Keep Calm and Tweet On: Creditors Have Been Sizing You Up Online for Years

via Digital Trends

Last week, reports surfaced that a number of startups have begun to factor in social media data, like who your friends are on Facebook, to determine your credit worthiness. The initial report, from CNN, made big news and spread around to countless publications, causing quite a stir on the social network.

Thing is, this story is not actually new. The idea that social-media connections and online activity can affect a person’s ability to get a loan has been around for years. Most of us just haven’t been paying attention.

Before we get into how your online activity can, and is, used in determining loan availability, we should clear up a few of the misleading, fear-mongery parts of the reports that have been flying around over the past week.

First, social media data does not affect your official credit score – as in, the one you receive when you request a credit report. The factors involved in figuring out that score, which is known as a FICO score, are highly, highly regulated under an extensive law known as the Fair Credit Reporting Act (pdf), or FCRA. Social-media connections and online activity may be used for determining credit worthiness, but they are not part of your FICO score just yet.

Second, CNN buried a key fact deep down in its article: Two of the startups the report mentions, Lenndo and Kreditech, are not U.S. companies, and do not do much (if any) business in the U.S. In fact, as CNN mentions, Lenndo only provides loans in Columbia, the Philippines, and Mexico.

OK, so now that we have what’s not happening, let’s dig into what is. Long story short: The long-respected FICO credit score is no longer the only factor that matters. And credit worthiness predictions are increasingly taking whom you know and what you say on social media into consideration.

For example, another credit-assessment startup, Neo, investigates whether a person has the job they say they have by looking at LinkedIn contacts, according to The Economist. Neo has also, as Time reports, begun investigating whether people who make racist statements online are less credit-worthy. Given that companies like Kreditech use some 8,000 data points in determining lending risk, we can safely assume there are a slew of unknown activities that we all do online that go into determining whether we should be allowed to get a mortgage or a car loan.

Credit worthiness is one area where what you say and do online can have major real-life consequences.

In other words, credit worthiness is one area where what you say and do online can have major real-life consequences.

This brings us to the most problematic part of this emerging system of risk assessment: Most of us have no idea what is being used against us. With FICO and other traditional credit ranking systems, the factors are fairly straight forward: Pay your bills on time, borrow a number of different loans and pay them all back, and keep low balances on the credit cards you have available. It’s more complicated than that, but not much.

As social factors come into it, however, it becomes virtually impossible to know how to behave properly. And there is little incentive for the companies calculating our risk assessments to divulge that information; if they tell us what not to do, they will have a more difficult time figuring out who is really a bad borrower.

Another reason that we don’t know what to do and not to do on social media is because the people calculating risk don’t know either. As Peter Fader of the University of Pennsylvania’s Wharton Customer Service Initiative told Knowledge@Wharton in February, “”It’s going to take years to understand what measures are truly valid. It’s the Wild West … like the early days of FICO.”

In other words, our credit worthiness is now being subjected to countless experiments, and that’s a problem – one that we likely can’t avoid, or stop, until after things start to go terribly wrong.

As disconcerting as the current situation is, it’s not all bad. One problem with traditional credit scoring is that it works against people who have little or no credit history. You are considered “guilty until proven innocent,” which means plenty of people who might be worth lending to can’t get a loan. Factoring in other metrics, including social-media data, is being used to help these “underbanked” people.

In June of last year, for example, credit agency firm Experian launched a product called Extended View, which factors “non-credit bureau data assets” that can help lenders provide loans to the estimated 64 million people in the U.S. with little or no credit history. And ZeistFinance, founded by former Google CIO Douglas Merrill, uses “Google-style machine learning” to analyze “thousands of potential credit variables – everything from financial information to technology usage.” ZeistFinance claims its credit assessment model “leads to increased credit availability for borrowers and higher repayment rates for lenders.”

In short, it’s currently impossible to give any specific advice about what not to say, or who not to “friend” or “follow” online, to help you get a loan – the factors involved in that are still evolving. So for now, the best thing you can do is keep your social circles tight, your controversial opinions to yourself, and always pay your bills on time. Everything else is up in the air.

Playing Video Games Can Boost Brain Power

via Neuroscience News

Certain types of video games can help to train the brain to become more agile and improve strategic thinking, according to scientists from Queen Mary University of London and University College London (UCL).

The researchers recruited 72 volunteers and measured their ‘cognitive flexibility’ described as a person’s ability to adapt and switch between tasks, and think about multiple ideas at a given time to solve problems.

Two groups of volunteers were trained to play different versions of a real-time strategy game called StarCraft, a fast-paced game where players have to construct and organise armies to battle an enemy. A third of the group played a life simulation video game called The Sims, which does not require much memory or many tactics.

All the volunteers played the video games for 40 hours over six to eight weeks, and were subjected to a variety of psychological tests before and after. All the participants happened to be female as the study was unable to recruit a sufficient number of male volunteers who played video games for less than two hours a week.

Participants who played Starcraft, a fast-paced strategy game, were more accurate and quicker in performing cognitive flexibility tasks than those who played the slower paced game, The Sims. This image shows a desktop screensaver based on the Starcraft game.

The researchers discovered that those who played StarCraft were quicker and more accurate in performing cognitive flexibility tasks, than those who played The Sims.

Dr Brian Glass from Queen Mary’s School of Biological and Chemical Sciences, said: “Previous research has demonstrated that action video games, such as Halo, can speed up decision making but the current work finds that real-time strategy games can promote our ability to think on the fly and learn from past mistakes.

“Our paper shows that cognitive flexibility, a cornerstone of human intelligence, is not a static trait but can be trained and improved using fun learning tools like gaming.”

Professor Brad Love from UCL, said: “Cognitive flexibility varies across people and at different ages. For example, a fictional character like Sherlock Holmes has the ability to simultaneously engage in multiple aspects of thought and mentally shift in response to changing goals and environmental conditions.

“Creative problem solving and ‘thinking outside the box’ require cognitive flexibility. Perhaps in contrast to the repetitive nature of work in past centuries, the modern knowledge economy places a premium on cognitive flexibility.”

Dr Glass added: “The volunteers who played the most complex version of the video game performed the best in the post-game psychological tests. We need to understand now what exactly about these games is leading to these changes, and whether these cognitive boosts are permanent or if they dwindle over time. Once we have that understanding, it could become possible to develop clinical interventions for symptoms related to attention deficit hyperactivity disorder or traumatic brain injuries, for example.”

Notes about this neuroscience and neuropsychology research

This research was supported by the United States Air Force Office of Scientific Research, US Army Research Laboratory, and National Institutes of Health and published in the journal PLOS ONE.

Contact: Neha Okhandiar – Queen Mary, University of London
Source: Queen Mary, University of London press release
Image Source: The Starcraft theme screensaver image is credited to Sam Marshall at Flickr. The image is licensed Creative Commons Attribution 2.0 Generic
Original Research: Full open access research for “Real-Time Strategy Game Training: Emergence of a Cognitive Flexibility Trait” by Brian D. Glass, W. Todd Maddox and Bradley C. Love in PLOS ONE. Published online August 7 2013 doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0070350

Building Meaningful Assessments

via LearnDash

Schools’ Test Focus Queried

via The New Zealand Herald

New Zealand’s children will lose out on jobs if the schooling system becomes too focused on tests and traditional measures of achievement, a visiting expert has warned.

Professor Yong Zhao, the presidential chair at the University of Oregon’s College of Education, said a focus on measuring traditional success risked producing homogenous, compliant workers ill-suited for a modern economy.

In the country as a guest of the NZEI education union, Professor Zhao told business leaders and academics that a focus on international test rankings was misguided.

When Shanghai, China ranked first in reading, writing and mathematics in the latest international standardised testing, it caused much angst in Western countries including the United States, Professor Zhao said.

The results were called a “Sputnik” moment, referencing the satellite which symbolised the Soviet Union’s lead in the space race.

New Zealand’s Education Minister Hekia Parata frequently refers to international rankings, and champions the use of student achievement data as a way to target support to where it is most needed.

Professor Zhao, who was born and educated in China and met Ms Parata yesterday afternoon, said it was wrong to equate the best test scores with the best education system.

He said that in China and other high performing countries there was much soul-searching about whether their education systems were producing graduates who could think for themselves and creatively – who might become the next Steve Jobs, the late co-founder of Apple.

There was often an inverse relationship between high test scores and children’s enjoyment of, or confidence in, a subject. And it was precisely those measures that were important for entrepreneurship and creativity – essential traits for the jobs of tomorrow.

Professor Zhao said creative jobs had been on the rise since the 1970s, as manufacturing and other traditional roles were replaced by machines and technology. “Black collar” workers – a term named after Jobs’ turtleneck – were now needed.

“Schools have always been responsible for producing the traditional middle class … we are facing a new economy, it is an economical re-setting.

“I want to warn the New Zealand Government – you may be raising your test scores, but you may be losing something else, and that might be very important for the future.”

Bennett Medary, chairman of the New Zealand Information and Communication Technologies Group, told the meeting it reflected the fact there were 15,000 vacant jobs in the technology industry.

“What we lament is the lack of creativity, of empathy, of the ability to work in teams, resilience and ambition – those softer attributes.

“Yet on the other hand I understand that stakeholders, parents and so on, would be very concerned about allowing students simply to discover themselves through education through this kind of random pathway, of passion and interests.”

Professor Zhao said knowledge should still be the focus of school, but it would be better to enable students to seek out what interests them, so that they stay engaged.

What’s best for students?

* Zhao says obsession with test results ultimately hurts students’ employability.
* Countries that top international tests often churn out graduates with little creativity.
* Knowledge should still be the focus of school, but it would be better to enable students to seek out what interests them, so they stay engaged.

The Digital Lives of Teens: Turning “Do As I Say” into “Do As I Do”

via Edutopia

Internet Learning: Meeting Students Where They Live

The ‘Forward-looking’ CFO: Linking Financial Rigor with Leadership

Global organizations operating in the contemporary business landscape need to tightly link financial rigor and strategic insight. Increasingly, senior financial executives are playing influential roles in strategy development and implementation, working closely with the CEO and the board to creatively assess and design growth opportunities.

The question is: Are CFOs prepared to move beyond the number-crunching function to act and lead in this capacity? Wharton’s Jason Wingard and John Percival discuss this and other issues.

http://knowledge.wharton.upenn.edu/podcast_archive.cfm?podcastID=2

LA Will Give All 640,000 Students an iPad by End of 2014

I am optimistic that this will be a program that changes the way we look at technology in the classroom (on a large scale). It will also provide a model to replicate for our schools across the country. I look forward to seeing the documentation and data.

Links about the program:

http://techwire.net/literacy-2-0-la-schools-put-tablets-on-the-table/

http://ktla.com/2013/08/11/new-school-year-brings-health-services-ipads-for-lausd-students/#axzz2bwdihskF

http://articles.latimes.com/2013/apr/25/local/la-me-ln-lopez-tablet-experiment-lausd-20130425

via Electronista

Apple contract will kick off with 31,000 iPads, covers all K-12 students

A total of more than a half-million iPads will be given out by the Los Angeles Unified School District, covering 1,124 schools by the end of 2014 in a deal worth “hundreds of millions” to Apple — far larger than the $30 million contract initially reported. That contract covers only the first deployment of iPads, covering 49 schools and an estimated 31,000 students that will be given out by the end of the year. As reported earlier, Apple will be the sole vendor for the ambitious project, resulting in costs of nearly $415 million over the first two years for the iPads alone.

The schools covered including all grades from Kindergarten through high school, and target in particular students who otherwise would not have access to the technology. The bulk of the total cost is the $678 per iPad fixed cost, which will come pre-loaded with Pearson e-textbooks and other educational apps that make up the remainder of the money. Each iPad will also come with a full three-year warranty, and allow the district to keep its learning materials completely up-to-date. Indeed, despite the large sums involved, the LAUSD believes it will save money compared to the costs associated with providing traditional textbooks and other educational materials to the schools.

Other tablets were considered and rejected as being “lesser” than the iPad, despite pressure from other vendors (particularly Microsoft) to diversify the program to include a range of tablet models. The board voted unanimously to reject this approach and give iPads to all students, following (on a grander scale) programs across the nation that offer iPads as a replacement for most traditional school materials. Studies have supported the notion that the cutting-edge technology found in tablets helps students learn by being more flexible in approaches, and able to support apps to tailor the learning experience to each student’s needs.

Apple had said at the time the deal was announced that it was the first step of a larger rollout with LA schools, but the details and scale of the project were finally revealed by CITEworld, an educational journal. A number of colleges are now also requiring or providing iPads, acknowledging the “post-PC” scenario that is likely to be even more prominent for everyday computing use in the future.

4 Reasons Why the Common Core Standards are Losing Popularity

What do you think? I am an advocate for change but I am also an advocate for common sense and the Common Core does not pass the Common Sense meter for me. I have spoken about this and written about it as well since 2011 when it was adopted by so many states across the country. The assessments don’t make sense either so can someone out there show me the data that states this will change things for the better, so far the data is horrific!!!

via eSchool News

In what could be compared to, well, many education reform initiatives over the years—educational technology included—a once-widely, and quickly, accepted initiative is dividing the education community; begging the question, ‘Are the Common Core State Standards (CCSS) just another flash in education’s pan?’

45 states and the District of Columbia have adopted the CCSS in what was once lauded as a giant step in the right direction in trying to improve student achievement and college- and career-readiness.

The K-12 Standards, developed for Mathematics and English Language Arts, are designed to bring student learning into the 21st Century through the inclusion of, and focus on, digital media, social learning tools, critical thinking skills, and online assessments.

Yet, many states, policy makers, and educators are saying that though giving the go-ahead was easy, successful implementation planning didn’t factor well enough into the decision to adopt, causing problems states are only now beginning to fully comprehend.

Here you’ll find the four most widely discussed contentions with CCSS. Do you think these points are valid? Are there any other issues concerning CCSS not mentioned on the list that you’d like to discuss? Be sure to leave your thoughts in the comment section below!

1. Limited resources for implementation

States that are already strapped for funding and have adopted the CCSS have spent many millions of dollars to create curriculum around them, implement them, and create tests aligned to the standards. The federal government also contributed roughly $360 million to help develop core-aligned tests.

But some states are now prohibiting spending for CCSS implementation. Examples include Kansas, Arizona, Michigan, and Indiana. Many states representatives say the cost of teacher training, new textbooks and materials, as well as the educational technology and IT foundation needed to successfully implement the CCSS, was not discussed properly prior to adoption.

2. Underdeveloped high stakes testing

Randi Weingarten, president of the American Federation of Teachers (AFT) recently called for a moratorium on the high-stakes implications of Common Core testing until the standards have been properly implemented.

“These standards, which hold such potential to create deeper learning, are instead creating a serious backlash—as officials seek to make them count before they make them work…And it is happening throughout the country,” said Weingarten. (Read “Editorial: Make the Common Core standards work before making them count.”)

And Weingarten isn’t the only one. The Los Angeles Times Editorial Board also urged city officials to delay CCSS testing until implementation is completed.

“Experts are divided over the value of the new curriculum standards, which might or might not lead students to the deeper reading, reasoning and writing skills that were intended,” the board explained. “But on this much they agree: The curriculum will fail if it isn’t carefully implemented with meaningful tests that are aligned with what the students are supposed to learn…it would be better off delaying the new curriculum a couple of years and doing it right, rather than allowing common core to become yet another educational flash in the pan that never lives up to its promise.”

Parents have also started a campaign to “opt” their children out of the Common Core-aligned high-stakes standardized tests. For example, parents in both Utah and New York are voicing their concerns on whether or not the CCSS are valid.

3. Not aligned for college-readiness

A recent report reveals that although most states have adopted the CCSS, their diplomas remain CCSS deficient. Of the 45 states and the District of Columbia that have voluntarily adopted Common Core, only 11 have aligned their graduation requirements in mathematics with those standards. (Read “Report: High school diplomas don’t support Common Core.”)

“They do not require high school graduates to complete the math classes that typically cover the content described in the new standards,” explains the report. “Until states and districts re-examine their graduation policies, a high school diploma will not necessarily signify college- and career-readiness as envisioned by the Common Core.”

4. Stifling creativity

Apart from many questioning the validity of the CCSS’ claims that the new standards will better teach students the skills they need to be college- and career-ready, many in the education sector are worried that the CCSS will become a new No Child Left Behind (NCLB)—turning today’s brightest minds into testing automatons.

“The world changes. The future is indiscernible. Clinging to a static strategy in a dynamic world may be comfortable, even comforting, but it’s a Titanic-deck-chair exercise,” explained Marion Brady, a veteran teacher, administrator, curriculum designer, and author in a recent Washington Postarticle.

Brady said that the CCSS assume that what kids need to know is covered by one or another of the traditional core subjects. “In fact,” she said, “the unexplored intellectual terrain lying between and beyond those familiar fields of study is vast, expands by the hour, and will go in directions no one can predict.”

“The word ‘standards’ gets an approving nod from the public (and from most educators) because it means ‘performance that meets a standard,’” she continued. “However, the word also means ‘like everybody else,’ and standardizing minds is what the Standards try to do. Common Core Standards fans sell the first meaning; the Standards deliver the second meaning. Standardized minds are about as far out of sync with deep-seated American values as it’s possible to get.”

27 Tips For Mentoring New Teachers

via Edudemic

How does a teacher go from just a teacher to a great teacher? Some say that some people are just naturally great teachers. Others might believe that it is the education that they receive. And others yet, point to the mentors that these new teachers have when they start out teaching. The handy infographic below shows tips for new teachers, mentors, and administrators to help all parties involved get the most out of seasoned teachers mentoring new ones. So if you’re looking for some quick tips and tricks to mentoring new teachers, this is for you.

Our Favorite Tips

For Mentors: Find the strengths of the new teacher. Work together to find ways to implement and enhance these strengths.

For New Teachers: Ask. If something confuses you, ask.

For Administrators: Select mentors with care. Choose the risk taker, the early adopter, the seasoned, or those with other special mentoring skills.