Pre-Employment Testing and the ADA

This brochure is one of a series on human resources practices and workplace accommodations for persons with disabilities edited by Susanne M. Bruyère, Ph.D., CRC, Director, Employment and Disability Institute, Cornell University ILR School. This brochure was written in 1997 and updated in 2000 by Mary Anne Nester, Ph.D., U.S. Immigration and Naturalization Service, Washington D.C., 2001. It was further updated in 2010 by Beth Reiter, an independent legal consultant, Ithaca, N.Y., with assistance from Sara Furguson, a Cornell University Employment and Disability Institute ILR student research assistant

Pre-Employment Testing and the ADA

This brochure on pre-employment testing and the Americans with Disabilities (ADA) is one of a series on human resources practices and workplace accommodations for persons with disabilities edited by Susanne M. Bruyère, Ph.D., CRC, SPHR, Director, Program on Employment and Disability, School of Industrial and Labor Relations – Extension Division, Cornell University. Cornell University was funded in the early 1990’s by the U.S. Department of Education National Institute on Disability and Rehabilitation Research as a National Materials Development Project on the employment provisions (Title I) of the ADA (Grant #H133D10155). These updates, and the development of new brochures, have been funded by Cornell’s Program on Employment and Disability, the Pacific Disability and Business Technical Assistance Center, and other supporters

Chapter 13 Rebuilding Relationships between Data, Method, and Theories

In both Management and I/O Psychology, contributions to theory remain an important, and in many cases, sole criterion for evaluating submissions to top journals. In many ways, the definition of theory and the primacy of theory in the organizational sciences is an outlier; in most sciences, articles rarely even mention theories, much less build themselves around advancing theory. We propose that the classic description of the scientific methods provides a better guide to understanding the relationships between data, methods and theory than our current model, which often starts and ends with proposing a theory, which may never again be referenced or tested. We describe a pyramid of types of evidence that is useful for assessing the reliability and worth of particular sorts of data and show how this approach to evidence informs the scientific method and assists in identifying and building useful theories

Chapter 13 Rebuilding Relationships between Data, Method, and Theories

In both Management and I/O Psychology, contributions to theory remain an important, and in many cases, sole criterion for evaluating submissions to top journals. In many ways, the definition of theory and the primacy of theory in the organizational sciences is an outlier; in most sciences, articles rarely even mention theories, much less build themselves around advancing theory. We propose that the classic description of the scientific methods provides a better guide to understanding the relationships between data, methods and theory than our current model, which often starts and ends with proposing a theory, which may never again be referenced or tested. We describe a pyramid of types of evidence that is useful for assessing the reliability and worth of particular sorts of data and show how this approach to evidence informs the scientific method and assists in identifying and building useful theories