Saturday, August 20, 2005

D2A Results and an Appeal for Info

Back in the post entitled "This was a test?" on 14 August, a reader asked for people to post their scores along with their rank on the list anonymously. About 3 people did - way to participate! Anyway, we've tracked down a couple of other scores and we'd like to let everyone look at them and draw some conclusions. We are going to round off the scores so we aren't pointing too obviously at the people who participated. Here we go:

Score/rank
154/50 ish
149/140 ish
146/190 ish
143/490 ish
140/790 ish
138/1470 ish

As you all should know, the city uses seniority as the tie breaker for tests like these. There is no way for us to know where the participants fall on the seniority roster, but a few things do stand out here. First, the top given score 154 out of a possible 175 and ranked 50 (actually under 50 but we rounded everything to the nearest ten) compared to the second given score. There are only 5 points score difference and 70 or so rank spots. Compare that to the bottom two scores given - only a 2 points difference but almost 700 rank spots. We really need a bunch more scores to paint an accurate picture but this seems a bit extreme. If the ratios of rank to score maintain anything like what is seen here, the numbers will not line up into what is known as a "bell curve" which just lends credence to the theory that all city tests are B.S. Of course, test results are guarded closer than nuclear secrets in this town, so there really isn't any way to tell what the results might actually look like.

We'd hope that one day the city, the test company and the FOP could come to some form of agreement to post all the result similar to what NYC does but we've a better chance of seeing a World Series, a Superbowl and a Stanley Cup Final in town than seeing that. So, in conclusion, if a bunch more people wouldn't mind posting their score and their rank (round off to the nearest 10 for rank if you're nervous) we'll see if we can't set up some kind of graphic.

44 Comments:

Anonymous Anonymous said...

all tests are rigged

8/20/2005 09:49:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

when and how many dicks are they making?

8/20/2005 09:50:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

score 151/rank 90ish 8 years on the job

8/21/2005 03:49:00 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

129/1900ish

8/21/2005 05:24:00 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

151 = 100ish

8/21/2005 09:03:00 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Didn't take the test, wife says I'm already a dick

8/21/2005 10:28:00 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

142/630ish

8/21/2005 11:48:00 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

136/1241

8/21/2005 01:14:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

119/2079

8/21/2005 01:14:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Shoulld told the wife you could be paid for being the big dick you are.

8/21/2005 01:15:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

What take that test and give up a winter district spot doing traffic control for snow removal? No way Jose!

8/21/2005 02:30:00 PM  
Blogger CLANDESTINEBIRD said...

SCORE 140/RANK 800

8/21/2005 02:43:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

The scores actually seem consistent, or reasonably so, to me. What some people don't understand is that when several people have identical raw scores, for instance 150/175, then those individuals are further lined up by age and time in grade. If 100 people take the test and a 10 get 150 right then all 10 will have a preliminary score of 85.7 which will be further adjusted based upon senority and then age. Those scoring 149/175 will have a preliminary score of 85.1 and so forth. Those 10 individuals scoring 150/175 would then be spread between 85.7 and 85.1 going from the most senior and oldest to the least senior and youngest despite the fact that all 10 got the same number of answers right.

I suspect that the above scoring method would traditionally favor white males because whites generally have been on the job longer and in greater numbers than blacks and males or either race were hired in greater numbers than females. On the other hand, anyone who has the dicipline and the incentive to spend a great number of hours reading G.O's etc., should do well when compared to others who show up without ever having reviewed the material. Anyone who hasn't prepared for the test has no right to complain when he/she gets passed over.

8/21/2005 03:14:00 PM  
Anonymous Northside said...

For posterity and the younger officers, I want to pass on the following additional information re: EXAMSCAM as FACT.

During my involvement in the investigation of EXAMSCAM, we came upon a genuine redacted copy of a FBI Form FD-302 in which then S/A Daniel Burger, FBI-Chicago, interviewed one of the newly promoted lieutenants from the rigged oral board. Based on the legitimate written portions of the process, this lieutenant would have flunked and remained a sergeant. It was only incidental to a corruption investigation into the CPD termed "Operation Phocus", FBI Case No. CG 194C-529, that he admitted that he gained his promotion by making "campaign contributions" to a certain South Side alderman.

The EVIDENCE in EXAMSCAM was overwhelming. Among others, the following individuals COULD have acted on the certain and pervasive FRAUD.

They neglected to do so:

(1) Peter Karl, then Unit 5 investigative reporter for WMAQ-TV, Channel 5. He defected to the payroll of the City of Chicago.

(2) Then U.S. Attorney for the Northern District of Illinois,
Anton R. Valukas.

(3) Former Mayor Eugene Sawyer

(4) Current Mayor Richard M. Daley

(5) The late James Gallagher, the then Editor of the Chicago Tribune. The Tribune actually signed for several cardboard boxes of "smoking gun" evidence proving the fraud. Over a month later, they returned the evidence to me. Without any explanation, the Tribune did absolutely nothing.

When it comes to RIGGED promotional "processes", the City of Chicago is well beyond the pale among big-city police departments. Historically, the City is ARROGANT, NOTORIOUS and SHAMELESS.

I have no comment whatsoever on the integrity (or lack thereof) of the current detective selection process.

8/21/2005 05:56:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

146/320

8/21/2005 06:43:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

The media are rattlesnakes. I always get a blast when some CPD controversy comes up. The media asks officers questions as if they actually think we're stupid enough to be truthful. Sometimes, they then report that no police officers had any complaints.

Politicians and the media are never to be trusted.

8/21/2005 08:22:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Alleged result, 133/175, rank 15XX, 10 years of service. This staff, we the patrolmen, really must boycot all future exams, take the cloak of legitimacy away from the city and the "made" supervisors ( which is ALL of them, 100%, no exceptions). After the last Det. exam I swore I'd never waste my time again, but I did. The reason? A connected friend "could" if he wants to, make a call for me. Will he? who knows, but if I'm not on the list, the phone call can't help me. Recenlty a friend described the CPD as a "family-run-business", that is actually a perfect description. Well cheers, and here's to visions of Richie being frog walked out of city hall in an orange jump suit!

8/21/2005 08:33:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

137/175. 1100's. 10+ years. Double my ranking from the last detective test. go figure

8/21/2005 10:11:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

140/175 824 5yrs 8mths
pretty sure 824 after in seen the first 2 numbers i tossed in in the garbage.

8/22/2005 12:18:00 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

126/ 2300ish

8/22/2005 12:21:00 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

hey northern, i have a question...
So what ever happened to that law suit from the 80's about the sgt's exam. I remember my old man scored 99 and never made it and then I remember him getting letters from the lawyer about every 2 years asking for more money. I wonder what they did with all that money from the coppers that got screwed. Not once but twice by lawyers

8/22/2005 12:25:00 AM  
Anonymous NorthSide said...

I have no knowledge of litigation involving a sergeants' exam.

EXAMSCAM involved a RIGGED LIEUTENANTS' promotional "process". If you and/or your father (or anyone else) have any further comments/questions, feel free to eMail me at:

cpdfop7@yahoo.com

8/22/2005 06:37:00 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

The lawsuit that I think the above poster was referring to came after Examscam and pertained to the 88 test for Sgt. handled by Kimberly Sutherland. We won, we lost, we got reversed on appeal, our lawyer sucked, and finally we lost altogether about 2 years ago and had to pay a portion of the City's costs - about $200.00 a person. Case in now over entirely.

8/22/2005 07:24:00 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

score 131 rank 1784 9 years on

8/22/2005 08:32:00 AM  
Anonymous Scantron Scandal ? said...

135 / 1330's...

...almost 11 years on...

...need to study harder A-N-D "phone a FRIEND"... or... "blow a FIEND"...

Without Clout, you "left out"! ;-P

8/22/2005 09:20:00 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

WELL I GOT A SCORE OF 144 AND I HAVE 8 YEARS ON THE JOB AND IM 444 ON THE LIST. I WONDER IF THEY WILL GO THAT HIGH ON THE LIST

8/22/2005 10:32:00 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

can anyone dare explain how a p.o. with 22+ street years not score better than a 140 on this exam, ????

8/22/2005 12:32:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Maybe he's a dumbass?

8/22/2005 12:47:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

thanks for the intelligent explanation!

8/22/2005 01:34:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

it's true

8/22/2005 01:39:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Years on the job doesn't necessarily correlate to your ability to read a question, absorb it's meaning and articulate your answer. Plus twenty years on the job doesn't make you a smart cop. It only means you've chosen not to retire at twenty and managed not to get fired.

8/22/2005 01:42:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

You can't expect to get a handout promotion because you have so many years on the job either. There are plenty of veterans and old timers that haven't done a lick of crime fighting their entire career...but they think they're entitled to a promotion-get real.
There are also the 3 year wonders that scored ridiculously well to get made detective. Even if they've done some decent street work in that time I seriously doubt that they can do a great job anytime soon. I wouldn't want them at my roundtable.

8/22/2005 02:48:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

20 years experience, or 1 year of experience 20 times.

8/22/2005 03:58:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

141 and Im 707 on the list

8/22/2005 04:24:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

There were some guys showed up in my area with 3 or 4 years on the job from the last test. They were in the first class from that last test. A lot of people griped about their lack of time; including myself. They quickly became excellent detectives and the backbone of the watch. They made rethink my ideas about time on the job and who's a good detective. Passing a test doesn't make you a good cop. There are plenty of dog-ass detectives with twenty+ years on the job. I would favor a system where you needed 5 years to be dick, 10 years to be sgt, & 15 to be a lt. That however, is a union issue & I don't think anyone is going to rain on baby Cline's parade.

8/22/2005 05:54:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

score 147/ 260ish

8/22/2005 06:12:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

148/200's
135/1300's

8/22/2005 06:36:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

score 138 rank 1000ish 10 yrs on the job

8/22/2005 06:46:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

137/1125
on the job in 1995
DOB 7/64

8/22/2005 08:29:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Regarding time on the job, I don't remember if it was Bratton or one of the other stars in NYC, but one of the people who led the policing revolution that has saved the lives of 1500 NYers (+ countless others in cities that copies the new NYC methods) was something like a transit lieutenant when Giuliani became mayor.

While I'd agree with something like 5 years for Sergeant or Dick, I'd hesitate to require too much additional time to make lieutenant or captain. Or Superintendent.

Sometimes the only person who will point out that the king has no clothes is a (relative) newber.

Of course, we all know that the king in Chicago has no clothes. But who has really thought about the answers that can be provided by the CPD?

Personally, my favorite is the idea of getting rid of O.W.'s system of greasing every squeaky wheel with a phone. Sometimes the police actually know where they should be, and making them armed secretaries and family counselors does little if anything to help a beat. Occasionally, I'd bet a young lieutenant would be the only one in the department who hasn't bought heavily into the Wilson orthodoxy.

But they don't want to hear about what works. They want you to spit back knowledge of their failed rules. They want you to PROVE how much you've invested in learning the details of a system that isn't working. Or they just want someone to make a phone call for you.

As far as I'm concerned, the next mayor should force about 95% of the exempts on this job to retire. The other 5% are only exempt by accident, but the 95% are exempt lieutenants for entirely wrong reasons.

And don't even get me started on leadership!

8/22/2005 08:47:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I always found it interesting that the fire department actually gives bonus points on tests for seniority but cpd doesn't.

8/23/2005 12:46:00 AM  
Anonymous StormTrooper said...

Why should you get bonus points because of your yrs on the job. Most O'timers are good cops, but next time take a study course and stay out of the ginmill. Why hold back a young copper because he scored better than you, especially if they are not one of these new pussy cops that is afraid to kick some fuck down the stairs.

8/23/2005 06:20:00 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

when will this nepotisim stop, in regards to promotions on this police dept.? The Merit promotion, is just another example of the choosen few being moved up the ladder.

How is it that the same people are meritorious Det. then Sgt. and now Lt.

It sickens me, that, the word merit is associated with most of these people. When in truth most of then have never really been the police

8/24/2005 07:05:00 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

when will this nepotisim stop, in regards to promotions on this police dept.? The Merit promotion, is just another example of the choosen few being moved up the ladder.

How is it that the same people are meritorious Det. then Sgt. and now Lt.

It sickens me, that, the word merit is associated with most of these people. When in truth most of then have never really been the police

8/24/2005 07:05:00 AM  

<< Home

Newer Posts.......................... ..........................Older Posts