№ lp_1_2_28419
File format: docx
Character count: 2801
File size: 123 KB
This document provides a detailed account of the candidate search and screening process for an academic position at the University of Chicago, including outreach efforts, screening criteria, and faculty voting results.
Year:
2025
Region / City:
Chicago, Illinois
Topic:
Academic Recruitment
Document Type:
Narrative
Institution:
University of Chicago
Author:
Not specified
Target Audience:
Search Committee Members, Faculty
Date of Approval:
Not specified
Date of Changes:
April 9, 2025
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.
Note:
Year
Year:
Not provided
Region / City:
Not provided
Theme:
Research methodology
Document type:
Academic paper
Organization:
AGH University of Science and Technology Press
Author:
Not specified
Target audience:
Researchers, academics, students
Period of validity:
Not specified
Approval date:
Not provided
Date of amendments:
Not provided
Year:
2026
Region / city:
Online
Subject:
Digital archive, search instructions
Document type:
Instruction manual
Organization:
WLHG Archive
Author:
Not specified
Target audience:
Users of the WLHG Archive
Date of approval:
Not specified
Date of changes:
Not specified
Year:
Not specified
Region / City:
Not specified
Subject:
Electronic Library Tools, Research Assistance
Document Type:
Informational / Instructional
Organization:
Bon Secours Memorial College of Nursing
Author:
Tina Metzger, College Librarian
Target Audience:
Students, Faculty
Effective Date:
Not specified
Modification Date:
Not specified
Contact Information:
[email protected]
Note:
, (804) 627-5340
Year:
2019
Region / City:
Cincinnati, OH
Theme:
Physical Therapy, Rehabilitation, Healthcare
Document Type:
Resume
Organization / Institution:
University of Cincinnati, West Chester Hospital, Tri-Health Rehabilitation Hospital
Author:
Reid Becker
Target Audience:
Employers in healthcare, rehabilitation facilities
Period of Action:
2016-2019
Approval Date:
Not specified
Modification Date:
Not specified
Year:
2026
Region / City:
Global
Topic:
SAP Fiori Designer, App Search
Document Type:
Tutorial
Author:
Not specified
Target Audience:
SAP Fiori Designer users, SAP administrators
Period of Validity:
Ongoing
Approval Date:
Not specified
Modification Date:
Not specified
Note:
Year
Topic:
Healthcare
Document type:
Guide
Target audience:
Healthcare professionals, librarians, and researchers
Description:
A guide for healthcare professionals on using a thesaurus to search database subject indexes more efficiently, with tips for reducing irrelevant results and linking related concepts.
Document Type:
Personal reflection
Subject:
Job search and interview preparation
Theme:
Career development and employment
Author:
Not specified
Institution:
Not specified
Intended Audience:
Instructor and classmates
Format:
Written coursework reflection
Time Period Referenced:
Contemporary employment experience
Geographical Context:
Not specified
Key Topics:
Resume writing, cover letters, job applications, interview preparation, career advancement
. Please see https:
//www.hrsa.gov/about/508-resources
Note:
for the HRSA digital accessibility statement.
Year:
202X
Region / City:
United States
Topic:
Virtual Engagement Strategies for Early Childhood Home Visiting Programs
Document Type:
Research Protocol
Agency:
Health Resources and Services Administration (HRSA)
Author:
The Policy & Research Group (PRG)
Target Audience:
Research Analysts, Focus Group Participants, Early Childhood Home Visiting Program Staff
Effective Date:
XX/XX/202X
Date Approved:
XX/XX/202X
Date of Last Update:
XX/XX/202X
Year:
N/A
Region / City:
N/A
Theme:
Philosophy, Art, Beauty
Document Type:
Essay
Author:
Pierre Eau Claire
Target Audience:
General public, philosophy and art enthusiasts
Period of Validity:
N/A
Date of Approval:
N/A
Date of Changes:
N/A
Context:
This essay explores personal reflections on beauty, drawing from philosophers, artists, and cultural references.
Year:
2026
Region / city:
N/A
Subject:
Science, Curiosity, Motivation
Document type:
Lesson plan
Organization / institution:
Educational institution
Author:
Dr. Alan Lightman
Target audience:
Students
Action period:
N/A
Approval date:
N/A
Date of modifications:
N/A
Year:
2024
Region / City:
Broadland, United Kingdom
Subject:
School safety, child protection, and behaviour management
Document type:
Policy
Organization:
Ormiston Academies Trust
Author:
Jane Nolan, Director of Inclusion – Behaviour, SEND, Safeguarding and Mental Health
Approved by:
OAT Executive
Release date:
April 2024
Review schedule:
In line with OAT internal policy schedule or when new legislation is introduced
New sections:
4.15–4.17 on guidance for use of sniffer dogs
Legislation referenced:
Education Act 1996, Health and Safety at Work Act 1974, Equality Act 2010, Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984, and other statutory guidance
Associated policies:
Child Protection and Safeguarding, Behaviour, Allegations against staff, Whistleblowing
Audience:
Staff, children, and parents
Context:
Applies to searches, screenings, and confiscations on academy premises including school trips
Year:
2025
Organization:
Intellectual Property Office of Singapore (IPOS)
Document Type:
Official report / PCT Committee document
Session:
Thirty-Third Session, Geneva, February 2–6, 2026
Author:
International Bureau of WIPO
Purpose:
Request for extension of appointment as International Searching and Preliminary Examining Authority
Application Received:
November 26, 2025
Scope:
International Searching Authority (ISA) and International Preliminary Examining Authority (IPEA)
Languages of Service:
English
Number of Qualified Staff:
142
Fields of Expertise:
Engineering and Physics, Info-communication Technologies, Chemistry and Materials, Biotechnology and Biomedical Sciences
Education Level of Staff:
Majority with PhD
Quality Management:
Implemented according to PCT Guidelines Chapter 21
Documentation Access:
Minimum patent documentation made available and accessible
Reference Links:
https://www.wipo.int/en/web/pct-system/quality/authorities#SG, https://pctlegal.wipo.int/eGuide/view-doc.xhtml?doc-code=SG&doc-lang=en#ISA, https://pctlegal.wipo.int/eGuide/view-doc.xhtml?doc-code=SG&doc-lang=en#IPEA
Year:
2022
Region / City:
Geneva
Theme:
Intellectual Property
Document Type:
Official Report
Author:
International Bureau
Target Audience:
Member States of the PCT Union
Period of Validity:
2022-2023
Approval Date:
11 July 2022
Amendment Date:
Not specified
Contextual Description:
A report from the Technical Cooperation Committee (PCT) regarding the proposed appointment of the Saudi Arabian Intellectual Property Authority (SAIP) as an International Searching Authority and International Preliminary Examining Authority under the PCT system.
Year:
2025
Region / city:
International
Subject:
Extension of Appointment as an International Searching and Preliminary Examining Authority
Document Type:
Application Form
Organization:
International Bureau of WIPO
Author:
International Bureau
Target Audience:
Patent Offices and Intergovernmental Organizations
Period of Validity:
Until December 1, 2025
Approval Date:
To be inserted by the International Bureau
Date of Changes:
N/A
Year:
2024
Region / City:
Seattle
Topic:
Service dogs, ableism, disability justice
Document Type:
Research Article
Organization / Institution:
Seattle Pacific University, Department of Physics
Author:
Amy D. Robertson
Target Audience:
Researchers, disability advocates, public policy experts
Period of Action:
Not specified
Approval Date:
Not specified
Date of Changes:
Not specified
) 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:
Global
Topic:
Investment Reporting and Project Progress
Document Type:
Report
Organization:
Gates Foundation
Author:
Not specified
Target Audience:
Grantees, Program Officers
Effective Period:
Not specified
Approval Date:
Not specified
Date of Amendments:
Not specified
Note:
Contextual Description
Year:
2026
Region / City:
United States
Theme:
Transitional Housing, Domestic Violence Support
Document Type:
Application Guide
Organization:
Office on Violence Against Women (OVW)
Author:
OVW
Target Audience:
Applicants for OVW Transitional Housing Assistance Grant Program
Period of Effect:
Not specified
Approval Date:
Not specified
Amendment Date:
Not specified
Year:
MM/DD/YYYY
Region / City:
Not specified
Subject:
Environmental Impact Assessment
Document Type:
Environmental Review Checklist
Agency / Organization:
Not specified
Author:
Not specified
Target Audience:
Project Managers, Environmental Consultants
Period of Validity:
Not specified
Approval Date:
Not specified
Date of Changes:
Not specified