Free 250-254 PDF and VCE at

Create sure that a person has Symantec 250-254 real questions of actual questions for the particular Symantec Cluster Server 6.1 for UNIX Technical Assessment Dumps before you choose to take the particular real test. All of us give the most up-to-date and valid 250-254 Real Exam Questions that will contain 250-254 real examination questions. We possess collected and produced a database associated with 250-254 PDF Download from actual examinations having a specific finish goal to provide you an opportunity to get ready plus pass 250-254 examination upon the first try. Simply memorize our own 250-254

Exam Code: 250-254 Practice exam 2022 by team
Symantec Cluster Server 6.1 for UNIX Technical Assessment
Symantec Assessment teaching
Killexams : Symantec Assessment teaching - BingNews Search results Killexams : Symantec Assessment teaching - BingNews Killexams : Formative and Summative Assessment

Assessment is the process of gathering data. More specifically, assessment is the ways instructors gather data about their teaching and their students’ learning (Hanna & Dettmer, 2004). The data provide a picture of a range of activities using different forms of assessment such as: pre-tests, observations, and examinations. Once these data are gathered, you can then evaluate the student’s performance. Evaluation, therefore, draws on one’s judgment to determine the overall value of an outcome based on the assessment data. It is in the decision-making process then, where we design ways to Strengthen the recognized weaknesses, gaps, or deficiencies.

Types of Assessment

There are three types of assessment: diagnostic, formative, and summative. Although are three are generally referred to simply as assessment, there are distinct differences between the three.

There are three types of assessment: diagnostic, formative, and summative.

Diagnostic Assessment

Diagnostic assessment can help you identify your students’ current knowledge of a subject, their skill sets and capabilities, and to clarify misconceptions before teaching takes place (Just Science Now!, n.d.). Knowing students’ strengths and weaknesses can help you better plan what to teach and how to teach it.

Types of Diagnostic Assessments

  • Pre-tests (on content and abilities)
  • Self-assessments (identifying skills and competencies)
  • Discussion board responses (on content-specific prompts)
  • Interviews (brief, private, 10-minute interview of each student)

Formative Assessment

Formative assessment provides feedback and information during the instructional process, while learning is taking place, and while learning is occurring. Formative assessment measures student progress but it can also assess your own progress as an instructor. For example, when implementing a new activity in class, you can, through observation and/or surveying the students, determine whether or not the activity should be used again (or modified). A primary focus of formative assessment is to identify areas that may need improvement. These assessments typically are not graded and act as a gauge to students’ learning progress and to determine teaching effectiveness (implementing appropriate methods and activities).

A primary focus of formative assessment is to identify areas that may need improvement.

Types of Formative Assessment

  • Observations during in-class activities; of students non-verbal feedback during lecture
  • Homework exercises as review for exams and class discussions)
  • Reflections journals that are reviewed periodically during the semester
  • Question and answer sessions, both formal—planned and informal—spontaneous
  • Conferences between the instructor and student at various points in the semester
  • In-class activities where students informally present their results
  • Student feedback collected by periodically answering specific question about the instruction and their self-evaluation of performance and progress

Summative Assessment

Summative assessment takes place after the learning has been completed and provides information and feedback that sums up the teaching and learning process. Typically, no more formal learning is taking place at this stage, other than incidental learning which might take place through the completion of projects and assignments.

Rubrics, often developed around a set of standards or expectations, can be used for summative assessment. Rubrics can be given to students before they begin working on a particular project so they know what is expected of them (precisely what they have to do) for each of the criteria. Rubrics also can help you to be more objective when deriving a final, summative grade by following the same criteria students used to complete the project.

Rubrics also can help you to be more objective when deriving a final, summative grade by following the same criteria students used to complete the project.

High-stakes summative assessments typically are given to students at the end of a set point during or at the end of the semester to assess what has been learned and how well it was learned. Grades are usually an outcome of summative assessment: they indicate whether the student has an acceptable level of knowledge-gain—is the student able to effectively progress to the next part of the class? To the next course in the curriculum? To the next level of academic standing? See the section “Grading” for further information on grading and its affect on student achievement.

Summative assessment is more product-oriented and assesses the final product, whereas formative assessment focuses on the process toward completing the product. Once the project is completed, no further revisions can be made. If, however, students are allowed to make revisions, the assessment becomes formative, where students can take advantage of the opportunity to improve.

Summative assessment...assesses the final product, whereas formative assessment focuses on the process...

Types of Summative Assessment

  • Examinations (major, high-stakes exams)
  • Final examination (a truly summative assessment)
  • Term papers (drafts submitted throughout the semester would be a formative assessment)
  • Projects (project phases submitted at various completion points could be formatively assessed)
  • Portfolios (could also be assessed during it’s development as a formative assessment)
  • Performances
  • Student evaluation of the course (teaching effectiveness)
  • Instructor self-evaluation


Assessment measures if and how students are learning and if the teaching methods are effectively relaying the intended messages. Hanna and Dettmer (2004) suggest that you should strive to develop a range of assessments strategies that match all aspects of their instructional plans. Instead of trying to differentiate between formative and summative assessments it may be more beneficial to begin planning assessment strategies to match instructional goals and objectives at the beginning of the semester and implement them throughout the entire instructional experience. The selection of appropriate assessments should also match course and program objectives necessary for accreditation requirements.

Fri, 03 Jun 2022 00:13:00 -0500 en text/html
Killexams : Assessment of Student Learning

Students discussing with instructor

We help members of the Northwestern community reflect on student learning.

  • Articulating learning objectives
  • Selecting appropriate teaching strategies and activities
  • Collecting evidence related to these objectives
  • Using the information to enhance learning and teaching

This site's purpose is to provide Northwestern faculty and staff with useful resources for their own assessments of student learning and to inform the community about assessment efforts at Northwestern.

Assess the impact of remote learning on students’ preparedness and progress.

The COVID-19 pandemic and social upheaval have influenced students’ learning contexts and contributed toward uncertainties related to the knowledge, skills, and experiences students have acquired. Access this resource for feasible ways to diagnose any gaps in students’ preparation, point students to useful resources, and make informed decisions about course design, instruction, and program milestones.


Key principles and structures that guide assessment at Northwestern UniversityThe Assessment Cycle and how to develop meaningful student learning objectives and assessmentsFrequently asked questions about assessment and resources Tools to assess learning at the course levelTools to assess learning in the sequences of a major, minor, or certificate programExamples of recent assessment activities from across the University Campus-wide and school-specific resources to enhance learning, teaching, and assessment
Mon, 09 May 2016 22:20:00 -0500 en text/html
Killexams : Assessment Process

Most of us, in our research, accept the need to be explicit in our goals, and open to empirical evaluation of whether we have achieved those goals. The same goes for our teaching. Just as with our research, explicit reflection on goals does not preclude unexpected results, insights or twists and turns along the way – the things that make both research and teaching to rewarding and exciting.

This figure summarizes the key components associated with the assessment of student learning. While the figure illustrates this process as a sequential cycle of steps, the order can vary; for example, designing measures of student learning can lead to rethinking some course objectives. 

Learn more about two key steps in the process:

To read more about course design, teaching methods, and evaluating courses, see our Teaching Strategies & Materials page.

Assessment Cycle. Click for a larger version

Click on the image to enlarge.

Mon, 17 Aug 2020 14:36:00 -0500 en text/html
Killexams : Designing Assessments

Determining how and when students have reached course learning outcomes.

The importance of assessment

Assessments in education measure student achievement. These may take the form traditional assessments such as exams, or quizzes, but may also be part of learning activities such as group projects or presentations.

While assessments may take many forms, they also are used for a variety of purposes. They may

  • Guide instruction 
  • Determine if reteaching, remediating or enriching is needed
  • Identify strengths and weaknesses
  • Determine gaps in content knowledge or understanding
  • Confirm students’ understanding of content
  • Promote self-regulating strategies 
  • Determine if learning outcomes have been achieved
  • Collect data to record and analyze
  • Evaluate course and teaching effectiveness

While all aspects of course design are important, your choice of assessment Influences what your students will primarily focus on.

For example, if you assign students to watch videos but do not assess understanding or knowledge of the videos, students may be more likely to skip the task. If your exams only focus on memorizing content and not thinking critically, you will find that students are only memorizing material instead of spending time contemplating the meaning of the subject matter, regardless of whether you attempt to motivate them to think about the subject.

Overall, your choice of assessment will tell students what you value in your course. Assessment focuses students on what they need to achieve to succeed in the class, and if you want students to achieve the learning outcomes you have created, then your assessments need to align with them.

The assessment cycle

Assessment does not occur only at the end of units or courses. To adjust teaching and learning, assessment should occur regularly throughout the course. The following diagram is an example of how assessment might occur at several levels.

This cycle might occur:

  • During a single lesson when students tell an instructor that they are having difficulty with a topic.
  • At the unit level where a quiz or exam might inform whether additional material needs to be included in the next unit.
  • At the course level where a final exam might indicate which units will need more instructional time the next time the course is taught.

In many of the above instances learning outcomes may not change, but assessment results will instead directly influence further instruction. For example, during a lecture a quick formative assessment such as a poll may make it clear that instruction was unclear, and further examples are needed.

Assessment considerations

There are several types of assessment to consider in your course which fit within the assessment cycle. The two main assessments used during a course are formative and summative assessment. It is easier to understand each by comparing them.

  Formative Summative
  Assessment for Learning Assessment of Learning
Purpose Improve learning Measure attainment
When While learning is in progress End of learning
Focused on Learning process and learning progress Products of learning
Who Collaborative Instructor-directed
Use Provide feedback and adjust lesson Final evaluation

An often-used quote that helps illustrate the difference between these purposes is:

“When the cook tastes the soup, that’s formative. When the guests taste the soup, that’s summative.” Robert E. Stake


Formative Both Summative
  • Homework
  • Summaries
  • Minute papers
  • Diagrams
  • Concept maps
  • Graphic organizers
  • Observation
  • Worksheets
  • Discussions
  • Video responses
  • Exit slips
  • Reflections
  • Peer assessments
  • Rubrics
  • Checklists
  • Journal entries
  • Performance tasks
  • Group assignments
  • Comprehension questions
  • Oral responses
  • Test
  • Quiz
  • Presentation
  • Research paper
  • Practicum or field work
  • Portfolio
  • Project

It is important to note, however, that assessments may often serve both purposes. For example, a low-stakes quiz may be used to inform students of their current progress, and an instructor may alter instruction to spend more time on a syllabu if student scores warrant it. Additionally, activities like research papers or presentations graded on a rubric contain both the learning activity as well as the assessment. If students complete sections or drafts of the paper and receive grades or feedback along the way, this activity also serves as a formative assessment for learning while serving as a summative assessment upon completion.

Best practices


For assessments to accurately measure outcomes and to provide optimal feedback to students, the following should influence assessment choice and design:

Learning outcomes

  • Cognitive complexity
  • Options for expression
  • Course and Class

Assessment and grading

  • Weight of assessment
  • Time for grading and feedback
  • Delivery modes

Course level

  • Prerequisites and post learning
  • Class size
  • Time and length of course


  • Practice opportunities
  • Accessibility and accommodations

Provide ongoing and varied methods

Because learning outcomes are unique, the types of knowledge and skills that demonstrate achievement of these outcomes will differ. Therefore, assessments will need to vary to capture this achievement. Consider using:

  • Ongoing assessments: Regular assessment helps determine where students are on the learning continuum. These allow for
    • Evaluation of participation and engagement
    • Opportunities for feedback
    • Demonstrable learner progress
    • Opportunities to test and apply their knowledge
  • Different types of evidence: The following resource summarizes the different types of evidence to determine progress and how this evidence can be collected.

Question types

There are several types of questions that you can use to assess student achievement. The following links explain question types and how to design high-quality multiple-choice questions.

Overview of the different types of questions you can use for assessments.

Overview of all the question types available in Blackboard to design an assessment.

Overview of how to construct high-quality multiple-choice test questions.


At the beginning of choosing assessments for your course, you should start by reviewing the learning outcomes and then matching assessments to them. Assessments should align to the cognitive complexity (see Bloom’s Taxonomy) or type of learning (see Fink’s Taxonomy) of course learning outcomes. 

For example, if your course outcomes expect students to be able to memorize or understand course content, exams with multiple choice questions may accurately assess these outcomes. If your outcome expects students to be able to create an original product, then a multiple choice question would not measure an innovative creation.

Instead, a project, graded with a rubric, may best assess this.

If an assessment does not map onto an outcome, you should ask whether you are missing a course learning outcome you care about and, if not, whether your assessment is necessary. Further, you may need to adapt the assessment itself or even your choice in assessment to align with the learning outcome.

The accompanying chart is helpful in choosing and reviewing your assessments as you create them. You may find as you go that a course outcome might change as you determine how you will be able to assess it or if the scope of the learning outcome is too large for the time needed for the assessment.

If you find most outcomes are assessed using quizzes and exams, consider alternative methods of assessment.

A colorized wheel illustrating how various assessments (60+) map onto the levels of learning outlined by Bloom.

Guide to developing formative assessment questions in alignment with Bloom’s Taxonomy.

Applying assessments to your course

  1. On your course design template, fill in the assessment column.
  2. Consider a variety of assessments (e.g., formative and summative assessments).
  3. Ensure assessments align to your course’s learning outcomes.

Next steps

Now that you have chosen assessments to measure learning outcomes the next step is to consider methods of teaching.

If you would like to begin building some of your assessments, see:

Sat, 31 Jul 2021 05:56:00 -0500 en text/html
Killexams : Alternative Assessments
What and why of Alternative Assessment

Are the dozens of research papers all starting to blur together? Are the scantron bubbles beginning to haunt your dreams? More than likely, they are for students too. In moving away from traditional forms of assessment it is becoming more common practice, and highly desired, by students, teachers, and the professional world to extend the life of assessments past a single moment. Alternative Assessment may offer new ways for you and your students to explore subject matter in unique, and holistically beneficial ways.

Although carrying its own importance and necessity in achieving specific outcomes, summative assessments do have distinct drawbacks (Williams, 2014). These typically include:

  1. Tedious completion and grading for professors and students
  2. Narrow learning outcomes
  3. A focus on the grade, rather than the process (for more on this see Ungrading)
  4. Disposable products that are never seen by student or teacher again
  5. Instances of concern for academic integrity

Alternative assessment offers solutions to these drawbacks and speak to emerging needs of college graduates. The professional world seeks college graduates who possess not only discipline-specific factual knowledge but also the problem solving, collaborative, and interdisciplinary skills that cannot be achieved by artificial intelligence advances (Binkley et al., 2012). Considering this, mixed method approaches to assessment are becoming necessary in the college environment (Hains-Wesson et al., 2020). Incorporating aspects of summative, formative, and alternative assessment can help to expand and enhance learning outcomes for the students as well as provide new experiences for the professor.

Types of Alternative Assessment


In this form, often written products are exchanged among peers for assessment. While the professor may provide the rubric, training, and criteria for the consistency of peer assessment, the “assessment” of the assignment is conducted by fellow students. This offers opportunity for the product to be reviewed by multiple people before any final submission to the professor and allows students to view their peers work. This exposure among peers can help to facilitate new connections and perspectives that students may be able to communicate among themselves in a way that had been missed in the course prior. Self-assessment can be constructed in the same way (with a rubric, criteria, and revisions) but offers students an opportunity to reflect on their own thought process and externally process. Additionally, pairing peer/self-assessment may allow students to review their peer’s work and then reflect upon their own in a new light (Wen & Tsai, 2006). These activities can also facilitate community within the classroom.

Authentic Assessment

This form of assessment aims to create “authentic” experiences that require practical, context-driven approaches with assessment as learning opportunities (Gulikers et al., 2004). When moving away from quantitative means of assessment, it can be difficult to concretely define authentic assessment in practice. Guliker et al. provides a five-dimensional theoretical framework:

  1. “An authentic task is a problem task that confronts students with activities that are also carried out in professional practice.”
  2. Physical Context: “Where we are, often if not always, determines how we do something, and often the real place is dirtier (literally and figuratively) than safe learning environments… Authentic assessment often deals with high fidelity contexts.”
  3. Social Context: “In real life, working together is often the rule rather than the exception… learning and performing out of school mostly takes place in a social system.”
  4. Assessment result or form: “The assessment result is related to the kind and amount of output of the assessment task, independent of the content of the assessment…It should be:
    • Quality product students would be asked to produce in real life
    • Demonstration that permits making valid inferences about the underlying competencies
    • Full array of tasks and multiple indicators of learning
    • Presentation of work either written or orally to other people”
  5. Criteria and standards: “Setting criteria and making them explicit and transparent to learners beforehand is important in authentic assessment, because this guides learning… and employees usually know on what criteria their performances will be judged.”

Work Integrated Learning (WIL)

This form of assessment aims to not only imitate authentic field experiences, but actually participates in these experiences outside of the classroom. As such, WIL is technically a form of authentic assessment – but takes it even further than in class experiences. Although common place in many vocationally oriented programs (such as social work internships or education student teaching), WIL is not limited to these types of curricula. Implementing WIL experiences into a course (or program) entails distinct challenges—specifically ensuring rigor and a means of using effective assessment practices (Ajjawi et al., 2020). As institutions are ultimately responsible for the WIL assessments reflecting intentional learning outcomes, it is important to put great care into ensuring the alignment of WIL assessments.


Technology has become a larger part of the college experience, not only in the classroom, but in the way that course assignments are completed. These various forms of media provide additional resources and creativity for alternative assessment. Developing electronic portfolios, creating video essays/reflections, music videos, or other digital products that require student creativity and engaging with course material is an effective means of using technology to aid in learning outcomes. The language of the learning outcomes do not necessarily have to change, but the criteria can. If large multimedia projects seem overwhelming or unachievable at a scale for your course, offering these as options for extra credit or alternatives to existing assignments is a good trial run for their implementation.

Crafting your own Alternative Assessment

Some of these suggestions may already be in practice or more inherent to your discipline. For others, jumping into these may seem daunting. It is not necessary to attempt to overhaul a course overnight. From these categories, there are endless possibilities for how to incorporate aspects into a single class session, or into a semester long capstone project. To hear from your fellow faculty more in depth on ways they are incorporating Alternative Assessment into their classrooms, view this Seminar for Excellence in Teaching.

  • What can I do next class? Have students write a self-reflection on that day’s syllabu on how it relates to their career path, what aspects of the syllabu they feel they have grasped well, or what areas they feel like they still do not understand well.
  • What can I do next unit? Craft the end of unit assessment to be something other than an exam or essay. Try to holistically assess student learning as they are experiencing it (e.g., have students put together a portfolio—in a journal or online—that has them describe/narrate as they view their complete understanding of that unit.)
  • What can I do next semester? Design each end of unit assessment as a segment that culminates into an end of course capstone project. The final product could combine audio, visual, and/or physical components that reflects products created within this discipline.
  • What can I do across semesters? Create a project or experience that builds on itself as more semesters participate in the activity—such that data collected, products created, or ideas generated create a continuous “living” assessment (e.g., literature reviews/meta-analyses that continually build based on new publications and expanding datasets to monitor trends through time).

Below are key characteristics and examples of alternative assessments compared with traditional approaches. While this is not exhaustive, it provides an insight to the ways in which you can begin to transform your own course assignments and assessments.

Figure 1: (Rojas Serrano, 2017)

Challenges and Champions of Alternative Assessment

In a similar frame of mind as formative assessment, alternative assessment seeks to provide a means of assessing student learning in real time, rather than as a snapshot such as in summative assessment. Alternative Assessment is less focused on grades and more focused on student process and thinking, allowing instructors to more clearly into the minds of their students and their learning. Other objectives you may be aiming for (including Universal Design for Learning and compassionate teaching) can be incorporated, if not enhanced, by employing alternative assessment. This has distinct advantages and challenges in the way it is realized in the classroom (Stasio et al., 2019). While these are important considerations, they are meant to provide context and mindful considerations as you explore these alternatives.


  • Ensuring academic rigor
  • Restructuring understanding of student’s role in learning
  • Requires time for development
  • Trial and error may be necessary
  • Aligning course outcomes with assessment tasks


  • Source of motivation for students connecting with their areas of study
  • Holistic approaches to subject matter
  • Applied skills and products for student portfolios
  • Build collaboration and opportunities for living course work
  • Places learning outcomes in the foreground

Ajjawi, R., Tai, J., Huu Nghia, T. le, Boud, D., Johnson, L., & Patrick, C. J. (2020). Aligning assessment with the needs of work-integrated learning: the challenges of authentic assessment in a complex context. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 45(2), 304–316.

Binkley, M., Erstad, O., Herman, J., Raizen, S., Ripley, M., Miller-Ricci, M., & Rumble, M. (2012). Defining Twenty-First Century Skills. In Assessment and Teaching of 21st Century Skills (pp. 17–66). Springer Netherlands.

Gulikers, J. T. M., Bastiaens, T. J., & Kirschner, P. A. (2004). A Five-Dimensional Framework for Authentic Assessment. ETR&D, 52(3), 67–86.

Hains-Wesson, R., Pollard, V., Kaider, F., & Young, K. (2020). STEM academic teachers’ experiences of undertaking authentic assessment-led reform: a mixed method approach. Studies in Higher Education, 45(9), 1797–1808.

Rojas Serrano, J. (2017). Making sense of alternative assessment in a qualitative evaluation system. Profile Issues in Teachers’ Professional Development, 19(2), 73–85.

Stasio, M. di, Ranieri, M., & Bruni, I. (2019). Assessing is not a joke. Alternative assessment practices in higher education. Form@re - Open Journal per La Formazione in Rete, 19(3), 106–118.

Wen, M. L., & Tsai, C.-C. (2006). University students’ perceptions of and attitudes toward (online) peer assessment. Higher Education, 51, 27–44. 10.1007/s10734-004-6375-8

Williams, P. (2014). Teaching in Higher Education Squaring the circle: a new alternative to alternative-assessment. Teaching in Higher Education, 565–577.

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
Tue, 03 May 2022 09:28:00 -0500 en-US text/html
Killexams : Why cyber-security needs to be a strategy in the infinite corporate game

Why cyber-security needs to be a strategy in the infinite corporate gameHow C-suites in modern businesses handle cyber-risk management will reveal that most of them (90 percent of whom represent SMBs) ‘play’ the game of increasing ROI against their peer competitors and focus mostly on product/application QoS to woo consumers. Image: Shutterstock

Most enterprise leaders around the globe have converged upon the importance of IoT and CPS technologies (complemented with Cloud and AI) to Strengthen business productivity and consequent ROI. It has become a common strategy across most businesses to compete (akin to a strategic game) with similar peers on popularly established business KPIs via the integration of IoT/CPS technology on the multiple critical business dimensions that include:

  1. asset tracking and inventory management,
  2. real-time data collection and sharing among business processes on how consumers interact with products,
  3. forming new business lines and value-added-services,
  4. facilitating omnichannel services,
  5. enhancing accessibility, efficiency, and productivity of business processes, and
  6. improving customer experience.

Attractive, as it might seem, the benefits of IoT/CPS integration in modern businesses are not without major security drawbacks. When exploited by nation-states and other cyber adversaries, they can majorly disrupt business continuity for up to multiple weeks at the individual and supply chain layers.

A closer look into how C-suites in modern businesses handle cyber-risk management will reveal that most of them (90 percent of whom represent SMBs) ‘play’ the game of increasing ROI against their peer competitors and focus mostly on product/application QoS to woo consumers. In the process, cyber-security of business processes at various levels of IT/IoT system granularity takes a backseat, even though many SMBs are equipped with necessary resources that can potentially mitigate the cyber-attack space. In this article, we view through a finite and infinite game-theoretic lens the existing glaring issues C-suites of organisations subject themselves to, against achieving robust organisational cyber-security. We argue why a typical finite game mindset prevalent in the business world is harmful in the long run to both, sustainable ROI and shareholder satisfaction, and a robust and secure cyber-space. We also propose managerial (strategic) action items, motivated by the principle of infinite (business) games, for cyber-security to become an integral part of the product/application design process and business competition.

Why C-Suites don’t make cyber-security a just cause

The main reason why cyber-security breaches affect organisations often, despite being resource-equipped to better manage cyber risk, is that most C-suites adopt a finite mindset and do not promote cyber-security as a just cause. The finiteness is a direct outcome of businesses competing with peers on well-established ROI metrics known to all, and cyber-security does not belong to these metrics. In doing so, businesses become myopic and do not account for the long-term futuristic impact of cyber-security as a new ROI-improving factor. The rationale behind this myopic firm behaviour is based on two main reasons.

1. Historically, according to multiple organisational surveys conducted on CEOs (Source: MIT CAMS), there has been a clear difference between the preferences of the C-suite and the IT managers (e.g., CISOs). The C-suite is
(a) often not knowledgeable and/or passionate about cyber-security,
(b) is sometimes over-confident in their organisation’s ability to manage cyber risk and/or the quality of their cyber posture.

In many cases, the C-suites offload the responsibility of cyber-security aspects of the business to the IT wing without making a conscious effort to understand the security loopholes in the business processes and their adverse impact. The one-dimensional fallout of these C-suite issues is that IT-driven businesses do not invest enough in cyber-security as they are (falsely) of the opinion that it does not significantly affect KPIs over time or have an instantaneous impact.

Also watch: Cybersecurity awareness, education dismal in Indian boardrooms

2. C-suites, even those who acknowledge the importance of cyber-security on business continuity, are primarily looking at profit as the main KPI and have their eyes on the external stakeholders and investors. There is hardly a long-term social cause like cyber-security an organisation is affirmative and optimistic about. In other words, the absence of a cyber-security social cause does not inspire a feeling amongst the ‘general’ employees of being part of a group or great cause advancing cybersecurity and societal well-being, alongside selling attractive products/applications. The major reason here is that application quality and seductiveness often is key to ROI enhancement. These are often anti-security and hence do not inspire profit-minded leaders to pursue product cyber-security enhancement as a major corporate objective that acts as a social cause. The game-theoretic connotation of this point is that business leaders and their employees, usually of finite mindsets, cannot foresee the role of cyber-security in the sustainable increase of business productivity and application attractiveness. Hence, play a myopic game with their peers that do not have cyber-security as a strategy element. On the contrary, it is much more likely that business productivity will be hampered and consumer reach diminished if digitally pervasive business applications and processes are statistically more breachable in a weak IoT security landscape.

3. At the C-suite level, organisations, especially banks, are often sceptical and risk-averse about sharing cyber-vulnerability information with vendors and their partners. They believe that doing so will dampen the consumer base and cause public outrage—leading to a sharp fall in ROIs. While such negative feelings might hold in the short-term, the strategy of voluntarily revealing cyber-vulnerability information could be a masterstroke in the long run in inculcating a deep-rooted feeling of trust in the consumers. They would be inclined to believe that an organisation is taking steps to inform customers of security loopholes and is continuously trying hard to ramp up its cyber-security posture.

Win-Win Managerial Recommendations Viewed Through the Lens of the Infinite Game

We recommend an expansion of the managerial mindset to account for cyber-security as a strategic variable in business competition. We propose the following recommendations rooted in the concept of infinite games. They will allow organisations to achieve improved business KPI performance, alongside contributing to societal welfare through improved cyber-security emanating from all its business processes and affecting relevant IT/software-driven supply chains.

1. Managers (C-suites) in IT/IoT-driven businesses should not adopt the Milton Friedman philosophy that states that a corporate executive is an employee of the owners of the business. This principle rapidly followed since the 1970s by most of the business world is the root cause behind firms racing towards making profits to solely satisfy their investors—without giving much thought to any just cause or the negative side-effects of the products. If 80 percent of a CEO’s pay is based on what the share price is going to do next year, they will do their best to make sure that prices go up, even if the consequences might be harmful to employees, customers, and society in general. In the context of cyber-security,

  • an increased push by businesses around the globe to deploy IoT devices with poorly configured cyber-security for improved productivity and efficiency, and
  • Google, Facebook, Twitter (and many other ad-driven firms) unfairly selling personal data to advertisers without consumer permission are prime examples of organisations adopting Milton Friedman’s principle of doing business.

Also read: Behavioural Economics: Why Indian urbanites may transparently sell their data

2. Managers in IT/IoT-driven businesses should adopt an Adam Smith-inspired version of capitalism that is better for society. The management should think of the societal consumer good (social welfare) before thinking of the producer (monetary returns of investors and shareholders). In the context of cyber-security, this means striking a proper balance between quality application features attracting customers and necessary security plug-ins. Such a product design approach should pervade all management, employees, shareholders, and investors concerning business incentive compatibility.

Organisations such as the US Office of Technology Assessment, examining the long-term impact of technology on society, need to be brought back to fashion at least concerning advancing cyber-security of business products and processes. As an example, such organizations should

  • check the application features in a product (including open-source code) to see whether important security constructs have been included before they are up for sale in the market, and
  • work with auditors and cyber-insurers to ensure a threshold level of cyber-hygiene in organisational employees working on IT business processes.

Moreover, in the context of Adam Smith’s philosophy, an infinite-minded leader, to promote their main goal of making cyber-security a just organisational cause, will first realise that the will of people—motivated via an inspiring security-driven organisational motto—will drive its goal through methodical problem solving, imagination, teamwork focussed on the just cause. This leader will be convinced that such an approach will in the long term bring more ROI and consumer trust to the organisation.

3. The C-suite should avoid the following four market competition pitfalls for the just cause. First, the just cause should not be a moon shot. As an example, in the context of cyber-security, a company should not put forward a long-term goal such as - “we will deploy technological tools such as differential privacy, secure multiparty computation, and homomorphic encryption in our products to protect consumer data”. Though this is a strong goal in the security interests of society and should be adopted, it is finite in scope and a moonshot towards a greater idealistic goal of being on the path to continually improving cyber-security. Second, the just cause should not be becoming the best. Egocentric causes often distract the organisation from achieving the social interests of society and bring in too much narrow-minded finiteness to lose out to product competition in the long run. As an example, from a cyber-security viewpoint, an organisation should not promote a goal such as “product with the best cyber-security”. In this process, they may be losing out on providing trendy and effective application benefits that the consumer needs. Third, the just cause should not be growth-at-all-costs (unless security is the factor of growth). This mentality, often leading to a tricky space of mergers and acquisitions, is detrimental because there will be inevitable marginal non-security technical improvements in the future for stable products, and it is not always investment-wise (unless the merger is to a security firm, e.g., the Broadcom-Symantec merge) to keep upgrading non-security dimensions without major upgrades on the nascent dimension of cyber-security. Finally, an organisational just cause should not adhere to corporate social responsibility (CSR) for cyber-security. CSR programs should only be part of the broader strategy to advance the cyber-security just cause with the goal being “do good making money” instead of “make money to do good”.

4. C-suites should exhibit strong leadership in being worthy rivals in the tech-driven industry competition. For example, in the traditional PC business, Apple had worthy rivals in IBM and Microsoft. If there are organisations in the market that can provide stand-out cyber-security services, others should follow too. This is a special setting, where even a plain imitation of other organisations’ finite-minded strategies will do good for society. More so, if there is good market competition for security-promoting tech products, it will be in the positive interest of competing organisations to “outdo” others in terms of market share. On this note, existential flexibility is important for leaders carrying the mindset of being worthy rivals/trendsetters if IT-driven businesses are to advance cyber-security.
Leaders must take a risk and flex their minds to realise and envision that security can be as attractive as the main application and motivate the tech minds in the organisation to develop solutions that fit this criterion. As an example, the pervasive use of IoT technology in the digital world may be the killer application for cyber-security to be a crowd-puller. To take this risk, organisation leaders should have exceptional courage to go against the status quo and enact existential flexibility to

  • promote products with strong security, and
  • hire a workforce that is willing to invest in improved cyber-security practices within the organisation.
This could imply rejecting the “first to move in the market” mindset and hiring talent that is willing to go the extra mile in ensuring cyber-security best practices through their work behaviour but may not be the best technical mind available for hire.

Ranjan Pal (Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Sloan School of Management)
Bodhibrata Nag (Indian Institute of Management Calcutta) Charles Light (Silicon Labs, USA)

Check out our Festive offers upto Rs.1000/- off website prices on subscriptions + Gift card worth Rs 500/- from Click here to know more.

[This article has been published with permission from IIM Calcutta. Views expressed are personal.]

Thank you for your comment, we value your opinion and the time you took to write to us!

Sun, 16 Oct 2022 22:59:00 -0500 en text/html
Killexams : Improving the Evaluation of College Teaching

Source: Paige Herrboldt, used with permission

Colleges and universities all over the United States are striding through the fall term. Some are already at midterms, six weeks in. Others have just started within the last week. Millions of students are sitting in classes (yes, in person after some turbulent pandemic years) being taught by thousands of educators. Most of them probably share their views of class with friends and family. Whereas I touched on the history of evaluating teaching in a post here earlier this summer, this is a good time to take a further look at college teaching.

There is a very common way colleges and universities measure teaching. Most discussions revolve around the use of student evaluations of teaching (SETs). For readers outside of academia, note that when an instructor who is hired in a tenure-track job is up for promotion or tenure, external letter writers receive dossiers of information, also looked at by internal committees. For fixed-term instructors and for yearly evaluations of teaching, SETs are often the key. To fully capture the hard work that is teaching, we need to change how we evaluate and reward teaching.

What is the purpose of evaluating teaching?

Teaching is primarily discussed (when discussed) in the context of determining tenure or merit raises. Some faculty handbooks suggest evaluators complement SET scores with peer observation reports, self-reflections, and often a range of course materials.

What many of these processes miss, is that a good evaluation should serve as a vehicle for improvement. The process should help the instructor improve, help them help their students improve, and can help the department and university better fulfill their charge.

When one considers this major purpose of evaluation, one sees that overreliance on SETs, like overreliance on grades in the measurement of learning, is misguided. Alternatives to grading are receiving much-needed attention, as the “ungrading” revolution indicates (see Blum, 2021). It is time for the same revolution in teaching evaluation.

What constitutes effective teaching?

Most faculty handbooks describe what teachers should be doing. The language and aspirations are commendable, but they belie the fact that most faculty do not receive training in how to be effective teachers or how to document effectiveness.

Studies of exceptional teachers (Bain, 2004) and detailed examinations of the evidence of model teaching show that the fundamental hallmarks of effective teaching are clear: strong course design (assessments and course activities that map onto explicit student learning outcomes); clear, student-centered syllabi; instructor knowledge of content; the use of effective instructional methods (e.g., fostering active learning); and inclusive teaching practices. Some of these hallmarks of effective teaching can be demonstrated by a collection of course materials showing evidence of the practices used. Missing are adequate pedagogical training for these areas and effective ways to document them.

One feature insufficiently documented is student learning. While some handbooks may note that where obtainable, evidence of student learning enhances evaluation, this prescription rarely makes its way into the documentation process.

How do you measure effective teaching?

There is no one gold standard to measure effective teaching. While this may seem like bad news, it provides both faculty and administrators with the opportunity to focus first on what they find most important and then on how to assess it. Unfortunately, because there is no set standard, it is easy to overly rely on what is most commonly used to measure teaching (SETs).

SET scores are exceedingly easy to generate; perhaps one key reason they are so ubiquitous in higher education. There are also fraught with problems. While some SETs suffer from significant scale construction, validity, reliability, and response rate issues, it is also clear that a number of factors—such as course difficulty, the instructor’s race and gender, the instructor’s presentation style, and even chocolate—can influence them (Boysen, 2016; Carpenter & Witherby, 2020).

Though most universities still rely heavily on quantitative data from SETs, there are many ways to capture effective teaching (Bernstein et al., 2006). This said, it is rare to see universities have consistent (i.e., across schools and departments) multi-faceted measures of teaching. It is easy to understand why: Holistic pictures of teaching take time to put together and take time to evaluate. Often the knowledge of how best to do both is lacking.

Key realities and solutions

Reality: Learning is complex. Students’ perceptions of their learning are also biased. Learning is difficult to measure as it is biased by a wide host of factors related to the student, the instructor, and the course. Instructor demographics and teaching behaviors and practices can easily influence perceptions of learning and instruction. This said, “teaching occurs only when learning takes place” (Bain, 2004, p. 173), so including measures of learning when evaluating teaching is critical.

Solution: Provide faculty with assessment know-how, and support reporting student learning outcome achievement, changes, and levels (Suskie, 2018).

Reality: Teaching excellence is contextual. What works at one university, in one discipline, for one level (first year, senior year), and for one group of students may not work elsewhere. This makes “best practices” a misnomer as practices may not be “best” for every context.

Solution: Provide faculty with course design know-how, and support modifying assignments and using different instructional methods.

Reality: Teaching excellence is not a fixed entity. Effective teachers need to be ready to change their practices and evolve to address different pedagogical challenges and external uncontrollable events (e.g., pandemics). This means it is unreasonable to set numerical quantitative benchmarks to assess teaching.

Solution: View teaching effectiveness holistically, providing faculty with ways to document their efforts and track and reflect on changes in student learning over time (see Bernstein et al., 2006).

Reality: Capturing effective teaching is challenging. It would be nice to have a quick, effective, cheap measure of teaching but it is difficult to get all three at once. Good measurement takes time and is not always easy. Faculty need to be given the time, resources, and incentives to engage in evaluation as effective evaluation benefits from training.

Solution: provide faculty funding to participate in workshops on good evaluation, and support them with well-staffed centers for teaching and learning.

Measuring effective teaching

A first step in the better evaluation of teaching is to reorganize our priorities for measuring teaching or, alternatively, be clear on all the benefits of measurement. If the goal of higher education is to help students be lifelong learners and gain the skills and knowledge to be happy, healthy, and responsible citizens (albeit only one set of aspirations), we need to help teachers help students learn.

Measures need to capture the fundamentals of effective teaching while providing easy ways to scale up the level of detail and complexity for those who opt for it. Most measures are self-reports where a faculty member reflects on their own knowledge, skills, and abilities, or can also be completed by students. Providing faculty with checklists of the fundamentals gives them a clear set of goals and benchmarks with which they can track their own progress and development.

Higher education needs to develop a culture of teaching excellence on campus. The effort to be an effective teacher is easier to expend when teaching is valued, rewarded, and seen as part of the fabric of the university. Some keys:

  1. Be clear about why you are assessing teaching. It is easier to invest effort in documenting teaching if it is clear why the evaluation is taking place. Evaluating teaching helps establish knowledge and use of fundamental evidence-informed practices provides benchmarks for self-improvement and can gauge student learning.
  2. Make it easy to describe and assess. Provide efficient ways to elucidate pedagogical activities and knowledge, and provide guidance on how to evaluate the same using a developmental growth (reflect, modify, and aim to improve) rather than a threshold (hit this number) approach.

Quality teaching is critical to student learning. Faculty need support, training, and development to be effective educators. Let's do more to help them.

A longer version of this post was published in the Teaching Professor.

Tue, 04 Oct 2022 22:07:00 -0500 en-US text/html
Killexams : 25 Reasons to Get Excited About Teaching

Louie F. Rodriguez

Louie F. Rodriguez is a professor and the Bank of America Chair of Education Leadership, Policy, and Practice in the School of Education at the University of California, Riverside.

Teaching at any level is one of the toughest jobs out there. Today, teachers are increasingly faced with challenges that may bring one to question whether they should even consider entering the profession at all. Whether it is the ongoing need for substitute teachers as the pandemic persists, controversies over curriculum, the ebbs and flows of school policy and practice, or the day-to-day working conditions that impact teacher life, there is certainly no shortage of issues that confront the field.

These conditions can leave an educator asking: “Should I even teach at all?” “Is it worth it?” “Will these larger challenges impact the quality of my experience as a qualified, credentialed, and dedicated classroom teacher?” For example, will I, as a teacher, be able to use research-informed pedagogical approaches that I have been taught in my teacher-preparation program? Will I be able to inspire and mentor students and even use my own educational journey to engage students in the classroom?

While these concerns certainly bring a series of potential challenges, I often think about the powerful role that educators and teaching play in our society, especially in the context of the last two years. For example, we know that vulnerable communities that have been disproportionately impacted by the pandemic were already marginalized by social, political, economic, education, and health-related disparities before March of 2020. These realities make the promise of education and the role of the teacher and teaching so much more significant in today’s context, especially for our nation’s most vulnerable.

It is in this context that I developed 25 reasons to teach. Rather than allowing the possible obstacles to teaching cloud our perspective on why the profession is so vital today, let’s focus on the opportunities that teaching brings every single day to the classroom. I think this is particularly relevant for teachers starting a new school year, future teachers currently in teacher education programs, and future teachers who are considering the field of education.

As a current or future educator, your teaching will likely provide you with opportunities to do the following:

  1. Build a meaningful connection with a student.
  2. Prioritize a student’s humanity.
  3. Allow students to reinvent themselves every single day.
  4. Exercise maximum flexibility, especially as we continue to navigate the pandemic.
  5. Recognize the collective trauma from No. 4 and its ongoing impact on just “being,” not only for students, but for teachers and families as well.
  6. Be a teacher who gives students second, third, and fourth chances.
  7. Reduce past systemic harm once the student enters your classroom by promoting equity-driven practices.
  8. Build community with your fellow teachers in your school, district, and/or community.
  9. Establish a partnership with families, especially those who have struggled to build such partnerships in the past.
  10. Spark an interest in learning for the seemingly disengaged student.
  11. Recognize the leadership qualities in that one student who needed to hear the words, “You are a leader.”
  12. Provide students with an intentional space for hearing their voices in the classroom.
  13. Inspire students by showing them who they were, who they are, and where they are going.
  14. Show students their community’s excellence.
  15. Redefine what educational excellence looks like in students’ various communities (peers, families, communities, society).
  16. Reflect back to your students their historical, cultural, and community contributions.
  17. Be the one teacher who your students look forward to seeing every day.
  18. Provide your students with instruction that validates their life experiences.
  19. Create pedagogical activities that (re)position students as teachers and facilitators of learning.
  20. Redefine “knowledge” with your students; students are indeed creators of knowledge.
  21. Model equitable practices in the classroom; equity is more than a principle but is also an action.
  22. Center cariño (care) within the educational endeavor.
  23. Forge hope for students in your classroom every single day.
  24. Wake up every single day knowing that you will make a difference in the life of a student.
  25. Realize the promise of public schooling every single day through your teaching and dedication.

While it is understandable that teachers and some prospective teachers may be questioning—or even doubting the teaching profession—my hope is that current and prospective teachers realize that they are in the right place and that our students, families, and communities need them. Teachers cannot do this important work alone and our leaders, policymakers, and teacher development professionals play a critical role in ensuring their success, especially in the context of all that the profession is.

Tue, 27 Sep 2022 07:28:00 -0500 en text/html
Killexams : 'Victory for all future educators': NJ does away with teacher certification test — sort of cannot provide a good user experience to your browser. To use this site and continue to benefit from our journalism and site features, please upgrade to the latest version of Chrome, Edge, Firefox or Safari.

Tue, 27 Sep 2022 00:30:00 -0500 en-US text/html
Killexams : Can IAM help save on cyber insurance?

Sponsored Feature Underwriters are continuing to feel the pinch as cyber insurance claims mount. That means customers are hurting too, with policies becoming more costly and insurers demanding more proof of cybersecurity. So how do organizations make better use of identity and access management to demonstrate their competency in protecting people's sensitive personal and financial data?

Darren Thomson is vice president of product marketing for identity security company One Identity, having previously held the role of EMEA CTO at Symantec before working at its cyber insurance analytics spin-off CyberCube. He explains that cyber insurance developed in the early 2000s as a way to hand off risk as cybersecurity concerns mounted.

"There comes a point where the simple choice between mitigating risks and ignoring them is not enough," he says. "People want to share or transfer that risk."

That point first came in 1997, when AIG launched the first documented internet security liability policy. It offered third-party risk coverage for technology services providers to reimburse their clients in the event of cybersecurity-related damage. In the mid-2000s, policies evolved to offer first-party risk, covering attacks against a policy holder's own business and broadening the target market beyond tech firms.

As cyber threats grew, so did the appetite for risk transfer, with the US Government Accountability Office (GAO) noting a dramatic increase in the proportion of insurance clients taking out cyber insurance policies. In 2016, just 26 percent of clients opted for this coverage with one large broker it studied. By 2021, that number had reached 47 percent.

The rise of enterprise ransomware

Transferring the risk to an insurance company helps to regulate a client's investment in cybersecurity, which in turns aids the avoidance of over- or under-investing in protective measures proportional to the risk. But what happens when the risks become too volatile for the insurers too?

That's what happened as ransomware evolved from attacks on individuals and small businesses into a mature criminal industry targeting bigger companies. Cyber crooks became more sophisticated, hitting larger organizations with deeper pockets. They also became more successful at it. The size of ransom demands rose accordingly from tens of thousands to millions. "Insurance companies didn't see that coming," says Thomson.

The other problem for insurers was complexity. Clients frequently add more tools and technologies to their sprawling infrastructures. The pandemic exacerbated the problem. As hybrid work became a necessity, the physical perimeter disappeared.

Companies supporting a hybrid workforce found themselves grappling with endpoints sitting on residential local area networks (LANS) used for both work and personal activities. Managing these devices' access to corporate information became more difficult. The change in infrastructure and access methods created yet more layers of security risk, making cyber risk transfer even more problematic for underwriters.

The problem of valuing cyber risk

Fairly assessing and pricing this risk has been tough for insurers, especially given the lack of available data. Actuaries have decades of data on car accidents and health conditions, but not much about cyber risk for example. Assessing the risk of cyber attack is more art than science, and the industry demand for the skills to support that process is high.

Insurers that charged too little for covering cybersecurity risk have found themselves shouldering an array of costs. Ransomware payments are perhaps the simplest to understand, but they're just one factor among many possible expenses. These include post-breach investigation and data recovery; loss of income from business disruption; breach notification costs; legal claims; and regulatory penalties. Supply chain attacks make third-party liability costs especially worrying for insurers, who face reimbursement costs for their clients' downstream users.

In May, Fitch Ratings found that reported cyber insurance claims had risen 100 percent annually in the past three years. Claims closed with payment grew by 200 percent annually over the same period, with 8,100 claims paid in 2021. This eats into insurers' profits. The direct loss plus defense and cost containment (DCC) ratio is the proportion of the earned premium paid out in claims expenses. Lower is better and in 2015-2019, the average figure was 42 percent. In 2021, it stood at 65 percent

Insurers naturally became obsessed with ransomware as payouts increased, recalls Thomson. This, along with other evolving security risks, transformed the still-nascent cyber insurance industry into a 'hard market'.

"A hard market is one that is difficult to comply with," he explains. One characteristic is the rising price of premiums.

The Council of Insurance Brokers and Agents has measured these increases. Its most recent Q1 2022 data showed a 27.5 percent quarter-on-quarter bump in premium prices for cyber insurance, following a 34.3 percent rise in Q4.

"The policies are highly priced and the payout limits are very low," continues Thomson. "So it's actually pretty hard for many organizations to get good coverage on cyber now."

Holding clients to account

The other reaction from insurers has been more scrutiny. Insurance companies are asking more detailed questions about their clients' cybersecurity posture before assuming their risk. They are also building more cyber assessment capabilities, ranging from auditing through to penetration testing and IT security consulting.

Increased insurer scrutiny means a lot more hoop-jumping for companies that were used to treating the premium payment as a simple hedge against attack. Now, they must demonstrate a robust approach to cybersecurity.

"A better security posture means higher coverage and/or lower rates," explains Thomson.

Insurance firms started establishing minimum requirements with checklists before verifying compliance. And clients which find themselves falling short must step up to address any issues if they want a reasonable cyber insurance policy.

Insurers are asking organizations to demonstrate their plans for disaster recovery for example. Backup and restoration too play a big part in that assessment, Thomson explains, prompting companies to demonstrate that they are regularly testing these capabilities.

Underwriters are paying extra attention to email security in their assessments, given the heavy use of phishing in ransomware and other cyber attacks.

Clients are under extra pressure to demonstrate that they're patching their systems regularly, which also increases attention on endpoint management and effective software inventory (you can't patch what you don't see).

Other focal points include classification schemes for networks, data, and systems, along with education and cybersecurity awareness programs for users.

The role of identity and access management

Thomson sees one of the most significant areas that companies can Strengthen upon is identity and access management. Solutions that stop attackers from getting onto the company network and accessing information inappropriately are of particular interest.

"IAM teams historically always struggled to show concrete benefits to the business," he says. "Now, with cyber insurance as a risk management requirement and potential savings on policies it's a much easier argument to win. IAM can clearly demonstrate value for the business."

Insurers are focusing on multi-factor authentication in their evaluations as they realize the growing importance of identity in cybersecurity posture. Harvesting some low-hanging fruits is mandatory, including multi-factor authentication (MFA) for the whole workforce.

"Most insurers now want to know that you have at least two factors of authentication in place for your users and your customers, if not multi-factor authentication," Thomson continues.

But not all MFA solutions are equal, and this choice can affect clients' cybersecurity protection. One common problem is the lack of support for on-prem devices. Many solutions will secure access to SaaS applications but can't protect access to the workstation you're sitting in front of. So the type of MFA you use affects issues on insurer checklists such as endpoint security management.

"One Identity managed to cover this capability gap by fusing together Defender (our on-prem 2FA) and OneLogin SaaS, creating a hybrid solution well suited to these hybrid needs," Thomson adds.

Increasing the focus on identity infrastructure

Some insurers are also acknowledging the need to enforce complex passwords and avoid default passwords or default accounts, One Identity says. Companies should also look at other areas, such as structured processes for handling joiners, movers, and leavers.

Insurers are already asking more questions about the management of access credentials on their cyber insurance premium questionnaires. They are becoming more interested in techniques ranging from password management through to privileged access management, and are asking companies to attest to their capabilities here too.

AIG asks clients about their techniques for managing privileged access credentials, including the use of access logging tools and secure storage mechanisms, for example. It also makes explicit reference to the use of MFA for workers remotely accessing corporate resources.

Active Directory or equivalent directory systems are foundational technologies when managing identity data and access privileges, so it's not surprising that this comes up in questionnaires. You'll find insurers asking about the number and types of accounts used on that system, Thomson says.

As technology moves on, he expects insurers to embrace other facets of identity management, such as passwordless technology.

"They [insurers] are aware of the trend and they're excited about the next phase," he says. "They're tracking the maturity of those solutions."

As underwriters continue to turn up the pressure on cyber insurance clients, we're seeing a traditionally conservative industry tackle the challenge of insuring against a dynamic, fast-moving set of risks. Ultimately, this will benefit everyone, increasing insurers' confidence in underwriting cyber risk while forcing clients to Strengthen their protection. Acquiring the right tools in areas such as IAM and IT management, combined with an appropriate risk management mindset, are critical for equitable, sustainable risk transfer.

Sponsored by One Identity.

Mon, 10 Oct 2022 20:10:00 -0500 en text/html
250-254 exam dump and training guide direct download
Training Exams List