L.A. Fire Captain’s School Under Attack for Alleged Coaching on Promotion Test

A private school run by a Los Angeles city fire captain to tutor firemen for key department promotional tests has come under attack following an investigation into allegations that he may have leaked questions on a recent Civil Service exam to his students.

While a city investigation has concluded that there is no evidence of wrongdoing, the city Personnel Department has recommended throwing out the essay portion of the exam and giving it again.

A 10-page report summarizing a joint investigation by the Personnel and Fire departments cites certain “unexplained” events as well as “nagging questions with regard to the degree of specificity of some of the information given during the final hours before the test.”

Many of the nearly 500 firefighters who took the exam do not want to take it over, and the Fire Commission has taken the position that without a finding of wrongdoing, the test should be allowed to stand.

But the Personnel Department contends that the “re-administration of the essay portion of the test is a necessary price to pay to restore that highest level of confidence in the integrity of the examination process which has, in fact, been lost.”

It is up to the city Civil Service Commission to decide whether to cancel the exam. A hearing is scheduled for today.

The dispute centers on the activities of Capt. Russell Weck and his controversial school, known as “Weck Tech,” which charges an enrollment fee of $2,300 a student.

The school has long been criticized by the Personnel Department, which is recommending that the Civil Service Commission give “clear written indication” to the Fire Commission “of the degree of disfavor” with which it regards “the type of coaching school known as ‘Weck Tech.’ ”

On several occasions since the late 1970s, the personnel staff has notified the Fire Department of its opposition to Weck Tech, based on the fact that it is run by a city employee who charges a substantial fee and employs highly subjective admission standards.

Among the 61 enrollees in a Weck training program for a Jan. 10 captain’s exam were five firefighters who have told city officials of “their concerns regarding perceived examination improprieties,” according to the city report. Their concerns arose partly from telephone calls several of them got the day before the test. In the calls, Weck told students about “information on several specific topics to study,” the report said.

Three firefighters finished the exam and then reported what they believed were possible improprieties to their superiors. Two others protested the exam by walking out of the test when they said they discovered four essay questions that they believed Weck had given them on the phone the day before. The four questions account for 39.5% of the examination.

After investigating allegations about the phone calls, the personnel staff concluded in its report:

“Not withstanding the fact that many issues described by Capt. Weck in his final round of phone calls did not appear on the examination, there is a high degree of ‘coincidence’ involved in this case, no matter what viewpoint or explanation is accepted as most credible.”

Weck told The Times that his intensive, wide-ranging course is designed to prepare the department’s most highly rated firefighters for any conceivable exam question. He said it is “sheer coincidence” if some of the questions he posed were similar to ones on the examination.

Graduates of his school describe Weck as a dynamic, effective teacher--sometimes arrogant or abrasive--but a man of high integrity who would never condone cheating.

The five firefighters who reported their concerns about possible improprieties are also exceptionally talented and trustworthy men, according to department spokesman Tony DiDomenico.

Two of these firefighters, Andy Valencia and Steven Vizcaino, who hold the rank of inspector, said they were immediately suspicious about the pointers Weck gave them during a phone call the afternoon before the exam. The two men took notes on the information Weck gave them during the call and have provided these notes to investigators and to The Times.

“The degree of detail that they (Valencia and Vizcaino) recall (about the phone call from Weck), and the ‘11th-hour’ nature of the call they received, when coupled with the direct phrasing they recall in Capt. Weck’s manner of speech, all combined to create a climate of concern,” the report stated.

In an interview, Vizcaino said: “I stopped him (Weck) because it was getting so detailed and I said, ‘Where are you getting your information?’ And he said, ‘Don’t ask any questions. I was praying for something like this.’ ”

According to the report, a third firefighter also got a call from Weck. The report states that when this firefighter asked Weck where he got his information, Weck responded that he could not talk about it over the phone.

The report states that Weck has “steadfastly denied . . . making any of the statements attributed to him about not being able to discuss the source of his information over the phone or about his prayers having been answered.”

Weck told The Times: “I don’t use that kind of colloquialism. It’s not in my character or makeup or whatever.”

The report concludes that Weck “did make several phone calls on the day before the examination” and states that Weck has said “his desire was to inform those who missed that last day (of class) of the important information that had been discussed.”

Weck said he cannot remember exactly what he said during the calls to his students the day before the test, but according to the report, he has said that “he may indeed have said almost anything about any type of fire problem likely to be encountered by a fire captain.”

Valencia, one of the two firemen who walked out of the test, told The Times that he was so troubled by the specific information Weck imparted that he called Weck back and demanded: “What the hell is going on here? I will not have a part of . . . this thing. . . . How could you even think we need this kind of edge?”

Weck reassured Valencia that the topics had sprung from a “brainstorming” session about possible questions, the report stated.

The next day, Valencia went to Hollywood High School for the four-hour captain’s exam--one of the most competitive promotional tests in the department.

Valencia said that in looking at the exam he noticed that Weck had correctly predicted that for the first time it would be scored half on the multiple-choice questions and half on the essays.

On this allegation, the report states that Weck does not remember making this comment, but that Weck’s assistant does recall Weck having said so.

Valencia said that as he sat pondering the exam’s scoring, he thought, “This is coincidence. OK. I’ll accept that.”

But when he arrived at the essay portion of the test, he said, “The very first question he (Weck) gave us was the exact question . . . the 10-story building, fourth-floor ruptured water pipe, the fact there was a bank on the first floor, the fact that we were going to be the first-in engine company and we were going to be the incident commander responsible for that incident. We were supposed to place companies, prioritize equipment, just like he gave it to us. It goes beyond coincidence.”

The report states that when Weck was asked if he discussed a water problem involving “a high-rise building with a bank on the first floor, he indicated that he may have . . . and he added that most high-rise buildings have banks on the first floor.”

Three other questions on the test closely paralleled questions that Valencia and Vizcaino contend Weck had outlined to them in the call before the test, the report stated.

When Valencia realized this during the exam, he said he looked at Vizcaino and shook his head. “We both got up, went up to the proctor and told her . . . questions on the examination were given to us and for that reason we’re protesting the examination.”

The two men later made their charges in detail to the fire and personnel officials who conducted a joint investigation of their allegations. The concerns of the three other firefighters also were investigated.

According to the report, one of the three said that during class the day before the exam, he was asked by Weck to “pick a floor” during a general discussion of a problem involving a high-rise with a water problem. When the firefighter picked the sixth floor, Weck said, “No, make it the fourth.”

The Personnel Department characterized this as a “most troubling exchange” and concluded: “The reason for the change from the sixth floor to the fourth floor (the floor used in the test question) is unexplained.”

In an interview, Weck told The Times that his teaching method is to lay out a problem for the class, and in the give-and-take of the ensuing discussion, the problem is modified in many ways to change, for example, the height of a building, the occupants, and the source or location of a fire. Such discussion allows students to consider all types of conditions in firefighting problems.

The report states that the information Weck conveyed to his students in the phone calls was marked by a “lack of consistency.” According to the report, this undercuts any notion that Weck may have been engaged in “any direct attempt . . . to utilize confidential information to better prepare those enrolled in Weck Tech.”

“In summary, all that remains are the individual recollections of candidates, without any independent evidence of any advance examination information having been circulated,” the report said. “For many aspects of their stated concerns, there appear to be reasonable alternative explanations. Yet there remain certain nagging questions with regard to the degree of specificity of some of the information given during the final hours before the test.” The report did not enumerate the nagging questions.

The investigation of the allegations made against Weck was done jointly by officials in the Personnel Department and Fire Department, who conducted 40 interviews during a three-week period.

Jurutha Brown, chief of the Personnel Department’s Police and Fire Division, said investigators interviewed “everybody involved in the preparation of the exam, duplication of the exam, etc., as well as all these different people that had allegations to make. We interviewed other uncomplaining people, some involved in Weck Tech, some not involved in Weck Tech. We interviewed a whole gamut of people.”

The Personnel Department report, issued over Brown’s signature, states that the complainants are “undoubtedly sincere in their beliefs” but that “there is no independent corroboration of evidence beyond their recollections.”

In an interview, Brown said that she thinks it is appropriate to cancel the essay portion of the test because “there’s enough doubt” about it.