Personal Responsibility Rubric Formatted by the DCCCD in alignment with the AAC&U VALUE rubrics. Definition The Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board describes Personal Responsibility to include “the ability to connect choices, actions and consequences to ethical decision-making.” Framing Language This rubric is designed to assess the Core Objective (Personal Responsibility) as described by the THECB in the Texas Core Curriculum. In past attempts to assess Personal Responsibility, different faculty have focused on factors ranging from understanding and avoiding plagiarism to being on time for class. When the THECB defined the new core objectives, the DCCCD decided to use the five VALUE rubrics created by the AAC&U for the assessment of Personal and Social Responsibility. These rubrics were determined to be ineffective for assessing Personal and Social Responsibility as they are defined by the THECB. A team of representatives from each of the Colleges of the DCCCD met several times over the summer of 2016 to develop two new rubrics for assessing these two objectives in the next cycle of assessment. The focus of our discussions were centered on the definition of Personal Responsibility as described by the THECB. We also researched other colleges around the country with varying results. Ultimately, we wanted to create a rubric that would assess a student’s ability to work through an ethical decision making process. The ideal assignment will be a written essay that is long enough to address all three criteria. This rubric was created to fit well in a signature assignment that assesses more than one core objective simultaneously. Glossary – the definitions that follow were developed to clarify terms and concepts used in this rubric only. · Understanding Ethical Choices – The student is able to thoroughly discuss at least two sides of an ethical choice to be made. · Decision-Making – The student is able to state a position on the issue with more detailed explanation and/or reasons for the position and addresses objections to their position. · Consequences – The student is able to identify consequences and demonstrates a sophisticated understanding of the scope, complexity and/or magnitude of the consequences. Personal Responsibility (PR) – ability to connect choices, actions and consequences to ethical decision-making Capstone Milestones Benchmark Below Benchmark 4 3 2 1 0 Understanding Ethical Choices Student thoroughly discusses at least two sides of an ethical choice to be made. Student thoroughly discusses one side and partially describes another side of an ethical choice to be made. Student partially explains two sides of an ethical choice to be made. Student attempts to explain only one side of an ethical choice to be made. Student is unable to articulate an ethical choice to be made. Decision-Making Student states a position on the issue with more detailed e.

1. Personal Responsibility Rubric
Formatted by the DCCCD in alignment with the AAC&U
VALUE rubrics.
Definition
The Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board describes
Personal Responsibility to include “the ability to connect
choices, actions and consequences to ethical decision-making.”
Framing Language
This rubric is designed to assess the Core Objective (Personal
Responsibility) as described by the THECB in the Texas Core
Curriculum. In past attempts to assess Personal Responsibility,
different faculty have focused on factors ranging from
understanding and avoiding plagiarism to being on time for
class. When the THECB defined the new core objectives, the
DCCCD decided to use the five VALUE rubrics created by the
AAC&U for the assessment of Personal and Social
Responsibility. These rubrics were determined to be ineffective
for assessing Personal and Social Responsibility as they are
defined by the THECB. A team of representatives from each of
the Colleges of the DCCCD met several times over the summer
of 2016 to develop two new rubrics for assessing these two
objectives in the next cycle of assessment.
The focus of our discussions were centered on the definition of
Personal Responsibility as described by the THECB. We also
researched other colleges around the country with varying
results. Ultimately, we wanted to create a rubric that would
assess a student’s ability to work through an ethical decision
making process. The ideal assignment will be a written essay
that is long enough to address all three criteria. This rubric was
created to fit well in a signature assignment that assesses more
than one core objective simultaneously.
Glossary – the definitions that follow were developed to clarify

2. terms and concepts used in this rubric only.
·
Understanding Ethical Choices – The student is able to
thoroughly discuss at least two sides of an ethical choice to be
made.
·
Decision-Making – The student is able to state a
position on the issue with more detailed explanation and/or
reasons for the position and addresses objections to their
position.
·
Consequences – The student is able to identify
consequences and demonstrates a sophisticated understanding of
the scope, complexity and/or magnitude of the consequences.
Personal Responsibility (PR) – ability to connect choices,
actions and consequences to ethical decision-making
Capstone
Milestones
Benchmark
Below Benchmark
4
3
2
1
0
Understanding Ethical Choices
Student thoroughly discusses at least two sides of an ethical
choice to be made.
Student thoroughly discusses one side and partially describes
another side of an ethical choice to be made.

3. Student partially explains two sides of an ethical choice to be
made.
Student attempts to explain only one side of an ethical choice to
be made.
Student is unable to articulate an ethical choice to be made.
Decision-Making
Student states a position on the issue with more detailed
explanation and/or reasons for the position
and addresses objections to their position.
Student states a position on the issue with more detailed
explanation and/or reasons for the position.
Student states a position on the issue, but only provides limited
explanation and/or reasons for the position.
Student states a position on the issue without providing any
reasons for the position.
Student does not take a clear ethical position on the issue.
Consequences
Student identifies consequences and demonstrates a
sophisticated understanding of the scope, complexity and/or
magnitude of the consequences.
Student identifies consequences and demonstrates a moderate
understanding of the scope, complexity and/or magnitude of the
consequences.
Student identifies consequences of the choices, but

4. demonstrates a limited understanding of the scope, complexity
and/or magnitude of the consequences.
Student identifies the obvious consequences of each choice.
Student does not identify any consequences of the choices
available
Take Test: Unit V Assessment Content
https%3A%2F%2Fonline.waldorf.edu%2Fwebapps%2Fassessme
nt%2Ftake%2Flaunch.jsp%3Fcourse_assessment_id%3D_55194
6_1%26course_id%3D_137153_1%26content_id%3D_8300856_
1%26step%3Dnull

5. Assistive Technology Tips [opens in new window]
Test Information
InstructionsDescriptionInstructions
Assessment InstructionsMultiple Attempts
Not allowed. This test can only be taken once.
Force Completion

6. This test can be saved and resumed later.
Your answers are saved automatically.
Question Completion Status:
1
2
3
4

7. 5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12

8. Question 1
If a contract requires that a party to the contract perform
specific obligations that are expected to take 2 years to
complete, what circumstance would remove that contract from
the statute of frauds requirement that contracts that cannot be
performed within 1 year be in writing?
No circumstance would remove the contract from the statute of
frauds' requirement that the contract be in writing because all
contracts that cannot be performed within a year must be in
writing.
If the contract was between two business entities, the contract
would not have to be in writing.
If there is a possibility that the obligations under the contract
could be performed in less than a year after the contract was
made, the contract would not have to be in writing.
If the parties to the contract agree that the contract will be
enforceable even though it is not in writing, the contract would
not have to be in writing.
6 points
Question 2
Partial performance is an exception to the statute of frauds
requirement that a contract be in writing to be enforceable
because:
the actions of the parties in partially performing the contract
demonstrate the existence of the contract and the terms of the

9. contract.
once performance of obligations required in a contract begin,
that performance must be completed.
partial performance is considered to be an admission that the
parties to the contract have carefully considered the obligations
they assumed in making the contract.
under English common law, any action under a contract makes a
party to the contract responsible for fully performing the
contract.
6 points
Question 3
If a party to a contract performs almost all of their
obligations under the contract and has not intentionally failed to
perform the obligations under the contract that they have not
completed:
a court may find that there has not been a breach of contract
according to the substantial performance doctrine.

10. they have breached the contract.
a continuing condition has not been satisfied.
the contract is voidable.
6 points
Question 4
If a specific future event terminates a party's obligations under
a contract, that future event is called a(n):
foreseeable event.
continuing condition.
avoidable condition.
condition subsequent.
6 points
Question 5
One of the primary purposes of the statute of frauds
requirement that a contract be in writing is:
that courts do not favor verbal contracts.

11. to provide reliable evidence that a contract exists.
to ensure that lawyers are involved in the making of all
contracts.
to ensure that contracts involving large sums of money are
precise.
6 points
Question 6
If an unforeseen event occurs after a contract has been made
that makes one of the party's performance under the contract
prohibitively more expensive than was contemplated when the
contract was made:
the party whose performance is now more expensive still has to
perform their obligations under the contract.
that party's obligation to perform under the contract can be
cancelled under the doctrine of commercial impracticability.
the parties to the contract will have to renegotiate the terms of
the contract.
the contract is automatically breached.
6 points
Question 7

12. If a party to a contract unjustifiably fails to perform their
obligations under a contract:
substantial performance will save them from having breached
the contract.
that party can avoid breaching the contract by creating a
novation.
a material breach of the contract has occurred.
the contract is cancelled.
6 points
Question 8
Does an agreement to get married have to be in writing to
be enforceable?
No, a mutual promise to marry does not have to be in writing.

13. Yes, promises made in consideration of marriage are required to
be in writing.
Yes, if the date of the marriage is to be more than 1 year from
the date of the agreement.
Yes, if the parties to the agreement are citizens of different
states.
6 points
Question 9
Impossibility of performance can relieve a party from
performance of their obligations under a contract if:
an unforeseen event causes performance of the obligations to be
physically impossible.
the contract specifically provides that performance is forgiven.

14. the contract is in writing.
an event that was expected when the contract was made occurs.
6 points
Question 10
Mortgages and leases must be in writing to be enforceable
because:
they cannot be performed within 1 year.
they involve more than one party.
the payment of money is involved.
they are considered to be transfers of interests in real estate.
6 points

15. Question 11
Bill and Spenser entered into a contract on March 1, 2019,
which required Spenser to build a house according to plans and
specifications supplied by Bill. Under that contract, Spenser
was required to begin work on the house by April 1, 2019, and
complete the house by April 15, 2020. Was that contract
required to be in writing? Why, or why not?
Your response must be at least 75 words in length.
CRITICAL THINKING VALUE RUBRIC
for more information, please contact [email protected]
The VALUE rubrics were developed by teams of faculty experts
representing colleges and universities across the United States
through a process that examined many existing campus rubrics
and related documents for each learning outcome and
incorporated additional feedback from faculty. The rubrics
articulate fundamental criteria for each learning outcome, with
performance descriptors demonstrating progressively more
sophisticated levels of attainment. The rubrics are intended for
institutional-level use in evaluating and discussing student
learning, not for grading. The core expectations articulated in
all 15 of the VALUE rubrics can and should be translated into
the language of individual campuses, disciplines, and even
courses. The utility of the VALUE rubrics is to position
learning at all undergraduate levels within a basic framework of
expectations such that evidence of learning can by shared
nationally through a common dialog and understanding of
student success.Definition
Critical thinking is a habit of mind characterized by the
comprehensive exploration of issues, ideas, artifacts, and events
before accepting or formulating an opinion or conclusion.

16. Framing Language
This rubric is designed to be transdisciplinary, reflecting the
recognition that success in all disciplines requires habits of
inquiry and analysis that share common attributes. Further,
research suggests that successful critical thinkers from all
disciplines increasingly need to be able to apply those habits in
various and changing situations encountered in all walks of life.
This rubric is designed for use with many different types of
assignments and the suggestions here are not an exhaustive list
of possibilities. Critical thinking can be demonstrated in
assignments that require students to complete analyses of text,
data, or issues. Assignments that cut across presentation mode
might be especially useful in some fields. If insight into the
process components of critical thinking (e.g., how information
sources were evaluated regardless of whether they were
included in the product) is important, assignments focused on
student reflection might be especially illuminating.
Glossary
The definitions that follow were developed to clarify terms and
concepts used in this rubric only.
· Ambiguity: Information that may be interpreted in more than
one way.
· Assumptions: Ideas, conditions, or beliefs (often implicit or
unstated) that are "taken for granted or accepted as true without
proof." (quoted from
www.dictionary.reference.com/browse/assumptions)
· Context: The historical, ethical. political, cultural,
environmental, or circumstantial settings or conditions that
influence and complicate the consideration of any issues, ideas,
artifacts, and events.
· Literal meaning: Interpretation of information exactly as
stated. For example, "she was green with envy" would be
interpreted to mean that her skin was green.
· Metaphor: Information that is (intended to be) interpreted in a
non-literal way. For example, "she was green with envy" is
intended to convey an intensity of emotion, not a skin color.

17. CRITICAL THINKING VALUE RUBRIC
for more information, please contact [email protected]
Definition
Critical thinking is a habit of mind characterized by the
comprehensive exploration of issues, ideas, artifacts, and events
before accepting or formulating an opinion or conclusion.
Evaluators are encouraged to assign a zero to any work sample
or collection of work that does not meet benchmark (cell one)
level performance.
Capstone
4
Milestones
3 2
Benchmark
1
Explanation of issues
Issue/problem to be considered critically is stated clearly and
described comprehensively, delivering all relevant information
necessary for full understanding.
Issue/problem to be considered critically is stated, described,
and clarified so that understanding is not seriously impeded by
omissions.
Issue/problem to be considered critically is stated but
description leaves some terms undefined, ambiguities
unexplored, boundaries undetermined, and/or backgrounds
unknown.
Issue/problem to be considered critically is stated without
clarification or description.
Evidence
Selecting and using information to investigate a point of view
or conclusion

18. Information is taken from source(s) with enough
interpretation/evaluation to develop a comprehensive analysis
or synthesis. Viewpoints of experts are questioned thoroughly.
Information is taken from source(s) with enough
interpretation/evaluation to develop a coherent analysis or
synthesis. Viewpoints of experts are subject to questioning.
Information is taken from source(s) with some
interpretation/evaluation, but not enough to develop a coherent
analysis or synthesis.
Viewpoints of experts are taken as mostly fact, with little
questioning.
Information is taken from source(s) without any
interpretation/evaluation. Viewpoints of experts are taken as
fact, without question.
Influence of context and assumptions
Thoroughly (systematically and methodically) analyzes own and
others' assumptions and carefully evaluates the relevance of
contexts when presenting a position.
Identifies own and others' assumptions and several relevant
contexts when presenting a position.
Questions some assumptions. Identifies several relevant
contexts when presenting a position. May be more aware of
others' assumptions than one's own (or vice versa).
Shows an emerging awareness of present assumptions
(sometimes labels assertions as assumptions). Begins to identify
some contexts when presenting a position.
Student's position (perspective, thesis/hypothesis)
Specific position (perspective, thesis/hypothesis) is
imaginative, taking into account the complexities of an issue.
Limits of position (perspective, thesis/hypothesis) are
acknowledged.
Others' points of view are synthesized within position
(perspective, thesis/hypothesis).
Specific position (perspective, thesis/hypothesis) takes into
account the complexities of an issue.
Others' points of view are acknowledged

19. within position (perspective, thesis/hypothesis).
Specific position (perspective,
thesis/hypothesis) acknowledges different sides of an issue.
Specific position (perspective, thesis/hypothesis) is stated, but
is simplistic and obvious.
Conclusions and related outcomes (implications and
consequences)
Conclusions and related outcomes (consequences and
implications) are logical and reflect student’s informed
evaluation and ability to place evidence and perspectives
discussed in priority
order.
Conclusion is logically tied to a range of information, including
opposing viewpoints; related outcomes (consequences and
implications) are identified clearly.
Conclusion is logically tied to information (because information
is chosen to fit the desired conclusion); some related outcomes
(consequences and implications) are identified clearly.
Conclusion is inconsistently tied to some of the information
discussed; related outcomes
(consequences and implications) are oversimplified.
· 1000 - 1500 word argumentative essay valued at 18% of
final grade
PROMPT: If a belief makes a person who believes it happier
and more secure, does that make it true in any sense?
FAQ
· How should I get started?
Have the Personal Responsibility and Critical Thinking Rubrics
open in front of you. Your grade will be assessed according to
these two rubrics. The Personal Responsibility Rubric will
require that you refer to the ethical consequences of the above
question somewhere in your essay.

20. · How do I submit?
Please
DO NOT include your name anywhere within the text,
headings, or title of your essay, nowhere. This allows me to
grade anonymously, an equitable grading practice. Please have
no concern about omitting your name; as long as you submit
your assignment through your eCampus account, you will
receive credit for it. Save your assignment as a Microsoft Word
document. Scroll up and click the heading Essay 2. Submit your
essay as an attachment.
· How many sources do I need to cite?
You
must site some sources. See the Evidence component of
the Critical Thinking Rubric. Though there is no minimum
number of cited sources beyond our textbook, sometimes you
need to refer to other source material in making your argument.
Whenever you discuss content that should be backed up with a
source, be sure to incorporate accurate sources and cite them.
· What format and style of citation should I use?
Use MLA. Academic philosophers use Chicago Manual. If you
continue studies in philosophy, you will learn Chicago Manual;
however, for most introductory students, it is not practical to
learn it. MLA is fine for the purposes of this course