QuickHelper
$20/per page/
Another case study. In-text citations and references needed. No plagiarism.Â
Â
Video Case Study: Judicial, Alternative, and E-Dispute Resolution - Arbitrators Favoring Creditors
http://media.pearsoncmg.com/ph/streaming/bp/2013/business_law/BLaw2013_Jud_Alt.html
Watch the video case study and then write a one- to two-page reflective paper (double-spaced) on the following questions while discussing the connections between business, law, politics, and ethics.
One: What is the difference between arbitration and litigation? What steps in the litigation process are missing in arbitration?
Two: If the parties to arbitration instead went to court, discuss the steps that the parties would have to take in order to go to trial.
Three: The story talked about repeat players—companies that end up in arbitration repeatedly over time. Because arbitrators are selected by a negotiation between the two parties in the arbitration, this story indicates they are more likely to find for these repeat players. Discuss the ethics of this conflict of interest and what might be done to overcome the problem.
Â
Â
|
Aspect Being Evaluated |
Terminal Course Objective |
F Â <60% Deficient/Fail |
D/C 60–79% Limited Competency |
B/A 80+% Competent |
Level Achieved |
Comments & Feedback |
| Â | Â |
Competency not demonstrated |
Partial ability to execute, solve, and respond |
Characterized by accuracy, research, synthesis, creative insight, and anticipation of consequences |
 |  |
|
Assignment |
A/G |
Assignment does not show an ability to analyze, evaluate, and create alternative solutions to the various issues presented while arguing and debating the connections between law, politics, ethics, and business. |
Assignment demonstrates a limited ability to analyze, evaluate, and create alternative solutions to the various issues presented while arguing and debating the connections between law, politics, ethics, and business. |
Assignment demonstrates an effective ability to analyze, evaluate, and create alternative solutions to the various issues presented while arguing and debating the connections between law, politics, ethics, and business. |
 |  |
|
Articulation: (Mechanics, Spelling, Clarity Structure, Organization) |
 |
The writer seems unaware of purpose, audience, or organization. There is little evidence of a controlling idea. The writer fails to respond to the situation or explore the issues. The writer’s voice is not recognizable due to inadequate control of language. The style is undeveloped. Excessive grammatical and mechanical errors block meaning. |
It is partially reflective of purpose and audience. The development of a central idea produces some distortion or may neglect significant issues. The plan of organization is undermined by the omission of ideas and details and illogical or simplistic reasoning. The writer’s voice is weakly developed and use of language may be vague, imprecise, or awkward. The style is repetitive or plodding. Mechanical errors sometimes interfere with meaning. |
There is a clear and consistent focus on purpose and audience. The writer develops a strong central idea and explores the issues fully and insightfully. It is logically organized with concrete details that directly support major points. The distinctive voice of the writer emerges through superior command of language and stylistic variety and energy. It is essentially free from mechanical errors. |
 |  |
|
APA Style |
 |
The information is not supported by use of in-text citations or references. |
The information is supported by the use of references and in-text citations but with major deviations from APA style. |
When the student uses sources, the student provides the appropriate use of research. There are in-text citations and references with no readily detectable deviations from APA style. |
 |  |