewards does not mean you can lead people. No argument here. Management cannot continue to be the place we send medics just because they're burnt out or have destroyed their backs. Or just because they're the senior guy. 5. I agree that the best person should be promoted regardless of age, sex, or race, but the current system in most departments discriminates against those of a lower socio-economic background (all races). I'll admit that there's catching up to do, but with the issues listed above and previously discussed, I am not willing to place the blame for this on the feet of Fire or EMS. I also don't believe that any workplace has the responsibility to fix these social ills. Take all steps to ensure equality of opportunity, but not equality of result. Thanks Crotch. I didn't say the responsibility of being the sole arguer for your position was fun, just that you had the unfortunate responsibility of setting the tone. Cheers.
tniuqs Posted July 8, 2009 Posted July 8, 2009 (edited) 'crotchitymedic1986' date='Jul 8 2009, 02:41 PM' post='218829'] OK, will try once again: OK WOW ... head way ! 1. Standardized test are not objective, nor are they color or lower-socio-economically blind. As mentioned in a previous thread, a question like "saucer is to plate as wine goblet is to ________ ?" seems to be a fair question, unless you were a poor minority that has never seen a saucer or a wine goblet. Standardized questions are a MUST and they must be objective, this as a hose monkey sits beside me, but they must be relevant. Agreed ... Throw this stupid question out ! I have NO farking idea myself ... would that be a can of beer ? hell use the first fork I can find, and screw the fancy salad ... Dust can you use a fork with donuts ??? just asking ? 2. The national registry test did "fail" some unqualified applicants, but it also gave license to many who are not qualified. I would emotionally argue that the medics that passed their respective state tests in the 80s are far superior to medics that pass national registry today, but I can not back that up with fact. I would be most adamant myself ... if they cant bang a line in in a ditch in pouring rain (and its as big as as a rope) fail there asses. 3. I said base it on job performance, not supervisor opinion. If you are worth promoting, you should have a concrete record of accomplishment that you can point to. Unfortunately in EMS/Fire, we are typically too lazy (all races) to do any extracurricular projects until the promotional exam is mentioned, so all supervisors have to judge you on is a single "test" score. Nope use an educated mentor/ field trainer hired and responsible to state evaluators ... mentors that not crucify, as supervisors are usually suck up to the bosses, make field trainers/ examiners responsible to your state or province. 4. I agree that I would rather not have incompetent supervisors, but I am sure you have also had supervisors who were great medics or firemen but were horrible managers. In your world can an EMT-I or Fireman supervise Paramedics ? Many departments have done this for years, and the EMT or non-medic obviously could not pass a Paramedic skills test -- so how do they manage ? Just because you know human anatomy and physiology backwards and forewards does not mean you can lead people. Proven Paramedics evaluate Medics, Proven EMTs evaluate EMTs, .... this is the way MDS do it .... tell me an EMT can evaluate my skills ... I will chemically sedate him, chemically Paralyze him, put a tube in every orifice, ans make a few more holes so he wakes up in ICU and after the RRTs take his trach out, he/ she will ask WTF happened ? 5. I agree that the best person should be promoted regardless of age, sex, or race, but the current system in most departments discriminates against those of a lower socio-economic background (all races). Nope ... best man/ women/ alien bonus round to an alien with an extra eye in the back of the head and a third arm WINS ... and green is my favorite colour. Competent is Competent .... mediocre is death ! PERIOD. docharris Cheers. HEY thats my line .... Damn Ontario word thieves ! Edited July 8, 2009 by tniuqs
HERBIE1 Posted July 8, 2009 Posted July 8, 2009 OK, will try once again: 1. Standardized test are not objective, nor are they color or lower-socio-economically blind. As mentioned in a previous thread, a question like "saucer is to plate as wine goblet is to ________ ?" seems to be a fair question, unless you were a poor minority that has never seen a saucer or a wine goblet. The original topic was a promotional exam for firefighters. Either you know the material or you do not. Everyone has access to the same materials. Firefighting is race neutral, but if you try hard enough, I guess you can insert race into anything. Gawd knows plenty of activists make a nice living doing exactly that. 2. The national registry test did "fail" some unqualified applicants, but it also gave license to many who are not qualified. I would emotionally argue that the medics that passed their respective state tests in the 80s are far superior to medics that pass national registry today, but I can not back that up with fact. Never took the registry. 3. I said base it on job performance, not supervisor opinion. If you are worth promoting, you should have a concrete record of accomplishment that you can point to. Unfortunately in EMS/Fire, we are typically too lazy (all races) to do any extracurricular projects until the promotional exam is mentioned, so all supervisors have to judge you on is a single "test" score. As soon as you put a subjective component into anything, bias is a possibility. Is a purely objective exam the perfect solution? Of course not, but it beats all the suspicions of bias and clout when other things are considered. Someone will ALWAYS claim they were treated unfairly. 4. I agree that I would rather not have incompetent supervisors, but I am sure you have also had supervisors who were great medics or firemen but were horrible managers. In your world can an EMT-I or Fireman supervise Paramedics ? Many departments have done this for years, and the EMT or non-medic obviously could not pass a Paramedic skills test -- so how do they manage ? Just because you know human anatomy and physiology backwards and forewards does not mean you can lead people. Again, training in leadership, management skills should be mandatory for anyone who is a supervisor. The more responsibility someone has, the more training, education they should have. 5. I agree that the best person should be promoted regardless of age, sex, or race, but the current system in most departments discriminates against those of a lower socio-economic background (all races). No, the current system rewards those who do not adequately prepare for a test by giving them an easy alibi- racism. This USSC ruling is a step in the right direction for true equality. You take a pretty dim view of the intelligence of a race if you assume they cannot compete on a level playing field. Every time you insert racial exceptions into a situation, you diminish the accomplishments of every person of that group who succeeded and/or excelled without any extra help.
Dustdevil Posted July 9, 2009 Posted July 9, 2009 1. Standardized test are not objective, nor are they color or lower-socio-economically blind. As mentioned in a previous thread, a question like "saucer is to plate as wine goblet is to ________ ?" seems to be a fair question, unless you were a poor minority that has never seen a saucer or a wine goblet. Two failures here. First, to argue that a test is not objective simply because it is standardised is just ignorant. If the tests were not standardised, you would argue that too was a problem. You simply will settle for nothing less than affirmative action on the matter, regardless of how fair or racist it is. That is a failure of your personal objectivity. Second, your saucer-goblet question wasn't on the firemonkey exams, so it is totally irrelevant to the discussion. Why don't you give us a few actual questions from the actual examination being discussed that you believe are culturally biased? Can you do that? 3. I said base it on job performance, not supervisor opinion. If you are worth promoting, you should have a concrete record of accomplishment that you can point to. Unfortunately in EMS/Fire, we are typically too lazy (all races) to do any extracurricular projects until the promotional exam is mentioned, so all supervisors have to judge you on is a single "test" score. You're missing the obvious flaw in that equation. Who judges your performance? Wouldn't judging you based upon job performance put us right back at judging you based upon your supervisor's opinion? 4. I agree that I would rather not have incompetent supervisors, but I am sure you have also had supervisors who were great medics or firemen but were horrible managers. <snip> Just because you know human anatomy and physiology backwards and forewards does not mean you can lead people. Absolutely true. But the better part of leadership is setting an example for others to follow. Superior job knowledge is the foundation of that requirement. 5. I agree that the best person should be promoted regardless of age, sex, or race, but the current system in most departments discriminates against those of a lower socio-economic background (all races). If this is so true, why then is it so difficult for us to give us any solid examples? You have a lot of theories, but cannot seem to show us how this is actually taking place in the real world.
crotchitymedic1986 Posted July 9, 2009 Posted July 9, 2009 (edited) No, the current system rewards those who do not adequately prepare for a test by giving them an easy alibi- racism. This USSC ruling is a step in the right direction for true equality. You take a pretty dim view of the intelligence of a race if you assume they cannot compete on a level playing field. Every time you insert racial exceptions into a situation, you diminish the accomplishments of every person of that group who succeeded and/or excelled without any extra help. You miss the key point, the field is not level. If the field were level, I would have no problem with it. When you whites finally let us start attending your schools and universities just 40-50 years ago, the field began to level, for a few minorities. But you have to realize that racism still prevented us from getting good jobs, which relegated us to the inner city projects and worst public schools possible. Go to any innercity school in downtown detriot and talk with my young brethren --- then go to your average white school in suburbia, and tell me that the educational process is fair and equal. Edited July 9, 2009 by crotchitymedic1986
Dustdevil Posted July 9, 2009 Posted July 9, 2009 (edited) When you whites finally let us start attending your schools and universities just 40-50 years ago, the field began to level, for a few minorities You're over 50? Regardless, it's another red herring. You don't have to go to Harvard to succeed. You don't even have to go to a so-called "white" college to succeed. You just have to be determined, relatively intelligent, and get an education. Which one are you failing at? Edited July 9, 2009 by Dustdevil
Just Plain Ruff Posted July 9, 2009 Posted July 9, 2009 Does anyone know what the test actually covered? Did it cover the wine goblet question or did it cover firefighting. If it coved the wine goblet question the what the hell was that doing on a firefighting test but if it covered firefighting information and people didn't pass it then damnit, they failed regardless of racism. How many of us whitey's failed that test? Personal experience, I took the KC MO police officer entrance test a long time ago (too long ago for what I wish to remember) but of the 400 of those who took the test there was an equal number of blacks, whites and other colors as well as a few green 3 eyed 3 armed aliens who passed the test and there was what I could see an equal number of the same above that failed. Even the white guy who I went to school with who made better grades than I failed the test. I guess that all those whites who failed the test were just dumber than those under-advantaged black guys who failed it right?
Recommended Posts