23,361 research outputs found

    A Labeled Graph Approach to Analyze Organizational Performance

    Full text link

    Independent Evaluation of the Jim Joseph Foundation's Education Initiative Year 4 Report

    Get PDF
    Research indicates that well-prepared educators help produce strong learning outcomes for students. For the continued health of Jewish education, higher education institutions should have the capacity to prepare sufficient numbers of highly qualified educators and education leaders for careers in Jewish education. Teachers, division heads, and school heads represent a substantial segment of the educator population in Jewish day schools. More than 5,000 educators enter new positions in Jewish day schools every year and are in need of adequate preparation. The most frequent obstacle to instructional quality in Jewish day schools is the difficulty in recruiting qualified teachers (Ben-Avie & Kress, 2006; Jewish Education Service of North America, 2008; Kidron et al., in press; Krakowski, 2011; Sales, 2007).A similar problem has been observed in supplementary schools in congregational or communal settings. These schools enroll the majority of Jewish children and adolescents receiving a Jewish education in the United States (Wertheimer, 2008). In recent years, congregations have begun to replace traditional educational programs with new approaches that aim to raise the quality of instruction and the level of parent and student satisfaction relative to their programs. These new approaches may include greater integration of experiential Jewish education and community service, family learning, and the integration of all aspects of congregational learning under the leadership of one director (Rechtschaffen, 2011; Sales, Samuel, Koren, & Shain, 2010). High-quality programs that are updated or reconstructed across time to meet the needs of the Jewish community require well-prepared directors and educators. However, many directors and educators in congregational schools have not participated in teacher preparation programs, and the depth of Jewish content knowledge among these teachers is highly variable (Stodolsky, Dorph, & Rosov, 2008)

    Process model comparison based on cophenetic distance

    Get PDF
    The automated comparison of process models has received increasing attention in the last decade, due to the growing existence of process models and repositories, and the consequent need to assess similarities between the underlying processes. Current techniques for process model comparison are either structural (based on graph edit distances), or behavioural (through activity profiles or the analysis of the execution semantics). Accordingly, there is a gap between the quality of the information provided by these two families, i.e., structural techniques may be fast but inaccurate, whilst behavioural are accurate but complex. In this paper we present a novel technique, that is based on a well-known technique to compare labeled trees through the notion of Cophenetic distance. The technique lays between the two families of methods for comparing a process model: it has an structural nature, but can provide accurate information on the differences/similarities of two process models. The experimental evaluation on various benchmarks sets are reported, that position the proposed technique as a valuable tool for process model comparison.Peer ReviewedPostprint (author's final draft

    Portunes: analyzing multi-domain insider threats

    Get PDF
    The insider threat is an important problem in securing information systems. Skilful insiders use attack vectors that yield the greatest chance of success, and thus do not limit themselves to a restricted set of attacks. They may use access rights to the facility where the system of interest resides, as well as existing relationships with employees. To secure a system, security professionals should therefore consider attacks that include non-digital aspects such as key sharing or exploiting trust relationships among employees. In this paper, we present Portunes, a framework for security design and audit, which incorporates three security domains: (1) the security of the computer system itself (the digital domain), (2) the security of the location where the system is deployed (the physical domain) and (3) the security awareness of the employees that use the system (the social domain). The framework consists of a model, a formal language and a logic. It allows security professionals to formally model elements from the three domains in a single framework, and to analyze possible attack scenarios. The logic enables formal specification of the attack scenarios in terms of state and transition properties
    • …
    corecore