You have to prove that it is a bad question before you can prove any indication.Who wrote the test? And how do you know who did?No, "we" don't. Speak for yourself. You've not posted a shred of evidence except for what some loser said.
First of all, the only person so far who appears to consider it cheating is you. And that hardly passes for "always." Would you also say that going to med school is cheating at the profession of medicine?So someone who studied firefighting and perhaps was a firefighter knows less than an applicant? You know this, how?Who told you it was supposed to be a test of experience rather than knowledge?Who are the test writers?

So, a former firefighter would not be able to fill that role?Who are the tutors?

I thought long and hard about that before posting the first time.
Firefighting is a tech trade, and is not the kind of thing universities teach.
They teach theory instead, about basic disciplines, like physics, math, literature, etc.
You would never find someone qualified to teach advanced firefighting on a university staff. It would not be cost effective.

Local procedures could be dependent on things like the local terrain.
For example, if there are no hills, then there may be no procedures for them; or if streets are too narrow for easy turn around, they may always purchase trucks where orientation does not matter.
It may also depend on whether there are curbs or not, gravel or paved, etc.
I don't know any more then those who wrote the tests.
It is the actual firefighters who took the tests who probably know the most.

The test was written by I/O Solutions ("IOS") , who had never written a fire promotion for New Haven before.
It is well documented, and the test has been slammed by their competitor, as well as many who took it.
And the test writers know nothing of firefighting.
They just know how to scan questions from books.

Again, this is NOTHING like going to med school, where you have experts who can teach you something.
There is nothing to indicate anyone who took the test learned anything useful from any tutors, or even the extra material.
If the extra material was not relevant and was instead in conflict to standard operating procedures, then it was harmful not helpful.

These people taking the test were not rookie applicants, but experienced professionals.
There is absolutely no way those making the tests could know as much.

I know it was supposed to be a test of experience instead of knowledge, because that is the difference between a captain and a regular fire fighter.
There is no additional theory one can have. There is no place to learn that theory, and no one who researches it. Experience is everything with a tech trade like firefighting.

To believe otherwise would be like claiming an expert in music theory would be the best musician. The truth is that the best musicians are the ones with the most practice, instead of theory.

No, because these applicants were already the best of the firefighters.
Only current captains in this same city would be able to know more and be a tutor who could actually teach anything real as far as becoming good captains.

Not necesssarily, because it may take her longer, and that may not be possible in an emergency, such as what fire captains often face.

No, you're missing it, she's not slower at all. She just has dyslexia. There are tools they use that allow them to see the letters as they are written. I'm not sure where you've received your information but it's just not accurate.

Yes, we know he can fight fires.
All of them already have proven they can do that.
But that is not what the test was for.
It was for additional captain responsibilities, like doing paperwork.
Which a dyslexic MAY have problems with.

So there may be other factors that can be used to qualify, beyond the tests.

We have not specified any exact situation, so we are only supposing.
It may be that dyslexia may not be a problem.
But it could also be that it might be a problem in the field, where these tools may not be available.

It does not matter what the specifics are, only that there are other factors that should be used as criteria, beyond the tests.
And how much he spent on tutors should not count towards making him more qualified.

Link to this info please?How do you know that nobody advised the test writers? Is it not possible that a former firefighter advised them?So it's not possible that someone who is a former (or current) firefighting captain advised the test writers?How do you know the book writers were not experts?Well, you haven't posted any evidence of anything at all. So that would be one reason, I guess.Which of course you haven't proven. But feel free to make that "if" clause! Unless the captains or former captains worked to advise the question makers.So the only difference between a captain and regular is experience? No knowledge involved? How do you draw a solid, thin line between experience and knowledge, anyway?So, I can become a firefighter overnight? After all, experience is everything and cannot be learned. So therefore, my first night as a firefighter should be spent putting out a fire? Like, I could literally go down to the fire station, and tomorrow I'll be putting out a fire and rescuing people from burning buildings?So you don't need to know how the instrument operates? Theory is of no use to the musician at all?

What you posted made no sense.
I have provided links before, and you can look it up many places.
If the company, IOS, had used experts, they would have said so at the trial.
Instead, they said they had not.

How could anyone become a firerighter over night if experience is necessary?
Clearly a rookie gains experience watching others and doing minimal tasks.
Experience can be gained vicariously.

The difference between knowledge and experience is that with knowledge you have to know the underlying principles, that allow one to know calculate an exact outcome. There are no such underlying principles for firefighting as far as I have ever heard anyone claim.
Yes a musician can benefit from theory, but experience is far more important.
And it is not clear there ever could be firefighting theory.
You don't need to know Bernoulli's principle, in order to know fire spreads upwards faster than downward.

There may be some theoretical knowlege that has not been brought up, but I doubt it. I think being familiar with what ever standard operating procedures they actually decided to use is more important.

To steal a line from a movie, "I do not think that means what you think it means"

It is not nonsense - it is fact.
Yeah, so?
Really? You really think no normal person could spend $1000 on enhancing his job skills? Seriously?

Dude - i spend FAR more than that every year just to remain current - and no, my employer does not reimburse all of it either. In fact, much of it is at my own cost to be able to do my job more effectively.
Considering that, in your own words, he was among the best in the department, he was obviously able to do the job as well as others.
So? What does that have to do with anything?
Irrelevant.
Again, the "tutor" merely transcribed the reading materials to audio as he recognizes that he learns better when hearing the information rather than reading it. That is hardly a "tutor".

__________________
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.

Considering what the "tutor" did, it wouldnt need to be a retired fire captain.
Without reviewing Yale's course catalog, i wont disagree with you on Yale specifically. However, there are certainly universities which teach advance firefighting techniques. One of my best friends is an instructor in just such a course for the University of Oklahoma.
Sigh - wrong again.
That is quite possibly the dumbest thing you've said on this topic. "Any advantage" would mean someone who was naturally smarter would invalidate the test.

__________________
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.

Use a functioning brain next time.
You MIGHT want to let the universities know that.

Oklahoma State University » Home

That's a full on degree program at the university level.
Ah - so you've never actually BEEN to college...NOW it makes sense.
I've just proven you absolutely wrong. Want to try again?
All this conjecture means precisely squat in the situation being discussed
I would say you know even less.
Thank you Captain Obvious.

__________________
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.

I have officially lost my patience with you. Welcome to my ignore list.

__________________
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.