That is absurdly silly.
This was NOT a class.
This was a TEST, that was supposed to determine personal experience, not tricks the generic tutors could teach.
There is no reason at all to beleive generic tutors could make them better for the promotions.

The only evidence we have was one question that tended to indicate it was a bad test.
We also know that most tests like this are not very good because they are not written by experts in fire fighting, but only experts in writing generic tests.
So yes, the burden of proof is on those who beleive the test was a good means of determining applicant capability.
That is no basis for that belief.
We all know tests like this are not very good.

There is nothing wrong with studying, because anyone can do that equally.
But tutors are always considered cheating, because most can not afford that.
And in this case, it is impossible for tutors to know more about firefighting then the applicants did, so know real learing was implied.

This was supposed to be a test of experience, not genius.
Genius is something you can easily test for, but experience is nearly impossible to test for because the test writers don't have it themselves.

That makes no sense.
Where in a small city like this, are you going to find someone with advanced fire fighting skills and experience, who would be willing to tutor someone?
If you did, they would have to be one of those already in the job, who was supposed to be helping select the candidates, and would have a conflict of interest.
This is not a subject anyone else would know.

I'm gonna' go out on a limb and say that'd be a big "no"...

__________________



For those who have fought to defend it, freedom has a taste the protected will never know...



If it wasn't for double standards, liberals would have no standards at all...

I'm with you on this one.

Or he's a kid on summer vacation that likes to mess around on political forums.

In other words, you were talking out of your ass.
Again, talking out of your ass. As has been pointed out on this topic, the test was very specifically directed towards firefighting and has been used for years.
Uh - yeah - SURE you are.
No, you have a single claim that he felt one question was irrelevant.
Not even close bud. There are very legitimate reasons WHY that question would be asked, and those reasons have been identified by some people on this forum. Without even being a firefighter I can think of myriad reasons the direction of the truck on a hill would matter.
Well other than facts, yeah.

__________________
In case you were wondering, yes, there really ARE more idiots these days....technology has made natural selection obsolete.

Silence is golden...Duct tape is silver.

My guess would be at the fire station. Just a shot in the dark. You could also find a retired firefighter that has time on his hands. Maybe put an ad on Craigslist and wait for a response.

Seriously, are you just kidding around with everybody or being serious?

Wow.

Just... fucking wow.

I could find a firefighting tutor by reaching out my left arm and slapping my brother's arm (he's here on vacation). Before he left Long Island, he was the Asst. Chief of his local fire department. If someone was looking for someone to teach them advanced firefighting techniques, I'm sure he'd be happy to oblige them. A person could could certainly do worse when trying to find an instructor.

Maat, seriously, you're making yourself look stupid. You're saying things that aren't even arguably true. You're providing nothing to back up anything you're saying; you just keep spewing out idiocies.

Seriously, it was fun watching you make yourself look ignorant for a while but, really, it's gotten a little old...

__________________



For those who have fought to defend it, freedom has a taste the protected will never know...



If it wasn't for double standards, liberals would have no standards at all...

You're kidding right? Besides, the one who DID, did so at his own expense to overcome a learning problem. This was not forbidden by the test standards and even though it is arguably a disability, he did not expect to be reimbursed by the department.
No it doesnt.
Again - are you fucking serious? The ONE guy who did it chose to do so in order to help himself and to increase his chances of passing the test. Wealthy? Did you miss the whole part about them being firefighters? Not exactly what you would call a billionaires club.
No, but they would gain much needed personal assistance to ensure they passed a test they were required to pass in order to be promoted.
Sigh - you completely have ignored the whole reason he DID hire one.

__________________
In case you were wondering, yes, there really ARE more idiots these days....technology has made natural selection obsolete.

Silence is golden...Duct tape is silver.

It speaks to your bullshit about advantages of wealth.
Yeah - so? You're assuming facts not in evidence.
Sure there can. Those things can exist for even the ones who did not pass the test, correct?
Simple -the guy who DID hire one decided to adjust his spending in order to be able to afford one. He made this choice because he believed that succeeding on the test was a good investment of his time and money.
Why not? It isn't cheating in any way.

__________________
In case you were wondering, yes, there really ARE more idiots these days....technology has made natural selection obsolete.

Silence is golden...Duct tape is silver.

Really? You mean it is not possible that there are industry specific instructors?

Besides, the tutor was to aid him in studying - not in learning the skills.
You have proof of this or is this just more irrational conjecture on your part?

__________________
In case you were wondering, yes, there really ARE more idiots these days....technology has made natural selection obsolete.

Silence is golden...Duct tape is silver.

This is satire right? I mean you dont actually BELIEVE that crap do you?

Not everyone can study equally. This is WELL documented.
By WHOM? I don't know of ANY situation in which a tutor is considered cheating, and whether or not one can afford a tutor is irrelevant.
Impossible? Again, you have no fucking clue WHAT you're talking about. Also, again, the tutor was to help him learn - not to teach him industry specific skills.
Yeah - and it was.
Not really, but once again, you seem to have no problem making statements on issues you obviously do not understand
Sigh - again, you indicate your utter stupidity. Experience is EASY to test for, and the test writers could (and in this case DID) very easily have the experience themselves.

__________________
In case you were wondering, yes, there really ARE more idiots these days....technology has made natural selection obsolete.

Silence is golden...Duct tape is silver.

Well it is clear you have not read the subject and know nothing about it.
Ricci v. DeStefano - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The test had been specifically contracted for this instance, and never had been used before. That is because promotions like this in the fire departments are rare, and the material is always changing.

And there was testimony that the test was not fair, and that better tests could have been written.

And you show you have not even read or understood my posts, when you claim that the parking question was important.
I never said that the direction of parking made no difference.
Of course it could make a difference.
What I said is that the only information we have on the subject was from a quote by one of the test takers, who used it as an example of a bad question.
He said that the question was bad because there are too many other factor determining which direction was best to park.
Since the test did not include things like the specific type of truck, there was not enough information in the test to be able to answer the question correctly.
You claim that the question was valid because direction is important, shows you have no idea what the discussion is about.
No one said it wasn't important, depending on the equipment and station procedures. What was said is that the test did not provide enough information for a valid answer.

Well, since you seem to believe you're qualified to opine on such things, what is the difference?

__________________



For those who have fought to defend it, freedom has a taste the protected will never know...



If it wasn't for double standards, liberals would have no standards at all...