Letters to the Editor

Defending FDNY Standards

To the Editor:

In his Sept. 8 letter, Kevin James makes the point that "the question is not one of using standards; the question is one of what standards are relevant and quantifiable in hiring the best qualified."

There seems, however, to be a persistent presumption on his part that standardized exams are suspect, at best, when the facts appear to reveal that to be anything but the case.

The SATs, long derided by the anti-standardized testing cadre, are indeed excellent predictors of how well prospective students will do in college.

The folly of the anti-standardized exam cadre is highlighted by the fact that when asked to enumerate which test questions fall under the purview of "testing bias," there is a consistent failure on their part to accurately do so. On the SATs, which are divided into a math and a verbal section, one would logically expect more disparate impact and thus "testing bias" to be found in the verbal portion of that exam. Not so. It's the math portion that provides the greatest disparate impact, despite the fact that there's no difference whatsoever in numbers and their functions between cultures.

Though the civil service merit system may well be far from perfect, it was instituted precisely to eradicate the overt and rampant discrimination of nepotism, cronyism and political patronage that was routine in the civil service system right up into the 1930s.

So long as the test's questions are the same for all candidates and test preparation booklets are readily available to anyone who'd care to seek them out (they are), any given exam would seem to meet the basic criteria of "fairness."

So the most basic question left to the likes of Mr. James, FDNY Battalion Chief Paul Mannix, myself and any others who'd want to consider this issue is, "What skill sets that could be tested in written form are both applicable and essential to firefighting?" I'd assert that the ability to absorb/process information, retain it and apply it correctly is one of the most basic and vital skill sets you could test for. There are two basic components of virtually any skill, including firefighting: the first is knowing what must be done and the second is applying or using that skill appropriately.

It would also seem that there's a wide array of ways to test for that skill set. Most would seem to involve some basic reading comprehension, with the introduction of some information and some subsequent questions on uses and applications.

I'd strenuously assert that, if anything, the FDNY's recent written entrance exams have been far too easy, too watered down to function in any way as actual "tests," and that has been the case for at least the past quarter-century.

To claim that such a watered-down exam is "racially discriminatory" seems ludicrous, if not disingenuous. Moreover, if, as Claude Steele asserts, "stereotype threat cuts across racial, ethnic, age, gender and socio-economic lines," that hardly seems to be grounds on which to seek redress for one specific group.

Especially in light of the fact that the physical portion of the FDNY's entrance exam is weighted at 50 percent of the overall score, and that portion creates the only actual, current "test barrier" to service in the FDNY. Certainly it would seem that the FDNY's physical exam would appear to qualify as what Mr. Steele and Mr. James would both call a "test of one's natural athletic ability," and if, as Mr. Steele asserts, white males should be presumed to suffer "stereotype threat" when faced with that kind of test, then why no racial or ethnic disparity there?

In fact, you can even go back to the last FDNY physicals before they were made "job-related," the last such one given with the 1978 exam, and you'd find no challenges from white male candidates alleging that even those physical exams, which includes such things as a mile run, a narrow ledge walk while wearing a self-contained breathing apparatus, and the dreaded "bar hang," were either intimidating or discriminatory, and without question, the physical portion of the FDNY entrance exam has traditionally been the most challenging.

Moreover, Mr. James's reply seems to dismiss the reality that "underperforming schools" cut across all racial and cultural lines, as many upstate and Long Island schools are designated "underperforming," just as surely as many inner-city schools are.

He goes on to ignore the fact that individual students from such "underperforming schools" very often differ widely in their ability to perform well on exams. The view held by both Mr. Steele and Mr. James (that standardized exams discriminate against blacks) is not only patronizing to blacks, but innately derogatory to that group as well.

In 1986, I worked in Engine Co. 35, where I met Battalion Chief Reggie Julius (then in the 12th Battalion), who is both black and opposed to race-based preferences because of the inherent stigma of "presumed incompetence" they brought with them.

Chief Julius passed every promotion exam, and he took an obvious and righteous pride in his achievements and eschewed the view that others deserved a preference due to past injustices.

That has always been my view as well. My paternal grandfather worked for the New York City Bus Lines when they were still privately run, and was told straight-away that without a Mason's ring, he wouldn't rise above the position of dispatcher. Throughout his tenure there, he trained many newer employees who jumped over him due to something completely unrelated to merit or ability. My father neither asked for, received, nor deserved any redress for the injustices suffered by his dad, and, of course, neither do I, as such things are simply not inheritable.

In my view, in order for a pass/fail entrance exam to be effectively implemented, it would have to be made far more rigorous than the ones currently being given if it were going to delineate the "best-qualified candidates," something that both Mr. James and I appear to support.

Certainly a combined written and physical exam could easily be designed with a "pass mark" set at any given percentile of performance we'd like. Since no more than 5 percent to 8 percent of applicants from any given list are usually hired, this pass/fail entrance exam should be designed so that no more than 10 percent of the candidates would pass the combined written and physical exam. That would appear to be the only way to create a list of "the best-qualified applicants," rather than a larger, more-amorphous one that would include all "minimally qualified applicants."

The old complaints that "the top 10 percent of test-takers might not be the top 10 percent of the best candidates," is actually a hollow, superfluous complaint when we consider that as imperfect as standardized testing may be (what with "test phobias," "bad days," etc.), it's still far better than all the other options available. In fact, standardized testing is the only option that adheres to the precept of equal access, by allowing all candidates to compete on the same set of standards - that same 10-foot rim.

Still, one could well ask, how would such arduous exams guarantee an increase in diversity?

I don't know that they would.

But then again, I've yet to hear any compelling argument from anyone in favor of putting "diversity concerns" ahead of the concerns that dictate hiring "the best" or "most competitive candidates" available.

JOSEPH M. KEARNEY, Firefighter, Haz-Mat 1