881
1 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS
2 EASTERN DIVISION
3 PEGGY L. ADAMS, et al., ) Docket No. 94 C 5727
)
4 Plaintiffs, )
)
5 v. ) Chicago, Illinois
) March 11, 1996
6 CITY OF CHICAGO, ) 2:10 o'clock p.m.
)
7 Defendant. ) Preliminary Injunction
8
TRANSCRIPT OF PROCEEDINGS
9 BEFORE THE HONORABLE JOHN A. NORDBERG
10 APPEARANCES:
11 For the Plaintiffs: MR. KENNETH N. FLAXMAN
122 South Michigan Avenue
12 Suite 1850
Chicago, Illinois 60603-6107
13
14 For the Defendant: HON. SUSAN S. SHER,
Corporation Counsel, by
15 MS. DARKA S. PAPUSHKEWYCH
MS. SHONA B. GLINK
16 MR. JAY MICHAEL KERTEZ
Assistant Corporation Counsels
17 30 North LaSalle Street
Suite 1020
18 Chicago, Illinois 60602
19
20
21
22
23
ALEXANDRA ROTH CSR, LTD.
24 P. O. Box A-3201
Chicago, Illinois 60609-3201
25 (312) 294-0134
882
1 THE COURT: Sorry for the delay. We have an election
2 emergency we had to get scheduled.
3 If you will resume your position.
4 (Witness resumed the stand.)
5 THE COURT: We are all set to continue cross-
6 examination. And, sir, you remain under oath.
7 Mr. Flaxman, you can fire when ready.
8 MR. FLAXMAN: Thank you, Judge.
9 GERALD BARRETT, DEFENDANT'S WITNESS, PREVIOUSLY SWORN
10 CROSS-EXAMINATION (Resumed)
11 BY MR. FLAXMAN:
12 Q. Now, you told us about measures of good psychometric
13 properties for the written job knowledge test on direct
14 examination. Do you remember that?
15 A. Yes.
16 Q. You talked about reliability, is that right?
17 A. Yes.
18 Q. That's one of the those split half reliability measures?
19 A. Yes.
20 Q. You also talked about item total correlations, is that
21 right?
22 A. Yes.
23 Q. Now, is item total correlations also referred to as point
24 biserial correlations?
25 A. Yes.
883
1 Q. And what does it mean if there is a negative?
2 THE COURT: Could I have a definition of point
3 biserial correlation?
4 THE WITNESS: It's just a correlation between the
5 response on a -- one item on a test scored correct or not
6 correct, and a total distribution of responses on the 150-item
7 test. So you take --
8 THE COURT: By the same individual or by --
9 THE WITNESS: All people basically.
10 THE COURT: So it's apples -- it's a specific answer
11 versus --
12 THE WITNESS: Right or wrong answer, and the -- and
13 the total test score, the 150-item test score.
14 THE COURT: I mean, is it all people's answer to the
15 one question, or is it just a single individual's answer to one
16 question?
17 THE WITNESS: You sum all single individuals' answers.
18 THE COURT: All single.
19 BY MR. FLAXMAN:
20 Q. Does the point biserial correlation reflect some measure of
21 the contribution of getting a particular question right as to
22 the final score, or to the variance in the final scores?
23 A. I'm getting confused now.
24 Q. Okay. Let's say you have a question that everybody got
25 right.
884
1 A. Okay.
2 Q. Could you -- would it be meaningful to talk about the point
3 biserial correlation of that question?
4 A. No, it would not.
5 Q. And if you had a question everybody got wrong, then you
6 couldn't talk about point biserial correlation, is that right?
7 A. That's right.
8 Q. Let's say you had a hard item that 50 percent of the people
9 got wrong. Would that be a hard item?
10 A. Not usually.
11 Q. Let's say you had a hard item that 10 percent of the people
12 got right. Would that be a hard item?
13 A. Yes.
14 Q. Will --
15 A. It could be considered a hard item.
16 Q. If there was a high point biserial correlation for that
17 hard item, would that indicate that people who were getting
18 that question right were tending to get higher scores on the
19 test?
20 A. Yes.
21 Q. And if there was a low point biserial correlation for that
22 hard item, would that indicate that people who were getting the
23 question right were not tending to get hiring scores on the
24 test?
25 A. Yes.
885
1 Q. What does it mean when you get a negative point biserial
2 correlation?
3 A. That means that those who got the question right were
4 tending a low score on the test, full test.
5 Q. So that the people that -- does it also mean that the
6 people who got the question wrong were those who did well on
7 the test -- did better on the test?
8 A. Yes.
9 Q. Is there a psychometric justification for including items
10 that have a negative point biserial correlation on a test?
11 A. Yes.
12 Q. What is that?
13 A. When you construct a content-valid test versus a
14 standardized test, which is devised to be used over and over
15 again. As example we talked about a few days ago about
16 cognitability test. Let's assume you have a test of
17 vocabulary, and all of your items are vocabulary items. That
18 would be your general test of cognitability.
19 Then you could -- what is -- we could do various pilot
20 studies. You could take a large sample of people, a vocabulary
21 test. We could analyze the data, and we could say, all right,
22 there are certain items which have a negative relationship to a
23 total score. Now we want to test -- we just measure the
24 vocabulary and nothing else.
25 So what we should do now is, next time we give the
886
1 test, revise the test and start to make it a standardized test.
2 We take out those items and remove them, so that we have a
3 relatively -- what's called a pure measure of vocabulary
4 knowledge.
5 But this is not true in the types of tests we are
6 developing. We're developing what's called a content-valid
7 test. And it's only given one time, and it is on different
8 realms of knowledge. For example, there is a section which
9 deals with the Illinois Criminal Code. There is a section
10 which deals with general and specific orders.
11 So it's not a homogeneous domain of knowledge. So
12 it's certainly possible that somebody who studies one area know
13 more -- knows that better than another area. So at times you
14 can have a very good item, which is good in the
15 content-validity sense, but it may not have a positive
16 correlation to the total score.
17 So it's not unusual to find this occurring in a
18 content-valid test.
19 Q. And is it also not unusual in a content-valid test to find
20 questions that only 4 percent of the people taking the test
21 know the correct answer?
22 A. In any tests we've ever given there is a wide variation in
23 terms of one item, in terms of being hard or easy. So this is
24 a sort of variation you might well find and expect in a
25 content- valid test.
887
1 Q. Now, is it your testimony that if you have a content-valid
2 test for promotion to police sergeant and every question on
3 that test is something that a sergeant has to know the first
4 day they are on the job, that a question which only 4 percent
5 of the police officers taking the test know the correct answer
6 to is content valid?
7 A. I'm saying that every item on the test from our procedure
8 is content valid, yes.
9 Q. And that's true even if only 4 percent of the police
10 officers taking the test know the correct answer?
11 A. It's even true if 90 percent know the correct answer.
12 Q. Well, could you answer my question?
13 A. Yes, this is true.
14 Q. Okay. And every question on that written short answer test
15 was something that a police sergeant has to know the first day
16 on the job, is that right?
17 A. Yes.
18 Q. And this is the kind of knowledge that's critical to doing
19 the job successfully, is that right?
20 A. Well, I think that what we said, it's relevant, it's
21 important knowledge that -- important knowledge to have, yes.
22 Q. And that's true for each question on the written test, is
23 that right?
24 A. Yes.
25 Q. And you reviewed each question on the written test, is that
888
1 right?
2 A. Yes, that's correct.
3 Q. And you determined to your own satisfaction that each
4 question on the written test measured the standard you just
5 articulated, is that right?
6 A. Yes.
7 Q. Let me ask you to look at Plaintiffs' Exhibit 14.
8 MR. FLAXMAN: Your Honor, I have a copy for the Court.
9 THE COURT: I think I have that.
10 MR. FLAXMAN: No, this is -- Plaintiffs' Exhibit 14
11 has corrected formatting problems and has all the questions.
12 THE COURT: All right.
13 BY MR. FLAXMAN:
14 Q. Let me ask you to look at Question 83.
15 THE COURT: Again I am marking all these under seal.
16 MS. PAPUSHKEWYCH: Yes.
17 THE COURT: Excuse me. I interrupted. What question
18 now?
19 MR. FLAXMAN: 83.
20 THE COURT: 83, okay.
21 BY MR. FLAXMAN:
22 Q. Have you had a chance to read Question 83?
23 A. Yes.
24 THE COURT: Excuse me.
25 (Discussion had off the record.)
889
1 BY MR. FLAXMAN:
2 Q. Could you tell us, if you can, why it's important for a
3 police sergeant to know that the correct answer is D rather
4 than E?
5 A. All I can say is that the process we followed three years
6 ago was one where we reviewed the item, used appropriate
7 domain, and that that's the decision we made three years ago
8 following the process.
9 Q. When you say, we made, you mean, I, Dr. Gerald Barrett,
10 made, right?
11 A. I made the final decision of what -- for each item, that's
12 correct.
13 Q. Could you tell us what would be the problem in a sergeant
14 doing his or her job if he or she chose E rather than D?
15 A. Well, you're telling me that they wouldn't have the correct
16 information. They gave the wrong information to -- as I read
17 the question, to a parole officer.
18 Q. Would that wrong information, that incorrect information,
19 have any measurable impact upon the job of being a Chicago
20 police officer?
21 A. Well, I think we hurt the credibility of the sergeant with
22 his people if he gives out the wrong information about a
23 factor.
24 Q. Is credibility of a sergeant one of those things that you
25 identified on your job analysis?
890
1 A. In terms of supervision, we talked about the sergeant, the
2 supervisors of patrol officers.
3 Q. Are you now telling us that the written job knowledge test
4 was also measuring credibility?
5 A. In a sense that -- in a sense that if a person has not --
6 does not know the answer to the question, the supervisory
7 skills might certainly be questioned.
8 Q. Let me ask you to look at Question 15. Do you have that in
9 front of you?
10 A. Yes.
11 Q. Could you tell us, if you can, why it is that it's
12 important for a sergeant to know the correct answer to this
13 question the first day on the job?
14 A. Well, again, he might be asked this very question in terms
15 of what does this entail? If I am given this assignment, what
16 should I be doing?
17 Q. Now, in your job analysis did you ever determine how often
18 it is that sergeants are asked this question that's the subject
19 of Question 15, whether it's once a day, once a year, once
20 every ten years?
21 A. No.
22 Q. Let me ask you to look at Question 147. Could you tell us
23 why it is that it's important for a sergeant to know the
24 correct answer to this question the first day on the job?
25 A. This is the basic philosophy, new philosophy, for the
891
1 Chicago Police Department and was considered important that all
2 supervisory ranks under this basic strategic way of policing.
3 Q. Now, did anything in your job analysis reveal that knowing
4 the answer to Question 147 is related to performing the job
5 better?
6 A. In the sense, yes, this is a knowledge that the -- all
7 sergeants, all supervisory ranks, should have about the
8 approach being taken by the Chicago Police Department.
9 Q. In your opinion, the police officer who knows the answer to
10 Question 147 is going to be better as a sergeant than somebody
11 who doesn't know the answer, is that right?
12 A. Well, the aggregation. It's just not one item. We don't
13 depend upon one item. One item only is an exemplar for a
14 broader domain of knowledge. And we don't say that it's one
15 item per se. We say, it's aggregation of all 150 items which
16 is important.
17 Q. Well, did each item count as one point?
18 A. That's correct.
19 Q. Question 148, is that also something that's essential for a
20 sergeant to know the first day on the job?
21 A. This again is relevant information.
22 Q. And could you point to us to where in your job analysis it
23 indicated that knowing the answer to Question 148 is something
24 that a sergeant has to know to do his or her job?
25 A. Well, again, this has to do with the supervisory function
892
1 and understanding the policy of the police -- Chicago Police
2 Department. In other words, it's important that all uniformed
3 officers and particularly the supervisors understand the
4 policies of the department.
5 Q. Are you -- Question 148, you said, relates to supervisory
6 function? Is that your testimony?
7 A. In general I would say, yes, it probably relates to that.
8 I'm not really sure how we keyed it, but it does relate to
9 that -- relate to those sorts of issues.
10 Q. And would you say, give this -- would Question 149 also
11 relate to the supervisory function, the work of the sergeant?
12 A. Yes, again, this is a general policy issue that supervisors
13 should understand and know about in terms of the approach being
14 used by the Chicago Police Department.
15 Q. And this is something, in your opinion, that a sergeant has
16 to know the first day on the job, is that right?
17 A. A sergeant should know -- have the knowledge of the
18 approach being taken by the department in terms of their
19 policing strategy.
20 Q. Is Question 149 something that a sergeant needs to know to
21 assist a police officer by answering questions via radio, for
22 example, about how to interview reluctant, disoriented,
23 injured, mentally ill and minor witnesses or witnesses
24 requiring translators?
25 A. It, I think, emphasizes the point that the responsibility
893
1 is upon the patrol officer to provide these services. It's not
2 upon someone else.
3 Q. Well, is Question 149 -- do you need to know the answer to
4 Question 149 for a sergeant to assist a police officer to do
5 the police officer's job?
6 A. Well, I think that as part of his responsibility he will
7 want to convey to his patrol officers the primary
8 responsibility is upon the patrol officer himself or herself.
9 Q. Do you need to know the answer to Question 149 to
10 appropriately categorize incidents for reporting and
11 notification purposes?
12 A. For a sergeant to do that?
13 Q. That's correct.
14 A. No, I don't think you have to know this for the sergeant
15 review process.
16 Q. Does a sergeant need to know the answer to Question 149 to
17 identify whether or not elements of a particular incident exist
18 to indicate probable cause?
19 A. No, I don't think that would be required.
20 Q. Does a sergeant need to know the answer to Question 149 to
21 determine if there is justification for an arrest?
22 A. No, a sergeant doesn't have to know that.
23 Q. Does the sergeant need to know the answer to Question 149
24 to determine if a charge is appropriate?
25 A. No.
894
1 Q. Does the sergeant need to know the answer to Question 149
2 to identify which report should be used to a particular
3 situation?
4 A. No.
5 Q. Does the sergeant need to know the answer to Question 149
6 to determine -- to know how to process arrestees?
7 A. No.
8 THE COURT: You know, this can go on forever.
9 MR. FLAXMAN: We are almost done.
10 THE COURT: If you are relating it to how he keyed it
11 in, that would be a relevant question you could ask him.
12 Otherwise, you know --
13 BY MR. FLAXMAN:
14 Q. Well, how was -- what work behavior in the master job
15 description did you say was tapped by Test Item 149?
16 A. I don't recall.
17 Q. Do you have that exhibit in front of you, Exhibit D as in
18 dog? And I'd like you to turn to page Appendix I-8. Do you
19 see page I-8?
20 A. Yes.
21 Q. That showed, did it not, that Question 149 was keyed to
22 work behavior and master job description 1A4?
23 A. Yes.
24 Q. And 1A4 is what I have been reading to you in these
25 questions about assisting officers, is that right?
895
1 A. It's about supervision, as I recall.
2 Q. Could you explain to us, if you can, now knowing the
3 correct answer to Question 149 relates to 1A4 of the master job
4 description that appears at page C-8 of your report?
5 A. Again, as I said, it has to do with supervisory function
6 and in terms of here is the overriding philosophy of the --
7 Q. Is there particular language in 1A4 about knowing the
8 overall philosophy of the Chicago Police Department?
9 A. No, there is not.
10 Q. So that's -- okay.
11 And could you look at 150?
12 A. Item you are talking about?
13 Q. Question 150 in Exhibit 14. Have you had a chance to
14 review that?
15 A. Yes.
16 Q. Is there anything in your job analysis that indicates that
17 a field sergeant is responsible for dispatching uniformed
18 patrol units to 911 calls?
19 A. Again, it's part of the overall supervisory philosophy
20 that --
21 Q. Dr. Barrett, my question is, is there anything in your job
22 analysis that indicates that a field sergeant is responsible
23 for determining when a uniformed patrol unit should be
24 dispatched to the scene of a 911 call?
25 A. Well, certainly they --
896
1 Q. That's a yes or no question, Dr. Barrett.
2 A. I don't recall.
3 Q. Okay. And you decided, did you not, that Question 150 was
4 essential for a field sergeant to know the correct answer to
5 the first day on the job, isn't that right?
6 A. I said it was relevant information for the police sergeant
7 to have.
8 Q. Is relevant different than something that a sergeant has to
9 know the first day on the job?
10 A. Yes, it's relevant information.
11 Q. Relevant?
12 A. I think you said essential.
13 Q. You never said essential?
14 A. Possibly I did, I don't recall saying essential.
15 Q. If you said essential, you were mistaken, is that correct?
16 A. I'm not sure what the actual question was. I thought I
17 said relevant. I could be mistaken.
18 Q. Well, are you telling us that -- if I asked you whether
19 each question was essential for a sergeant to know the first
20 day on the job, would you say yes or no?
21 A. Well, I would say, each one of them is relevant and
22 important to know.
23 Q. That's --
24 A. I think that's what I said.
25 Q. And relevant is something less than essential, isn't that
897
1 right?
2 A. Probably.
3 Q. Okay. Now, at some point in your testimony you referred to
4 a wealth of scientific research that test scores relate to job
5 performance. Do you remember that testimony?
6 A. Not specifically, but I wouldn't disagree with it.
7 Q. Do you remember using the phrase, wealth of scientific
8 research?
9 A. No, I don't recall those exact words, but again I don't
10 disagree with it.
11 Q. Just so that we're clear, none of that scientific research
12 was on the type of in-basket that you administered in Chicago,
13 is that right?
14 A. All I can say is, we don't have -- did not perform studies.
15 Q. Dr. Barrett, my specific question is that isn't it correct
16 that none of that scientific research that test scores relate
17 to job performance concerns the type of in-basket test that was
18 part of the 1993 sergeants promotional test?
19 A. No, I wouldn't agree with that.
20 Q. Would you agree that none of that scientific research
21 relates to the type of oral examination that was part of the
22 1993 sergeants promotional test?
23 A. I wouldn't agree that all communication -- I guess I'd like
24 you to restate the question again.
25 Q. Okay. Would you agree that none of that scientific
898
1 research that test scores relates to job performance relates to
2 the type of oral examination that was part of the 1993
3 promotional test?
4 A. No, I wouldn't agree with that.
5 Q. Could you identify for us any scientific research that
6 supports the claim that a higher score on the oral test is
7 related to better job performance? By oral test I mean the
8 type of oral test that was used in Chicago in the promotional
9 test.
10 A. There have been many assessment centers which I believe
11 mention oral communication in fact related success of
12 supervisor.
13 Q. I didn't hear the last part.
14 A. I'm sorry. There have been many studies which have looked
15 at assessment centers and in particular the mention or oral
16 communication and found that in fact it does relate to job
17 performance as a supervisor.
18 Q. So are you telling us now that that oral test in the
19 sergeants promotional test was an assessment center?
20 A. I'm not saying it itself. I say -- no, it's not an
21 assessment center per se. It could be one element in an
22 assessment center.
23 Q. Could you point us to any research that's identifiable by
24 citation or by book or by journal or by reported decision which
25 supports what you told us, that there is scientific research
899
1 that test scores on the type of oral test that was part of the
2 sergeants promotional test relates to job performance?
3 A. All I can testify to is in terms of many assessment centers
4 have various exercises like this, where oral communication is
5 rated and does relate to the performance of a supervisor.
6 Q. Can you point us to any specific article, Dr. Barrett?
7 A. Well, there is books by -- I can think of one book by
8 Byham.
9 THE COURT: Can we spell that?
10 THE WITNESS: B-y-h-a-m, Byham.
11 BY MR. FLAXMAN:
12 Q. When did Byham write his book, if you recall?
13 A. No, I don't recall.
14 Q. Other than the book by Byham, is there anything else you
15 could point us to to support -- to provide scientific research
16 that test scores on the oral test that was part of the Chicago
17 promotional test relate to -- the higher scores relate to job
18 performance?
19 THE COURT: You're narrowing it to only one type of
20 test?
21 MR. FLAXMAN: That's right now.
22 THE COURT: Not knowledge test.
23 MR. FLAXMAN: No, just right now just focusing on the
24 oral examination.
25 THE COURT: Testing oral ability of oral
900
1 communication.
2 MR. FLAXMAN: Well, the question is specifically
3 directed to the oral component of the promotional test.
4 BY MR. FLAXMAN:
5 Q. Is there anything you could point us to, Dr. Barrett?
6 A. I am trying to find my reference list, which should help
7 me. What page is my reference list on?
8 Q. Page 149 is a reference list. That's page 149 of
9 Defendant's Exhibit D.
10 A. There is no 149 in this copy.
11 MR. FLAXMAN: That's --
12 THE COURT: That's what I got.
13 MR. FLAXMAN: Shall we take time out?
14 THE COURT: How about the attorneys for the defendant
15 coming up with something to help their witness so he can
16 testify?
17 MS. PAPUSHKEWYCH: I believe --
18 THE COURT: Apparently what he has got and my copy
19 doesn't have the page that --
20 MS. PAPUSHKEWYCH: Mine doesn't either, your Honor.
21 THE COURT: -- the reference. Is there a page 149?
22 MR. FLAXMAN: I have a page 149, Judge.
23 MS. GLINK: There is, your Honor, but it seems to be
24 missing from our copies. I can't -- at this point without
25 going back to my office, I can't -- unless Mr. Flaxman has an
901
1 extra copy that he can show to our expert.
2 BY MR. FLAXMAN:
3 Q. Let's -- to facilitate things, if I may, let me hand you my
4 copy of Defendant's Exhibit D, which has a page 149.
5 A. The Bray, B-r-a-y, Campbell and Grant 1974, "Formative
6 Years In Business Calling A Long-Term AT&T Study of Manager
7 Lives." The book discusses various types of assessment center
8 devices and gives information about the assessment tools which
9 do relate to success. Above that, Bray, B-r-a-y, 1982, is an
10 article called, "Assessment Center and Study of Lives, American
11 Psychologist."
12 There -- I see now there are a number of -- I can go
13 through it, but a number of various articles, which I cited,
14 which does discuss assessment centers and research in that
15 area. There is a study, Fitzgerald and Quaintance,
16 Q-u-a-i-n-t-a-n-c-e, 1982, which is a survey of assessment
17 center used in state and local government. It's a general
18 assessment center technology.
19 There is a peer by Gaudler, G-a-u-d-l-e-r, Rosenthal,
20 Thornton and Benston, a meta-analysis of assessment center
21 validity, general applied psychology.
22 (Brief pause.)
23 MR. GLINK: Your Honor, I think we could help expedite
24 it by directing Dr. Barrett to the correct part of his report,
25 if that would help the Court.
902
1 THE COURT: To what?
2 MS. GLINK: To the correct part of his report, which
3 specifically addresses assessment centers.
4 MR. FLAXMAN: I think that Dr. Barrett should be able
5 to find whatever he wants in his report himself --
6 THE COURT: All right.
7 MR. FLAXMAN: -- without --
8 BY THE WITNESS:
9 A. There is also a -- the Byham book I was referring to is
10 Thornton and Byham, B-y-h-a-m, 1982. "Assessment Centers and
11 Managerial Performance." But again there is other articles.
12 That's -- I was giving some chief articles which look at that
13 issue.
14 BY MR. FLAXMAN:
15 Q. Are you telling us now that the oral component of the
16 promotional test was an assessment center?
17 A. I'm saying that an oral component is very common in
18 assessment centers, yes.
19 Q. My question, Dr. Barrett, is, was the oral component of the
20 1993 sergeants promotional test an assessment center?
21 A. Well, you see you are using the term in a slightly unusual
22 way. Assessment center is a generic term, okay. And in an
23 assessment center you might have a number of different types of
24 testing processes. One might be an oral component. One might
25 be a written component. One might be an in-basket. And the
903
1 most common part of an assessment center is an in-basket.
2 So you use that terminology. I find it difficult
3 for -- to answer.
4 Q. Other than the articles you pointed us to or the books,
5 articles and books you pointed us to about assessment centers,
6 is there any scientific research of which you are aware that
7 test scores on the type of oral examination that you used in
8 the 1993 Chicago police sergeants promotional test relate to
9 job performance?
10 A. We didn't perform an empirical study.
11 Q. I -- that's fine, Dr. Barrett. My question is, are you
12 aware of any scientific research which indicates that test
13 scores on an oral test of the type that was used in the 1993
14 Chicago police promotional test relate to job performance?
15 A. Other than we already talked about, I'm sure there -- I
16 have given you books and articles.
17 Q. Dr. Barrett, you haven't talked about any study at all,
18 have you, that's just of an oral examination of the type that
19 was used on this exam?
20 A. I'm not sure what you are asking.
21 Q. You talked about assessment center studies, haven't you?
22 A. Yes, I have.
23 Q. You haven't talked about studies just of oral examinations,
24 have you?
25 A. Well, I can't recall. Now I shouldn't -- usually you would
904
1 not just give an oral examination by itself. I can't recall
2 that being done.
3 Now, there are -- there is something called -- which
4 is common in some jurisdictions, an oral interview board. But
5 it's not.
6 Q. Dr. Barrett, we are not talking about other jurisdictions.
7 We are not talking about oral interview boards. We are talking
8 about the type of oral examination that you told the City of
9 Chicago to use to make promotions to sergeants in 1993. With
10 respect to that particular type of test, is there any
11 scientific research that test scores on that test relate to job
12 performance?
13 A. Maybe the one I already discussed.
14 Q. You haven't discussed anything, Dr. Barrett. Is there any
15 scientific research that test scores on that particular oral
16 test relate to job performance?
17 A. We have not -- there are no empirical studies of that
18 particular test.
19 MR. FLAXMAN: Judge, could you instruct the witness to
20 directly answer my question?
21 THE COURT: I don't think he understands your question
22 because I think he's thinking of the test as being made up of
23 three parts as a combined test. I think what you are seeking
24 to ask him of is a test where there wouldn't be any test of
25 knowledge and there wouldn't be any in-basket test. The only
905
1 thing it would have is the oral test, has anybody written any
2 article about that?
3 MR. FLAXMAN: Well --
4 THE COURT: So I don't think he understands what you
5 are asking. Why don't you restate the question.
6 BY MR. FLAXMAN:
7 Q. The sergeants test that you prepared had three sub-tests,
8 is that right?
9 A. Yes.
10 Q. One was a written job knowledge test, is that right?
11 A. Yes.
12 Q. The other was the in-basket test, and the third was the
13 oral examination, is that right?
14 A. Yes.
15 Q. And scores from each of these three tests were combined
16 together to produce the final score, is that right?
17 A. That's correct.
18 Q. And then promotions were made, have been made and will be
19 made in rank order from that list, the results of three exams,
20 right?
21 A. Yes.
22 Q. Now, is it your contention that each -- that the scores on
23 each sub-tests of that test are such that higher scores on each
24 separate part mean higher job performance if promoted?
25 A. Yes.
906
1 Q. So somebody who got a 15 on the oral test, in your opinion,
2 is likely to do better than somebody who got a 13 on the oral
3 test, is that right?
4 A. There is a higher probability of success in general, yes.
5 Q. Is there any scientific research of which you are aware
6 that somebody who got a 15 on the oral test is likely to do
7 better as a sergeant than somebody who got a 13 on the oral
8 test?
9 A. Not other than what I told you about the research and
10 assessment center.
11 Q. Other than assessment center research is there any research
12 about the particular type of oral examination that you gave
13 which supports your view that somebody who had a 15 on the oral
14 examination is likely to do better as a sergeant than somebody
15 who got a 13?
16 A. We have done no specific studies on that examination.
17 MR. FLAXMAN: Judge, I think the question is clear at
18 this stage. And I don't think he is answering it. I'd like
19 you to ask him to try harder to answer the question.
20 THE COURT: Well --
21 MR. FLAXMAN: If it's not clear I will try again, but
22 I think --
23 THE COURT: No, I think you did make it clear. At
24 least it was clear to me what you were asking. And I thought
25 the answer was, he doesn't know. He hasn't done any empirical
907
1 research on pure oral tests.
2 BY MR. FLAXMAN:
3 Q. Other than empirical research on a pure oral test, and
4 other than the assessment center literature, is there any
5 research of which you are aware which supports your view of
6 somebody who gets a 15 on that type of oral test is going to do
7 better when promoted to sergeant than somebody who gets a 13?
8 A. Same question over again? I guess I can't differentiate
9 from the previous question.
10 Q. Could you answer the question?
11 A. I did. We have done no specific research on that.
12 Q. Are you aware of any specific research on that other than
13 what you may or may not have done?
14 A. No, I don't know of any specific research on one oral test
15 like that.
16 Q. Thank you.
17 And if I asked you the same question about the
18 in-basket, the particular type of in-basket that was part of
19 the sergeants promotional test, would you give me the same
20 answer, that you are not aware of any specific research to show
21 that somebody who got 60 correct on that in-basket in one hour
22 and 15 minutes is likely to be better as a sergeant than
23 somebody who got 57?
24 THE COURT: You are excluding all of the writing where
25 this is discussed in connection with assessment centers. I
908
1 don't know how you can do that, but you have done that. I
2 don't think he understands that's what you have done.
3 You are saying, you can't -- you don't want the ones
4 that do this in a context of an assessment center. You are
5 saying, you want something that's a separate article, that
6 doesn't talk about assessment centers, only talks about in-
7 basket test. Isn't that really what you are asking him?
8 Because I don't think he understands that.
9 MR. FLAXMAN: Could I have a minute, Judge?
10 THE COURT: Yes.
11 MR. FLAXMAN: To regroup?
12 (Brief pause.)
13 BY MR. FLAXMAN:
14 Q. Could I have my exhibit?
15 When you did your meta-analysis, were you trying to
16 include all of the relevant studies?
17 A. We did the meta-analysis in a really short period of time.
18 So we were not that comprehensive in terms of our
19 meta-analysis.
20 Q. Is it correct that the only studies that you considered in
21 the meta-analysis are those shown on page R-4 of your report?
22 A. Yes.
23 Q. Now --
24 THE COURT: That's page R-4?
25 MR. FLAXMAN: That's correct, Appendix R, page R-4.
909
1 BY MR. FLAXMAN:
2 Q. Is there, in fact, literature that scores on a written test
3 of job knowledge relates to job performance?
4 A. Yes.
5 Q. Is the primary source that you've relied on for that
6 assertion in preparing your work for Chicago police promotional
7 test the study by Dye, Reck & McDaniel?
8 A. At that point in time, that was the main study we relied
9 upon. Since that time I have my affidavit. I sort of go back
10 and individually review each separate study which he reviewed.
11 And I believe in my affidavit I've reviewed something like 80
12 studies, which show that job knowledge relates to job
13 performance.
14 Q. Now, do you agree that to justify use of a content-valid
15 test for ranking it must be demonstrated from empirical
16 evidence either that mastery of more difficult work behaviors
17 or that mastery of a greater scope of knowledge corresponds to
18 a greater scope of important work behavior?
19 A. No.
20 Q. Do you agree that to be content-valid the test should
21 fairly sample the information that is actually used by the
22 employee on the job?
23 A. That's generally true, yes.
24 Q. Did you make any effort in preparing the test to determine
25 whether the level of difficulty of the test items corresponds
910
1 to the level of difficulty of the knowledge that's used in the
2 work behavior?
3 A. Yes.
4 Q. When you talked about challenges to the test, the people
5 taking the test weren't given the test when they left, were
6 they?
7 A. No.
8 Q. In other words, to make a challenge you have to identify
9 the particular question you were challenging, is that right?
10 A. Yes.
11 Q. And you have to explain why you are challenging it, is that
12 right?
13 A. Yes.
14 Q. Do you have the actual answer sheets for the written test?
15 A. No, I think the actual answer sheets are maintained by
16 Arthur Andersen.
17 Q. Are you familiar with the questions and answers of the
18 Equal Employment Opportunity Commission on the uniform employee
19 selection guidelines?
20 A. In general, yes.
21 Q. Have you ever reviewed them?
22 A. Yes.
23 Q. Have you ever disagreed with any of those questions and
24 answers?
25 A. I probably have.
911
1 Q. Well, do you disagree -- is there -- do you recall if there
2 is a particular question about rank order selection?
3 A. There probably is.
4 Q. Now let me show you what's been marked as Plaintiffs'
5 Exhibit 84 and ask you to look at --
6 MS. GLINK: Your Honor, I'd like to lay a foundation
7 that the document that Mr. Flaxman -- the relevancy of this
8 document and what it is. And I just think he needs to
9 establish more what this means by question and answer. I
10 don't --
11 MR. FLAXMAN: I think I will do that when I show him
12 the document.
13 THE COURT: I will again overrule the objection
14 subject to subsequent motion to strike.
15 BY MR. FLAXMAN:
16 Q. Could you tell us, have you ever seen Plaintiffs'
17 Exhibit 84 before in any form?
18 A. Yes.
19 Q. What -- can you tell us what it is?
20 A. This is titled, "The Equal Employment Opportunity
21 Commission Uniform Employee Selection Guidelines,
22 Interpretation And Clarification."
23 Q. And have you read these?
24 A. Yes.
25 Q. And do these -- and clarify and interpret but not modify
912
1 the uniform guidelines on employee selection procedures?
2 A. You are asking the first sentence? Yes, that's correct.
3 That's the first sentence.
4 Q. Do you agree with Question and Answer 39, "Can a user rely
5 upon written or oral assertions of validity instead of evidence
6 of validity?" And the answer --
7 THE COURT: Are we talking about Question 39 that
8 appears on page 4199?
9 MR. FLAXMAN: That's correct.
10 THE COURT: Okay.
11 MS. GLINK: 38?
12 MR. FLAXMAN: 38, I'm sorry. 38. Let me reask the
13 question.
14 BY MR. FLAXMAN:
15 Q. Do you agree with Question and Answer 38, "Question: Can a
16 user rely upon written or oral assertions of validity instead
17 of evidence of validity?" The answer is, no, with an
18 explanation.
19 A. Can a user, it says, and I don't have any real problem, I
20 don't believe, with that statement.
21 Q. Okay. Let me ask you to look at Question and Answer 62.
22 Question 62, which is at page 4204, is, "Under what
23 circumstances may a selection procedure be used for ranking?"
24 A. You want me to read it?
25 Q. I'd like you to read it to yourself and tell us if you
913
1 agree with that answer or disagree with that answer.
2 Have you had a chance to finish reading it?
3 A. Yes, I have.
4 Q. Do you agree or disagree with the answer to Question 62?
5 A. Well, in general I would agree with the answer to 62.
6 Q. Now, do you agree with the proposition that the scientific
7 method uses empirical data to determine if one fact or another
8 is true?
9 A. I'm sorry. Say that again.
10 Q. Do you agree with the proposition that the scientific
11 method uses empirical data to determine if one fact or another
12 is true?
13 A. There is always this question with how you define empirical
14 data. So it's a little hard to answer.
15 Q. Well, do you -- are you unable to answer my question
16 whether you agree or disagree with it?
17 A. I would agree in general, in terms of that sort of
18 statement as a generalization.
19 Q. Well, have you ever used that phrase, the scientific method
20 uses empirical data to determine if one fact or another is
21 true?
22 A. Yes, I might have used that statement.
23 Q. Well, do you remember writing an article in 1992 called
24 "Clarifying construct validity, definitions, processes and
25 models," published in Human Performance where at page 27 you
914
1 wrote, "The scientific method uses empirical data to determine
2 if one fact or another is true"?
3 A. No, I don't recall that exact phrase.
4 Q. Let me show you what's been marked as Plaintiffs'
5 Exhibit 85, ask you first, is this a copy of our article?
6 A. Yes, it is.
7 Q. Let me ask you to look at page 27 and see if you can find
8 the material I was quoting from.
9 A. (No response.)
10 Q. And it's under the heading, "Construct validation in the
11 law."
12 A. Yes, I would read the section. "Regrettably, personnel
13 psychologists far too often appear to be talking the viewpoint
14 that the law should dictate professional practice. As Lerner
15 1980 pointed out, the legal fact is merely what a judge or jury
16 finds to be true. The law should not be equated with a method
17 of seeking scientific truth. Rebell 1989. The scientific
18 method uses empirical data to determine if one fact or another
19 is true."
20 I can go on and read the end, or is that enough?
21 Q. Dr. Barrett, my question is, you wrote that sentence, "The
22 scientific method uses empirical data to determine if one fact
23 or another is true"?
24 A. I wrote the sentence above, too. So you can't take the
25 sentence out of context.
915
1 Q. Well, okay. My question, Dr. Barrett, is there empirical
2 data to determine if higher scores on the 1973 sergeants
3 promotional test mean higher performance?
4 MS. GLINK: Your Honor, I am just going to interpose
5 an objection at this point. We have gone through this before
6 the break, and I made the same point. We have gone through
7 this. Dr. Barrett testified over and over again that he has
8 empirical evidence and not a criteria related study and that no
9 criteria related study has been conducted.
10 I think that that has been established at this point.
11 THE COURT: My understanding of it is, you don't have
12 to have empirical data of the very institution or very persons
13 that are being tested. It is empirical data that is
14 scientifically applicable to the type of testing procedure
15 that's being used. So that's why you have statements made that
16 in content-validity test you don't need empirical data to
17 support the validity of the test.
18 MR. FLAXMAN: That's certainly what his testimony has
19 been. I don't think your Honor is making a finding that's what
20 the --
21 THE COURT: No, no. I thought that's in the EEOC's
22 uniform guidelines.
23 MR. FLAXMAN: I think we need to --
24 THE COURT: Or am I getting all confabulated?
25 MR. FLAXMAN: If that's the way we are coming out,
916
1 then we lost the case and I think we won the case. So I think
2 there is -- there is a communications problem.
3 THE COURT: I don't have before me the guidelines on
4 contents validity. But I thought that there was not a need,
5 that there was a specific sentence on that.
6 MR. FLAXMAN: What I think --
7 THE COURT: Am I mixing that up?
8 MS. GLINK: We don't think so.
9 MR. FLAXMAN: This is what is in dispute in the case.
10 I think if you come out that way --
11 THE COURT: That's not my coming out. I am trying to
12 regurgitate what I thought I read. But I may have read it
13 someplace else, and I have gotten it intermingled now.
14 MR. FLAXMAN: I think --
15 THE COURT: This is a field that is not easy to keep
16 everything in nice little compartments, I think. So I will
17 stand corrected if I am in error.
18 But anyway, you are reading empirical data meaning
19 that you have to make the study of the actual institution
20 that's being tested.
21 MR. FLAXMAN: That's --
22 THE COURT: Do you have a basis for --
23 MR. FLAXMAN: That's what --
24 THE COURT: -- that's what is meant?
25 MR. FLAXMAN: That's what the cases have held and
917
1 that's what --
2 THE COURT: It isn't empirical data of similar
3 situations; it has to be the exact institution?
4 MR. FLAXMAN: Or something very, very close.
5 THE COURT: You have got to run a complete study of
6 the Chicago Police Department before you could have a test.
7 MR. FLAXMAN: If you are going to give the test to
8 make rank order selection, you have to have some reason to
9 believe it relates to this particular job. That's what the
10 standard was in --
11 THE COURT: Not some reason, it's something else. You
12 have to run an actual empirical study of the actual police
13 department that's involved.
14 MR. FLAXMAN: If you are going to make rank order
15 selection, that's what -- that's the standard that Judge
16 Marshall applied.
17 MS. GLINK: We just, for the record, like to interpose
18 our objection to his characterization of what the law requires,
19 what the the guidelines require.
20 THE COURT: Is this going to be in the --
21 MS. GLINK: Yes, it will.
22 THE COURT: -- findings and conclusions of law?
23 MR. FLAXMAN: It better be.
24 THE COURT: You are going to say that it's already
25 settled and they are going to say it's already settled. And
918
1 you are going to come to opposite conclusions.
2 MS. GLINK: That's right, your Honor.
3 THE COURT: Sounds like a typical lawsuit. All right.
4 Well, in any event, we are at 3:15. I don't mean to
5 cut you short on your cross-examination.
6 MR. FLAXMAN: I think if -- I think I am done. I have
7 no further questions.
8 THE COURT: All right.
9 MS. GLINK: Can we take a short break? We now speak
10 with our --
11 MS. PAPUSHKEWYCH: And, your Honor, I think we are
12 getting a little bit closer on our exhibits in terms of Mr.
13 Flaxman.
14 THE COURT: That will be helpful.
15 (Brief recess.)
16 MS. GLINK: Your Honor, we are missing the witness for
17 a moment.
18 THE COURT: That's fine. While we are waiting for
19 him, I just want to say that I re-read to improve my faulty
20 recollection of the part 1607 of the Equal Employment
21 Opportunity Commission's regs and uniform guidelines on
22 employee selection procedures dated 1978, and particularly the
23 reference being to the 1607.5 and 1607.14. And my memory is
24 not as good as I thought it was.
25 About how long would you anticipate it's going to take
919
1 now for redirect?
2 MS. PAPUSHKEWYCH: Mr. Flaxman I believe wanted to --
3 MR. FLAXMAN: I thought I did, but --
4 THE COURT: Do you have more questions?
5 MR. FLAXMAN: I won't do that. They can --
6 MS. PAPUSHKEWYCH: Okay.
7 MS. GLINK: We have just a few.
8 THE COURT: Okay.
9 MS. PAPUSHKEWYCH: We have just a few.
10 THE COURT: Roughly half hour or something?
11 MS. PAPUSHKEWYCH: Not even that.
12 THE COURT: I see. All right.
13 MS. PAPUSHKEWYCH: We have tried to locate our next
14 witness. Hopefully he will be here before too long.
15 THE COURT: All right. We are all set here. All
16 right. We are ready for redirect now, I believe.
17 Tomorrow at 4:30 we have a hearing on Les Cut the
18 Taxes, Golden versus the City of Chicago, Board of Election
19 Commissioners, I guess.
20 THE LAW CLERK: Cook County Officers Electoral.
21 THE COURT: Cook County Officers Electoral Board,
22 election hearing. And I will be -- we set that for 4:30. I
23 have to rule tomorrow so that there is still an opportunity to
24 try to get on the ballot. All right.
25 REDIRECT EXAMINATION
920
1 BY MS. GLINK:
2 Q. Dr. Barrett, I'd like to call your attention to the
3 technical report that you prepared, which is Defendant's
4 Exhibit D. And I specifically would like to call your
5 attention to page 69 of that report.
6 A. Yes.
7 Q. Can you read for me the paragraph that is directly under
8 the heading, "Chicago police sergeant promotion process"?
9 A. "The following section describes relevant research on the
10 methods chosen for Chicago police sergeant promotional process.
11 Specifically the written job knowledge examination and two
12 assessment center exercises, the in-basket simulation and oral
13 briefing exercise were selected to promote candidates to
14 Chicago police sergeant. A literature review is conducted on
15 each to determine the best method."
16 Q. When you say, the best method, what do you mean by that?
17 A. The method to construct these types of examinations.
18 Q. Can you describe for me in general, you don't have to read
19 through it, what follows that paragraph? And this is under the
20 literature review section of your report, is that correct, Dr.
21 Barrett?
22 A. Yes, on this issue.
23 What follows on page 69 is a section on the written
24 job knowledge examination, which reviews many studies
25 indicating the relevance of job knowledge tests, and the
921
1 criteria of related studies which have been conducted with
2 those types of tests.
3 On page 72, I discuss assessment center exercises, and
4 I discuss the assessment center literature. And then on
5 page 73 I talk about the two most common exercises, the
6 in-basket and the oral exercise.
7 Q. Let me stop you there. Now, when you say, the two most
8 common exercises, do you mean the two most common exercises
9 that are generally part of assessment centers?
10 A. Yes, I do.
11 Q. And in your opinion, can you give me a definition of
12 assessment center?
13 A. It's a -- it's a set of exercises or tests used for
14 selection of promotion purposes. It can consist of a variety
15 of different types of exercises, and it is usually defined as
16 more than one type of exercise or test being used in
17 combination.
18 Q. And you consider both in-basket and simulation and oral
19 briefing -- do you consider the two -- these two components of
20 your examination, oral briefing and in-basket simulation, to be
21 assessment center exercises?
22 A. Yes.
23 Q. And does this literature that's set forth on pages 69 for
24 the written job knowledge test, beginning with the written job
25 knowledge test, and then on page 72 with assessment centers --
922
1 does this literature support the use of these examinations, in
2 your opinion, for this examination for police sergeant?
3 A. Yes.
4 Q. And why is that?
5 A. There is ample evidence here in terms of criteria related
6 studies and other types of evidence indicating that these types
7 of exercises are effective in selecting supervisors.
8 Q. Did any of the assessment center studies that you looked at
9 that are included in here directly deal with safety forces?
10 A. There are a few which does deal with safety forces.
11 Q. Dr. Barrett, does the fact that an examination has adverse
12 impact mean that it's not content valid?
13 A. No.
14 Q. And if a test does not have adverse impact, would that mean
15 it is content valid?
16 A. No.
17 MS. GLINK: We have nothing further.
18 THE COURT: All right.
19 Any additional cross now?
20 MR. FLAXMAN: Yes, Judge.
21 RECROSS-EXAMINATION
22 BY MR. FLAXMAN:
23 Q. You told us on redirect that as part of your work in
24 preparing the 1993 Chicago police sergeants test, a literature
25 review was conducted on each, and I think each referred to
923
1 written job knowledge examination, in-basket simulation and
2 oral briefing exercise, to determine the best methods, is that
3 right?
4 A. Yes.
5 Q. And by best methods, did you mean the best way to do an
6 in-basket simulation?
7 A. Well, that's part of what is contained in the report. But
8 it's more basically the evidence for in-basket being valid in a
9 variety of situations.
10 Q. And all of the literature that you reviewed about an
11 in-basket being valid in these situations is set out in this
12 report pages -- starting at page 69 and ending at page 77, is
13 that right?
14 A. There may be more in the report. That would satisfy the --
15 that's concentrated, yes.
16 Q. After review of this existing relevant research and
17 literature, you ended up using the same type of in-basket that
18 you had used for the Akron police sergeants, is that right?
19 A. That's correct.
20 Q. And the same type of in-basket you used for the Akron fire
21 lieutenants, is that right?
22 A. The same type, yes.
23 Q. After this review of relevant research and literature, you
24 ended up using the same type of oral interview that you had
25 used for Akron police sergeants?
924
1 A. Same type of format, yes.
2 Q. Page 70 of your report, in the one, two, three, fourth line
3 down, is the phrase, corrected mean validity. Do you see that?
4 A. On page 70, yes, it says, "Written job knowledge tests have
5 been shown to have substantial validity. In a meta-analysis of
6 502 validity coefficients, Dye, Reck & McDaniel, 1993, found a
7 corrected mean validity of .45 for studies predicting job
8 performance."
9 Q. What does corrected mean -- validity mean?
10 A. That is a -- in this context it refers to a meta-analysis
11 procedure or in the area of what's known in psychology
12 specifically when it's applied to validity coefficients, it's
13 called validity generalization. And the corrections are of
14 about 11 types.
15 No. 1 would be the correction based upon the sample
16 size of the many different studies being used. The second
17 would be a correction based upon the reliability of the test or
18 predictor. The third correction would be based upon the
19 reliability of the criterion or job performance measure.
20 A fourth correction would be in terms of restriction
21 of range on the predictor or the test. A fifth correction
22 would be in terms of restriction of range of the dependent
23 variable criterion or more specifically the job performance
24 measure.
25 A sixth correction would be based upon the
925
1 imperfection of the test in measuring a construct of interest.
2 The seventh would be a correction of the dependent variable,
3 the criterion or job performance variable in terms of its
4 imperfections measuring the construct of relevance.
5 You want me to continue?
6 Q. Is the Dye, Reck & McDaniel study of something -- a study
7 of validity generalization?
8 A. It's based upon a meta-analysis, and in our field we call
9 meta-analysis, we use correlations between a test score and job
10 performance. It's then labeled validity generalization.
11 Q. Let me show you what's been marked as Plaintiffs' Exhibit
12 27. Is Plaintiffs' Exhibit 27 a copy of this Dye, Reck &
13 McDaniel article?
14 A. No.
15 Q. What is Plaintiffs' Exhibit 27?
16 A. This is a manuscript of the article. This is not the
17 actual article.
18 Q. Does it have the same words as the actual article?
19 A. I can't tell.
20 Q. Well, does Barrett & Associates have a fax machine?
21 A. Yes, it does.
22 Q. And on June 22, 1995, at 1:27 p.m. did Barrett & Associates
23 fax a copy of this article to the City of Chicago?
24 A. It appears they did.
25 Q. Do you know if Barrett & Associates ever faxed a copy of
926
1 the actual article to the City of Chicago?
2 A. I don't know if they did or not.
3 Q. Have you ever seen a copy of the actual article?
4 A. Yes, I have.
5 Q. Do you know how it's different from what is before you as
6 Plaintiffs' Exhibit 27?
7 A. As I have said, I have not reviewed and compared the two.
8 Q. Well --
9 THE COURT: Is the article in the International
10 Journal of Selection and Assessment?
11 THE WITNESS: Yes, it is.
12 THE COURT: On the first page.
13 THE WITNESS: It's been published there. It's now a
14 published article in that journal.
15 BY MR. FLAXMAN:
16 Q. Well, have you ever seen a preprint of an article that's in
17 press?
18 A. This is not a preprint.
19 Q. What is this?
20 A. This is their -- I assume, their final manuscript they sent
21 in to be published.
22 Q. And this is what you gave to the city on June 22, 1995?
23 A. I assume one of my associates faxed it on that day, yes.
24 Q. Well, is this the same study that was subsequently printed
25 in the International Journal of Selection and Assessment that's
927
1 referred to at your report at page 70?
2 A. I assume it would be very similar or the same to this
3 manuscript. I have no reason to believe it's not.
4 Q. Okay. Well, let me ask you to look at page 12 of this
5 exhibit, Exhibit 27. Have you ever seen this table before?
6 A. Yes, it looks very similar to the table which has been
7 published.
8 Q. Well, "total N," do you see that column heading?
9 A. Yes.
10 Q. Does that mean the total number?
11 A. Yes.
12 Q. And "total R's" -- excuse me -- "number R's," what does
13 that mean?
14 A. I'm sorry. Where are we now? Number -- yes, number of
15 correlations, it says.
16 THE COURT: R means correlation?
17 THE WITNESS: Yes.
18 BY MR. FLAXMAN:
19 Q. And then the next column is "the mean R"?
20 A. Yes.
21 Q. And the next column after that, is that a Greek letter?
22 A. Yes, that's the corrected correlation.
23 Q. Is the corrected correlation twice the correlation?
24 A. That's what they had found.
25 Q. Do you know how they determined that they should double the
928
1 correlation?
2 A. I thought I just went through at least six, seven or eight
3 of the corrections that they make --
4 Q. To --
5 A. -- in terms of the usual meta-analysis or generalization
6 study.
7 Q. Well, do they explain in their report the basis for
8 doubling the correlation?
9 A. I assume that they do discuss the meta-analysis procedure
10 somewhere in the report. I can look and see for you.
11 They say they did a meta-analysis on page 6.
12 Q. Have you found anything in the paper, Plaintiffs' Exhibit
13 27, that explains why the correlation was doubled?
14 A. I just said, they said they did a meta-analysis. They
15 said, this is what they did.
16 Q. But does the meta-analysis explain why the correlation --
17 why the corrected validity is twice what the correlation was in
18 the column 4?
19 A. Well, you have to -- I thought I went through at least six
20 or seven of the corrections which are made in the
21 meta-analysis.
22 Q. Does this report explain which of those six or seven
23 rationales for increasing the correlation was relied on?
24 A. I'm not -- I haven't read the total report recently, but I
25 assume that they did standard meta-analysis, standard
929
1 technique.
2 Q. Standard meta-analysis involves doubling the correlation,
3 is that what you tell us?
4 A. No. All I am saying is that meta-analysis is a process and
5 as I mentioned, today it's used in drug studies. It's used in
6 many places, and that it's a standard technique which is used
7 in the field to do exactly what they did do.
8 Q. When you wrote your report, Defendant's Exhibit D, did you
9 rely on the Dye, Reck & McDaniel study that's cited in that
10 report?
11 A. This was one study which was cited in the course which took
12 into account the findings.
13 Q. The Dye, Reck & McDaniel study, does that indicate to
14 you -- does that -- back in 1994, when you completed
15 Defendant's Exhibit D, did you know what studies had been
16 relied on in the Dye, Reck & McDaniel article?
17 A. I don't know the time sequence. I do know that we started
18 to collect the actual underlying data at some point in time.
19 And I believe I have in my affidavit, my review so far of 80 of
20 those articles which supports their position in terms of
21 showing in each case that the job knowledge test relates to job
22 performance.
23 Q. The Dye, Reck & McDaniel article doesn't identify which
24 studies it relies on, does it?
25 A. No, it does not.
930
1 Q. Now, the Dye Reck & McDaniel article -- or the studies that
2 are used in the Dye, Reck & McDaniel article presumably had
3 some kind of measure of performance in those studies, is that
4 right?
5 A. Yes.
6 Q. And there was -- is a correlation of success on a written
7 test and performance on the job, is that right?
8 A. That's correct.
9 Q. Now, you told us, I think, that for a variety of reasons
10 it's impractical to devise a measure of performance for Chicago
11 police officers, is that right?
12 A. Yes.
13 Q. So by using this validity generalization and meta-analysis,
14 is it correct that what you're able to do is avoid any need to
15 measure actual on-the-job performance of police officers by
16 relying on performance of people in other professions and how
17 they do on written tests?
18 A. I don't recall saying that.
19 Q. Well, I'm not asking if you said it, Dr. Barrett. But
20 isn't that the effect of relying on the Dye, Reck & McDaniel
21 study?
22 A. No, it's not.
23 Q. Well, is the Dye, Reck & McDaniel study a compilation of
24 studies that compared performance on written tests with
25 performance on the job?
931
1 A. Yes.
2 Q. And based on the results of the Dye, Reck & McDaniel study,
3 you have formed the opinion that people who do better on
4 written job knowledge tests do better on the job, is that
5 right?
6 A. Well, that is one piece of evidence. As I said before,
7 just for example --
8 Q. Could you just answer my question, Dr. Barrett, and spare
9 us the speeches? It's getting late.
10 Is that correct, that you relied on the Dye, Reck &
11 McDaniel study as part of your belief that people who do better
12 on written tests will do better on the job?
13 A. I use that to -- as part of the evidence that job knowledge
14 tests do relate to job performance.
15 Q. Now, why is it feasible or was it feasible to have measures
16 of job performance for all of those 3,653 -- '528 people who
17 were involved in the Dye, Reck & McDaniel study, but you
18 couldn't have a measure of job performance for Chicago police
19 officers?
20 A. As I explained before, we have a situation in safety forces
21 throughout the United States, which makes it very difficult to
22 obtain a good reliable measure of job performance from the
23 supervisors.
24 Q. So --
25 A. There is -- the supervisors are reluctant to give
932
1 performance appraisal measures when they know or believe that
2 it may result in their findings being revealed, result in court
3 action. There is a variety of reasons I went through before
4 why there is a feasibility issue now which was -- may not have
5 been true in the past.
6 Q. So you're telling us that for safety forces you can't
7 measure how well somebody is doing on the job, is that right?
8 A. I'm saying, to conduct a validation study -- if that was
9 your question?
10 Q. No, my question is that if you wanted to measure job
11 performance, you can't do that for safety forces; is that your
12 opinion?
13 A. I am saying it's very difficult to measure job performance
14 for safety forces in a way which can be used for criteria-
15 related study.
16 Q. And you're telling us that it's not very difficult to
17 develop valid measures of job performance for whatever the jobs
18 were that were involved in the Dye, Reck & McDaniel studies, is
19 that right?
20 A. Yes, those -- many of those studies were performed -- were
21 conducted a number of years ago and in situations where there
22 is not the consistent constant litigation that we have in
23 safety force.
24 Q. Some of those studies were of jobs where -- like factory
25 workers. You could measure how many widgets somebody produced
933
1 in an hour, is that right?
2 A. Sure.
3 Q. That's different than the job of a police sergeant, isn't
4 it?
5 A. Yes, it is.
6 Q. And some of those studies that were relied on in Dye, Reck
7 & McDaniel were students in school, isn't that right?
8 A. I don't recall students in school, I guess.
9 Q. Well, was there a study of why some students perform well
10 and others perform poorly on SAT math items?
11 A. There could have been, yes.
12 Q. Is that the kind of information -- is that the kind of
13 study that you rely on in your opinion that police officers who
14 do better on a test of written job -- a written test of job
15 knowledge will do better when promoted?
16 A. No, it wouldn't be that specific study. I wouldn't rely on
17 that study if you say it's just college students.
18 Q. Well, when you submitted an affidavit in this case, did you
19 list 82 studies to support your contention that people who do
20 better on tests of job knowledge do better on the job?
21 A. Yes, I started to review the Dye, Reck & McDaniel
22 literature.
23 Q. And was one of those studies an article by Burns and
24 Takahira, T-a-k-a-h-i-r-a, 1994, and "Contemporary educational
25 psychology, why some students perform well and others perform
934
1 poorly on SAT math items"?
2 A. If it's listed there, it was in that review process, yes.
3 Q. And that's the kind of data that you rely on for making
4 judgments about Chicago police officers?
5 A. That's one study.
6 Q. Okay. Is another study that you relied on for your
7 judgment about Chicago police officers and job knowledge a
8 study about prediction of achievement in radio training school?
9 A. Again if it's listed there, it's probably an Army study if
10 I would guess.
11 Q. Well, is another study that you relied on one about
12 predicting success in machine bookkeeping?
13 A. Again, if it's listed there, it would be one -- one of the
14 articles which was contained in Dye, Reck & McDaniel.
15 Q. And another study was one about a selection battery for
16 bake shop managers?
17 A. Yes, if it's listed there, it would be one of the articles
18 we reviewed.
19 Q. And several of the studies that you relied on were
20 anonymous, weren't they?
21 A. Yes, some are published without an author, that is correct.
22 Q. Was there also a study about measuring performance criteria
23 of bank tellers?
24 A. I think there was one like that.
25 Q. As you sit here now, do you think it's possible to devise
935
1 some objective criteria to measure the performance of a bank
2 teller?
3 A. Yes.
4 Q. Now, by looking at these datas from other studies and doing
5 a meta-analysis, does that avoid having to come up with a valid
6 measure of performance for the particular job that you are
7 applying the results of the meta-analysis to?
8 A. The two are quite separate.
9 Q. Well, maybe my question wasn't clear. Dr. Barrett, by
10 using the meta-analysis you are able to come up with a
11 generalization that if you -- the more job knowledge you have,
12 the better your performance on the job will be, is that
13 correct?
14 A. Are you referring now to the Dye, Reck & McDaniel report?
15 Q. That's correct.
16 A. That was the conclusion they reached, yes.
17 Q. That's in accordance with your general opinion about
18 general tests of job knowledge, is that correct?
19 A. Yes.
20 Q. And by doing a meta-analysis, you can demonstrate that in
21 some manner, is that correct?
22 A. Well, there are many -- I don't want to confuse you about
23 this. Be clear there are many different ways one can do this.
24 For example, Professor Jencks in his book, "Who Gets Ahead,"
25 does not use meta-analysis. He comes to the same conclusion I
936
1 come to and he uses job knowledge test achievement.
2 Q. Now --
3 A. That finds that --
4 Q. Now, you relied on the Dye, Reck & McDaniel article, didn't
5 you?
6 A. It's one piece of evidence we did rely upon, yes.
7 Q. And you relied on it on page 70 of your report, is that
8 correct?
9 A. It's one of the studies we cited, yes.
10 Q. Okay. And by citing this study, what this study did --
11 this study concluded that job knowledge related to job
12 performance, is that right?
13 A. Well, even more specific than that. It pointed out that
14 when you have a test which is specific to the actual job, which
15 really tests knowledge, which is -- corresponds very closely to
16 the job knowledge, you have even a higher correlation.
17 Q. Well, so that the Dye, Reck & McDaniel study, as you read
18 it then, shows that job-specific knowledge tests are correlated
19 with success on the job, is that right?
20 A. That's correct.
21 Q. And you have generalized from the results of the Dye, Reck
22 & McDaniel study to the Chicago Police Department, is that
23 right?
24 A. That's one piece of evidence we've used.
25 Q. Do you understand my question?
937
1 A. I thought I did.
2 Q. Have you generalized from the results of the Dye, Reck &
3 McDaniel study that more knowledge on the job means better
4 performance -- that better performance on the job to apply that
5 to the Chicago Police Department?
6 MS. GLINK: Your Honor, I object to the question. He
7 answered it the last time and the time before that. I don't
8 think he has to continue to answer the same question.
9 THE COURT: Well, there seems to be a difficulty in
10 the understanding of it. I will overrule the objection, permit
11 him to answer now.
12 BY THE WITNESS:
13 A. It's one piece of evidence that we did use to support our
14 position.
15 BY MR. FLAXMAN:
16 Q. And your position is that more job knowledge means better
17 performance on the job, is that right?
18 A. Yes.
19 Q. And that's based on a validity generalization from other
20 studies, is that right?
21 A. Not totally. As I said, there is a variety of evidence.
22 We can put even more evidence in. We can put in "Who Gets
23 Ahead" by Professor Jencks to support the same proposition.
24 Q. When you did your report, Defendant's Exhibit D, as in dog,
25 you didn't mention Professor Jencks, did you?
938
1 A. No, his work is in sociology typically. I could have put
2 it in. I probably was remiss not putting it in.
3 Q. You could have put in Shakespeare, couldn't you, doctor?
4 A. No, I could not have put in Shakespeare for that
5 proposition.
6 Q. You didn't put in Shakespeare, did you?
7 A. As I recall, I did not put in Shakespeare.
8 Q. And you didn't put in Professor Jencks, did you?
9 A. No, I did not.
10 Q. You put in Dye, Reck & McDaniel, isn't that right?
11 A. That's correct.
12 Q. And you relied on Dye, Reck & McDaniel's meta-analysis for
13 your generalization that job knowledge is related to
14 performance on the job?
15 A. That's one piece of evidence we did use.
16 Q. And that was a significant piece of evidence, isn't that
17 right?
18 A. Well, I would say that it's the largest study putting all
19 material together, yes. It's a large study.
20 MR. FLAXMAN: Thank you. I have nothing further.
21 MS. GLINK: No redirect, your Honor.
22 THE COURT: All right. Sir, that, believe it or not,
23 completes your testimony. You are excused.
24 THE WITNESS: Thank you.
25 THE COURT: And there is no snow, and the airplanes
939
1 are flying.
2 (Witness excused.)
3 THE COURT: We have 20 minutes, if somebody can be put
4 on as a live witness?
5 MS. PAPUSHKEWYCH: We can, Commander DeLopez.
6 THE COURT: I know that you previously testified, but
7 we will place you under oath again anyway.
8 (Witness sworn.)
9 MR. FLAXMAN: Judge, I have a plaintiff sitting with
10 me at counsel table. I'd like him to have a look at the
11 written test questions and advise me. If he agrees to sign the
12 protective order, can he do --
13 THE COURT: Yes.
14 MS. PAPUSHKEWYCH: Certainly.
15 THE COURT: Absolutely.
16 MS. PAPUSHKEWYCH: I will remove the material, your
17 Honor, from the previous witness.
18 THE COURT: I guess your direct testimony was cut off,
19 is that right?
20 MS. PAPUSHKEWYCH: That's correct.
21 THE COURT: Or wasn't completed.
22 MS. PAPUSHKEWYCH: That's correct.
23 JOSEPH A. DeLOPEZ, DEFENDANT'S WITNESS, DULY SWORN
24 DIRECT EXAMINATION (Resumed)
25 BY MS. PAPUSHKEWYCH:
940
1 Q. I believe we were on what has been marked as Plaintiffs'
2 Exhibit --
3 MS. PAPUSHKEWYCH: Is it 55, Ken, question 1?
4 MR. FLAXMAN: Question 1 is 55.
5 MS. PAPUSHKEWYCH: 55, I stand corrected.
6 BY MS. PAPUSHKEWYCH:
7 Q. I will show you what's been marked as Plaintiffs'
8 Exhibit 55, and will direct you to Question 111, which is where
9 I believe we stopped on Friday.
10 A. Thank you.
11 Q. Will you take an opportunity to review the question,
12 please?
13 Have you had a chance to review it?
14 A. Yes, I have.
15 Q. In Question 111, does the question identify who is seeking
16 the charge?
17 A. No, it doesn't.
18 Q. Could you describe what type of information is being sought
19 by the question?
20 A. The question itself seeks to identify if someone taking
21 this test or reading this question could identify the
22 appropriate charge to be placed against the individual
23 referenced here committing the certain offense, based upon the
24 elements that are stated here.
25 Q. And is the information contained in this question the type
941
1 of knowledge a sergeant needs to know for his job?
2 A. Yes.
3 Q. Why is that?
4 A. To assure appropriateness of charging certainly, to ensure
5 protection of constitutional rights for a potential arrestee,
6 and for coordination of reporting purposes and for charging
7 purposes and for presentation of that evidence potentially to a
8 watch commander or state's attorney for formal charging.
9 Q. And do you see on that form where the correct answer is
10 shown as being A?
11 A. Yes, I do.
12 Q. And is that your understanding as to what the correct
13 answer to this question would be?
14 A. Yes.
15 Q. And what are the consequences, if any, of an individual,
16 let me make that more specific, a sergeant believing that E is
17 the correct answer?
18 A. That would probably lead to wrongful arrest of an
19 individual and depravation of rights of that individual.
20 Ultimately besides the depravation of rights, potentially civil
21 action against the sergeant and the city.
22 Q. Now, does the correct answer to this question depend on who
23 within the Chicago Police Department is seeking approval of the
24 charge?
25 A. No, it doesn't.
942
1 Q. Does the answer to this question depend on whether it's a
2 police officer or a sergeant who is being asked this question?
3 A. No.
4 Q. Does the answer to this question depend on whether you are
5 a field or a desk sergeant?
6 A. No, it doesn't.
7 Q. Or a rapid response sergeant?
8 A. No.
9 Q. Could you turn to Question 117, please?
10 THE COURT: Could I -- I am expressing my ignorance
11 here, but I don't know what t-a-s-a-r means.
12 BY MS. PAPUSHKEWYCH:
13 Q. Commander, can you help us out?
14 A. Yes, a Tasar weapon is one which shoots one or two barbs
15 attached to a wire that remains -- the wire remains attached to
16 the device. The device transmits an electrical charge through
17 that wire into the barb. It's not comfortable.
18 THE COURT: I have never seen the word before.
19 BY MS. PAPUSHKEWYCH:
20 Q. Turn to question --
21 THE COURT: I think I know what to stay away from.
22 All right. You may proceed.
23 BY MS. PAPUSHKEWYCH:
24 Q. Question 117, please. Please review that.
25 A. I'm ready.
943
1 Q. Does this question identify who is seeking to charge the
2 suspect?
3 A. No, it doesn't.
4 Q. What information is being sought by this question?
5 A. Information as to what must occur in order to charge a
6 suspect with a particular type of an offense.
7 Q. And what type of offense in terms of classification is
8 involved in Question 117?
9 A. Well, this is a forcible felony. Do you want me to
10 identify the offense?
11 Q. No, that's sufficient. Thank you.
12 Is the information contained in this question the type
13 of knowledge a sergeant needs to know?
14 A. Yes.
15 Q. And why is that?
16 A. As I previously stated, the potential there for possibly
17 inappropriate charging or charging someone who should not be
18 charged with an offense, again the protections of the rights of
19 an individuals, and ultimately for proper reporting, proper
20 documentation, proper presentation of that case for approval of
21 formal charges.
22 Q. Does the answer to this question depend on who within the
23 Chicago Police Department is seeking approval of a charge?
24 A. No.
25 Q. Does the answer to this question depend on whether you are
944
1 a field or a sergeant -- desk sergeant?
2 A. No.
3 Q. Does the answer to this question depend on whether it's a
4 police officer or a sergeant who is being asked the question?
5 A. No, it doesn't.
6 Q. Is the correct answer E?
7 A. Yes, it is.
8 Q. Turn to Question 120, please. Please take a moment to
9 review it.
10 A. Right.
11 Q. Have you had a chance --
12 A. Yes.
13 Q. Who is seeking approval of the charges in this instance?
14 A. The arresting officer.
15 Q. And would the sergeant have any role in that process?
16 A. Yes, for a very -- probably.
17 Q. And what role would that be, if any?
18 A. The sergeant would be serving in an advisory capacity,
19 supervisory capacity, in a directing -- have a directing role
20 also.
21 Q. Is the information contained in this question the type of
22 knowledge a sergeant needs to know?
23 A. Yes.
24 Q. And why is that?
25 A. For differentiation between appropriate charges, for
945
1 determination if in fact an individual should be arrested and
2 should be charged with a certain offense or charges should be
3 sought against that person, for proper evidence gathering, for
4 proper documentation, for proper seeking of witnesses and other
5 evidence which might contribute to the successful prosecution
6 of that case.
7 Q. Now, does the answer to this question depend on who within
8 the police department is seeking approval of the charge?
9 A. Yes, it does initially.
10 Q. And why is that?
11 A. As it states here that the arresting officer should seek
12 approval to the charge.
13 Q. And is the correct answer based on who is seeking the
14 approval?
15 A. It's -- the correct answer is not based on who is seeking
16 approval, no.
17 Q. Does the answer to this question depend on whether it's a
18 police officer or a sergeant who is being asked this question?
19 A. No.
20 Q. Do you see that the correct answer is indicated as C?
21 A. Yes, I do.
22 Q. What -- are there any consequences if the arresting officer
23 or his supervising sergeant believed that the correct answer is
24 B?
25 A. Well, yes, there are consequences.
946
1 Q. What are they?
2 A. Possibility of failure to prosecute and inability to
3 prosecute this case or obtain proper approval of proper
4 charges. And again, possibility of inappropriately
5 investigating this matter prior to the presentation of all
6 evidence for approval.
7 Q. Does the answer, the correct answer, to this question
8 depend on whether you are a field or a desk sergeant?
9 A. No.
10 Q. Turn to page 122 -- Question 122, please. Review it.
11 A. Ready.
12 Q. What information is being sought by this question?
13 A. The correct charge with which to charge the suspect in this
14 manner.
15 Q. And is the information contained in this question the type
16 of knowledge a sergeant needs to know?
17 A. Yes.
18 Q. And why is that?
19 A. To determine the appropriate manner in which to investigate
20 the offense, to determine whether or not elements are there
21 that warrant seeking of the charge and which charge should be
22 sought if, in fact, there is a charge that should be sought.
23 Q. Who is seeking approval of the charges in this matter -- in
24 this question?
25 A. The arresting officer.
947
1 Q. And does the sergeant have any role in that process?
2 A. Yes.
3 Q. And what is that?
4 A. Advisory, supervisory and also to direct to ensure that
5 there is proper investigation of this matter prior to
6 presenting it for approval.
7 Q. And the correct answer, as indicated, is A, is that
8 correct?
9 A. Yes, it is.
10 Q. Does the correct answer to this question depend on who
11 within the police department is seeking approval of the charge?
12 A. No, it doesn't.
13 Q. Turn to Question 123, please.
14 A. I'm ready.
15 Q. Does the question identify who is seeking the charges?
16 A. No.
17 Q. What information is being sought by this question?
18 A. The potential charge that an individual could be charged
19 with.
20 Q. And is that information -- is the information contained in
21 this question the type of knowledge a sergeant needs to know?
22 A. Yes.
23 Q. And why is that?
24 A. In the case of this question, you have misdemeanors and
25 felonies, and the determination as to which would be
948
1 appropriate response to this question is determined by the
2 facts given. But also it has an effect upon an individual's
3 guaranteed rights upon the ability to prosecute the particular
4 matter in question, and whether or not proper investigation had
5 been done prior to presentation of this particular case for
6 approval of charges.
7 Q. And what kind of an offense in terms of classification is
8 the offense that is in answer A?
9 A. Felony.
10 Q. And what type of an offense is the offense that is in
11 answer B?
12 A. Misdemeanor.
13 Q. And if a sergeant does not know the information in this --
14 elicited in this question, is it an appropriate procedure to
15 call around and try to contact the prostitution unit to find
16 out the answer?
17 A. It wouldn't be practical at the time of the occurrence, and
18 I don't know of any sergeants that really have access to a
19 telephone in their vehicles either.
20 Q. Thank you.
21 Question 124.
22 A. I'm ready.
23 Q. Let me ask you a question as to who would respond to this
24 kind of incident when it occurs.
25 A. Well, more than likely you would certainly have a police
949
1 officer assigned and you would have a supervisory member
2 assigned because of the nature of this type of allegation.
3 Q. Would the detective division ever be contacted in the first
4 instance to conduct the preliminary investigation?
5 A. No, preliminary investigation would be conducted by field
6 unit personnel, district personnel.
7 Q. When does the -- when is the detective division called upon
8 to further investigate an incident?
9 A. Subsequent to the arrest and completion of preliminary
10 investigation.
11 Q. What information is being sought by Question 124?
12 A. What elements were necessary in order to charge with the
13 stated charges listed in the stem of the question.
14 Q. Is that charge a felony?
15 A. Yes.
16 Q. And does the answer to this question depend on who within
17 the Chicago Police Department is seeking approval of the
18 charge?
19 A. No.
20 Q. Does the answer to this question depend on whether it is a
21 police officer or a sergeant who is being asked this question?
22 A. No, it doesn't.
23 Q. Does the answer to this question depend on whether you are
24 a field or a desk sergeant?
25 A. No.
950
1 Q. Turn to Question 125, please.
2 A. Okay. I'm ready.
3 Q. What information is being sought by this question?
4 A. The appropriate charge to be sought by an arresting
5 officer.
6 Q. And is the information contained in this question the type
7 of knowledge a sergeant needs to know?
8 A. Yes.
9 Q. And why is that?
10 A. For the purpose of directing, guiding, advising and
11 ensuring proper investigation of this matter.
12 Q. Are all of the answers listed in A through E felonies?
13 A. I believe so.
14 Q. And is C the correct answer?
15 A. C is the correct answer.
16 Q. Does the correct answer to this question depend on who
17 within the police department is seeking approval of the charge?
18 A. No, it doesn't.
19 Q. Does the answer to this question depend on whether it's a
20 police officer or a sergeant who is being asked this question?
21 A. No, it doesn't.
22 Q. Does the answer to this question depend on whether you are
23 a field or a desk sergeant?
24 A. No.
25 Q. Question 126?
951
1 A. I'm ready.
2 Q. What information is being sought by this question?
3 A. The appropriate charge that should be sought to charge the
4 offender in this -- the alleged offender in this particular
5 instance.
6 Q. And who is seeking approval of the charges?
7 A. The arresting officer.
8 Q. And is the information contained in this question the type
9 of knowledge a sergeant needs to know?
10 A. Yes.
11 Q. And why is that?
12 A. For purposes of proper guidance of subordinates, proper
13 preparation of the preliminary investigation, proper gathering
14 of evidence, and seeking of proper charges, which would entail
15 also the ability to articulate all the elements of the offense.
16 Q. Does the answer to this question depend on who within the
17 police department is seeking approval of the charge?
18 A. No.
19 Q. Does the answer to this question depend on whether it's a
20 police officer or a sergeant who is being asked this question?
21 A. No, it doesn't.
22 Q. Does the answer to this question depend on whether you are
23 a field or a desk sergeant?
24 A. No.
25 Q. Turn to the next page, please.
952
1 A. Would that be No. 130?
2 Q. That would be 130, yes.
3 A. I'm ready.
4 Q. What information is being sought by this question?
5 A. The proper charge which the arresting officer should seek
6 approval for.
7 Q. And is the information contained in this question the type
8 of knowledge a sergeant needs to know?
9 A. Yes.
10 Q. And why is that?
11 A. For proper direction and guidance of subordinates, for
12 proper investigation, preliminary investigation, of the matter,
13 proper evidence gathering, for proper identification of
14 witnesses and ultimate presentation for approval.
15 Q. And who is seeking approval of the charges in this case?
16 A. The arresting officer.
17 Q. Does the answer to this question depend on who within the
18 police department is seeking approval of the charge?
19 A. No, it doesn't.
20 Q. Does the answer to this question depend on whether it is a
21 police officer or sergeant who is being asked this question?
22 A. No.
23 Q. Is this a type of situation that a youth officer would get
24 involved in?
25 A. Possibly.
953
1 Q. And --
2 A. Probably.
3 Q. -- at what time would a youth officer get involved in this
4 type of circumstance?
5 A. Once the preliminary investigation is being completed and
6 an arrest was made, if an offender was able to be arrested.
7 Q. So is the investigation at that point turned over to the
8 youth officer?
9 A. The investigation would be -- there would be a follow-up
10 investigation conducted by the youth officer subsequent to the
11 initial investigation by the patrol division personnel.
12 Q. Would a youth officer be called to the scene immediately?
13 A. Not normally.
14 Q. Question 137. In this question -- I'm sorry. Did you have
15 a chance --
16 A. I am ready.
17 Q. In this question who is being directed to do the activity?
18 A. The sergeant.
19 Q. And what information is being sought?
20 A. The appropriate action that should be taken by an
21 individual regarding compliance with traffic regulations.
22 Q. Where is the information -- strike that. What information
23 let me rephrase that.
24 Where is the information contained that is being
25 elicited by this question, if you know?
954
1 A. That information is contained within municipal code, state
2 statute.
3 Q. And is the information contained in this question the type
4 of knowledge a sergeant needs to know?
5 A. Yes.
6 Q. Why is that?
7 A. On this particular question you are dealing with a matter
8 of public safety. The supervisor is being requested to
9 instruct citizens with regard to the proper action to take.
10 And there is a potential here for endangering others if the
11 appropriate action isn't taken.
12 Q. Now, the correct answer is D, is that right?
13 A. Yes.
14 Q. What is --
15 THE COURT: Could I just interject here because I
16 don't know about the rest of you, but I have seen a number of
17 these things, and they don't stop for stoplights or stop signs
18 or anything. Now, my recollection is that usually there is a
19 police car at the lead, but I mean, this is a policy that's
20 followed in the City of Chicago?
21 MS. PAPUSHKEWYCH: Well, would you give me a moment,
22 your Honor?
23 THE COURT: Well, no, I am not trying to create a
24 problem. It's just that I have seen so many of these things
25 where they don't pay any attention to the lights. In fact,
955
1 they usually have noise. They got flags on the cars.
2 MS. PAPUSHKEWYCH: Well, I think that's an absolute
3 appropriate example of why we want to make sure that our
4 sergeants and police officers know what they are supposed to be
5 doing.
6 THE COURT: I have never seen a long funeral
7 procession stop at stop signs, stop at traffic lights and so
8 on. Maybe I have just had unusual experiences, but --
9 MS. PAPUSHKEWYCH: Well, I am going to show the
10 witness what has been marked as part of Defendant's Exhibit
11 K-75.
12 MR. FLAXMAN: Could I see that?
13 (Brief pause.)
14 MS. GLINK: Your Honor, this is going to be part of
15 the stipulation.
16 MS. PAPUSHKEWYCH: This is part of the stipulation.
17 And what I will ask you, for the record, this is a stipulation
18 that contains the underlying either general order or criminal
19 code or municipal code where the correct answer is listed. And
20 we will be providing the Court with this for each and every
21 question.
22 THE COURT: Okay.
23 MS. PAPUSHKEWYCH: That is in --
24 THE COURT: Well, I'm sure that the law does not
25 create an exception for funeral procession, but --
956
1 BY MS. PAPUSHKEWYCH:
2 Q. Could you please just take a moment to review?
3 THE COURT: It's interesting to see the number of
4 answers that would have had E, "Use caution when proceeding
5 against the signal." There is quite a few. In fact, it was
6 the majority.
7 MS. PAPUSHKEWYCH: I'm sure if we self-administered
8 the exam, your Honor, we'd get a lot of different questions.
9 THE COURT: Okay.
10 BY MS. PAPUSHKEWYCH:
11 Q. Have you had a chance to review this document?
12 A. Yes, I have.
13 Q. And I will just identify it as -- could you identify it for
14 the record if you know what it is?
15 A. I didn't read the cite, I'm sorry. Let me look at the
16 cite, please.
17 Q. Okay. I think it's up in the corner?
18 A. It's chapter 9, Section 32-20, of the Municipal code of
19 Chicago, I believe.
20 Q. And does that indicate what the correct answer is?
21 A. Yes, it does.
22 Q. And what is the correct answer?
23 A. Correct answer by option here is option D.
24 MS. PAPUSHKEWYCH: You will be able to look at all of
25 them.
957
1 THE COURT: Tough. I promise I won't make a citizen's
2 arrest.
3 THE WITNESS: I think this is a case where practice
4 and the law diverged over the years.
5 BY MS. PAPUSHKEWYCH:
6 Q. Is the information contained in this question the type of
7 knowledge a sergeant needs or should know?
8 A. Yes.
9 Q. Why is that?
10 A. Again, as I previously stated, because it deals with
11 matters of public safety. Inappropriate instruction could in
12 effect unnecessarily endanger the general public.
13 Q. Question 139, please.
14 What information is being sought by this question?
15 A. The statutory establishment for a particular speed limit.
16 Q. Is it rare to issue these types of citations?
17 A. No, it's not.
18 Q. And why is it important to -- is it -- the information
19 contained in this question the type of knowledge a sergeant
20 needs to know?
21 A. For many reasons, one we are assuming that all of our
22 personnel are responsible to operate police vehicles. They
23 drive through alleys. They must comply with all laws and
24 ordinances when they are operating a police vehicle, unless
25 it's an emergency situation. Then there is exigent
958
1 circumstances.
2 That alone is probably enough, but also in effect that
3 they will be required at times to ensure proper enforcement
4 action by their own subordinate personnel.
5 Q. I am going to call your attention now to Questions 147,
6 148, 149 and 150.
7 A. I don't have those.
8 Q. You don't? These are the ones that keep going from the
9 package.
10 THE COURT: I will give you mine, here. You can get
11 it from here.
12 THE WITNESS: Thank you, your Honor. 147?
13 BY MS. PAPUSHKEWYCH:
14 Q. Let's start with 147.
15 A. Okay. I'm ready.
16 Q. What is the Chicago Alternative Police Strategy, CAPS.
17 A. CAPS is the philosophical change in the police department.
18 It's the direction we are going in for the future of the law
19 enforcement in Chicago.
20 Q. In 1993, at the time of the development of the sergeant
21 exam, what stage of implementation was CAPS in?
22 A. We were entering a prototype stage. We had identified five
23 police districts which were going to be the prototypes for
24 implementation of this initial strategy. And subsequent to
25 that we are going to expand department-wide.
959
1 Q. And had anything been issued regarding the new approach to
2 policing strategies, if you know, in 1993?
3 A. Yes.
4 Q. What had been issued?
5 A. Document called "Together We Can."
6 Q. And who had it been issued to, if you know?
7 A. All personnel of the department.
8 Q. And what did that document contain?
9 A. It contained the -- it was a blueprint for change for the
10 Chicago Police Department, contained all the elements of any
11 change for the department.
12 Q. And has the CAP -- has the CAPS or CAPS subsequently been
13 implemented within the Chicago Police Department?
14 A. Yes.
15 Q. What's the status of that implementation today?
16 A. It's been expanded to all 25 police districts and is
17 currently being integrated to the support units of the
18 department.
19 Q. Is -- in your opinion, is the information contained in this
20 question relating to CAPS the type of knowledge a sergeant
21 needs to know?
22 A. I would say, yes, most emphatically it is.
23 Q. Why is that?
24 A. This is going to be the future of the Chicago Police
25 Department, and this is going to be something which is going to
960
1 be a daily responsibility of not only line personnel but their
2 supervisors.
3 Q. Could you refresh my recollection again on when you left
4 the training academy?
5 A. 19 -- May of 1995.
6 Q. Were you responsible for the training program for sergeants
7 when promotions were made from this examination in August of
8 1994?
9 A. Yes.
10 Q. And at that point, what was the -- at what stage was the
11 implementation of the CAPS program?
12 A. It had already begun. Again we were in the prototype
13 districts, during our prototype phase, with that primary
14 implementation.
15 Q. Would you look at question 148?
16 A. I'm ready.
17 Q. The information being sought in that question, do you know
18 from what material that information was derived?
19 A. This material, I believe, was taken directly from "Together
20 We Can."
21 Q. And Question 149?
22 A. Ready.
23 Q. Do you know from what material this information was
24 derived?
25 A. "Together We Can."
961
1 Q. And I will ask you the same question on Question 150. From
2 what information was this material derived, if you know?
3 A. Again it appears to be from "Together We Can."
4 Q. Is the information --
5 THE COURT: Could I interrupt? We are at 45 now,
6 4:45.
7 MS. PAPUSHKEWYCH: 4:45. I am on --
8 THE COURT: I was just wondering how long you are to
9 completing?
10 MS. PAPUSHKEWYCH: I have three more questions.
11 THE COURT: All right. We will let you complete. And
12 then we will see how long the cross might be, because otherwise
13 we have to invite him back again.
14 BY MS. PAPUSHKEWYCH:
15 Q. Question 150, is the information contained in this question
16 the type of knowledge a sergeant needs to know?
17 A. Yes.
18 Q. Why is that?
19 A. Well, again it deals with the fundamental ability to
20 provide service to a community and to begin the implementation
21 of this philosophical change that we are talking about called
22 CAPS.
23 Q. Now, I believe it was your testimony, commander, on Friday
24 that you did review all 150 items of the work job knowledge
25 test, is that right?
962
1 A. Correct.
2 Q. Having reviewed all 150 items, did you form an opinion as
3 to whether the information contained in those questions was
4 information that a sergeant needs to know?
5 A. Yes, I did.
6 Q. What was that opinion?
7 A. I felt that it was relevant to the responsibilities of a
8 sergeant. The items to me appeared to be things that a
9 sergeant should know.
10 MS. PAPUSHKEWYCH: Thank you very much.
11 THE WITNESS: Thank you.
12 THE COURT: All right. Should we invite him back?
13 MR. FLAXMAN: Yes, I think we should.
14 THE COURT: All right. Always nice to have you here.
15 THE WITNESS: I love it here, your Honor.
16 THE COURT: So you are temporarily excused until
17 tomorrow then at 9:00 o'clock.
18 MS. PAPUSHKEWYCH: Yes.
19 THE COURT: All right. And does it look like we can
20 complete the taking of the evidence tomorrow then?
21 MS. PAPUSHKEWYCH: Depends on Mr. Flaxman, as usually.
22 We certainly should be able to put on our case unless we are --
23 we have a lot of cross-examination of our witnesses.
24 THE COURT: How many are we going to have? Does he
25 know who they are?
963
1 MS. PAPUSHKEWYCH: Oh, yes. Oh, yes, we have
2 exchanged. We told him our witnesses. It's -- we have two
3 more, maybe three, but the third one would be short.
4 THE COURT: Klein and the --
5 MS. PAPUSHKEWYCH: And Commander Cadogan, or Chief
6 Cadogan is I guess what he is.
7 MR. FLAXMAN: I have some rebuttal, and I also have a
8 psychologist in rebuttal who is available in the morning but
9 not in the afternoon. She is going to be very short.
10 MS. PAPUSHKEWYCH: First we have heard of this.
11 MR. FLAXMAN: She is a rebuttal psychologist about the
12 point about oral comprehension and reading comprehension, which
13 came up in Dr. Yard's (phonetic) testimony.
14 THE COURT: Okay. All right.
15 MS. PAPUSHKEWYCH: I presume we will not get the
16 findings of fact to you tomorrow since we are still fighting
17 them out.
18 THE COURT: What I am worried about is that you are
19 going to have witnesses appear so that you are going to fore-
20 stall this. I am kidding, but can we say Wednesday for sure,
21 Wednesday morning by 10:00 o'clock?
22 MS. PAPUSHKEWYCH: Our case would be done tomorrow
23 except for Mr. Flaxman.
24 MR. FLAXMAN: We are talking about the findings, not
25 about the evidence. I -- we won't have all the transcripts by
964
1 Wednesday, and probably we should have the transcript. We've
2 spent so much time doing --
3 THE COURT: I know you have. I know you have. And
4 all of this, of course, is applicable to any final injunction
5 hearing. So to the extend that it doesn't have to be all
6 duplicated, it's of value.
7 MS. PAPUSHKEWYCH: I will try to explain that to my
8 department.
9 THE COURT: All right. Don't drive in the City of
10 Chicago anymore.
11 MS. PAPUSHKEWYCH: Don't lead funeral processions.
12 So are we saying Thursday now for the findings of fact
13 and conclusions of law, Mr. Flaxman?
14 MR. FLAXMAN: I think that's realistic.
15 MS. PAPUSHKEWYCH: Fine.
16 THE COURT: All right. All right. Because we need
17 that more than ever. Each day makes it harder.
18 MS. PAPUSHKEWYCH: Yes.
19 THE COURT: Thank you very much.
20 (Hearing adjourned until the following day, March 12, 1996,
21 at the hour of 9:00 o'clock a.m.)
22
23
24
965
1 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS
2 EASTERN DIVISION
3
4 PEGGY L. ADAMS, et al., ) No. 94 C 5727
)
5 Plaintiffs, )
)
6 vs. )
)
7 CITY OF CHICAGO, ) Chicago, Illinois
) March 12, 1996
8 Defendant. ) 9:10 a.m.
9
10 TRANSCRIPT OF PROCEEDINGS
BEFORE THE HONORABLE JOHN A. NORDBERG
11
APPEARANCES:
12
For the Plaintiffs: MR. KENNETH N. FLAXMAN
13 122 South Michigan Avenue
Suite 1850
14 Chicago, Illinois 60603
15
For the Defendant: HON. SUSAN S. SHER
16 Corporation Counsel
30 North LaSalle Street
17 Suite 1020
Chicago, Illinois 60602
18 BY: MS. DARKA S. PAPUSHKEWYCH
MS. SHONA B. GLINK
19 MR. JAY MICHAEL KERTEZ
Assistants Corporation Counsel
20
21 ALEXANDRA ROTH, CSR, LTD.
Pamela S. Warren, CSR, RPR
22 P.O. Box A-3201
Chicago, Illinois 60690-3201
23 (312) 294-0134
24
25
DeLopez - cross 966
1 (Proceedings held in open court:)
2 THE CLERK: 94 C 5727, Adams versus the City of
3 Chicago, for hearing.
4 MR. FLAXMAN: Let me --
5 THE COURT: Good morning, all. We'll give you time to
6 get everything set. And we're all set to --
7 MS. GLINK: She is --
8 THE COURT: -- go ahead with our witness?
9 MS. GLINK: Yes, we are.
10 MS. PAPUSHKEWYCH: He's here.
11 THE COURT: All right. Sir, if you will come forward
12 again.
13 Now you remain under oath. Be seated.
14 THE WITNESS: Yes, sir.
15 THE COURT: We should have water there for you.
16 THE WITNESS: Thank you, your Honor.
17 CROSS EXAMINATION (Resumed)
18 BY MR. FLAXMAN:
19 Q. Commander DeLopez, when you were the training -- when you
20 were commander of the training division, what did you do?
21 A. I am not sure what you're asking me.
22 Q. Well --
23 A. My scope of responsibility?
24 Q. What is the training division?
25 A. Well, the training division is one division of the
DeLopez - cross 967
1 department that is responsible for both in-service and basic
2 training for Chicago police personnel and in addition does
3 training for other departments under the auspices of the
4 Illinois State Training Board.
5 Q. Now this -- the basic training, is that for newly hired
6 police officers?
7 A. Yes.
8 Q. And is there classroom instruction in that basic training?
9 A. Yes, there is.
10 Q. Does that classroom instruction cover the statutes of the
11 State of Illinois?
12 A. Yes, it does.
13 Q. Does it cover the general orders of the Chicago Police
14 Department?
15 A. Yes, it does.
16 Q. Does it cover the special orders of the Chicago Police
17 Department?
18 A. Yes.
19 Q. Does it cover the relevant -- the ordinances of the City
20 of Chicago that are relevant to a police officer?
21 A. Yes, it does.
22 Q. And are there tests in that basic training?
23 A. Yes.
24 Q. And are these tests where you have to pass -- are these
25 tests given on a periodic basis?
DeLopez - cross 968
1 A. Yes, they are.
2 Q. Like every week?
3 A. No.
4 Q. How often are they given?
5 A. Approximately every other week.
6 Q. And is the test scored so that only the top half go on to
7 continue training?
8 A. No.
9 Q. How are the tests -- is there a passing score in the test?
10 A. There is a passing score on an exam, yes.
11 Q. And if you don't pass the test, do you get to take it over
12 again?
13 A. No.
14 Q. What happens if you don't pass the test?
15 A. You're offered supportive training remediation assistance
16 with preparation in the areas which you might be weak in.
17 Q. So is that extra tutoring?
18 A. Yes, it is.
19 Q. And after the extra tutoring, do you get retested?
20 A. No.
21 Q. How is it determined that the extra tutoring has helped
22 the recruit learn what he or she needs to know?
23 A. By the performance on subsequent exams.
24 Q. Now you also talked about in-service training.
25 A. Yes.
DeLopez - cross 969
1 Q. And what's in-service training?
2 A. That's training that's done for non-probationary officers,
3 veteran officers in specific areas.
4 Q. Now this -- the basic training, is there a final exam that
5 you have to pass?
6 A. Yes. Well, actually there are two final exams.
7 Q. Does that cover the rules, regulations and policies of the
8 Chicago Police Department that an officer needs to know?
9 A. Depending on which exam we're talking about.
10 Q. Well, the --
11 A. There's the -- if I could expound.
12 Q. Tell us.
13 A. There is a final exam, that's an academy final exam, and
14 then there is also a state mandate that every officer that is
15 certified as a peace officer in the State of Illinois must take
16 and pass the state certification exam which is a comprehensive
17 exam.
18 Q. Now the -- putting the state exam aside, the academy exam,
19 does that cover the knowledge that a police officer needs to
20 know to be a police officer?
21 A. Yes.
22 Q. And does everyone who is a police officer who graduates
23 from the academy have passed that academy exam?
24 A. Yes, they do.
25 Q. Now once a police officer has graduated from the academy,
DeLopez - cross 970
1 is there any periodic testing that you have to do as a police
2 officer to be -- to determine whether or not you continue to
3 know the rules and regulations of the Chicago Police
4 Department?
5 A. You mean ongoing testing for incumbent officers?
6 Q. Right. Do you have to take a test every year to see if
7 you still know the rules?
8 A. No.
9 Q. Do you have to take a test every year to see if you still
10 know the statutes?
11 A. No.
12 Q. Do you know why that is?
13 A. No, I don't.
14 Q. Now you have studied for a promotional test, haven't you?
15 A. Yes.
16 Q. You have studied for job knowledge tests, is that right?
17 A. Yes, I have.
18 Q. You have studied for job knowledge tests for promotion to
19 sergeant, is that right?
20 A. Yes, I have.
21 Q. You also studied for a job knowledge test for promotion to
22 lieutenant, is that right?
23 A. Correct.
24 Q. What did you do when you studied for the job knowledge
25 test in those promotional exams?
DeLopez - cross 971
1 A. Well, in preparation for my exams, I first compiled a list
2 of documents. I obtained all those documents, you know, which
3 were relevant. I began to study those, read those, prepare
4 questions for myself, tape record myself, test myself, work
5 with others to assist each other with our study preparation,
6 which included orally testing each other.
7 Q. And how much time did you spend reviewing the general
8 orders and special orders and relevant statutes?
9 A. I don't recall at this point.
10 Q. Was it --
11 A. It's been quite a well.
12 Q. Was it over a several month period?
13 MS. PAPUSHKEWYCH: Could we just have established some
14 foundation about which particular promotional exam and when
15 this was?
16 MR. FLAXMAN: I'll withdraw the question.
17 BY MR. FLAXMAN:
18 Q. When you studied for the -- you took the 1977 lieutenant's
19 test, is that right?
20 A. Yes, I believe so.
21 Q. And you studied -- did you study the rules and regulations
22 and statutes that are applicable to Chicago police lieutenants
23 in preparation for that exam?
24 A. That was part of what I studied, yes.
25 Q. And did you study over a several month period?
DeLopez - cross 972
1 A. Again I don't recall how much time I prepared. I couldn't
2 tell you that.
3 Q. Is there any reason of which you are aware as the former
4 commander of the training division why there couldn't be
5 courses to assist police officers who want to learn what it
6 takes, the knowledge necessary to be a sergeant, why the
7 training academy couldn't run a course like that?
8 A. Why the training academy couldn't run a course like that?
9 Q. Yeah.
10 A. Well, specifically why the training academy doesn't run a
11 course like that, I can't speak to that. I mean, there are
12 several courses already available to people that are tutorial
13 or preparatory in nature.
14 Q. Those are not -- those are private courses, aren't they?
15 A. Correct, they are privately organized.
16 Q. And as a matter of fact the present director of the
17 training academy has run some of those private study groups, is
18 that right?
19 A. I believe he has.
20 Q. His name is -- what's his name?
21 A. Deputy Superintendent Charles Roberts.
22 Q. Is there any reason of which you are aware as former
23 director of the training division why the Chicago Police
24 Department could not run a study session, a study group to
25 learn what it takes -- what you need to know to be a sergeant?
DeLopez - cross 973
1 MS. PAPUSHKEWYCH: Could we just establish at what
2 point, counsel? Is it before the exam? During?
3 I just am -- I am failing to follow where we are in
4 the process in terms of his question.
5 THE COURT: I'll sustain the objection as to the form.
6 It is not clear exactly what you are relating.
7 BY MR. FLAXMAN:
8 Q. What -- is it your opinion that in order to become a
9 Chicago police sergeant, a police officer needs to know about
10 the rules and regulations of the Chicago Police Department, the
11 statutes of the State of Illinois and the relevant ordinances
12 of the City of Chicago?
13 A. Yes, to be an effective supervisor, I think, yes.
14 Q. And is it correct that under the system that's been in
15 place for the last -- since you have been a police officer, the
16 way in which police officers who want to be promoted to
17 sergeant prepare themselves to show that they have acquired
18 that information is by self-study?
19 A. Well --
20 Q. And self-study and then taking a written multiple choice
21 test?
22 MS. PAPUSHKEWYCH: I'm just --
23 BY THE WITNESS:
24 A. I can't speak to that.
25 MS. PAPUSHKEWYCH: May I interpose an objection to the
DeLopez - cross 974
1 relevancy of these questions and to basically the foundation
2 for these questions. If the witness can answer what 4,700
3 people did to study for this exam, if he is competent to do so,
4 I think he should go ahead and do that, but what is the
5 relevancy of this whole line of questioning?
6 THE COURT: We'll hear that in the closing argument.
7 I will overrule the objection and permit you to proceed.
8 BY MR. FLAXMAN:
9 Q. Do you remember the last question?
10 A. As I began my response, I can't speak to that because I
11 really am not familiar with what everyone has done to prepare
12 for an exam.
13 Q. Well, what you did was to study on your own and with
14 others, is that right --
15 A. Right.
16 Q. -- for the 1977 lieutenant's job knowledge test, is that
17 right?
18 A. Right.
19 Q. And that's the same thing you did to study for the
20 sergeant's test you took before that?
21 A. Correct.
22 Q. Then after you studied you went and took a timed multiple
23 choice test, is that right?
24 A. For the sergeant's exam, yes, that's correct.
25 Q. Okay. Now -- and you know as you sit here now that that's
DeLopez - cross 975
1 the same -- well, strike that.
2 Is the test that you took to be promoted to sergeant
3 similar in format to the test you were looking at yesterday,
4 Exhibit 55, those questions?
5 A. To the written job knowledge portion of the test?
6 Q. Yes.
7 A. Yes, it was as far as my recollection.
8 Q. Now as former director of the training division, is there
9 any reason of which you're aware why there couldn't be a course
10 for people who want to be promoted to sergeants where they are
11 taught the rules and regulations and statutes and ordinances
12 and then tested every two weeks to see if they have learned
13 them?
14 A. Certainly constraints of time, space, cost, and in
15 addition to that it is something that's already done in the
16 basic preparation of a police officer for his service to our
17 city.
18 Q. Other than -- now when you talked about time, what did you
19 mean? It would take time --
20 A. Time constraints of the staff themselves. There are
21 limits to the amount of resources available certainly.
22 Q. Well, and what do you mean by space?
23 A. The effective identification of sufficient space to
24 accommodate the people that might necessarily want to
25 participate.
DeLopez - cross 976
1 Q. What do you mean by cost?
2 A. The costs -- who would bear the cost of the presentation.
3 When you're doing a tutorial you have a lot of incidental
4 costs. You have preparation of materials, you have duplicating
5 costs, you have time for possibly bringing in people that have
6 specialties, specialty areas of concentration.
7 Q. Is there any other reason of which you are aware why the
8 city could not have an instructional course to -- of the type
9 that I have described for people who want to be promoted to
10 sergeant?
11 A. Not to my knowledge.
12 Q. Do you know if when you were director of the training
13 division if havi