Student Learning Outcomes & Assessment
** legal research papers required in Law 17 and 34 and optional in all other classes
Criteria for Case Briefs
Students will read evidence cases and write a case brief demonstrating their understanding and application of the essential facts and rules of law and legal principles of the case. see case brief rubric at http://missionparalegal.pbworks.com/briefing
Criteria: The “case brief” will achieve an “acceptable” or higher rating, and will be indicative of a paralegal who is competent to work in a law office, state agency or with the courts.
Students will read a court case and write a “case brief” using the FIRACT method of case briefing (“Facts, Issue, Rule, Application and Conclusion”).
The assessment will be evaluated using the following rating scale:
(4) – Superior - comprehensive, very accurate, analytical, sophisticated logic, incisive, persuasive discussion of the facts, issues, rules, rationale, holdings, applications, and conclusions (Facts, Issue, Rule, Application, Conclusion, Take Home Message - "FIRACT" method)
(3) – Strong - generally convincing, sufficiently analytical and logical, covers well all of the parts of the FIRACT method for a case brief.
(2) – Acceptable – basic understanding, reasonable, unsophisticated but shows comprehension of the case and legal points, lacking mastery but still in control, limited scope, occasionally original, misses parts of the FIRACT method for a case brief.
(1) – Unacceptable - superficial, lacking understanding, non-academic, undigested, unfinished, missing the target, perfunctory, inappropriate to the assignment, poorly developed, does not follow FIRACT method for a case brief.
CASE BRIEF - GRADING RUBRIC
|
Outstanding
A
|
Proficient
B
|
Adequate
C
|
Inadequate
D/F
|
Case Name and Citation
|
Complete case name and properly formatted citation appear at the top of the case brief
|
Complete case name is provided but citation is incomplete
|
Complete case name is provided but no citation is give
|
Neither the case name nor the citation appears at the top of the case brief OR both case name and citation are incorrect.
|
Operative Facts
|
Operative facts are relevant to the issue being examined by the court and are logically organized.
|
Facts are relevant to the question being answered but lack coherence or organization.
|
Irrelevant facts are included. Lack of logical organization.
|
Relevant facts are omitted or lost in discussion of unrelated information.
|
Procedural Facts
|
Procedural history of the case is clearly and logically presented in proper chronology.
|
Procedural history of the case is presented but chronology is confusing.
|
Some procedural history is presented.
|
No procedural history is presented.
|
Issue/Short Answer
|
Includes all elements (applicable law, issue being examined and relevant facts) in a well crafted, grammatically correct question.
Answer responds to question being posed.
|
Issue is separately articulated, but does not include all elements; applicable law, issue being examined and relevant facts.
Answer responds to question being posed.
|
Issue is not separately articulated, but implied through description of facts or discussion of law.
Answer does not respond to question being posed.
|
Issue is not articulated
No answer is given.
|
Law
|
Law is correct and is relevant to the question being answered. Rule(s) of law succinctly paraphrased rather than quoted.
|
Law is correct and is relevant to the question being answered, but is not paraphrased
|
Rules of law are used in providing answer, but it is unclear if writer understands the law and is properly applying it.
|
Rules of law are omitted from answer or incorrect law is used.
|
Rationale
|
The court’s reasoning is presented in a clear and logical fashion, leading the reader to an understanding of the rationale behind the law.
|
Law is applied to the facts, but the underlying rationale is not clear.
|
Analysis is unclear, causing the reader to question whether the law is correct.
|
No analysis of the law is given.
|
Writing Mechanics
|
Sentence structure, grammar, punctuation are substantially correct.
Each component‘s material is logically organized and presented in a clear, concise manner.
|
Sentence structure, grammar, punctuation are substantially correct.
Organization is logical but needs better consistency and clarity.
|
Adherence to rules of writing is poor.
Material lacks organization and/or is unclear, making it difficult to understand.
|
Rules of writing are ignored or misunderstood.
No apparent logic to the organization of the material. Writing lacks clarity.
|
Research and Writing Papers
Students will prepare a final legal research and writing paper (In Law 17 and Law 34) and will use the following format - http://profjordan.pbworks.com/format
Final Paper Grading Rubric
The final papers will be graded using the following grading rubric
http://missionparalegal.pbworks.com/rubric-finalpaper
The A Paper
* Provides a cohesive and well argued "thesis"
* Incorporates pertinent and detailed information from the five (5) court cases or codes provided in the paper
* Maintains focus & avoids being sidetracked by tangents
* Presents all information clearly and concisely and in an organized manner
* Does much more than merely restate the thesis and offer a brief response
* Avoids distracting grammar/spelling/etc. problems
· Very well written with sound grammar and spelling
· Paper has clear introductory thesis and effective topic sentences
· Demonstrates creativity
· Provides at least 5 court cases or codes
· Analyzes issues and advances an argument throughout the paper
The B Paper
· Good writing skills, some grammatical/spelling mistakes
· Has an overall theme, but the arguments and evidence are not so sophisticated
· Reasonably well structured but introductory thesis and topic sentences less clear
· Answers all questions from the assignment, but lacks some critical reflection
· Draws upon at least 5 court cases or codes, citing them effectively and properly using case citation format.
The C Paper
· Mediocre writing skills, evident grammatical and spelling mistakes
· Lacks an overall theme
· Poorly structured with no evident introductory thesis and topic sentences
· Lacks critical reflection and/or arguments not entirely clear
· Answers most questions from the assignment but not all
· Description of cases or codes lack details, few mentioned specifically
· Poor integration of legal materials and readings
· Draws upon at least 5 cases, citing them effectively and properly using case citation format.
The D paper
· Very poorly structured with no evident introductory and concluding statements
· No critical reflection and/or confusing arguments
· Very poor writing skills, replete with grammatical and spelling mistakes
· Completely lacks integration
· Does not have a thesis and does not mention at least 5 court cases and codes
· Poor description of the court cases or codes, generalities
· Very poor to no integration of source case or code materials and readings or has less than 5 court cases or codes.
The F paper
· No critical reflection and/or confusing arguments. Plagiarism!
Final Papers will be checked with a Plagiarism Checker, so please DO NOT plagiarize. Use your own words, and create your own work.
updated: 4/7/11
Comments (0)
You don't have permission to comment on this page.