Option 3: Address Selected Answer Choice and Provide Right Answer
This option is a middle ground between the first two options. Here, the feedback addresses the wrong answer and provides the right answer, but does not go into the reasoning behind each of the other wrong answers that weren’t selected.
Considerations: This option assumes that it’s important for the student to know why their wrong answer is wrong, and what the right answer is, but not why the other wrong answers are wrong. Because the student would get the right answer after their first attempt, you wouldn’t expect them to try again and see the other sets of feedback.
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.
C is the correct answer. 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.
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.
C is the correct answer. 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.
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).
C is the correct answer. 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.
Example as it appears in H5P:
Check Your Understanding
