Assignment 1: The State Judicial Selection Process
Content
Top of Form
Name: SOC205 Week 5 Assignment 1: The State Judicial Selection Process
Description: SOC205 Week 5 Assignment 1: The State Judicial Selection Process
|
|
Unacceptable Below 60% F |
Meets Minimum Expectations 60-69% D |
Fair 70-79% C |
Proficient 80-89% B |
Exemplary 90-100% A |
|
SOC205-A1-1 1. Discuss the judicial selection process of your state. Include, at a minimum, the qualifications and steps that are taken in order to select judges for the different kinds of courts within your specific state. Weight: 25% |
Points Range:0 (0%) - 29.98 (14.99%) Did not submit or incompletely discussed the judicial selection process of your state. Did not submit or incompletely included, at a minimum, the qualifications and steps that are taken in order to select judges for the different kinds of courts within your specific state. |
Points Range:30 (15%) - 34.98 (17.49%) Insufficiently discussed the judicial selection process of your state. Insufficiently included, at a minimum, the qualifications and steps that are taken in order to select judges for the different kinds of courts within your specific state. |
Points Range:35 (17.5%) - 39.98 (19.99%) Partially discussed the judicial selection process of your state. Partially included, at a minimum, the qualifications and steps that are taken in order to select judges for the different kinds of courts within your specific state. |
Points Range:40 (20%) - 44.98 (22.49%) Satisfactorily discussed the judicial selection process of your state. Satisfactorily included, at a minimum, the qualifications and steps that are taken in order to select judges for the different kinds of courts within your specific state. |
Points Range:45 (22.5%) - 50 (25%) Thoroughly discussed the judicial selection process of your state. Thoroughly included, at a minimum, the qualifications and steps that are taken in order to select judges for the different kinds of courts within your specific state. |
|
SOC205-A1-2 2. Choose a second state, and describe the qualifications and the selection process for judges within that state. Weight: 20% |
Points Range:0 (0%) - 23.98 (11.99%) Did not submit or incompletely chose a second state, and did not submit or incompletely described the qualifications and the selection process for judges within that state. |
Points Range:24 (12%) - 27.98 (13.99%) Insufficiently chose a second state, and insufficiently described the qualifications and the selection process for judges within that state. |
Points Range:28 (14%) - 31.98 (15.99%) Partially chose a second state, and partially described the qualifications and the selection process for judges within that state. |
Points Range:32 (16%) - 35.98 (17.99%) Satisfactorily chose a second state, and satisfactorily described the qualifications and the selection process for judges within that state. |
Points Range:36 (18%) - 40 (20%) Thoroughly chose a second state, and thoroughly described the qualifications and the selection process for judges within that state. |
|
SOC205-A1-3 3. Compare and contrast for both states the qualifications necessary for a prospective candidate to become a judge. Next, identify the steps that the relevant persons / entities need to take in order to remove a judge from office for disciplinary reasons for each state. Weight: 20% |
Points Range:0 (0%) - 23.98 (11.99%) Did not submit or incompletely compared and contrasted for both states the qualifications necessary for a prospective candidate to become a judge. Next, did not submit or incompletely identified the steps that the relevant persons / entities need to take in order to remove a judge from office for disciplinary reasons for each state. |
Points Range:24 (12%) - 27.98 (13.99%) Insufficiently compared and contrasted for both states the qualifications necessary for a prospective candidate to become a judge. Next, insufficiently identified the steps that the relevant persons / entities need to take in order to remove a judge from office for disciplinary reasons for each state. |
Points Range:28 (14%) - 31.98 (15.99%) Partially compared and contrasted for both states the qualifications necessary for a prospective candidate to become a judge. Next, partially identified the steps that the relevant persons / entities need to take in order to remove a judge from office for disciplinary reasons for each state. |
Points Range:32 (16%) - 35.98 (17.99%) Satisfactorily compared and contrasted for both states the qualifications necessary for a prospective candidate to become a judge. Next, satisfactorily identified the steps that the relevant persons / entities need to take in order to remove a judge from office for disciplinary reasons for each state. |
Points Range:36 (18%) - 40 (20%) Thoroughly compared and contrasted for both states the qualifications necessary for a prospective candidate to become a judge. Next, thoroughly identified the steps that the relevant persons / entities need to take in order to remove a judge from office for disciplinary reasons for each state. |
|
SOC205-A1-4 4. Justify the selection process for the state that you believe has the best system in place. Justify the response. Weight: 20% |
Points Range:0 (0%) - 23.98 (11.99%) Did not submit or incompletely justified the selection process for the state that you believe has the best system in place. Did not submit or incompletely justified the response. |
Points Range:24 (12%) - 27.98 (13.99%) Insufficiently justified the selection process for the state that you believe has the best system in place. Insufficiently justified the response. |
Points Range:28 (14%) - 31.98 (15.99%) Partially justified the selection process for the state that you believe has the best system in place. Insufficiently justified the response. |
Points Range:32 (16%) - 35.98 (17.99%) Satisfactorily justified the selection process for the state that you believe has the best system in place. Satisfactorily justified the response. |
Points Range:36 (18%) - 40 (20%) Thoroughly justified the selection process for the state that you believe has the best system in place. Thoroughly justified the response. |
|
SOC205-A1-5 5. 3 references Weight: 5% |
Points Range:0 (0%) - 5.98 (2.99%) No references provided |
Points Range:6 (3%) - 6.98 (3.49%) Does not meet the required number of references; all references poor quality choices. |
Points Range:7 (3.5%) - 7.98 (3.99%) Does not meet the required number of references; some references poor quality choices. |
Points Range:8 (4%) - 8.98 (4.49%) Meets number of required references; all references high quality choices. |
Points Range:9 (4.5%) - 10 (5%) Exceeds number of required references; all references high quality choices. |
|
SOC205-A1-6 6. Clarity, writing mechanics, and formatting requirements Weight: 10% |
Points Range:0 (0%) - 11.98 (5.99%) More than 8 errors present |
Points Range:12 (6%) - 13.98 (6.99%) 7-8 errors present |
Points Range:14 (7%) - 15.98 (7.99%) 5-6 errors present |
Points Range:16 (8%) - 17.98 (8.99%) 3-4 errors present |
Points Range:18 (9%) - 20 (10%) 0-2 errors present |
Name:SOC205 Week 5 Assignment 1: The State Judicial Selection Process
Description:SOC205 Week 5 Assignment 1: The State Judicial Selection Process
Bottom of Form