Swift Kick Central

Affinity Housing: The Importance of Roommate Matching

College of Coastal Georgia recently transitioned to a four-year residential institution. Among the many changes, the campus will soon include residence halls and a director of residence life. Dave Leenhouts, director of CCGA's student life, heads the committee to hire their director of residence life.

In a conversation with Dave over the weekend, he talked about how the big buzz word on the committee is affinity housing. In other words, pre-matching roommates ahead of time based on similar traits to ensure higher retention rates.

The impact of first year roommates on an individual is huge and can have lasting life time effects from grades, to weight, to drinking habits. The NY Times recently posted an article on the science of roommates.

First-year roommates matter. Though they may go their separate ways sophomore year, their reach can ripple throughout the college years and after.

The researchers aren't entirely clear on why one student has such an impact over another in their first year, but it sounds like a hybrid of the proximity effect of the Framingham Heart Study and the emotional gap felt by first year students.

CCGA is currently using Red Rover as their campus directory to socially connect first year students to similar students and campus clubs. Dave wants to go further and use the directory to roommate students based on similar interests, activities, and background.

An affinity housing dashboard is already within the scope of Red Rover. And because so much of Red Rover is data driven it will be interesting to study the results of matching roommates who are 100% identical verses those who are intellectually, socially, spiritually, etc opposites as a way to promote diversity.

Guiding Principles - Part 3

The following is the third part of our assumptions pulled from our "Guiding
Principles" Wikipage.

Here is Part 1 and Part 2

---

Assumptions Part 3:

These are broad based and not as set as principles. It's useful to list assumptions, just to be clear on the thought behind the system. Some of these are more controversial than others. Some were controversial when we started and are not anymore. Some we believe whole heartedly. With others we just needed to pick a side.

On Research

1. Research and "truth" are great. Trying things is an important first step towards both. We are on that first step.
2. Entrepreneurs can't do research and market at the same time. We like research and researchers and hope to work with lots of them. Ethics will require transparency, that's a good thing.

On Academia vs. Business

1. We would like to build a bridge over the "vs." see research above.
2. On average, businesses should be more honest and transparent.
3. On average, academia should be more flexible and experimental.

On Changing the Education System

1. We're not setting out to revolutionize anything. We are doing things that seem smart that are now possible. It's incremental change that's now obvious to us.
2. We might be wrong. That's cool. Luckily we'll only be losing our own money.
3. This isn't foreign policy, if we are wrong, our mistake won't hurt anyone.
4. "If you aren't prepared to be wrong, you'll never do anything original." -Sir Ken Robinson
5. Pedagogy is great, it's just not our focus with Red Rover. There is pedagogy built in to the tool. This list is part of that process, but again, it's not our focus.
6. Very few people do things for the "right" reasons. Most people do it because everyone else is.
7. Most people don't know or care why Facebook or iPhones work or how they change industries. They use them because they work well and everyone else does. We have to figure out the why and how for Red Rover and know that most people will never care.
8. Tools that people use but don't understand can change the world. This can be dangerous. We hope we're not dangerous.
9. We don't know as much history with education reform as we should. We will catch up on our reading as soon as we are done building this thing. In the meantime, we really appreciate summaries and reading lists.

Stop Making Parents the Punchline and Include Them in the EdTech Conversation

Digitally ignorant parents find themselves once again the punchline of a new website dutifully called MyParentsJoinedFacebook.com. The site was created by a daughter after her dad joined Facebook and his social networking activity quickly became obnoxious to her. With a swift gain in popularity, MyParentsJoinedFacebook.com joins others in exploiting (right or wrong) parents' naivete as a way to add a few laughs and clicks. 

Between the easy laughs and "Dateline" fear mongering, I can understand why a 2008 MacArthur Foundation supported study showed that parents tend to be in the dark about what their kids are doing online and 66% consider "the internet" as dangerous as drunk driving.

We need to stop scaring, laughing at, or excluding parents and instead start having real conversations. As James P. Steyer, CEO of Common Sense Media, said:

“Technology is a major part of our kids’ worlds, and that is not going to change. Parents need to know what their kids are doing in their digital lives, and they have to be well informed about issues like privacy, ethical behavior, digital literacy, and cyberbullying. When parents understand these potential pitfalls and communicate with their kids, the internet can be an educational, entertaining, and safe environment.”

Not surprisingly, research shows that the more educated and engaged a parent is in their child's online activity, the more positively they see the internet's potential.

Having said all this, we at Swift Kick are launching several new educational offerings geared toward parents and grandparents.

To kick off, this Saturday we're partnering with the world-renounwed education group QLN to host our first, parent/grandparent only, training in San Diego. If you are in the area, sign up today to reserve your seat.

Then, over the next month, we'll begin announcing a series of regional parent/grandparent programs, webinars, and an ongoing Web Coaching Program.

After 5 years and 300+ trainings with 10,000s of students and educators we know we've progressed the technology conversation further past the doom and gloom. Now it's time to work with parents as a critical third player.

We are bringing to parents the same level of quality and research that's awarded us the title as the #1 Campus Trainers for 2007, 2008, and 2009 by member schools of the Association for the Promotion of Campus Activities.

There are champions already promoting great work like Common Sense Media, iSafe, Digital Dialog, Cable in the Classroom, Radical Parenting, The Online Mom, and BJ Fogg that we'll parter with to help dispel the myths and promote positive, effective technology use.

These are just a few and we don't like to move slow, so if you're connected to parents and would like to partner, either leave a comment below or contact us.

Here's to parents, we got your digital back ;-) 

Facebook and The Adolescent Brain - The Emerging Employers' Dilemma

Two weeks ago, I asked my Facebook followers if they'd post differently knowing that 60% of employers search the web when considering potential employees. Several students came back with strongly worded annoyances about not wanting to change their online behavior:

Then my adult friends chimed in:

Though we were talking about online behavior, the difference in opinion between students and adults highlights that adolescent behavior online is no different than adolescent behavior offline. And the gap between adult cognitive processing and adolescent cognitive processing is still tangible.

The cognitive processing gap reminded me of the September 2008 Time Magazine cover story that took an in-depth look at the adolescent brain, led by Dr. Jay Giedd of the National Institute of Mental Health. The goal of the study was to:

... determine how the brain develops from childhood into adolescence and on into early adulthood.

After 1800 teenage participants and 13 years of research, Dr. Giedd is convinced we have miscalculated the links between adolescent behavior and adolescent brain development.

... the wild conduct once blamed on "raging hormones" is being seen as the by-product of two factors: a surfeit of hormones, yes, but also a paucity of the cognitive controls needed for mature behavior.

Dr. Giedd explains how brains generally develop from back to front. With the prefrontal being the last section to fully develop around 25.

The very last part of the brain to be pruned and shaped to its adult dimensions is the prefrontal cortex, home of the so-called executive functions--planning, setting priorities, organizing thoughts, suppressing impulses, weighing the consequences of one's actions.

"Scientists and the general public had attributed the bad decisions teens make to hormonal changes," says Elizabeth Sowell, a UCLA neuroscientist. "But once we started mapping where and when the brain changes were happening, we could say, Aha, the part of the brain that makes teenagers more responsible is not finished maturing yet."

... the parts for exercising judgment are still maturing throughout the course of adolescence. So you've got this time gap between when things impel kids toward taking risks early in adolescence, and when things that allow people to think before they act come online. It's like turning on the engine of a car without a skilled driver at the wheel."

In light of these new findings, even the American Bar Association has urged state legislatures to ban the death penalty for juveniles:

"For social and biological reasons, teens have increased difficulty making mature decisions and understanding the consequences of their actions."

Going back to my original Facebook question, it seems like Dr. Giedd's study is playing out in real time on the internet with employee/employer relationships.

The 2009 Deloitte LLP Ethics & Workplace Survey found that 60% of business executives say they have a "right to know" how employees portray themselves and their organizations online and 30% admit to "informally monitoring social networking sites." In reaction, 53% of employees said their social networking pages are none of their employers' business and 61% say that even if employers are monitoring, they won't change their online behavior.

We have a classic chicken/egg challenge. Will adolescents change their behavior online to suit their current or future employers needs, or will employers change their attitudes about online behavior knowing that the prefrontal doesn't fully develop until 25?

Dr. Giedd jokes that at least the rental car industry has it right because you can't rent a car until you're 25.

I tend to think that as more of our adolescent years are played out and recorded online forever, societal attitudes will shift towards a greater acknowledgment of "oh those were his/her adolescent years" and put less long term judgement on those actions.

It will be interesting to see our first "Facebook President," or watch a parent tell a child not to do something and the child turns around and Googles a video and picture of the parent doing the exact same thing.