Religiosity and Romanticism in Mandar's Love Poem Text: Stylistic Analysis

The purpose of this study was to find the lexical form of religiosity and romanticism contained in the Mandar Sayang-sayang poetry. The type of research used is qualitative research, with qualitative descriptive methods. Sampling was done by using purposive sampling technique. The data collection procedure used a literature review procedure, listening method, note-taking technique, and reflective-introspective. The data analysis model used is an interactive model (interactive model). The results of the study found that the lexical containing the meaning of religiosity was found in the verse at the beginning of the text Sayang-sayang Mandar. Meanwhile, the lexical containing the expression of romanticism is found in almost all stanzas of the Mandar Sayang-Sayang text. The Mandar affectionate poetry is an expression of religiosity and the character of mutual love for fellow Mandar people and for all human beings in the world.

Peer review declaration

• Type of peer review: closed, collective. At the first stage, candidates sent their short abstracts when registering on the conference website. Totally, 483 candidates have been registered. The Program Committee pre-selected the submitted abstracts on the basis of the peer review procedure with the involvement of external experts. 286 selected participants were admitted to the conference. Upon the end of the conference, the participants sent in extended versions of their works in the format required for publication in the Journal of Physics: Conference Series. The program committee finally selected 221 articles for publication in the Journal of Physics: Conference Series. • Conference submission management system: Articles were downloaded through the conference website. • Number of submissions received: 483 • Number of submissions sent for review: 483 • Number of submissions accepted: 221 • Acceptance Rate (Number of Submissions Accepted / Number of Submissions Received X 100): 46 • Average number of reviews per paper: 2 • Total number of reviewers involved: 10 • Contact person for queries: Prof. Alexey E. Zhukov, HSE – St Petersburg, 3(1) Kantemirovskaya str, St Petersburg, 194100, Russia [email protected]

Volume 10, Issue 2, Formation

In editors of the Iraqi Journal of Embryos and Infertility Researches (IJEIR) are thankful to the huge efforts made by the reviewers in peer reviewing the submitted manuscripts. Thanks to their efforts the second issue of the 10th volume is now available online with open access to the articles content. We are looking forward in inclusion in relevant indexing in the near future. We would like to acknowledge the reviewers for their contribution, and we wish them the greatest success. We ensured the anonymity of both reviewers and authors and followed a double-blind peer-review procedure. We strictly followed the COPE ethical code in the published studies. As of now, the IJEIR is published in new website https://ijeir.net/index.php/ijeir supported by the Open Journal Systems (OJS), therefore all the activities were strictly by the online system. Journal reviewers were given the proper credit via Publons (an online platform that promotes the peer review process). Currently, IJEIR is indexed in Google Scholar, Science gate, Crossref, Iraqi academic journals, Publons, Dimensions, LOCKSS, and CLOCKSS. Our articles are published under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License and the rights are with the authors which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0

Requirements for Becoming an Adjunct Professor in Medicine: A Comparative Analysis of the Regulations of German Medical Faculties

Background: Following a medical habilitation or equivalent qualification after continuous scientific activity, one can apply for a position as an adjunct professor (außerplanmäßige Professur). The medical faculties in Germany have issued regulations for these appointments. The aim of this paper was to compare the requirements for appointment as an adjunct professor among medical faculties. Methods: The currently valid regulations of medical faculties in Germany were analyzed for the target criteria of publication performance, teaching performance, possibility of shortening the procedure; consideration of appointment for junior professor, patents, acquisition of third-party funding, medical didactic qualifications, and/or special scientific achievements; and review procedure. Results: An analysis of 38 currently valid regulations showed large differences between the requirements. The number of required first/senior authorships differs significantly within the regulations (from 4 to 16). The median of the required number of first/senior authorships is six (Q1 = 5, Q3 = 7). In total, 93% (n = 35) of the universities provide information on the publication medium or the value of the publication. Third-party funding is desired or required in 68% (n = 26) of the regulations. There are also clear differences in the scope of required teaching activities, which range from two to a maximum of six years of teaching. Shortening the time to apply for an adjunct professorship is possible in 45% (n = 17) of the cases. In total, 97% (n = 37) of the faculties provide information on external review, with 71% (n = 27) most frequently requesting one or two external reviews. Conclusion: The regulations show clear differences among individual requirements for adjunct professorship. Standardization would be desirable and would lead to comparable conditions and therefore also to a fair recognition of scientific achievements.

Peer review declaration

The present document contains details on the procedure for reviewing the materials of the third International Scientific and Practical Conference MATHEMATICAL MODELING, PROGRAMMING AND APPLIED MATHEMATICS 2021. • The type of peer review is double blind peer review. • All the submitted materials, timely received by the conference e-mail [email protected], were considered by the program organizing committee. The program committee identified the reviewers who received the authors’ articles through the conference email. Each article was submitted to two independent peer reviewers with a scientific degree who did not know the name of the author (or the names of authors) of the article being reviewed. All articles submitted for consideration have passed the peer review procedure in accordance with the standards of editorial ethics, with international practice of editing, reviewing, publishing and authorship of scientific publications and the recommendations of the Committee on Publication Ethics –COPE. Plagiarism, improper borrowing, attempts to circumvent plagiarism detection, verbatim copying and paraphrasing of one’s own work (self-plagiarism) without proper justification, copyright infringement is considered unacceptable practices. All articles that have passed the peer review procedure are original works that have not been previously published in other publications in their current or similar form; they have not been reviewed in other editions. Materials of low scientific level are not accepted for publication. • The number of applications received is 105, of which 59 were accepted for work, the acceptance rate (number of applications accepted / number of applications received X 100) was 56%. • Average number of reviews per paper - 1,6. • The total number of reviewers involved is 40 experts in this particular subject area. • Additional information on the process of consideration of materials: only applications, the authors of which had corrected the substantiated comments of the reviewers, were accepted; the articles that received a negative review from the reviewer were excluded from the conference materials. The conference materials submission control system is presented on the official conference website at https://www.novsu.ru/dept/515278/i.454744/?id=1759423. • For inquiries please contact Dr. Oxana Fikhtner, Head of Academic Publishing Development centre of NovSU ([email protected]).

Reviewing Procedure vs. Judging Substance: How Increasing Bureaucratic Oversight Can Reduce Bureaucratic Accountability

How does the scope of review affect bureaucratic policymaking? To explore this question, I consider a policymaking environment in which an expert agency develops policy that is upheld or overturned by an overseer who may have different policy goals. The agency can affect the quality of implementation through effort investments in addition to choosing the substantive content of policy. Under procedural review the overseer only reviews the agency’s effort, which allows the agency to fully utilize its expertise. Substantive review also tasks the overseer with judging agencies’ substantive policy choices, which can lead the agency to disregard its superior information and obfuscate to avoid reversal. Depending on the policy environment, this dynamic can either benefit or harm the overseer. In some cases the overseer can be made better off by having less transparent review institutions; that is, institutions that direct the overseer to only review procedure and preclude judging substance.

On the handling of German citizens who died abroad

Background Decedents who are repatriated to Germany from abroad are not systematically registered nationwide. In Hamburg, in addition to an epidemic hygienic examination, registration and examination of the content of the documents accompanying the corpses of German citizens has been carried out since 2007. In this way, unclear and non-natural deaths in particular are to be followed up as necessary. Material and methods Protocols of external and internal autopsies of German nationals who died abroad and were repatriated to Hamburg via the port or airport between 2007 and 2018 were retrospectively evaluated with respect to numbers, completeness of the autopsy abroad and correctness of manner and cause of death. Results Between 2007 and 2018 a total of 703 corpses were repatriated via the port or airport of Hamburg and examined by the Port Medical Service for epidemic hygiene and for anything conspicuous in the documents accompanying the corpse. Of them, 307 corpses were examined at the Institute of Legal Medicine at the University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf. In total, 82.4% of the examined cases had an incorrect, unspecific or incomplete foreign death certificate. Of the deceased, 238 were subjected to a second external autopsy by a forensic pathologist and 69 deceased were autopsied again or for the first time in Hamburg. It was found that 84% of the autopsies performed abroad were not performed according to German and European standards. The most common discrepancy was incomplete preparation of the organs. In almost one quarter of the autopsies performed in Hamburg a different cause of death than abroad was determined at autopsy. Conclusion Since the quality of autopsies performed abroad sometimes does not meet the standards in Germany and Europe and many papers accompanying corpses are incomplete or incorrectly filled out, a systematic review procedure in the home country is recommended. Through the system established in Hamburg in 2007, at least a re-evaluation of the cases takes place.

A systematic literature review: Apology and request strategies in English by Libyan university students

Much research has been done in the realization of apology and request speech act but very few have explored this in the context of Arabic language. We perform a Systematic Literature Review (SLR) process in this paper to gather and analyze studies to identify the diverse apology and request strategies preferred by Arabic learners of English and the influence of culture and social distance on them. The strategies employed and the speech acts along with the native and foreign dialects and pragmatism involved are researched. Following a predefined review procedure, we identified 15 literature papers within the years 2016-2020 presenting research on apology and request strategies preferred by Arabic learners of English. The studies are gathered from various resources and illuminate the apology and request strategies in different contexts. We analyzed the papers to understand the preferred strategy method chosen and the logic behind it. Moreover, this study presents a related discussion and conclusions.

Computer Science Unplugged: A Systematic Literature Review

The computer science (CS) unplugged approach intends to teach CS concepts and computational thinking skills without employing any digital tools. The current study conducted a systematic literature review to analyze research studies that conducted investigations related to implementations of CS unplugged activities. A systematic review procedure was developed and applied to detect and subsequently review relevant research studies published from 2010 to 2019. It was found that 55 research studies (17 articles + 38 conference proceedings) satisfied the inclusion criteria for the analysis. These research studies were then examined with regard to their demographic characteristics, research methodologies, research results, and main findings. It was found that the unplugged approach was realized and utilized differently among researchers. The majority of the studies used the CS unplugged term when referring to “paper–pencil activities,” “problem solving,” “storytelling,” “games,” “tangible programming,” and even “robotics.”