About | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline
LOG IN
LOG IN

44 U. Cin. L. Rev. 690 (1975)
Civil Service Testing and Affirmative Action: A Psychologist's Perspective

handle is hein.journals/ucinlr44 and id is 706 raw text is: CIVIL SERVICE TESTING AND AFFIRMATIVE ACTION: A PSYCHOLOGIST'S PERSPECTIVE Thelma Hunt* For this symposium, I am writing as a psychologist among lawyers. Our two professions are brought together in this context by the legal profes- sion's role in recent challenges of psychological testing. We psychologists might decide our technical standards for test validity are either non- attainable or incomprehensible or both, and leave the task of defining a valid test to the courts. However, as a psychologist involved in public employment testing, I believe that psychological tests can be defended and that their use in public (or private) employment is compatible with current social goals. This paper attempts to measure the gap between present civil service testing systeros and affirmative action goals, focusing on the extent to which compromise between them is possible. Civil service testing systems generally stemmed from legal requirements demanding employment on the basis of merit. Merit replaced the spoils system, in which personal preferences of the employer were the deter- mining factor, with objective criteria used to hire the best qualified persons.1 The growth of merit systems coincided with the development by psychologists of a wide variety of objective tests that have proven helpful in selecting qualified employees.2 The dependence upon tests, * Professor Emeritus of Psychology, George Washington University; Director, Center for Psychological Service, Washington, D.C.; Senior Program Consultant, Na- tional Civil Service League; A.B., 1924, Ph. D. in Psychology, 1927, M.D. 1935, George Washington University. 1. Public merit system employment began with an act of Congress which es- tablished the United States Civil Service Commission. Civil Service Act, 5 U.S.C. §§ 1101-1508 (originally enacted as Act of Jan. 16, 1883, ch. 27, 22 Stat. 403). For a summary of the early history of Civil Service testing, see P. DuBois, A HISTORY OF PSYCHOLOGICAL TESTING (1970). 2. The terms test and psychological test are used interchangeably in a generic sense to include a variety of instruments which psychologists and psycho- metricians have devised for evaluating human traits and characteristics. These instruments include pencil and paper general ability tests, general aptitude tests, skills tests, psychomotor (strength and agility) tests, and techniques for evaluating personality :'nd character traits. This broad coverage of the term is in agreement with EEOC usage. EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION TESTING AND SELECTING GUIDELINES, 29 C.F.R. § 1607.2 (1974). The layman often regards psychological tests as involving mainly, or only, psychological adjustment in the mental health, character, or psychiatric sense. The term test alone has a very broad con- notation in EEOC usage. Most of the current problems relating to public employment law and the controversies between psychologists and civil rights advocates have been concerned mainly (but not exclusively) with the objective pencil and paper test.

What Is HeinOnline?

HeinOnline is a subscription-based resource containing thousands of academic and legal journals from inception; complete coverage of government documents such as U.S. Statutes at Large, U.S. Code, Federal Register, Code of Federal Regulations, U.S. Reports, and much more. Documents are image-based, fully searchable PDFs with the authority of print combined with the accessibility of a user-friendly and powerful database. For more information, request a quote or trial for your organization below.



Short-term subscription options include 24 hours, 48 hours, or 1 week to HeinOnline.

Purchase Access

Contact us for annual subscription options:

Contact Us

Already a HeinOnline Subscriber?

Log In

profiles profiles most