№ lp_2_3_62046
File format: docx
Character count: 7413
File size: 55 KB
Poem and analytical writer’s statement presenting a contemporary reinterpretation of a traditional fable through second-person narration and literary analysis, accompanied by evaluative assessment criteria and grade.
Title of Poem:
Human Nature
Original Source Text:
The Scorpion and the Turtle
Document Type:
Poem and Writer’s Statement with Assessment Criteria
Task:
Fairy Tale Transformation
Related Fable:
The Scorpion and the Turtle
Themes:
Trust, human nature, domestic abuse, naivety, victim blaming
Form:
Adapted poem in second person perspective
Source Text Form:
Prose fable in third person
Target Audience:
Mature readers
Assessment Criteria Referenced:
KU1, KU2, AN2
Grade:
A
Price: 8 / 10 USD
The file will be delivered to the email address provided at checkout within 12 hours.
The file will be delivered to the email address provided at checkout within 12 hours.
Don’t have cryptocurrency yet?
You can still complete your purchase in a few minutes:- Buy Crypto in a trusted app (Coinbase, Kraken, Cash App or any similar service).
- In the app, tap Send.
- Select network, paste our wallet address.
- Send the exact amount shown above.
The final amount may vary slightly depending on the payment method.
The file will be sent to the email address provided at checkout within 24 hours.
The product description is provided for reference. Actual content and formatting may differ slightly.
Title:
Cinderella
Genre:
Fairy tale
Form:
Dramatic script
Setting:
Unspecified kingdom and royal court
Main Characters:
Cinderella; Stepmother; Stepsisters; Fairy; Prince; Minister; Cat; Narrator
Themes:
Transformation; Social inequality; Love; Magic; Justice
Key Motif:
Lost slipper
Narrative Perspective:
Third-person narration with dialogue
Intended Audience:
Children and family audience
Structure:
Prologue and sequential scenes culminating in royal marriage
Year:
Unknown
Region / City:
Unknown
Theme:
Fairy tales, folklore
Document Type:
Story collection
Author:
Unknown
Target Audience:
Children
Period:
Traditional / timeless
Source Language:
English
Format:
Text narrative
Year:
1994
Region / city:
California, United States
Topic:
Vernal Pool Branchiopods, Conservancy Fairy Shrimp, Endangered Species
Document Type:
Environmental report
Organization / Institution:
USFWS
Author:
USFWS
Target Audience:
Researchers, Environmentalists, Policy Makers
Effective Period:
Ongoing
Approval Date:
1994-09-19
Date of Changes:
2012-06
Year:
Unspecified
Region / Setting:
Near a great forest
Document Type:
Narrative script / Storyboard
Author:
Unspecified
Target Audience:
Children and general readers
Period Covered:
Unspecified
Narrative Perspective:
Third-person with narrator and dialogues
Characters:
Hansel, Gretel, Woodcutter, Stepmother, Narrator
Events:
Family poverty, children abandoned in the woods, survival through cleverness
Medium:
Screenplay format with scene directions
Year:
2023
Region / City:
Not specified
Topic:
Linguistics, Phraseology
Document Type:
Thesis
Organization / Institution:
Not specified
Author:
Not specified
Target Audience:
Linguists, students of linguistics, scholars of folklore
Period of Validity:
Not specified
Date of Approval:
Not specified
Date of Amendments:
Not specified
Year:
1871
Author:
George MacDonald
Genre:
Fairy tale collection
Language:
English
Publisher:
Strahan & Co.
Region:
United Kingdom
Target audience:
Children and young adults
Format:
Printed book
) and join the S1NET. For guides with in depth examinations of performance measure definitions, go to:
https://www.milsuite.mil/book/docs/DOC-129783
Table of Contents (Hyperlinks to Sections):
Developing ‘Significant Duties and Responsibilities’ OER Narratives: Notes, Rules, and Instructions OER Narrative Prohibited Techniques, Inconsistencies, No-Go’s: Negative Comment Rules Referred OERs Narrative Comment Examples Block a. APFT and HT/WT Block b. Overall Performance Block c. Character (to include SHARP comments) Block d. Presence Block e. Intellect Block f. Leads Block g. Develops Block h. Achieves Senior Rater Potential Senior Rater Narrative Examples Senior Rater Narrative Comment Examples (for potential, promotion, school, etc.) Successive Assignments Other SR Comments (explanations of anything unusual about OER) Effective Words for Evaluations JUNIOR OFFICER PLATE (DA FORM 67-10-1) NOTE: 2LTs who have NOT completed BOLC, will not receive an OER until they complete BOLC (AC and ARNG; USAR officers can receive an OER before completing BOLC). The FROM date will be their commissioning date. All time until their BOLC graduation will be NONRATED on their first OER. OER PROFILING: OERs: Rater and Senior Rater Profiles are CONSTRAINED, meaning Officers are only allowed to grant 49% of each rank they rate with either an “EXCELS” (as Rater) or “MOST QUALIFIED” (as Senior Rater). HOWEVER, if you have an immature profile, and have only just begun rating/senior rating Officers of a certain rank, you are allowed a ONE TIME option of giving one of the first two evaluations you make at a particular grade, an “EXCELS” (as Rater) or “MOST QUALIFIED” (as Senior Rater). OER (OER SUPPORT FORM) PART III: Developing ‘Significant Duties and Responsibilities’ (blocks a., b., and c.): Refer to DA PAM 611-21 (https://www.milsuite.mil/book/groups/smartbookdapam611-21
) and DA PAM 600-3 (Commissioned Officer Professional Development and Career Management), to assist in the development of PART III, block d. As a minimum, the duty description will include pr:
- Number of personnel supervised, - Amount of resources under the rated officer’s control, - Scope of responsibilities. 3) Descriptions must be clear and concise with emphasis on specific functions required. 4) Note conditions unique to the assignment; e.g. RA officers assigned to FT support duties with RC units or USAR officers assigned to RA units OER NARRATIVES: Notes, Rules, and Instructions Rater and Senior Rater Narratives: - Requires candor and courage; frank and accurate assessment. - Quantify officer’s value relative to peers and do so in concert with rater/senior rater box check. - Are short; tell a simple story about the quality of officer being evaluated. - Are interesting and compelling. - Are looked at by selection board members when they are looking for in-depth information about a rated officer’s performance and potential. - Numbers; 1-10, write them out (e.g. one, two, ten). 11 or higher, write the number; e.g. 11, 15, 105. Exception, when a 1-10 is WITH an 11 or higher; e.g. “5 tool kits with 20 tools each.” - Fashion the narrative to the officer; double check use of “he/his” vs. “she/hers.” - Awards: Awards and/or special recognition received during the rating period may be cited in evaluation comments (for example, “received the Humanitarian Service Medal” or “named the Instructor of the Year”). - Raters and SR CAN use the officer’s name in the narrative; e.g. “1LT Joe was ….” Rater and Rater Narratives: - Focus on PERFORMANCE; explaining what the rated officer did and how well he/she did it. - Focus on specifics to quantify and qualify performance. - Raters should advocate the rated officer to the SR. - When there is no SR (due to lack of qualifications), rater’s narrative provides the input on both performance and potential. Senior Rater (SR) and SR Narrative (see SR Rater Narrative section for examples): - Focus on POTENTIAL, 3-5 years out (promotions, command, school, & assignments). - Can amplify box checks by using the narrative to clearly send the appropriate message to selection boards. - CANNOT mention Box Check. - Additional information for when SR is also Rater can be found in DA PAM 623-3, pg. 26, “DA Form 67–10–1, part VI: block c—Senior Rater Narrative.” OER Narrative Prohibited Techniques, Inconsistencies, No-Go’s: - School/Course Comments: Bullets about how a Soldier did in a school or course are ONLY allowed if that school did not produce an AER/DA Form 1059. - Narratives are not a laundry list of superlatives – more is not necessarily better. - Brief, unqualified superlatives or phrases, particularly if they may be considered trite. - Excessive use of technical acronyms, or phrases not commonly recognized. - Techniques aimed at making specific words, phrases, or sentences stand out from the rest of the narrative; e.g. excessive use of capital letters; unnecessary quotation marks; repeated use of exclamation points; wide spacing between selected words, phrases, or sentences to include double spacing within a paragraph or between paragraphs. - Inappropriate references to box checks; e.g “Would be TOP BLOCK if profile allowed” or “absolutely far exceeded the standard”. - Trying to quantify (e.g. “top 2% of my captains”) with a small population. - Stay in your lane/level; avoid comments like “Best 1LT in the Army” unless you’re the Army CoS. - Stating “the best ever”; having 10 in the population, 50 in the profile. - Using overused phrases and clichés that are counterproductive or overused; e.g. stellar, historic, “delivered a dazzling performance,” “hit the ground running,” consummate professional, and unlimited potential. - Using specific selection board-type language. Examples of this include, “definitely a 6+ Soldier”. - Don’t exaggerate; “If I could prove it, CPT X is an LTC disguised as a CPT.” - Be mindful of what IS NOT said; it can have the same impact as what is said; e.g. NOT having numbers, or quantifiable points. - Don’t say the sa
Note:
en
Topic:
Officer Evaluation, Narrative Guidelines
Document Type:
Guide
Target Audience:
Raters, Senior Raters
Year:
2023
Region / City:
USA
Topic:
Writing guidelines, Document formatting
Document type:
Guide
Author:
Andrea Snarr
Target Audience:
Writers preparing documents for HTML publishing
Date of approval:
Not specified
Date of changes:
Not specified
Year:
2022
Region / city:
Australasia
Topic:
Short Story Writing, Emerging Writers
Document Type:
Prize Announcement
Organization:
Australasian Association of Writing Programs (AAWP), Australian Short Story Festival (ASSF)
Author:
Unknown
Target Audience:
Emerging Writers
Period of Validity:
Opens New Year, closes 31 July 2022
Approval Date:
Not specified
Date of Changes:
Not specified
Context:
A prize offering publication, networking opportunities, and festival participation for emerging short story writers in Australasia.
Year:
2025
Region / City:
Vancouver
Theme:
Literature, Authors, Book Lists
Document Type:
Event Schedule
Organization / Institution:
Vancouver Writers Fest
Target Audience:
General public, literary enthusiasts
Period of Action:
October 20–26, 2025
Approval Date:
June 26, 2025
Note:
Year
Year:
1886
Region / City:
United States / New Zealand
Theme:
Christmas, cultural perspectives, consumerism
Document Type:
Non-fiction texts
Author:
Washington Irving, Anonymous (journalist)
Target Audience:
General public
Period of Action:
19th century, 2016
Approval Date:
Not specified
Date of Changes:
Not specified
Year:
2026
Region / City:
Brimbank
Topic:
Literature, Cultural Heritage
Document Type:
Event Program
Organization / Institution:
Brimbank City Council
Author:
Brimbank City Council
Target Audience:
General Public
Period of Action:
12–17 March 2026
Date of Approval:
Unknown
Date of Changes:
Unknown
Year:
1985
Note:
Region / City
Theme:
Literature, Transgression, Dystopian Fiction, Gothic Fiction
Document Type:
Literary Analysis
Year:
2025
Organization:
Royal Court Theatre
Program:
Writers’ Card Lottery Fund
Target Audience:
Writers holding a Royal Court Writers’ Card
Payment Amount:
£600 per winner
Number of Awards:
10
Eligibility Criteria:
Registered Writers’ Card members, with reserved awards for Black and/or Global Majority, Working Class, and D/deaf, disabled or neurodivergent writers
Application Deadline:
19 February 2025
Submission Method:
Online portal only
Document Type:
Guidance and application instructions
Year:
2021
Region / city:
United States, Canada
Topic:
Literary awards, Creative writing
Document type:
Guidelines
Organization / institution:
Great Lakes Colleges Association
Author:
Great Lakes Colleges Association
Target audience:
Publishers, authors
Effective period:
2021
Approval date:
Not specified
Modification date:
Not specified
Note:
Year
Subject:
Publishing Industry
Document Type:
Questionnaire
Organization:
International Thriller Writers
Author:
N/A
Target Audience:
Publishers
Validity Period:
N/A
Approval Date:
N/A
Modification Date:
N/A
Date:
2nd June, 2016
Recipient:
Mr. Stephen Gibson, CEO, Wentworth Club
Sender:
Bernie McGuire, Secretary, Association of Golf Writers
Email:
[email protected]
Location:
Wentworth Club, Virginia Water, Surrey
Event Date:
13th June, 2016
Document Type:
Letter
Subject:
Invitation to annual dinner
Context:
Letter from the Secretary of the Association of Golf Writers thanking the CEO of Wentworth Club for hosting a lunch and extending an invitation for an upcoming event.
Year:
2025
Region / City:
Oklahoma City, OK
Subject:
Literary Awards, Student Writing
Document Type:
Press Release
Organization:
Oklahoma Department of Libraries
Author:
Kaylee Reed
Target Audience:
General Public, Students, Educators
Period of Validity:
N/A
Date of Approval:
May 14, 2025
Date of Changes:
N/A
Note:
Contextual Description
Year:
2005
Region:
International
Theme:
Literary adaptation, publishing, and film industry
Document type:
Academic chapter / scholarly article
Author:
Petra Hermanns
Source publication:
Frankfurt Book Fair Newsletter
Target audience:
Scholars, literary agents, publishers, filmmakers
Period covered:
1980s–2000s
Key subjects:
Book fairs, film festivals, writers’ weeks, adaptation studies, transnational literary markets
Languages discussed:
English, multiple translations
Academic field:
Literary studies, adaptation studies