The revision process

2021 ◽  
pp. 67-69
Author(s):  
Alison Wilcox
Keyword(s):  
2008 ◽  
Vol 13 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-12
Author(s):  
Christopher R. Brigham ◽  
Robert D. Rondinelli ◽  
Elizabeth Genovese ◽  
Craig Uejo ◽  
Marjorie Eskay-Auerbach

Abstract The AMA Guides to the Evaluation of Permanent Impairment (AMA Guides), Sixth Edition, was published in December 2007 and is the result of efforts to enhance the relevance of impairment ratings, improve internal consistency, promote precision, and simplify the rating process. The revision process was designed to address shortcomings and issues in previous editions and featured an open, well-defined, and tiered peer review process. The principles underlying the AMA Guides have not changed, but the sixth edition uses a modified conceptual framework based on the International Classification of Functioning, Disability, and Health (ICF), a comprehensive model of disablement developed by the World Health Organization. The ICF classifies domains that describe body functions and structures, activities, and participation; because an individual's functioning and disability occur in a context, the ICF includes a list of environmental factors to consider. The ICF classification uses five impairment classes that, in the sixth edition, were developed into diagnosis-based grids for each organ system. The grids use commonly accepted consensus-based criteria to classify most diagnoses into five classes of impairment severity (normal to very severe). A figure presents the structure of a typical diagnosis-based grid, which includes ranges of impairment ratings and greater clarity about choosing a discreet numerical value that reflects the impairment.


2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
David Monciardini ◽  
Jukka Tapio Mähönen ◽  
Georgina Tsagas

AbstractThe article introduces the thematic issue of Accounting, Economics, and Law: A Convivium dedicated to the regulation of non-financial reporting. It provides the reader with an overview of the varying approaches and frameworks that have emerged over time in relation to the reporting of non-financial information. In particular, the article focuses on the European Non-Financial Reporting Directive. We maintain that to date this latter initiative has failed to deliver on its intended objectives. In the context of the ongoing revision process of this initiative, the present paper outlines five key areas to be improved drawing on the lessons learnt from the past as well as from key points raised by the papers in the present thematic issue. What emerges from this collective effort is a renewed agenda that highlights some of the structural failures of the current reporting regime and a blueprint for future reforms. The final section summarises the various contributions of articles included in this thematic issue.


2016 ◽  
Vol 30 (3) ◽  
pp. 284-288 ◽  
Author(s):  
Cecily L. Betz ◽  
Julia Muennich Cowell ◽  
Melissa Spezia Faulkner ◽  
Veronica D. Feeg ◽  
Cindy Smith Greenberg ◽  
...  

2015 ◽  
Vol 13 (1) ◽  
pp. 88-89 ◽  
Author(s):  
M. D. Hagen ◽  
M. A. Quan ◽  
R. Fain ◽  
W. DeBord

2021 ◽  
Vol 22 (1) ◽  
pp. 14-44
Author(s):  
Marija Zlatnar Moe ◽  
Tamara Mikolič Južnič ◽  
Tanja Žigon

AbstractThe article explores the interaction among three key figures in the process of publication of a literary translation into a language of low diffusion: the translator, the editor and the language reviser (the latter specific to the Slovene situation). The aim of the research is to identify who has the strongest position of power in the decision-making process of the production of a literary translation, especially when conflict arises. Information was gathered from the three groups with questionnaires, interviews and an analysis of public statements. The questions focused on the selection of the translator and language reviser, the translation process, the revision process and conflict resolution. A cross-comparison of the results indicates that despite the automatic central position of the editors, they tend to yield their decision-making power to translators, while language revisers have a more subservient, consulting role.


Target ◽  
2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Silvia Parra-Galiano

Abstract This article proposes a hierarchy of translator and reviser competences in prototypical scenarios in legal translation with a view to determining the most appropriate revision foci to ensure translation quality. Built on a prior characterisation of the most common professional translator profiles in legal translation, the proposal for a hierarchy of competences derives from two premises: (1) The professional profile of those who translate and revise legal documents is very diverse in terms of competence and qualifications (training and experience), and (2) translation competence and specialist knowledge in legal fields (i.e., domain competence) are fundamental when revising to guarantee the quality of legal translations. The proposal is framed by quality assurance in legal translation through a revision process based on (1) the coherent management of the work of the translators and revisers involved in the translation project, and (2) the appropriate methodology for revision applied to legal translation by adapting the revision mode’s focus to ensure its effectiveness. Six common scenarios are identified in light of the translators’ profiles, for which revisers’ profiles are then proposed in order to detect any legal translation competence deficiencies among translators, and thus ensure quality.


Author(s):  
Hossam Hassan ◽  
Khalifa Al-Jabri

The Accreditation Board for Engineering and Technology (ABET) accredits college and university programs in engineering under the Engineering Accreditation Commission (EAC). The process follows Engineering Criteria (EC) 2000, which focuses on outcomes (what is learned) rather than what is taught. This paper presents an overview of the processes developed by the civil engineering (CE) program at Sultan Qaboos University to satisfy ABET Criteria 2, 3, and 4. The program had a successful accreditation visit in November 2013. Program educational objectives (PEOs) were developed. A review and revision process for PEOs was also developed. ABET student outcomes (SOs) were adopted by the CE program. SOs were broken to outcome elements. Key performance indicators were developed for each outcome element, according to the six levels of Bloom’s taxonomy for cognitive domain. The process used direct indicators from student work as well indirect survey instruments. The program has developed a detailed and systematic approach for assessment of SOs with feedback and follow-up on implementation of actions for continuous improvement. Planning for the next accreditation cycle of SO assessment proved valuable, as the new accreditation committee started executing an already laid out work plan.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document