4 Matching Annotations
- May 2018
The literature on open textbooks so far suggests that: (1) students are spending a significant amount of money on commercial textbooks; (2) it is likely they could achieve the same or better learning outcomes if their courses assigned open textbooks (keeping in mind the caveats above noted by Hilton, 2016); (3) students appear to be using open textbooks at the same rate as they use traditional textbooks; and (4) students overwhelmingly rate the quality of open textbooks to be just as high or higher than that of traditional textbooks. Overall, then, the picture emerging from the research suggests that assigning open textbooks in post-secondary courses is likely to provide the same benefits as commercial textbooks at no cost (or a fraction of the cost, for print versions).
- Jan 2017
The approach you're probably using to train with could be improved by nearly 70%!
- CR (Counterintuitive Rationale)
- I (Intrigue)
- P (Promise)
- PP (Problem or Pain)
- IP.B (Introduce the Product: Benefit)
- OL (Open Loop)
- CG (Curiosity Gap)
- Feb 2014
What rationale is important to include in a brief? This is probably the most difficult aspect of the case to determine. Remember that everything that is discussed may have been relevant to the judge, but it is not necessarily relevant to the rationale of the decision. The goal is to remind yourself of the basic reasoning that the court used to come to its decision and the key factors that made the decision favor one side or the other.
Extraction. What rationale is important to include in a brief?
Reasoning The reasoning gives the reader insight into how the court arrived at its decision. It is instructive in nature. Courts often back their holdings with several lines of reasoning, each of which should be summarized in this section. Unnecessary repetition of facts or the issue should be avoided. A court�s rationale for its holding might be a simple explanation of its thought process. Alternatively, the reasoning might be based on the plain language of the statute, Congressional intent, the re-enactment doctrine, or other common means of resolving judicial disputes.
Several lines of reasoning may be used to back the Court's holdings and may be:
- a simple explanation of the Court's thought processes
- based on the plain language of the statute
- congressional intent
- re-enactment doctrine
- other common means of resolving judicial disputes (what are those?)