Option 1: Only Address Selected Answer Choice
For this option, each set of feedback addresses only the particular answer choice selected. If a student selects the wrong answer, it will say why that answer is wrong but WILL NOT provide the right answer. Wrong answer feedback will include the instruction to “try again.”
Considerations: Because the wrong answer feedback does not state the right answer, it assumes that students who get a wrong answer will keep trying to eventually reach the right answer. If a student never selects a particular wrong answer choice, they will never see the feedback for that choice, but might see multiple sets of feedback if they continue to get the answer wrong and try again.
Example of how you could present the text to us:
Question: Summary judgment exists primarily for the purposes of:
A. Making the jury’s role more significant
Incorrect. If anything, summary judgment minimizes the jury’s role and is subject to critique by some on those grounds. Try again.
B. Shifting the burden to the defendant on issues of fact
Incorrect. There is no burden shifting in summary judgment motions, necessarily; the parties may cross-move for summary judgment, but it is only on issues where there are no remaining “genuine issues of material fact.” Hence the last part is also incorrect on those grounds. Try again.
C. Streamlining litigation and allowing parties to resolve legal questions without (or before) trial
Correct. Summary judgment exists to streamline litigation and allow parties to resolve legal questions without trial or (in some cases, such as in Rodriguez) before trial, so that only certain questions go before the jury.
D. Flushing out information so that the parties can determine whether they have plausible claims
Incorrect. Summary judgment is too late a point at which parties would be assessing the plausibility of their claims; this happens at a pleading stage. You didn’t need to know that last part, however (which you could say is a civil procedure type of concern or inquiry). You just needed to be able to rule out the use of summary judgment as a mechanism for flushing out information. RIL is such a mechanism, and you’ve learned all sorts of reasons (and ways) in which it might be used to do so. Summary judgment is a form of ending, or streamlining, litigation, resolving issues as a matter of law without involving costly and time-intensive determination of facts (or if it is a motion for partial summary judgment, by minimizing fact-intensive inquiries and leaving for trial only the ones that are genuinely raising issues of material fact). Try again.
Example as it appears in H5P:
Check Your Understanding
