The following 8 Anchor Papers represent a range of score points and are used in conjunction with the rubrics to assess student responses.

Score for Anchor Paper #1: Rubric Score 1

Annotation: This response shows minimal knowledge. The student gives a few fragmented advantages (you don’t need to get a jury no witnesses and no court room; much easier process).

Score for Anchor Paper #2: Rubric Score 1

Annotation: This response shows minimal knowledge. A couple of skeletal ideas are provided (goes by faster; judges and attorneys…do less work) to describe the advantages and disadvantages of out-of-court settlements.

Score for Anchor Paper #3: Rubric Score 2

Annotation: This response shows knowledge of issues surrounding out-of-court settlements. Appropriate ideas are provided (it is faster; probably get closer to what you want; they could fight or do something they wouldn’t do in a court). A key idea is then completed (judges should only encourage out-of-court settlements if it is a small situation, otherwise judges should hear the case to make the best decision to benefit both the people).

Score for Anchor Paper #4: Rubric Score 2

Annotation: This response shows knowledge of out-of-court settlements. The student gives several advantages/disadvantages (taking less time; sometimes less money; not being as fair as a court case). A key idea is then completed (so that courts can focus on more important uses instead of business disputes).

Score for Anchor Paper #5: Rubric Score 3

Annotation: This response shows some understanding of the issues surrounding out-of-court settlements. Concepts are accurate and supported (can directly compromise…without a ‘middle man;’ saves both time and money; ‘shady business’ could ensue; room for corruption). Some evidence of higher order thinking is reflected in the analysis of how these settlements might affect the current court system (courts already have many cases to review; if more and more…settle out-of-court, the courts may not have any purpose at all; should be kept to a minimum level).

Score for Anchor Paper #6: Rubric Score 3

Annotation: This response shows some understanding of the issues involved in out-of-court settlements. The student provides accurate, supported concepts by addressing the potential advantages (speedy resolution; reduced fees) and disadvantages (agreement may not follow the law; plaintiff may not get as much money). In the analysis of the legal system and the evaluation of why these types of settlements may be unwise (our court system was built to interpret the laws), some evidence of higher order thinking is demonstrated.

Score for Anchor Paper #7: Rubric Score 4

Annotation: This response shows understanding of the issues surrounding out-of-court settlements. Accurate, well supported concepts are given (courts are extremely backed up; costs money to the taxpayer). Powerful evidence of higher order thinking is provided in the analysis of how out-of-court settlements benefit individual interests and hinder community interests (justice may not entirely prevail and lawful behavior is, to a certain extent, discouraged as it seems money can buy immunity) and in the insightful deduction that encouraging these settlements is, in essence, discounting the Constitution (it is their {judges and attorneys} duty to enforce laws according to their interpretation of the Constitution; Constitution does not provide for individuals who wish to save themselves bad publicity and therefore pay to avoid court cases).

Score for Anchor Paper #8: Rubric Score 4

Annotation: This response shows understanding of the issues involved in out-of-court settlements. Powerful evidence of higher order thinking is demonstrated as the advantages and disadvantages are thoughtfully weighed (both sides benefit…because they spend less time; less publicity and, therefore, a limited negative effect; court cases are decided by the judge; high costs that may even surpass the cost of using a lawyer; lack of precedent). The response then analyzes the benefits of settlements to the legal system (although domestic disputes are important, the courts’ main role includes criminal cases; when the plaintiff and defendant can agree out of court, then the court’s time is available for cases dealing with more urgent matters).