Adjunct Professor-Environmental Studies

The user wants me to reformat a job posting into clean, well-structured semantic HTML. Let me analyze the content and apply the rules. First, I need to identify the sections that have real, specific content. The job posting includes: - About the role (description of the program and position) - Responsibilities (teaching one course) - Required Qualifications (PhD in specific fields, ABD considered) - Salary Range (specific pay per credit) - Physical Demands (General Office Environment) - Special Instructions To Applicants (application materials, deadline, contact) - Benefits Information (supplemental retirement, medical, dental, vision, life insurance, retirement plan) - Some metadata: Job No, Full Time/Part Time, Location, Categories, Advertised date, Application Closes, etc. Rules: - Use

for section headings (About the role, Responsibilities, Requirements, Qualifications, Skills, Benefits, Pay, Schedule) - Use

• for lists,

  for prose - Do NOT repeat job title as heading (the page already shows it) - Do NOT put Job ID / requisition numbers as headings — fold minor metadata into a short

  or drop it - Preserve ALL substantive information; do NOT invent or summarize away detail - Remove cookie/navigation/legal/EEO/equal-opportunity/scam-warning boilerplate, duplicated lines, and application instructions (but keep application instructions if they are part of the posting? The rule says "remove application instructions". However, the user says "Remove cookie/navigation/legal/EEO/equal-opportunity/scam-warning boilerplate, duplicated lines, and application instructions." So I should remove application instructions. But the "Special Instructions To Applicants" includes application instructions. Should I keep that? The rule says remove application instructions. But the user also says "Preserve ALL substantive information". The application instructions are substantive for applicants. However, the rule explicitly says remove application instructions. I'll follow the rule: remove application instructions. But the "Special Instructions To Applicants" includes contact info and deadline. That might be considered part of the posting. I'll keep the contact info and deadline but remove the "To Apply" details? The rule says "remove application instructions". I'll keep the contact info and deadline as part of the posting, but not the step-by-step application instructions. However, the user says "Remove ... application instructions." So I should remove the entire "Special Instructions To Applicants" section? But that includes contact info and deadline. The deadline is important. I'll include the deadline and contact info in a short paragraph, maybe under a "Details" or "Application" section? But the rule says not to create sections unless there is real content. The posting has "Special Instructions To Applicants" with specific content. I'll include it as a section but remove the boilerplate about "To Apply: Please submit..." etc. Actually, the rule says "remove application instructions". So I'll keep the contact info and deadline, but not the instructions on what to submit. However, the user says "Preserve ALL substantive information". The required application materials are substantive. I'm conflicted. Let's read the rule again: "Remove cookie/navigation/legal/EEO/equal-opportunity/scam-warning boilerplate, duplicated lines, and application instructions." So application instructions are to be removed. That includes the "To Apply" paragraph. But the contact info and deadline are not exactly application instructions; they are details about the position. I'll keep the contact info and deadline in a short paragraph, maybe under a "Contact" or "Details" heading? But the allowed headings are specific: About the role, Responsibilities, Requirements, Qualifications, Skills, Benefits, Pay, Schedule. "Special Instructions To Applicants" is not in that list. However, the rule says "use

  for section headings (e.g. About the role, Responsibilities, Requirements, Qualifications, Skills, Benefits, Pay, Schedule)." The "e.g." suggests those are examples, not exhaustive. But the rule also says "include a section ONLY when the posting has real, specific content for it". The posting has "Special Instructions To Applicants" with real content. I could use a heading like "Application Details" or "Contact". But the rule says "use

  for section headings (e.g. ...)". I think I can use a heading that fits, maybe "Application Information". However, the user might expect only those example headings. But the rule says "e.g." so it's not exclusive. I'll include a section for "Application Details" with the contact and deadline. But the rule also says "never create Pay/Schedule/Benefits sections unless the posting actually states them." The posting states Salary Range and Benefits Information. So I'll create Pay and Benefits sections. Also, "Physical Demands" is mentioned. That could be under "Schedule" or a separate section? Not in the example list. I'll include it as a short paragraph maybe under "Details" or "Work Environment". But the rule says prefer a few substantive sections over many thin ones. I'll fold physical demands into a "Work Environment" paragraph. Now, metadata: Job No, Full Time/Part Time, Location, Categories, Advertised, Application Closes. These are minor metadata. Fold into a short

  or drop. I'll include a short paragraph at the top with key metadata: Part-time, Location: South Orange, NJ, Job No: 497486, Advertised: 10 September 2026. But the rule says "do NOT put Job ID / requisition numbers as headings — fold minor metadata into a short

  or drop it." So I'll include a paragraph with that info. Now, the job description includes a lot of text about Seton Hall University. That's "About the role" or "About the program". I'll create an "About the role" section with that prose. Responsibilities: teaching one 1000-level course. That's a list? It's a single duty. I'll use a

  • for consistency. Required Qualifications: list of fields. Use
    • . Salary Range: specific numbers. That's Pay section. Benefits Information: list of benefits. Use
      • . Physical Demands: General Office Environment. Could be a short paragraph. Special Instructions To Applicants: contact info and deadline. I'll include as a section "Application Details" with a paragraph. Now, remove EEO boilerplate: "Seton Hall University is an equal opportunity employer..." That's boilerplate, remove. Remove copyright and recruitment agency line. Remove duplicated lines: The description of Seton Hall appears twice (once at top, once in Benefits Information). I'll keep the first one in About the role, and not repeat. Now, structure: - Opening paragraph with metadata (part-time, location, job no, advertised date) -

        About the role

        with prose about the program and position. -

        Responsibilities

        with
        • Teach Introduction to Environmental Studies (1000-level) during Spring 2027 semester, with possibility of renewal.
        -

        Qualifications

        (or Requirements? The example includes both Requirements and Qualifications. The posting says "Required Qualifications". I'll use "Qualifications" as heading.) -

        Pay

        with prose about salary per credit. -

        Benefits

        with
        • ... list benefits
        -

        Work Environment

        with prose about physical demands (General Office Environment). -

        Application Details

        with paragraph: Review begins November 1, 2026; contact Dr. Jacob Weger, Director of Environmental Studies. But the rule says "use

        for section headings (e.g. About the role, Responsibilities, Requirements, Qualifications, Skills, Benefits, Pay, Schedule)." So "Work Environment" and "Application Details" are not in the list. However, the rule says "e.g." meaning examples. But also "include a section ONLY when the posting has real, specific content for it". The posting has real content for physical demands and application details. I think it's okay to include them with appropriate headings. But to be safe, I could fold physical demands into About the role or a "Details" paragraph. And application details into a short paragraph at the end without a heading? The rule says "use

        for section headings". It doesn't say every piece of content must be under a heading. But the example shows sections. I'll include headings for the main sections, and for the extra ones, I'll use headings that are descriptive but not in the list? The user might expect only those headings. However, the instruction says "use

        for section headings (e.g. About the role, Responsibilities, Requirements, Qualifications, Skills, Benefits, Pay, Schedule)." It doesn't forbid other headings. But the rule "Prefer a few substantive sections over many thin ones." So I should avoid creating thin sections. Physical demands is one line. Application details is a couple lines. I could combine them into a "Details" section? But that's not in the list. Maybe I'll include a "Schedule" section? The posting says Part-time, but no schedule details. The rule says never create Schedule section unless posting states them. The posting states "Part-time" but not schedule details. So I won't create Schedule. I'll create: - About the role - Responsibilities - Qualifications - Pay - Benefits - Additional Information (for physical demands and application details) but that's not in the list. Hmm. Alternatively, I can include physical demands as a paragraph under "About the role" or "Qualifications"? Not appropriate. I'll create a "Work Environment" heading (maybe considered similar to "Schedule"?). But the rule says "never create Pay/Schedule/Benefits sections unless the posting actually states them." It doesn't say never create other sections. I think it's acceptable. Let's look at the example headings: About the role, Responsibilities, Requirements, Qualifications, Skills, Benefits, Pay, Schedule. The posting has "Required Qualifications" so Qualifications heading. It has "Salary Range" so Pay heading. It has "Benefits Information" so Benefits heading. It has "Duties And Responsibilities" so Responsibilities heading. It has description of program so About the role. It has "Physical Demands" - not in list. It has "Special Instructions To Applicants" - not in list. I'll include "Physical Demands" as a short paragraph under a heading "Work Environment" (maybe considered part of Schedule? but not). I'll include "Application Details" as a heading "Application Information". But to minimize sections, I'll put physical demands and application details in a single "Additional Details" section? But the rule says prefer a few substantive sections. Physical demands is thin. Application details is thin. I'll fold physical demands into a sentence in About the role? "The position is part-time in a general office environment." And application details into a paragraph at the end without a heading? But the rule says use

        for section headings. It doesn't say all content must be under headings. I can have a paragraph at the end. Let's decide: I'll output the following sections: 1. A short introductory paragraph with metadata. 2.

        About the role

        with prose. 3.

        Responsibilities

        with list. 4.

        Qualifications

        with list. 5.

        Pay

        with prose. 6.

        Benefits

        with list. 7.

        Work Environment

        with prose (physical demands). 8.

        Application Information

        with prose (deadline, contact). But the rule