this is for my man Mr.ResearchPro
I just want to write for 2 pages bro .
Here what I want you use in my paper, I want you write this in my paper step by step all of them is imprtant when you write the paper .
1- Issue
2.Rule
3- Analysis
4-Conclusion
5- What you learned
6-Content and Quality Connections
Here the explain about that i need in that paper .
This will be the rubric used to evaluate your case submissions with the one exception that is noted in the Module 5.
IRAC Grading Rubric
IRAC/Case Analysis Rubric
|
Criteria
|
Ratings
|
Pts
|
|
Issue
|
Clearly identifies the relevant issue of the case
5 pts
|
Identifies the issue but is not a clear and concise statement
4 pts
|
Can see an issue but does not properly address it
3 pts
|
Having difficulty concentrating on the issue.
2 pts
|
Does not understand the issue
1 pts
|
No Marks
0 pts
|
|
pts
|
|
Rule
|
Concisely states the rule
5 pts
|
Mostly states the rule
4 pts
|
Partially states the rule
3 pts
|
Vaguely states the rule
2 pts
|
Does not state the correct rule
1 pts
|
No Marks
0 pts
|
|
pts
|
|
Analysis
|
Clearly shows an understanding how the law applies to the facts.
5 pts
|
States how the facts and the law relate
4 pts
|
Does not clearly state how the facts and law relate
3 pts
|
Does not connect the facts or the law
2 pts
|
Unable to apply the law to the facts
1 pts
|
No Marks
0 pts
|
|
pts
|
|
Conclusion
|
Clearly and Concisely states the conclusion
5 pts
|
States a good conclusion
4 pts
|
States a conclusion that is not concise but still on point
3 pts
|
States a conclusion
2 pts
|
Does not state a conclusion
1 pts
|
No Marks
0 pts
|
|
pts
|
|
What you learned
|
Clearly states what the case taught you
5 pts
|
States what the case is about (paraphrases case)
4 pts
|
States the case verbatim or interjected personal feelings into the response
3 pts
|
States ideas not connected to the case
2 pts
|
Did not understand the case.
1 pts
|
No Marks
0 pts
|
|
pts
|
|
Content and Quality Connections
|
Response is thoughtful, contains substantive insight and analysis in relation to topic. makes strong connections to readings, lecture, experience, workplace
5 pts
|
Response(s) demonstrate significant understanding. Robust insight and analysis. Evidence of connections.
4 pts
|
Content response is accurate but superficial. Some responses may be off topic. Acknowledges connections exist.
3 pts
|
Lacks depth; responses too general, conclusory, simplistic in nature. Some aspects of response are off topic. Posts lack connections.
2 pts
|
Interjected emotional responses, personal feelings, and /or beliefs in analysis
1 pts
|
No Marks
0 pts
|
|
pts
|
|
Total Points: 30
______________________________________________________
Here the assigemnts for the home work :
Original Post:
"After reading the case, assume you are a lawyer, your client, Van Gorkom has been approached by the board of Directors. He comes to you for advice. What would you advise the Van Gorkom to do?
Consider:
1. the business judgment rule
2. rights of the Directors
3. obligations of prudent directors
4. other issues discussed by the court
You, as a lawyer must be objective and NOT insert your personal beliefs in the answer. Use the IRAC analytical format to respond to each separate issue you find (there are more issues than listed)"
You may do additional internet research, the search terms "Smith" and " Van Gorkom" and "Delaware" will be helpful
Response Posts: Respond to the posts of at least 2 other students.
Note: The student response for this case is due three weeks from today. This case is very long. Students are required to read the majority opinion of this case. The concurrence and the dissent in this case is optional reading.
|
No comments:
Post a Comment