№ lp_1_2_49630
File format: docx
Character count: 7213
File size: 147 KB
Questionnaire set describing structured self-reports and student reports used in educational research to assess dialogic teaching practices and classroom dialogue across defined domains.
Year:
2021
Authors:
Alexander Gröschner; Sara Hennessy; Ruth Kershner; Mathias Dehne; Elisa Calcagni
Place of publication:
Jena; Cambridge
Language:
English
Thematic area:
Dialogic teaching; classroom interaction; educational research
Document type:
Questionnaire; survey instrument
Target groups:
Teachers; students aged 13–18
Educational level:
Secondary education
Assessment scale:
Six-point Likert scale
Domains assessed:
Openness for Dialogue; Inviting Students’ Contributions; Dialogic Participation
Related framework:
Teacher Scheme for Educational Dialogue Analysis (T-SEDA)
Availability:
Freely available online as part of a resource pack
Research context:
Teaching practice analysis; lesson evaluation
Source type:
Educational research instrument
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.
Year:
2021
Region / City:
Jena/Cambridge
Topic:
Dialogic teaching, educational dialogue
Document Type:
Questionnaire
Author:
Alexander Gröschner, Sara Hennessy, Ruth Kershner, Mathias Dehne, Elisa Calcagni
Target Audience:
Teachers, students aged 13 to 18
Period of Validity:
N/A
Approval Date:
N/A
Date of Changes:
N/A
Year:
2021
Region / City:
Jena/Cambridge
Topic:
Dialogic teaching, educational dialogue
Document Type:
Questionnaire
Author:
Alexander Gröschner, Sara Hennessy, Ruth Kershner, Mathias Dehne, Elisa Calcagni
Target Audience:
Teachers, students aged 13 to 18
Period of Validity:
N/A
Approval Date:
N/A
Date of Changes:
N/A
Year:
2022
Region / City:
Queensland
Theme:
Education
Document Type:
Template
Organization / Institution:
State of Queensland (QCAA)
Author:
State of Queensland (QCAA)
Target Audience:
Educators
Period of Validity:
N/A
Approval Date:
N/A
Modification Date:
N/A
Licence:
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0
Copyright Notice:
www.qcaa.qld.edu.au/copyright
Year:
2023
Region / City:
Global
Topic:
Product Updates, Technology, Hospitality
Document Type:
Press Release
Organization:
Airbnb
Author:
Airbnb
Target Audience:
Hosts, Guests, Technology Enthusiasts
Effective Date:
2023
Date of Changes:
2023
Description:
Press release announcing new features on Airbnb, including Guest Favorites, revamped ratings & reviews, and the Listings tab for hosts.
Year:
2020
Month:
January
Organisation:
HfL
Document type:
Evaluation criteria
Education phase:
Primary and secondary education
Geographic scope:
England
Rating framework:
RAYG (Red, Amber, Yellow, Light Green, Dark Green)
Related framework:
Ofsted Education Inspection Framework 2019
Assessment frequency:
Annual
Assessment basis:
External test and examination data, professional judgement
Target institutions:
Schools and academies
Special provisions:
Early Years Foundation Stage, Post-16 provision
Use of ratings:
School improvement prioritisation and support allocation
Internal roles referenced:
HIP, SEA, DSEA, ESD
Note:
Year
Industry:
Upstream Oil and Gas Industry
Company:
PDO and its contractors/subcontractors conducting PDO contracted work
Location:
Depends on the type of operation
Exploration:
same survey field, (e.g. Lekhwair seismic field)
Drilling:
rig involved, not where the rig is drilling (e.g. rig 18)
Asset Integrity:
the same facility, (e.g. pumping station, gas plant)
Pipeline:
the same pipeline (e.g. header, MOL)
Road incident:
same operational area, (e.g. Fahud, Nimr)
Camp incident:
the same camp, not where the camp is situated
Period:
Last twelve calendar months from the date of the incident being investigated, but not including the date of the incident
Context:
Guidance document for assessing the severity and potential risk of incidents in the upstream oil and gas industry, based on historical data and a risk assessment matrix.
Date:
July 10, 2024
To:
NEPOOL Transmission Committee
From:
NEPOOL Counsel (Eric Runge and Margaret Czepiel, Day Pitney LLP)
Subject:
Summary of Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking – Implementation of Dynamic Line Ratings (RM24-6)
Issuing Authority Referenced:
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
Related Proceeding:
RM24-6
Related Orders and Notices:
Order No. 881; Notice of Inquiry dated February 17, 2022
Comment Deadline:
90 days after publication in the Federal Register
Document Type:
Legal memorandum
Topic:
Dynamic Line Ratings and transmission line rating reforms
Geographic Scope:
United States
Organizations Mentioned:
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission; NEPOOL; Day Pitney LLP
Subject:
Pilot duty ratings for relays and switches controlling inductive loads
Standard reference:
UL 508 Industrial Control Equipment
Note:
Standard reference
NEMA standards for control-circuit devices
Frequency:
50 and 60 hertz
Current type:
Alternating current (AC) and direct current (DC)
Voltage range:
Up to 600 VAC and 600 VDC
Load type:
Inductive loads including solenoids, relays, and contactors
Rating codes:
NEMA designations A, B, C, D, E and R300
Thermal current categories:
10.0 A, 5.0 A, 2.5 A, 1.0 A, 0.5 A
Testing conditions:
Power factor 0.35 or less for VAC ratings
Application scope:
Control-circuit contacts and general purpose relays
Qualification method:
Product qualification testing with specified make and break currents
Tables included:
AC control-circuit rating codes table; DC control-circuit rating codes table
Rules defined:
Rule A, Rule B, Rule C for voltage-dependent current calculations
Year:
2015–2016
Organization:
School of Aeronautics
Department:
Finance
Document Type:
Employee Performance Review Form
Review Period:
Annual and Probationary Period
Evaluation Sections:
Overall Rating; Top 3–5 Goals; Comments
Performance Ratings:
Exceptional; Exceeds Expectations; Meets Expectations; Needs Improvement; Unsatisfactory
Improvement Requirement:
Performance Improvement Plan (PIP) required for Needs Improvement or Unsatisfactory ratings
Key Areas:
Financial Reporting; Metrics and KPI Development; Project Financial Support; Strategic Planning; Talent Management
Referenced Systems:
CalPlanning
Target Roles:
Finance leadership and project management staff
Key Dates:
October 31, 2015; December 31, 2015; February 28, 2016; June 15, 2016; April 1; July 1
Form Number:
CAP-04/029 (rev. 2)
Document Type:
Administrative form
Subject:
Air Traffic Controller ratings and service record
Related Regulation:
Rule 95 of the Aircraft Rules, 1937
Issuing Authority:
ATS In-charge
Applicable To:
Air Traffic Controllers (ATCOs)
Fields Included:
Ratings, AELP, Class 3 Medical Assessment, ATC Incidents, Skill Assessment after Corrective Training
Certification Statement:
Information verified from ATCO Logbook and station records
Distribution:
Individual Record File of ATCO; ATCO; ED (CAP); ATS In-charge of next station; GM (ATM-HRD); RED of the Region; Accountable Manager of ATSTO
Attachments Required:
Copy of last Class 3 Medical Fitness; Copy of last AELP Certificate
Record Scope:
Posting period at specified airport
Year:
2021
Region / City:
United States
Subject:
sUAS Ratings and Requirements
Document Type:
Regulation
Organization:
Civil Air Patrol
Author:
Civil Air Patrol
Target Audience:
CAP Cadets, sUAS Pilots, CAP Instructors
Effective Period:
Ongoing
Approval Date:
August 2021
Date of Amendments:
Not specified
Form Number:
AC-AWS006-3
Document Type:
Application Form
Subject:
Local Approved Maintenance Organisation Certificate and Ratings
Regulatory Reference:
AMO Regs. 11 & 12
Issuing Authority:
Civil Aviation Authority (implied)
Purpose:
Application for AMO Certificate Issue, Rating Change, Location or Facilities Change, Ownership Change, Re-Certification or Renewal
Applicant:
Maintenance Organisation
Required Information:
Organisation Name, Number, Location, Mailing Address
Ratings Categories:
Aircraft; Engine and Propellers; Equipment and Instruments; Accessories; APU
Aircraft Classes:
Composite Small Aircraft; Composite Large Aircraft; Metal Small Aircraft; Metal Large Aircraft
Engine Classes:
Piston <400hp; Piston >400hp; Turbine Engine
Propeller Classes:
Fixed Pitch; All Other Propellers
Equipment Classes:
Communication Equipment; Navigation Equipment; Radar Equipment
Instrument Classes:
Mechanical; Electrical; Gyroscopic; Electronic
Additional Information:
Specialised Services; Scope of Ratings Applied For; Contracted Maintenance Functions
Ownership Declaration:
AMO Owner(s) and Incorporation Date
Certification Statement:
Authorised declaration of accuracy and truthfulness
Signature Requirements:
Date; Authorised Signature; Printed Name; Title
Year:
2026
Region / City:
Not specified
Subject:
Personality assessment, Five Factor Model
Document Type:
Research appendix / supplemental material
Institution:
Not specified
Author:
Not specified
Sample Size:
397 participants
Assessment Tool:
IPIP-NEO-120
Target Description:
Nominated individuals referred to as “assholes”
Variables Measured:
Neuroticism, Extraversion, Openness, Agreeableness, Conscientiousness and their facets
Scale:
1 (Disagree Strongly) to 5 (Agree Strongly)
Significance Threshold:
p < .01
Year:
2026
Region / City:
Not specified
Subject:
Therapist self-care, feelings of incompetence, professional development
Document Type:
Research appendix / survey tables
Institution / Organization:
Not specified
Author:
Not specified
Target Audience:
Psychotherapy educators, supervisors, and therapists
Data Collection Method:
Survey of novice and experienced therapists
Survey Topics:
Difficulties faced by therapists, coping mechanisms, educational practices
Period Covered:
Not specified
Date of Analysis:
Not specified
Year:
2026
Region / City:
Not specified
Subject:
Advertising Effectiveness
Document Type:
Survey Results
Organization / Institution:
Not specified
Author:
Not specified
Target Audience:
Consumers exposed to the advertisements
Data Collection Method:
Semantic Differential and Likert Scale
Products Evaluated:
Puppy Monkey Baby, Berries and Cream
Scale Metrics:
Very Much, Somewhat, Neither, Somewhat, Very Much
Year:
2021/2022
Region:
Nottinghamshire, UK
Type:
Care Home Inspection Data
Source:
Local Health and Social Care Authority
Data Coverage:
All registered care homes in the region
Categories:
Residential and Nursing Care Homes
Rating Scale:
1–5 (Quality Band)
Compiled by:
Health and Social Care Regulatory Body
Update Frequency:
Annual
Year:
2024
Region / city:
Australia
Topic:
Modular licensing, aircraft type ratings, amendments to Part 66 MOS
Document type:
Consultation document
Organization / institution:
CASA
Author:
CASA
Target audience:
Air operators, Airworthiness organisations, Part 147 Maintenance Training Organisations, Licensed Aircraft Maintenance Engineers (LAME), Aircraft Maintenance Engineers (AME), CASA staff
Period of validity:
Not specified
Approval date:
Not specified
Amendment date:
Not specified