Opinion ID: 766623
Heading Depth: 4
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Job-Specific Validation

Text: 118 Title VII requires that a defendant using a test with a racially disparate adverse impact demonstrate that the test is job related for the position in question. 42 U.S.C. S 2000e2(k)(1)(A)(i). The Uniform Guidelines provide that[a]ny validity study should be based upon a review of information about the job for which the selection procedure is to be used. 29 C.F.R. S 1607.14(A). The 1985 Practitioners' Study 119 The 1985 study defined the jobs it sought to analyze as 1) elementary schoolteachers, 2) secondary school teachers, 3) librarians and pupil personnel (counselors and attendance officers), and 4) school administrators. All panel members were asked to judge the relevance of the CBEST skills by category for those jobs, ranking them from not relevant to very relevant. Although one might argue that the job classifications were too broad, we note that teachers are not infrequently called upon to teach outside of their area of primary expertise. As such, we cannot conclude that the District Court clearly erred in finding the job analysis in the Practitioners' Review to be sufficiently particularized. 1995 Lundquist Study 120 Dr. Lundquist identified teachers' job activities through several means, including literature reviews, observation of teachers on the job, and interviews with teachers regarding their job activities, their use of reading, writing, and mathematics skills, and other knowledge, skills and abilities used on the job. AMAE II, 937 F. Supp. at 1414. The Lundquist study began with an initial list of 103 specific reading, writing, and mathematics skills. From that list Lundquist created a survey in which 1,100 educators ranked the relevance and importance of those skills to the job of teaching. According to the District Court, [a] version of those survey for administrators was also created to determine whether they shared a common set of skill requirements with classroom teachers . . . . Based on her comparisons of teachers' and administrators' responses, Dr. Lundquist concluded that `all of the skills identified as important for teachers were also important for administrators.'  Id. at 1414-15. Dr. Lundquist's study reports: 121 Basic skill ratings were examined for administrators to determine if the same skill sets applied to both teacher and administrator jobs. Results showed all but one skill item (a math item) retained for teachers also applied to the administrator group. Thus the basic skill requirements identified for teachers were found to be job-related for administrators as well, and the same test specifications may be used to test basic skills for teachers and administrators. 122 Dr. Lundquist classified jobs as either teacher or administrator and determined that the CBEST, validated for teachers, was also valid for administrative positions. The District Court accepted this validation, concluding that the CBEST has been adequately validated with respect to nonteaching jobs. Id. at 1418. Reviewing the record, we find no clear error in that conclusion and we therefore uphold it. 123