# Factual Question: Did the DoJ require Dayton to lower its testing standards for police?

**URL:** <https://boards.straightdope.com/t/factual-question-did-the-doj-require-dayton-to-lower-its-testing-standards-for-police/618103>\
**Category:** Factual Questions\
**Created:** [April 7, 2012, 6:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/factual-question-did-the-doj-require-dayton-to-lower-its-testing-standards-for-police/618103 "2012-04-07T18:21:47Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 1\
**Page:** 2

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![md2000](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/73ab20/32.png) [@md2000](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/md2000)\
**Post date:** [April 10, 2012, 10:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/factual-question-did-the-doj-require-dayton-to-lower-its-testing-standards-for-police/618103/21 "2012-04-10T22:07:37Z")

</div>

> [@jtgain](#):
>
> I understand the law, but I wonder why the government takes the position that disparate impact is per se discriminatory for unlawful reasons. Let’s say that basic math is not a job requirement, but as a business owner, I see mathematical knowledge as indicative of overall intelligence and what I look for in an employee. That might be ridiculous, but hey, so are all of the other stupid job interview questions.
> 
> So, I have my math test for my job with nary a racist thought in my head. In fact, when you break down the numbers, if you correct for socio-economic factors, all race groups score equally, it’s just that more minority applicants were poor than white applicants.
> 
> I have a test that’s fair on its face, not motivated by racism, is no more silly than any other requirement, but it is no good simply because not enough minority applicants can pass the test?
> 
> So the DOJ makes me change it. What do I change it to? My first test was objectively fair. How do I know that my new test that I spend money to design won’t have similar disparate results? Statistics show that minority groups do worse on tests than white counterparts. I could spend money to change the test, but really the easiest, surefire and best way to get the DOJ off of my back is to simply lower the standards on the first test.
> 
> In a way, this does implicitly force lower standards.

The first logic failure is that math equals smart; or that paper math equals smart. Or that the test truly tells you how good a person is at basic math. They may be dyslexic, but really smart, for example. Or they may be smart, but their school did a crappy job of teaching math. Or, they freeze up when presented with a paper test.

If you use this as your criteria, tyou select for people who have taken a lot of tests and eople who are good at taking tests. Maybe if you are trying to police a neigbourhood “in transition” this is not what you need for a police officer.

Situational written tests are even more prone to being fixed; “you see a wounded man by the side of the road. Should you stop, yes or no?” The response HR is looking for may not match the inner city guy’s response nor the returning Iraq vet’s resposne, but likely there is no space for “please explain your answer”.

> [@newme](#):
>
> From my quick reading of the story, it appears the candidates for police positions must take a generic Dayton Civil Service Exam. As far as I can tell, the exam has not changed. They have lowered what they consider a “passing score.” This course of action was approved by the DOJ. It does not say _this particular remedy_ was imposed by the DOJ. Presumably, they could have changed the exam in a manner acceptable to DOJ.

So it’s a generic test - obviously then even less directly applicable to police work than a test intended to pick olice officers.

[Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/factual-question-did-the-doj-require-dayton-to-lower-its-testing-standards-for-police/618103.md?page=1)