Hostname: page-component-7bb8b95d7b-nptnm Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-09-12T20:18:27.331Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Civil Service Mandated Cutoff Scores: Challenges and Practice Recommendations

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  06 March 2018

Calvin C. Hoffman
Calvin C. Hoffman*
Affiliation:
Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department
*
Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Calvin C. Hoffman, Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department, Test Development Unit, 4700 Ramona Blvd., Monterey Park, CA 91754. E-mail: choffma@lasd.org
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Los Angeles County's civil service rule specifies a 70% cutoff score regardless of the situation (type of job, type of assessment, or outcome of interest). This civil service rule would be difficult to defend if it were challenged in court, and the rule places the county at increased risk in the event of employment litigation, particularly with public safety jobs (police, fire, sheriff, etc.). Additionally, it is unlikely that this cutoff would optimally balance the county's interests in fair employment practices and expected job performance (SIOP, 2003). Given the propensity for public safety candidates and employees to file lawsuits related to hiring and promotions, and given the fact that public safety agencies in this county have been subjected to a number of employment-related lawsuits in the past, the current rule is problematic. Prior to this rule's development, as well as after its implementation in 1988, there has been substantial litigation related to cutoff scores, and courts have identified what they consider to be more and less appropriate methods for setting cutoff scores.

Type
Practice Forum
Information
Industrial and Organizational Psychology , Volume 11 , Issue 1 , March 2018 , pp. 158 - 172
Copyright
Copyright © Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology 2018 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

The author gratefully acknowledges the comments and suggestions provided by Dr. Jerry Kehoe during the writing of this paper.

References

AERA, APA, NCME. (1999). Standards for educational and psychological testing. Washington, DC: American Educational Research Association.Google Scholar
American Psychological Association. (2002). Ethical principles of psychologists and code of conduct (Amended February 20, 2010).Google Scholar
Angoff, W. H. (1971). Scales, norms, and equivalent scores. In Thorndike, R. L. (Ed.), Educational measurement (2nd ed., pp. 508–600). Washington, DC: American Council on Education.Google Scholar
Cascio, W. F., Alexander, R. A., & Barrett, G. V. (1988). Setting cutoff scores: Legal, psychometric, and professional issues and guidelines. Personnel Psychology, 41, 1–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Contreras v. City of Los Angeles , 656 F.2d 1267 (9th Cir. 1981).Google Scholar
Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, Civil Service Commission, Depart of Labor & Justice. (1978). Uniform guidelines on employee selection procedures. Federal Register, 43, 38290–38315.Google Scholar
Gatewood, R., Feild, H., & Barrick, M. (2011). Human resource selection (7th ed.). Mason, OH: Southwestern.Google Scholar
Griggs v. Duke Power Company , 401 U.S. 424 (1971).Google Scholar
Guardians Association of New York City Police Department, Inc. v. Civil Service Commission , 484 F. Supp. 785, 793 (S.D.N.Y. 1980).Google Scholar
Hoffman, C. C., & Thornton, G. C. III (1997). Examining selection utility where competing predictors differ in adverse impact. Personnel Psychology, 44, 601–619.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kehoe, J., Brown, S., & Hoffman, C. C. (2012). The life cycle of successful selection programs. In Schmitt, N. (Ed.), The Oxford handbook of personnel selection and assessment (pp. 903–936). New York: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kehoe, J., & Olson, A. (2005). Cut scores and employment discrimination litigation. In Landy, F. J. (Ed.), Employment discrimination litigation (pp. 410–448). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
Kline, T. J. B. (2006). Psychological testing: A practical approach to design and evaluation. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
National Education Association v. South Carolina , 434 U.S. 1026 (1978).Google Scholar
Nunnally, J. C., & Bernstein, I. H. (1994). Psychometric theory (3rd ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
Ployhart, R. E., & Holtz, B. C. (2008). The diversity–validity dilemma: Strategies for reducing racioethnic and sex subgroup differences and adverse impact in selection. Personnel Psychology, 61, 153–172.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology, Inc. (2003). Principles for the validation and use of personnel selection procedures (4th ed.). College Park, MD: Author.Google Scholar
U.S. and Vulcan Society v. City of New York , 490 F2D 387 (2009).Google Scholar
Valle, C., & Hoffman, C. C. (2013, May). Commentary on TRAC STAND function. Unpublished technical note, Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department.Google Scholar