LEC16: Physical Employment Standards - Standards and Cut Scores Flashcards
Cut scores from a legal interpretation
Historical approach is to draw a “line in the sand” implying a level of precision that does not exist
Cut scores from a scientific perspective
In reality, there must be a “grey zone” around the cut-score that is due to error or uncertainty in the method used to set the score
AND in the way test scores around the cut-score are interpreted
What is “representative sampling” of the workforce?
What segment of the workforce does this sample represent?
What is “authentic performance” of the tests by the workforce?
Was it as fast as possible or at a safe and effective pace?
What was the “arbitrariness” of the cut-score?
Is it based on a minimum performance standard or another factor?
What are the methods of setting cut-scores?
- Normative approaches
- Performance criterion
- Physiological criterion
Normative approaches
Comparison to the population (e.g., mean + 2 SD)
- “80% rule”: Cut-score allows 80% of lower-performing subgroup(s) to pass
- Set according to “worst performing” but safe worker
Typical approach is to test a representative sample of workers
Performance criterion
- Demonstration of performance linked to physiological criterion
- Demonstration of performance that meets or exceeds a requirement based on specified criteria (e.g., safety, effectiveness)
Physiological criterion
Demonstration of specific VO2 or strength level
What is adverse impact?
An often unseen yet negative consequence of an employment policy or practice
Higher mass gives (blank) advantage in work against absolute load (e.g., charged hose advance)
small
“Advantage” is usually quite small (<30%)
OTHER factors (e.g., “fitness”) are more important
Lower mass gives (blank) advantage in weight-bearing work (e.g., ladder climb)
Lower mass gives small advantage in weight-bearing
work (e.g., ladder climb)
“Advantage” is usually quite small (<30%)
OTHER factors (e.g., “fitness”) are more important
