So for the 2003 Sgts exam Ray Kelly and the media found it unacceptable that you could have gotten a 58 and made Sgt. It made the papers at the time. So Ray Kelly makes it that you have to get a 70 to pass a promotional test and make the list. Fast forward to this test and one of the recent Captains test and they threw out 1/4 of the test to make a decent list. So my question is whats the point of getting a 70 if you really got a 55 and the rest you get via thrown out questions. I am not knocking anyone because obviously its not anyone's fault but anything he puts his hands on turns to mush. Just my commentary. Please post your thoughts. This is a complete disaster. Only like 160 people actually got over a 70.
wereinbacklog said
Jun 14, 2012
Doesnt make any sense to me but I must admit its not really the PCs fault. Blame must be attributed to those responsible of creating a promotional exam in which 1/4 of the questions get thrown out.
Stanza said
Jun 14, 2012
STI it's not a disaster for 661 of us. I'm enjoying the moment.
STOPTHEINSANITY said
Jun 14, 2012
You should enjoy the moment but if this continues it will affect you if you decide to be a captain. The entire process is screwed up.
wereinbacklog said
Jun 14, 2012
I agree they need to change the process to prevent these things from occurring. Its downright embarrassing.
oneadditional said
Jun 14, 2012
I'm dancing in the street
stiggityone said
Jun 14, 2012
STOPTHEINSANITY wrote:
So for the 2003 Sgts exam Ray Kelly and the media found it unacceptable that you could have gotten a 58 and made Sgt. It made the papers at the time. So Ray Kelly makes it that you have to get a 70 to pass a promotional test and make the list. Fast forward to this test and one of the recent Captains test and they threw out 1/4 of the test to make a decent list. So my question is whats the point of getting a 70 if you really got a 55 and the rest you get via thrown out questions. I am not knocking anyone because obviously its not anyone's fault but anything he puts his hands on turns to mush. Just my commentary. Please post your thoughts. This is a complete disaster. Only like 160 people actually got over a 70.
The 70 raw score rule in theory is an excellent idea. You can't use this abortion of an exam to make an argument against it. This exam was horrendously written, full of grammatical and factual errors, and quite frankly....experimental (non factual judgement/opinion questions). If we're talking about a normal exam, the 70 rule is appropriate.
brat4914 said
Jun 14, 2012
I've been saying this very thing for a few years now. Makes no sense. They grade it on a curve in the end anyhow. In fact it worked against them when they came up with a list of many more people passing with a 70 or more than they were able to accomodate (Lt 2006).........put it back to the old way. Its the same in the end anyhow, but you have more control over the size of the list the old way.
STOPTHEINSANITY said
Jun 14, 2012
I did not take this test so I can't comment on difficulty but it seems that these ABORTION tests seem to be the norm rather than the exception lately. The concept of 70 passing is fine but when they have to keep throwing out 1/4 of each test to get a normal list something is obviously wrong. Let's say you walked in cold to this past Lietenants test it is possible that you could get in the 50 s and get promoted. That's just crazy.
Abeyance said
Jun 14, 2012
I agree that this test was horribly put together, however there were a lot more people in the past that made it with high 50s and low 60s on a much easier and straight forward exam as opposed to this one. I give kudos to those who made it with "low Scores" they stayed in the fight and deserve their list#s.
smartcookie said
Jun 14, 2012
I think the real problem is the poorly written exams that are consistently administered, not the people who are taking them. Maybe it would help if professional test writers (people in the education field) worked together with MOS to create a fair exam. I'm sure crafting 100 questions that are clear, concise and worthy of an NYPD promotional exam is no easy task, but the fact that 1/5 of the questions needed to be thrownout on more than one occasion is an abomination. I think it would do the Dept. well to look to other large police departments and inquire as to how their promotional exams are written. I believe that keeping a 70 passing score is a way to ensure that the job doesn't appear to be promoting a bunch of imbeciles, no matter how ridiculous the test may have been.
Gomery2898 said
Jun 16, 2012
The problem is that the test writers try so hard to come up with difficult questions that they end up fooling themselves. It's very simple, after every question is written, look up any PG procedure/PL/Admin Guide that it may relate to and see if any conflict exist. If it does, re-write the question. Then have a different person review the question and do the same.
NextLtTest said
Jun 16, 2012
Gomery2898 wrote:
The problem is that the test writers try so hard to come up with difficult questions that they end up fooling themselves. It's very simple, after every question is written, look up any PG procedure/PL/Admin Guide that it may relate to and see if any conflict exist. If it does, re-write the question. Then have a different person review the question and do the same.
Good idea, or, just stop having so many conflicts in the patrol guide. People sit back, scratch their heads and say wow look at all the throwouts/double answers. Given enough time a smart person could probably come up with arguments against every P.G. question.
I'm dancing in the street
The 70 raw score rule in theory is an excellent idea. You can't use this abortion of an exam to make an argument against it. This exam was horrendously written, full of grammatical and factual errors, and quite frankly....experimental (non factual judgement/opinion questions). If we're talking about a normal exam, the 70 rule is appropriate.
I've been saying this very thing for a few years now. Makes no sense. They grade it on a curve in the end anyhow. In fact it worked against them when they came up with a list of many more people passing with a 70 or more than they were able to accomodate (Lt 2006).........put it back to the old way. Its the same in the end anyhow, but you have more control over the size of the list the old way.
I think the real problem is the poorly written exams that are consistently administered, not the people who are taking them. Maybe it would help if professional test writers (people in the education field) worked together with MOS to create a fair exam. I'm sure crafting 100 questions that are clear, concise and worthy of an NYPD promotional exam is no easy task, but the fact that 1/5 of the questions needed to be thrownout on more than one occasion is an abomination. I think it would do the Dept. well to look to other large police departments and inquire as to how their promotional exams are written. I believe that keeping a 70 passing score is a way to ensure that the job doesn't appear to be promoting a bunch of imbeciles, no matter how ridiculous the test may have been.
The problem is that the test writers try so hard to come up with difficult questions that they end up fooling themselves. It's very simple, after every question is written, look up any PG procedure/PL/Admin Guide that it may relate to and see if any conflict exist. If it does, re-write the question. Then have a different person review the question and do the same.