= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
James_Miller comments on A Gamification Of Education: a modest proposal based on the Universal Decimal Classification and RPG skill trees - Less Wrong
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
= 783df68a0f980790206b9ea87794c5b6)
Loading…= b715d02e85f7b3b4ae65ca3d3e450868)
Subscribe to RSS Feed
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d){kind=logo}
Comments (80)
I've looked briefly, and I don't see a federal statutory cite that explicitly prohibits IQ testing. Most employer decisions not to administer an IQ can be almost completely explained by a risk-averse unwillingness to defend IQ tests. Defending lawsuits costs money, even if one wins, and litigation is always a risk.
In short, I think employer behavior avoiding IQ tests is expect-value maximizing for individual employers - for tragedy-of-the-commons reasons, this might be bad for employers overall. Most importantly, I don't think there is a federal law specifically prohibiting IQ testing for employment, it's just expensive for an employer to show that higher IQ is helpful for the specific position the potential employee is seeking.
See this.
That article is consistent with my brief legal research, and increases my confidence that Congress has not explicitly prohibited IQ tests by statute, regardless of whether a potential employee could show disparate impact through use of the IQ test. I think this quote from the article is a reasonable statement of current law:
I make no comment on whether the current state of the law optimizes what it claims, or what it should optimize in some moral sense.