We are looking for a sponsoring educational institution, perhaps with a team of the education department, psychology department, and technology department to pilot an implementation of this system.
SUMMARY
Financial institutions are required by law to have “stress tests” to predict systemic catastrophic financial failure. However, it is not the law to have predictive “stress tests” in educational institutions to predict mass catastrophic injury to students by students.
Recent tragedies at school facilities self-evidence the need for empirical analytics for “stress testing” and risk assessment. These catastrophic events prove the need for new tools in the assessment and prediction of students who may require additional attention and support.
Currently, educational systems provide support structures that tend to occur with the subjective effort of a “guidance counselor,” such as from prescheduled student meetings; remedial efforts that result from observed discrete events, including events of misconduct; and/or self-diagnosed inquiries. Each of these methods relies upon subjective determinations.
The following Educational Institution “Stress Test” and Method for the Determination of Isolation Risk provides an objective analytics methodology process for educational institutions to aid in the assessment of the catastrophic risk that is a function of student social isolation.
This methodology relies upon an assessment of social “reciprocity” with an analytics data engine implemented in a test that self-ratchets for context. Based upon test results, students are scored with an “Isolation Risk Result” (score) determined by a function of external affinity references and affinity reciprocity.
The best score will be students who have the highest combination of external affinity references and reciprocity of affinity. The Isolation Risk Results taken in the aggregate at an institutional level, and when placed into the context of comparable institutions, tend to disclose how well the institution has achieved integration of individual students into a statistically healthy social network for the particular institutional context.
The methodology taught isolates the perception of affinity and the reality of affinity that is exposed by a “delusion of affinity.” Students who are neither matched to reciprocally identified friendships nor referenced externally as a friend exposes a risk of social isolation. The test can be performed in a semi-anonymous methodology.
No test can predict whether the most popular, unpopular or socially isolated student result will be a social threat; however, the test tends to demonstrate social delusion and isolation, which supports an empirical basis for subjective review of the data by appropriate institutional staff.
For example, a “straight-A” student who recently moved to a school district with a poor Isolation Risk Result may be assessed differently and/or corrected differently, from a long-time student with a history of misconduct and poor grades. To the extent relevant and appropriate, the results of the process provide a statistical basis to conjoin with other demographic or personal attribute information for even more meaningful risk assessment within the particular institution’s context.
It must be remembered that exceptional catastrophic social events will not tend to be predicted by the analytics normal result; the goal of the risk assessment is to isolate and to expose that item of the data that provides meaningful information for prediction of, and interposed corrective action prior to, a socially catastrophic event.
EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTION “STRESS TEST” AND METHOD FOR THE DETERMINATION OF ISOLATION RISK-Technicals
- Variables. The methodology has certain tailorable characteristics, which depend upon the particular implementation. See Exhibit 1, hereby incorporated by this reference.
- Exhibit 1 demonstrates, by example and not limitation, application of
the Isolation Risk Test, based upon a field of 15 students, each of
whom identifies five (5) “friends” in the order of preference. - The formulaic symbols and variables for the Isolation Risk Test are:
SL = Scope Limiter
Rc = Reference Count
Rw = Reference Weight
Rr = Reference Result
Yc = Reciprocity Count
Yw = Reciprocity Weight
Yr = Reciprocity Result
Dv = Delusion Weight Variance
Ir = Isolation Risk Result - The methodology is to be conducted on a closed field of participants. Each of the participants will identify that number of “best friends” up to and including the number identified by the Scope Limiter (SL), which is five (5) in Exhibit 1, but could be more or less depending upon the context. The method could be available online using pre-populated fields of names or could be rendered using physical media or an otherwise manner that elicits controlled responses. It could also be structured for semi-anonymous matching.
- Exhibit 1 demonstrates, by example and not limitation, application of the Reference Count (Rc) and Reference Weight (Rw) and the multiplied product thereof, Reference Result (Rr). Rc is the number of times that the subject person is referenced as a friend (i.e. affinity) by another person in the tested field group. Rc tests for “popularity” without regard to reciprocity. In other words, for example, irrespective of Quentin Quarterback’s affinity to others, others believe that they have affinity with Quentin Quarterback. This criterion discloses if Quentin Quarterback is likeable (popular) whether or not he likes the same people who like him. Rw is the weighting that is given to each such Rc reference. In effect of the overall test, Rw is a weighting relative to Yc/Yw.
- Exhibit 1 demonstrates, by example and not limitation, application of Reciprocity Count (Yc) and Reciprocity Weight (Yw) and the multiplied product thereof, Reciprocity Result (Yr). Yc is the number of times that the subject person’s responses are mutual; that is, the number of times that, for example, the persons Quentin Quarterback identifies as friends have also mutually identified him as a friend. Yc tests for “bonding” and implies popularity (Rc) of one on a per-mutual basis. Yw is the relative weight attributed to each Yc. The weighting of Yw is effectively relative to Rw. That is, the weight of how many Rc’s should be equal to the weight of one Yc. In Exhibit 1, the relative weighting is 1 to 5, demonstrated with Rw being one (1) per Rc and Yw being twenty-five (25) per Yc, implying that one “bonded” affinity (which implies one Rc) is equal to five more basic “popularity” Rc’s.
- Delusion Weight Variance is not demonstrated in Exhibit 1, but is a factor of the existence of, or relative positioning of, one subject’s reference to another. For example, if Quentin Quarterback identifies Debrah Debater as his first-ranked (best) friend No. 1, and she does not identify him at all or she identifies him as friend No. 5, there is delusion implied by the deviation in ranking. That deviation can be assessed as part of the Isolation Risk Result (Ir).
- The conclusion of the test is the Ir sum of Rr plus Yr. The three elements of data, Rr, Yr and Ir, provide the three crucial elements of risk assessment. The 3-element core framework of financial reporting is A – L = C (Assets – Liability = Capital/Owner’s Equity). For Isolation Risk Assessment the core 3-element framework is Rr + Yr = Ir (Reference Result + Reciprocity Result = Isolation Risk Result).
- A contradiction is the requirement for permission, particularly in a public school environment. This is mitigated by the context of the field in which the IST is implemented (see below Sample Permission Letter).
- On an institutional basis, the collection of the data implies how well the institution is relatively performing. For example, the various statistical data, such as standard deviation, median and average all provide meaningful data of social integration on an institution basis. In Exhibit 1, the standard deviation demonstrates a large disparity between the best result and worst result, which implies that students are at risk of isolation and may require some intervention. It is anticipated that “best practices” standards will be developed for implementation.
- The use of the IST is best applied in a cooperative manner between and among the parents, educational institution, and various government agencies that are charged to implement educational standards. The results can also be secondarily applied with other demographic information to determine institutional social cohesion, so that remedial action can be conducted where and when required.
Click Here to Download the Isolation Stress Test
Sample Permission Letter:
Dear Parents:
Acme grade school is conducting a new pilot program for the [5th Graders] for the purpose of improving social cohesion among the students, called the “Isolation Stress Test.” The purpose of the IST is to assist in determining whether a student is socially integrated in a manner that denotes healthy social relationships. [We are administering this test at an early age, where relationships tend to be more genuine and natural.]
The test is rather straight-forward in itself, but the results are invaluable [to you, to the school, and to the respective departments of education].
The test works like this: Each student is provided a unique number [that is unknown to anyone except Testing Co., the independent test administrator]. Each student then chooses that student’s top [5] friends by number. That is all.
The results are [anonymously compiled without names] in a manner that correlates whether friendships are reciprocated. [The results are compiled externally by Testing Co., so that that the results are provided to us only by number[, except a confidential letter will be provided to you, as the parent, with your child’s assessment.]
For example, if John identifies his best friends (or at least who he thinks are his best friends), none of whom have identified him, it demonstrates an “isolation risk.” This may be true even if John is “popular,” because “popularity” is different than social bonding. Stated another way, we can feel alone in a crowd.
[[The results of this test are anonymous.] [The results of this test are sent to you directly from the testing agency and you can then take any remedial action with your child or contact the school for assistance.] [The results of this test are sent without identification to the respective federal and state departments of education for social referential demographic cohesion [integration].] [The artificial intelligence engine at the testing agency will provide a prediction for your information.] [You may opt [in/out] of this test.] [The IST will assist evaluation on a per-student, per-grade, per institution, per community, etc. basis.]
The simplicity of the test belies its significant value to a positive and rewarding educational system to serve students, and the Great School hopes that you will [not] [opt-in/opt-out] so that the best community and student results can be determined.
From LinkedIn:
Q. How often should the Isolation Risk Result test be administered to ensure accurate and timely assessments?
A. Andrew Jax This is a great question. There is the taking of the test and there is the use of the results.
As to the taking, as a practical matter, perhaps sometime in mid-October to mid-November after re-entry of the grade, or perhaps diffused with other administrative tests. Although more might be better, the noisy intrusion may create pushback. And this test will likely require some form of parental consent, depending upon how it is administered and used, and to what degree it is anonymous and used on a macro-evaluation systemic remediation or personal remediation, including any AI determinations. That is, anonymous statistics could be used by the state or federal Department of Education to determine schools underperforming in social cohesion, or on a personal level for an Isolated student.
The real key to the test is the “Delusion of Affinity.” Quentin Quarterback (Exhibit) is popular and has friendship “reciprocity.” The Isolated student will not have the “incoming” affinity and therefore would disclose a friendship vacuum. Although sad, the Isolated student would either not be marked by others as a “best friend” or may simply have a Delusion of Affinity. Either way, the situation exposes the space of remediation.
Examples:
Quentin Quarterback is selected as “best friend” by 20 students; however, the people that he identifies did not identify him. This means he is popular but does not have healthy social bonds.
Debra Debater, Sally Singer and Paula President are in a clique and each identify one or the others as “best friends.” The primary purpose of the IST demonstrates healthy bonding, understanding that “too perfect” a “reciprocity” result may demonstrate a less than ideal general social bond. An educational institution might determine that there are a significant number of small cliques, which is something perhaps for remedial action.
If the data exists, it may be determined that the reciprocity bonding is based upon some form of minority or majority attribute without general “popularity” that, again, provides data about the social cohesion. For example, if three minority students have excellent reciprocity as a bonded group, it might indicate healthy individual bonding for “friendly personal support” purposes, but, without some form of “general popularity” it denotes failure of social integration. The SL-Scope Limiter can expand the inquiry to provide greater opportunities in the test result.
The extent to which the IST results are used, and by whom, and how anonymous, is a matter of policy and permission. However, the empirical results of the IST, in conjunction with AI and newer data correlation technologies, now provide superb opportunities for remedial individual and social action.
Copyright © 2018 Jodi and Gregg Zegarelli. All rights reserved.
GRZ_229 GRZUID229