Paralegal Studies ARC Scenario
Jenny works for a large law firm in Tampa. She recently worked late into the night to
complete a deposition summary for her supervising attorney, Jim. She proudly left it on
his desk for him to find on Monday morning. This was a very important case and client
for the firm. Jenny knew that her work product was equally important due to her recent
inquiry as to a promotion to head paralegal. She has been with the firm for 6 years. She
had not been offered the position yet, but she felt it was just a matter of time.
She later stopped by his office for comment, but he was in court. She tried again the
next day, but he was still out. Days went by without acknowledgement or response from
Jim--only new assignments on her desk for completion, as he often did. None of the new
assignments were depositions for her to summarize, and she mused about the possible
significance of that.
Increasingly, she worried that something must have been wrong with the summary on
which she worked so hard. On Tuesday, she overheard another paralegal, Mona, who
commented that Jim was on the phone with the opposing attorney shouting for two hours
about the case. Mona also commented that it must have been about Jenny’s work
product. On Wednesday, Jenny had already sent out resumes to other firms thinking that
her job was at risk. The next day, she had secured an interview with another firm in the
area for the following week. The other firm is smaller by far and is in St. Petersburg
which is closer to her home. By Friday, Jenny was fuming with anger that he had
delayed his comments and left her in doubt all week. Jenny does not necessarily want to
switch jobs but had been in situations before where her boss just did not appreciate her.
She really wants to confront him about his "unwillingness to provide feedback and convey
criticism appropriately." Jenny also realizes that she has not seen Jim for a week.
The following Monday morning, Jim is in his office bright and early. While getting their
morning coffee, Mona told Jenny in the break room that one of the five paralegals in the
office was going to be laid off that week. Mona made it quite clear that she heard this
from a reliable source in the firm. Jenny has quite a dilemma facing her in how she is
going to address her current employment with Jim. She is quite angry about his actions
and that of Mona as well but also realizes that there are many things on the line. The
options she is considering are:
1. Confronting the attorney about her work product and displaying her current
level of anger and confusion.
2. Confronting Mona about her comments on Wednesday and then confronting
the attorney in an inter-office meeting with Mona about her conduct.
3. Go home sick immediately and take the following two days off to consider
staying or leaving her current firm.
4. Putting in her two weeks notice and taking the other position with little to no
explanation to her current firm.
Please address the following items regarding the facts listed above:
1. Define the problem in your own words. (Create a timeline of events as well to assist
you in addressing the problem).
2. Compare & contrast the available solutions within the scenario.
3. Select one of the available solutions and defend it as your final solution.
4. Identify the weaknesses of your final solution.
5. Suggest ways to improve/strengthen your final solution (may use information not
contained within the scenario).
6. Reflect on your own thought process after completing the assignment.
o
What did you learn from this process?
o
What would you do differently next time to improve?
SPC’s Assessment of Critical Thinking (ARC) Scoring Template
Rater (scorer) name: _____________________________Paper ID: _____________________Date: ____________________
Performance
Element
I. Communication
Define problem in
your own words.
II. Analysis
Compare &
contrast the
available solutions.
III. Problem
Solving
Select & defend
your final solution.
Exemplary
(4)
Identifies the main
idea or problem with
numerous supporting
details and examples
which are organized
logically and
coherently.
Proficient
(3)
Identifies the main idea
or problem with some
supporting details and
examples in an
organized manner.
Developing
(2)
Identifies the main
idea or problem
with few details or
examples in a
somewhat organized
manner.
Emerging
Not Present
(1)
(0)
Identifies the main
Does not identify
idea or problem
the main idea or
poorly with few or no problem.
details or states the
main idea or problem
verbatim from the
text.
Uses specific
inductive or
deductive reasoning
to make inferences
regarding premises;
addresses
implications and
consequences;
identifies facts and
relevant information
correctly.
Thoroughly identifies
and addresses key
aspects of the
problem and
insightfully uses facts
and relevant evidence
from analysis to
support and defend
potentially valid
solutions.
Uses logical reasoning
to make inferences
regarding solutions;
addresses implications
and consequences;
Identifies facts and
relevant information
correctly.
Uses superficial
reasoning to make
inferences regarding
solutions; Shows
some confusion
regarding facts,
opinions, and
relevant, evidence,
data, or information.
Makes unexplained,
unsupported, or
unreasonable
inferences regarding
solutions; makes
multiple errors in
distinguishing fact
from fiction or in
selecting relevant
evidence.
Identifies and
addresses key aspects
of the problem and
uses facts and relevant
evidence from analysis
to develop potentially
valid conclusions or
solutions.
Identifies and
addresses some
aspects of the
problem; develops
possible conclusions
or solutions using
some inappropriate
opinions and
irrelevant
information from
analysis.
Identifies and
Does not select and
addresses only one
defend a solution.
aspect of the problem
but develops
untestable
hypothesis; or
develops invalid
conclusions or
solutions based on
opinion or irrelevant
information.
Does not analyze
multiple solutions.
Score
4 3 2 1 0
    
N/A 
Comments:
4 3 2 1 0
    
N/A 
Comments:
4 3 2 1 0
    
N/A 
Comments:
Rater (scorer) name: _____________________________Paper ID: _____________________Date: ____________________
Performance
Element
IV. Evaluation
Identify weaknesses
in your final solution.
V. Synthesis
Suggest ways to
improve/strengthen
your final solution.
VI. Reflection
Reflect on your own
thought process.
“What did you learn
from this process?”
“What would you do
differently next time
to improve?”
Exemplary
(4)
Insightfully interprets
data or information;
identifies obvious as
well as hidden
assumptions,
establishes credibility
of sources on points
other than authority
alone, avoids fallacies
in reasoning;
distinguishes
appropriate arguments
from extraneous
elements; provides
sufficient logical
support.
Insightfully relates
concepts and ideas
from multiple sources;
uses new information
to enhance final
solution; recognizes
missing information;
correctly identifies
potential effects of new
information.
Identifies strengths and
weaknesses in own
thinking: recognizes
personal assumptions,
values and
perspectives, compares
to others’, and
evaluates them in the
context of alternate
points of view.
Proficient
(3)
Accurately interprets
data or information;
identifies obvious
assumptions,
establishes credibility
of sources on points
other than authority
alone, avoids fallacies
in reasoning;
distinguishes
appropriate
arguments from
extraneous elements;
provides sufficient
logical support.
Developing
(2)
Makes some errors in
data or information
interpretation; makes
arguments using
weak evidence;
provides superficial
support for
conclusions or
solutions.
Accurately relates
concepts and ideas
from multiple
sources; uses new
information to
enhance final
solution; correctly
identifies potential
effects of new
information.
Identifies strengths
and weaknesses in
own thinking:
recognizes personal
assumptions, values
and perspectives,
compares to others’,
with some
comparisons of
alternate points of
view.
Inaccurately or
incompletely relates
concepts and ideas
from multiple
sources; shallow
determination of
effect of new
information on final
solution.
Identifies some
personal
assumptions, values,
and perspectives;
recognizes some
assumptions, values
and perspectives of
others; shallow
comparisons of
alternate points of
view.
Emerging
(1)
Interprets data or
information
incorrectly;
Supports
conclusions or
solutions without
evidence or logic;
uses data,
information, or
evidence skewed
by invalid
assumptions; uses
poor sources of
information; uses
fallacious
arguments.
Poorly integrates
information from
more than one
source to support
final solution;
Incorrectly predicts
the effect of new
information on
final solution.
Not Present
(0)
Does not evaluate
data, information,
or evidence related
to final solution.
Identifies some
personal
assumptions,
values, and
perspectives;
does not consider
alternate points of
view.
Does not reflect on
own thinking
Score
4 3 2 1 0
    
N/A 
Comments:
Does not identify
new information
for final solution.
4 3 2 1 0
    
N/A 
Comments:
4 3 2 1 0
    
N/A 
Comments: