№ lp_2_2_05532
File format: docx
Character count: 86384
File size: 136 KB
The document is a guide containing a set of macros designed for fiction writers to improve their productivity using Microsoft Word by automating common tasks like counting words in headings and identifying repeated phrases.
Note:
Year
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.
) 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
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
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
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
Note:
Year
Topic:
Writing Exercises
Document Type:
Student Instruction
Target Audience:
Students
Year:
2024
Region / City:
Utrecht
Topic:
Literary translation, machine translation, translation quality assessment
Document Type:
Thesis
Organization / Institution:
Universiteit Utrecht
Author:
Lola van Scharrenburg
Target Audience:
Academic community, translation professionals
Period of Validity:
N/A
Date of Approval:
May 2024
Date of Changes:
N/A
The Reality of Gangs: Gang Prevention Academy Fact vs. Fiction Realities of Gang Culture Lesson Plan
Year:
2021
Region / City:
Arizona
Theme:
Gang prevention, education
Document Type:
Educational lesson plan
Institution:
Arizona Foundation for Legal Services & Education
Author:
Arizona Department of Education
Target Audience:
Middle and High School students
Period of validity:
Not specified
Approval Date:
Not specified
Date of Changes:
Not specified
Context:
Educational resource focused on educating students about the realities of gang life versus media portrayals, including activities that encourage critical thinking and creative expression about gang prevention.
Year:
2009
Region / city:
UK
Theme:
Creative Writing, Mythology, Fantasy Literature
Document Type:
Article
Author:
Unknown
Audience:
Scholars, students of creative writing, fantasy literature enthusiasts
Period of Validity:
N/A
Date of Approval:
N/A
Date of Changes:
N/A
Note:
Year
Topic:
Education, Literature
Document Type:
Exam Instructions
Target Audience:
Students
Contextual description:
Instructional document providing exam guidelines for students in an American fiction course, detailing submission process and requirements for written answers.
Year:
2018
Author:
Katelynn Ingle
Course:
English 4323
Institution:
[Not specified]
Document type:
Academic essay / literary analysis
Target audience:
Young adult literature students / scholars
Topic:
Holocaust, Gender, Responsibility, Young adult literature
Sources cited:
Opdyke & Armstrong, Baer, Vasvári
Period covered:
World War II, Holocaust
Focus:
Personal memoir analysis, historical and philosophical implications