WK5TA

Grading Guide: Week 2 Team Paper

Content

60 Percent

Points Earned

1.5/3

Discussed the case as if you were part of the defense team in State v. Stu Dents and the defendant wanted to plead insanity.

Clearly answered the following questions as a team:

• Does your team feel this defendant is competent to stand trial? Why or why not?

• What is required in your state for an insanity defense?

• What steps must be taken to prove insanity?

Did not clearly look at the case from the defense perspective and respect your client’s wishes to proceed with an insanity defense. Remember your personal opinion need not come into play with the role assigned in the instructions!

Did not fully outline if the defendant was competent to stand trial. Did not explore the legal rational needed for competency hearings – i.e. can he aid his lawyers in his defense, understand the proceedings and consequences, etc. This is before, separate and distinct from any insanity defense that may be raised later at trial. Make sure you understand the difference! It seems this is the division among your teammates you mentioned at the end, but you confused it with insanity.

Did explain the law in a specific state for an insanity defense.

Did clearly outline the specific steps to prove insanity and linked them back to said state.

Organization and Development

20 Percent

Points Earned

.5/1

• The paper is 700-1050 words in length.

• The paper is clear and organized; major points are supported by details, examples, or analysis.

• The tone aligns with the assignment’s purpose and is geared towards the appropriate audience.

• The paper provides relevant background on the topic and uses visual aids appropriately and effectively.

• Team members participate according to Learning Team Toolkit standards about individual and team performance.

• The paper is logical, flows, and reviews the major points.

Met the word count.

Your points were clearly organized and they were supported them with proper details. Did always have a logical flow. Did not give a clear introduction that was a roadmap for the paper here or a conclusion of all the points contained with the paper. Had one unified paper.

Did direct your ideas to the correct audience and used a formal tone for most of the paper. Avoid the first person – I, we, etc. – as well as using specific team member’s names or referring to the team. Also, even if the team was divided you chose one perspective to present as a unified project. No direct quotes from team members should ever be included in formal papers.

Gave appropriate background information.

Did meet the standards for team and individual performance.

Mechanics and Format

20 Percent

Points Earned

1/1

• The assignment file is presentable and functional.

• Rules of grammar, usage, and punctuation are followed; spelling is correct.

• The paper—including the title page, reference page, tables, and any appendixes—is consistent with APA guidelines. Intellectual property is recognized with in-text citations and references.

The file was functional. No grammar or editing issues. Did properly format your paper. It should be in APA style (double spaced, citations, etc.) Had a title page and a proper and separate reference page. Did always properly cite your sources within the text itself. You did list the state laws you referred to. Remember you need to cite any outside work you use – even your text – and even if it isn’t a direct quote. Please see the CWE for how to cite your sources correctly if needed. For example, APA citations never say “According to…” instead they are in parenthesis following the sentence.

Total Percent

100%

Total Earned

3/5

Additional Comments:

Nice start. You met some of the substantive portions of the paper well and several of the technical points. Continue to work on your tone, point of view, introductions, and conclusions. Thanks for posting on time!