NYS Civil Service Tests - Obsolete?

[x635 4,066]

Are the NYS Civil Service exams for Firefighter, Police, and Dispatcher obsolete and irrelevant?

Is the giving the test once every four years still a fair way to do things?

Personally, I feel they are. There are much more relevant testing, some even interactive and based on actual academy-type curriculum, instead of just generic old school questions.

I also feel that there should be computer based testing, and you should be allowed to take each test once a year, with the list dynamic instead of static lists.

But, more importantly, can the above (for example), produce the best candidates for the job?

[kinkchaser 352]

I wished you were right 635, but the best candidate is no longer part of the dynamic

[ptwatson 82]

I think the entire NYS civil service testing needs to be computerized. The best civil service test I ever took was a computerized one in NYC. You get your "unofficial" score before you leave and can instantly get an idea on where you might be placed on a list. Instead of packing hundreds of people on a Saturday into a local high school it would be better to go to a civil service testing center sit down at a computer and take your test. it would be am ore relaxing and better test experience.

[v85 212]

I too think that NY's civil service system needs to be modernized and more automated. (i.e. waiting 3 to 6 months to have test results snail-mailed to you is ridiculous.

However, I do believe some form of civil service system is required because there are still a lot of small villages and towns that would become entirely political and nepotistic without a civil service system

[Bnechis 3,961]

There are much more relevant testing, some even interactive and based on actual academy-type curriculum, instead of just generic old school questions.

You need to define "relevant"?

The purpose of much of the (firefighter) test was never to determine what fire knowledge you have, you will learn that at the academy. The reason a large portion is math & reading comp is because the purpose is to determine who has the basic academic skills to be able to understand the concepts and material taught in the acadamy. If you can not do basic math, it is very hard to keep up during pump calculation, etc.

[x635 4,066]

You need to define "relevant"?

The purpose of much of the (firefighter) test was never to determine what fire knowledge you have, you will learn that at the academy. The reason a large portion is math & reading comp is because the purpose is to determine who has the basic academic skills to be able to understand the concepts and material taught in the acadamy. If you can not do basic math, it is very hard to keep up during pump calculation, etc.

When was the last time you saw the NYS Firefighters Exam test? Do you want someone who is book smart to top every other candidate all the time, or do you want someone who is more well rounded and can bring other important modern skills to the table while still being able keep up academically?

[mustang22_2002 21]

It doesn't matter if they continue to give tests or not because the minority's will just cry and complain and get the job like FDNY was made to hire them

[FireMedic049 597]

When was the last time you saw the NYS Firefighters Exam test? Do you want someone who is book smart to top every other candidate all the time, or do you want someone who is more well rounded and can bring other important modern skills to the table while still being able keep up academically?

Exactly what do you mean by "well rounded" and what sort of "important modern skills" are you talking about?

[FireMedic049 597]

I think the entire NYS civil service testing needs to be computerized. The best civil service test I ever took was a computerized one in NYC. You get your "unofficial" score before you leave and can instantly get an idea on where you might be placed on a list. Instead of packing hundreds of people on a Saturday into a local high school it would be better to go to a civil service testing center sit down at a computer and take your test. it would be am ore relaxing and better test experience.

There's a certain level of irony in advocating for a "more relaxing and better test experience" when discussing a test used to get hired into a high stress/high pressure job like police officer or firefighter.

[Bnechis 3,961]

When was the last time you saw the NYS Firefighters Exam test? Do you want someone who is book smart to top every other candidate all the time, or do you want someone who is more well rounded and can bring other important modern skills to the table while still being able keep up academically?

I have taught many prep classes over the years, In yonkers, White Plans & NR.

Can you explain how someone who is "well rounded" will out score someone who is "book smart" on a written test?

Also as I previously wrote, they are testing for general skills, math & reading in particular. If you do not know them, you will not do well in class.

If we were worried about other abilities, like phisical ability, and caracter, we would add those to the test....Oh wait we do those things in other parts of the process. So we do get well rounded candidates

[x635 4,066]

Exactly what do you mean by "well rounded" and what sort of "important modern skills" are you talking about?

It's time to require EMT or Paramedic certification, as it's a big part of most jobs. Many guys struggle with this in the academy. College degree in fire protection or related could cull candidates who are academically ready. An oral board (no, not an interview) portion should be considered. The days of being a firefighter who just comes on the job to fight fires with a high school diploma are over. The role of a firefighter nowadays are greatly expanded.

In many areas of the country require you to have a valid CPAT card to test...why not require this to weed out candidates before the written? Many areas of the country are doing this, either through private testing facilities or fire academies charging a fee to cover costs.

There's a certain level of irony in advocating for a "more relaxing and better test experience" when discussing a test used to get hired into a high stress/high pressure job like police officer or firefighter.

So, is it an academic test, or a pressure test? Having computer based testing would also be much more economical and efficient, and it would still be timed, so still the same pressure.

I have taught many prep classes over the years, In yonkers, White Plans & NR.

Can you explain how someone who is "well rounded" will out score someone who is "book smart" on a written test?

Also as I previously wrote, they are testing for general skills, math & reading in particular. If you do not know them, you will not do well in class.

If we were worried about other abilities, like phisical ability, and caracter, we would add those to the test....Oh wait we do those things in other parts of the process. So we do get well rounded candidates

I agree on the basic academic minimums. But I don't believe it's all about "outscoring" on a basic written test being the end all. Also, there are no questions on the NYS test to gauge potential EMS aptitude, like there are mechanical aptitude questions. I know many guys on the job who somehow passed the written who can barely spell. Again, a college degree could probably ensure that the person has those basic academic skills.

A yearly test would allow a person to improve their skills, without having to wait 4 years. How many guys miss out because of this and the age limits and other factors?

And, as a reminder, this is a discussion. An opinion is not right or wrong. I'm just looking to discuss is there a better way to test?

[Bnechis 3,961]

1) It's time to require EMT or Paramedic certification, as it's a big part of most jobs. Many guys struggle with this in the academy.

2) College degree in fire protection or related could cull candidates who are academically ready.

3) An oral board (no, not an interview) portion should be considered.

4) The days of being a firefighter who just comes on the job to fight fires with a high school diploma are over.

5) In many areas of the country require you to have a valid CPAT card to test...why not require this to weed out candidates before the written?

6) Having computer based testing would also be much more economical and efficient, and it would still be timed, so still the same pressure.

7) But I don't believe it's all about "outscoring" on a basic written test being the end all.

8) Also, there are no questions on the NYS test to gauge potential EMS aptitude, like there are mechanical aptitude questions.

9) Again, a college degree could probably ensure that the person has those basic academic skills.

10) A yearly test would allow a person to improve their skills, without having to wait 4 years. How many guys miss out because of this and the age limits and other factors?

1) That would violate the federal court mandate for 900 of the approximatly 1150 jobs in Westchester

2) But the test already does that and it would violate the federal court mandate for 900 of the approximatly 1150 jobs in Westchester

3) You think the computer part will reduce cost (it will and I agree it should go that way) this would increase the cost dramatically.

4) The majority of our latest hires all have degrees and most are in their 30's. They perform better on the test and even on the physical agility (seams they listen to the suggestions on how to improve times).

5) That would violate the federal court mandate for 900 of the approximatly 1150 jobs in Westchester

6) see #3 above

7) Its not, you still have to outscore on the physical agility test

8) True, but then we should have entry tests for all EMT classes, there are a lot of "kids" that cant pass that class also.

9) That would violate the federal court mandate for 900 of the approximatly 1150 jobs in Westchester

10) That might help individules but the test is about hiring the best for the department, not about improving the individuals ability to pass. Also if I worked my a** off to score well and you sat back, why should you be rewarded?

Edited October 19, 2013 by Bnechis

[FireMedic049 597]

It's time to require EMT or Paramedic certification, as it's a big part of most jobs. Is prior fire training a requirement now? If it isn't, why should EMT be required? I'm at a bit of a disadvantage since I'm not familiar with the specifics of NYS civil service testing, but get the impression that we're discussing a testing process that multiple jurisdiction draw new employees from a combined pool. If that is the case, then people without their EMT would be unfairly discriminated against in the testing process should there be agencies using the test, but not requiring their personnel to be an EMT.

Many guys struggle with this in the academy. Many struggle with other parts of the training too.

College degree in fire protection or related could cull candidates who are academically ready. Yes it could, but the HS diploma should already be enough of an indication of academic readiness considering the level upon which many of these tests are written.

An oral board (no, not an interview) portion should be considered. Not arguing against but, why do you think that?

The days of being a firefighter who just comes on the job to fight fires with a high school diploma are over. The role of a firefighter nowadays are greatly expanded. Yes, the days of just fighting fire are over considering the wide array of things the FD is expected to handle, however we really haven't advanced to the point where a college degree is necessary at the entry level.

In many areas of the country require you to have a valid CPAT card to test...why not require this to weed out candidates before the written? Many areas of the country are doing this, either through private testing facilities or fire academies charging a fee to cover costs. Are they getting better results doing this?

BTW, I don't think you actually answered my question. What do you mean by "well rounded" and what are the "important modern skills"?

So, is it an academic test, or a pressure test? Having computer based testing would also be much more economical and efficient, and it would still be timed, so still the same pressure. Yes, there could be some ways in which a more individualized testing routine could be helpful for the applicant, like being able to take the test at a time of convenience rather than a specific date/time that could be in conflict with other family/work requirements. However, I think you missed the irony of wanting a more "relaxing" environment to test for a job that will require you to make decisions under high stress/high pressure conditions.

I agree on the basic academic minimums. But I don't believe it's all about "outscoring" on a basic written test being the end all. Also, there are no questions on the NYS test to gauge potential EMS aptitude, like there are mechanical aptitude questions. I know many guys on the job who somehow passed the written who can barely spell. Again, a college degree could probably ensure that the person has those basic academic skills. As I stated above, a college degree should not be required to ensure that a person has the basic academic skills needed, when a HS diploma is supposed to represent that the person has those basic academic skills. A college degree should only be a requirement when you are looking for candidates with advanced academic skills.

A yearly test would allow a person to improve their skills, without having to wait 4 years. How many guys miss out because of this and the age limits and other factors? Is the current process not yielding sufficient qualified applicants for the positions available over those 4 years?

And, as a reminder, this is a discussion. An opinion is not right or wrong. I'm just looking to discuss is there a better way to test? Better for who?

[x635 4,066]

And, as a reminder, this is a discussion. An opinion is not right or wrong. I'm just looking to discuss is there a better way to test? Better for who?

For those giving the test, and for those taking the test. Is complacency key, or do we always want to be looking at better ways to do things?

I understand, the testing is to gauge the candidates ability to learn. But there's new ways and methods to do things, and sitting down with a pencil and Scantron form filling out bubbles once every four years is, at the very least, a very old school way of doing things.

What I'm hearing is that as long as I take a test every four years, and I'm proficient in math, reading comprehension, etc, can pass a physical agility, and get through an interview, I can get through an academy and get a civil service job for 20-30 years with excellent pay and benefits, for the most part, and a pension, and not give a crap about the actual job or improving myself to make me better during my career on my own.

One example: If I was hiring a firefighter, and I had two candidates at the equal level determined above, and one worked in construction, was just a laborer and pursued nothing else or taken any opportunities to advance his career in the field, and the other was a Paramedic, I'd pick the Paramedic.

A Paramedic has to want to be a Paramedic, and has to work very hard, and devote many hours at a college level for about two years just to become a Paramedic. All at their own cost of thousands of dollars. And they have to continually maintain certification through MAC's, Continuing Education, etc. In essence, it's much harder to become a Paramedic then a firefighter, yet they rarely have civil service, decent pay, promotional opportunities and other things that are afforded to firefighters. And the medical background benefits the majority of a career FD calls....the EMS first response. Yet, a firefighter career is basically handed to you as long as you have a high school diploma and score well, and you're provided the education. And the same process is used to promote to become an officer, which for some is only for better pay and a higher pension, not career advancement. It really doesn't reflect your accomplishments during your time as a firefighter. (But most officers do want it and take a more relevant test)

Why would I choose the laborer who scored one point above? Because CURRENT Civil Service law says so and a basic test says he can possibly learn AND retain. Yup. But is he the better candidate? Is this something that could be studied long term to see outcomes?

I know a ton of great Firefighters, Fire Officers, and Police Officers in Westchester County who have succeeded in their careers that started off in EMS, and that says something to me about aptitude. And I know a lot of people who would make excellent firefighters and cops who show dedication and want who get passed over for obsolete, irrelevant, and "PC" laws.

[JunebugKFD257 48]

I might be biased because I got the job, but I don't see anything wrong with the system as it is. If you want to be a Firefighter, then you should have a "whatever it takes" attitude to get on.

[FireMedic049 597]

For those giving the test, and for those taking the test. Is complacency key, or do we always want to be looking at better ways to do things? Sure, we should always be looking at whether or not there are "better" ways to do things and adjust when appropriate.

I understand, the testing is to gauge the candidates ability to learn. But there's new ways and methods to do things, and sitting down with a pencil and Scantron form filling out bubbles once every four years is, at the very least, a very old school way of doing things. The old saying about "reinventing the wheel" seems to fit here.

The reality is that civil service testing is intended to provide an "equal" opportunity for employment. In order to provide that equal opportunity, testing for the most part has to be objective. A multiple choice type exam is a very good tool to provide a uniform testing experience and be objective. There's only so many ways you can give that type of test. Scanned answer sheets may be "old school", but they are still relevant.

What I'm hearing is that as long as I take a test every four years, and I'm proficient in math, reading comprehension, etc, can pass a physical agility, and get through an interview, I can get through an academy and get a civil service job for 20-30 years with excellent pay and benefits, for the most part, and a pension, and not give a crap about the actual job or improving myself to make me better during my career on my own. I think you're hearing what you want to hear.

One example: If I was hiring a firefighter, and I had two candidates at the equal level determined above, and one worked in construction, was just a laborer and pursued nothing else or taken any opportunities to advance his career in the field, and the other was a Paramedic, I'd pick the Paramedic. How old is laborer? Maybe he's only 23 and hasn't had enough time doing construction to have advanced yet? What shape are they both in? There's a good chance that the laborer could withstand the physical demands of the job better.

A Paramedic has to want to be a Paramedic, and has to work very hard, and devote many hours at a college level for about two years just to become a Paramedic. All at their own cost of thousands of dollars. And they have to continually maintain certification through MAC's, Continuing Education, etc. In essence, it's much harder to become a Paramedic then a firefighter, ...... Not necessarily. Comparatively, the training required to become a firefighter is far more physically demanding than that to be a paramedic. For the most part, paramedic training is probably more academically demanding, but not necessarily more demanding overall mentally. Additionally, firefighter jobs are far more difficult to get than are paramedic jobs.

yet they rarely have civil service, decent pay, promotional opportunities and other things that are afforded to firefighters. That's a whole other discussion as to why that is.

And the medical background benefits the majority of a career FD calls....the EMS first response. Assuming that is the majority of their calls and that actual EMS care needs to be provided on those calls.

Yet, a firefighter career is basically handed to you as long as you have a high school diploma and score well, and you're provided the education. A firefighter career is not just handed to anyone.

And the same process is used to become an officer, which for some is only for better pay and a higher pension, not career advancement. Something that is not exclusive to the fire service. BTW, getting promoted is career advancement regardless of ones motivation for it.

Why would I choose the laborer who scored one point above? Because CURRENT Civil Service law says so and a test says he can learn. Yup. But is he the better candidate? Maybe, for the reasons I stated above.

Is this something that could be studied long term to see outcomes? Probably.

I know a ton of great Firefighters, Fire Officers, and Police Officers in Westchester County who have succeeded in their careers that started off in EMS, and that says something to me about aptitude. And there are many that didn't start off in EMS and have succeeded equally as well.

And I know a lot of people who would make excellent firefighters and cops who show dedication and want who get passed over for obsolete, irrelevant, and "PC" laws. Yeah, that sucks and the issue with that stuff lies more in ideology than any problem with the testing process itself.

I don't know if it's the case or not, but you seem to come across as someone who is not having success testing for a firefighter position and therefore is arguing that the system is flawed rather than accept the possibility that maybe you aren't as qualified as you think you are or that other candidates are simply more qualified.

[Bnechis 3,961]

1) For those giving the test, and for those taking the test. Is complacency key, or do we always want to be looking at better ways to do things?

2) I understand, the testing is to gauge the candidates ability to learn. But there's new ways and methods to do things, and sitting down with a pencil and Scantron form filling out bubbles once every four years is, at the very least, a very old school way of doing things.

3) What I'm hearing is that as long as I take a test every four years, and I'm proficient in math, reading comprehension, etc, can pass a physical agility, and get through an interview, I can get through an academy and get a civil service job for 20-30 years with excellent pay and benefits, for the most part, and a pension, and not give a crap about the actual job or improving myself to make me better during my career on my own.

4) One example: If I was hiring a firefighter, and I had two candidates at the equal level determined above, and one worked in construction, was just a laborer and pursued nothing else or taken any opportunities to advance his career in the field, and the other was a Paramedic, I'd pick the Paramedic.

5) In essence, it's much harder to become a Paramedic then a firefighter,

Yet, a firefighter career is basically handed to you as long as you have a high school diploma and score well, and you're provided the education.

6) And the same process is used to promote to become an officer, which for some is only for better pay and a higher pension, not career advancement.

7) Why would I choose the laborer who scored one point above? Because CURRENT Civil Service law says so and a basic test says he can possibly learn AND retain.

8) I know a ton of great Firefighters, Fire Officers, and Police Officers in Westchester County who have succeeded in their careers that started off in EMS, and that says something to me about aptitude.

1) Why should we waste time looking to change a system that can not be changed without permission of the federal courts? In watching what the courts are doing with FDNY, they have made it clear that it could be much worst if we open this can of worms up.

2) One thing it does, is determine if an applicant is smart enough to use a pencil and paper. Can't tell you how many "smart" people can't fill out those cards and get all the answers in the corrisponding boxes.

3) then you are hearing what you want. When 500 - 1,000 people take a test that 6-20 will get hired, and its not "passing" the physical agility is being physically more capabile since for 80% of Westchester Hirings is competative scored. If you do not work hard for it you will not get hired. They are not getting handed a job for showing up.

4) I'd like to know their work history etc. Just because they worked hard to get the medic does not mean they did not turn into a poor paramedic. I have seen more than a few that can not make it 1 flight of stairs (without turnouts and hose, etc.) because they are in such poor physical shap. I would much rather have a dedicated hard worker, who really wants the job, because they always want to be a FF, than a paramedic who only wants it because he does not like his current employment and the pension.

5) Being both and having taught both I can say you are wrong. It is harder to pass paramedic, but it is much harder to become a firefighter. Its not handed to you you have to score better than 1,000 other candidates.

6) Yes, a competitive test that if you do not know your stuff you will most likely score low and not get promoted. It absolutely is career advancement. The irony is for FDNY Paramedics career advancement is becoming a firefighter, because there are few opertunities in EMS for career advancement.

7) Wrong, Civil service law does not require taking him. It allows for 3 to interview for 1 position and the best candidate even if he/she does not have the best score can be hired.

8) No it says that PD & FD jobs (and RN, PA etc.) are better and everyone I ever worked with as a medic was looking for how to "advance" out of EMS.

[wraftery 1,275]

I think I might hire the construction laborer. If you had a shi*^y job, at least you realize what a good job firefighting is. If after all his education, aptitude, certifications and so on, the laborer still beat him by a point. That says a lot for that laborer. Maybe he never had enough money to pay for higher education. Maybe he bought a couple of prep books and studied every chance he got.

One thing you do know is that he has a job that requires hard work at sometimes menial tasks, and sometimes for hours at a time. (Sound familiar to those firefighters out there?) And amazingly he still beat the paramedic by a point!

Paramedics, don't get your knickers in a knot. I still like you and I'm not the one who picked "paramedic vs. laborer" to be the example. When the Yankees play the Red Sox, if Boston scores just one more run than the Yankees, guess who loses?

The test is given every four years because the demand on jobs isn't there. If the test were every year the b**** would be "Why do they give the test every year to 1000 people and then hire only 50 a year?

Scantron tests that take six months for a list to be posted is beyond me. You'll just have to ask somebody else about how that works.

Qualifying before hiring is done in Florida. See how many people are disgruntled because they spent so much time and money qualifying and never got hired. Does the statement "You have to be a firefighter before you can become a firefighter" make any sense to you?

Edited October 19, 2013 by wraftery

[Chkpoint 131]

I have no problem with NYS test. Problem I have is waiting 6months. Many other places give you results a lot quicker. There a few other minor things that fall under NYS civil service law that the county or towns can't change that I would.

[velcroMedic1987 330]

The written test is only one part of the hiring process. There is also an interview process, background check, medical assessment, agility/fitness assessment, and psychological assessment. This is what insures that the majority who make it through the process have the basic skills and aptitude for the job.

As someone else said, the one in three rule pretty much gives the municipality the ability to hire the best candidate for the job. You can call best most well rounded if you want to but there is always the possibility that one of those hired won't cut it. Look at the FDNY academy class and all those flopping out of it.

EMS providers don't necessarily make better cops and firefighters just like good EMT's don't necessarily make good paramedics. The ones who you see doing really well are those that really want it and work really hard. Effort generally distinguishes the cream from the chaff.

College degrees don't necessarily mean much either. There are plenty of complete morons with PHD after their names and there are guys with a HS diploma who have a great understanding of things.

Civil service written exams are only one piece of the process.

[velcroMedic1987 330]

900 of 1150 jobs? Do you mean civil service firefighter positions?

I know there are a lot of FD's in Westchester but there aren't 1150, right?

[wraftery 1,275]

900 of 1150 jobs? Do you mean civil service firefighter positions?

I know there are a lot of FD's in Westchester but there aren't 1150, right?

I am not sure what he means, but there are 56 FDs in Westchester, 10 are what I would consider "mostly Paid." There are about 1150 paid FFs in Westchester. Paid Depts and paid FFs are mostly in southern part of the county, south of I-287 (a line about 10 miles north of the NY City line)

This area is considered "Downstate" by people north of us and considered "Upstate" by our Bronx Brothers. Now do you know why we are usually confused?

[Bnechis 3,961]

900 of 1150 jobs? Do you mean civil service firefighter positions?

I know there are a lot of FD's in Westchester but there aren't 1150, right?

I did mean civil service positions.

About 900 are Mt. Vernon, New Rochelle, White Plains & Yonkers are regulated under federal court mandates and are different than the other depts.