iRubric: Criteria for Interviewing Skills II rubric

edit print share Copy to my rubrics Bookmark test run assess... delete Do more...

Criteria for Interviewing Skills II

Criteria for Interviewing Skills

This rubric will help to assess how good my client interviewing skills are.

Rubric Code: HX32W24

By deedee5191

Ready to use

Public Rubric

Subject: Communication

Type: Writing

Grade Levels: Undergraduate

Criteria for Interviewing Skills Enter rubric description
	Developing (N/A)	Competent (N/A)	Mastered/Exemplary (N/A)
Language was familiar Jargon was not used when these questions were asked	Developing Lawyer used legal jargon without explanation.	Competent Jargon was defined, but content had language that was unfamiliar to clients.	Mastered/Exemplary Specialized vocabulary, jargon, and other references used in interview were explained to the client.
Questions were clear The lawyer's questions were clearly communicated to the client.	Developing Questions were broad and confusing to the client. Some were irrelevant.	Competent Questions explained with familiar language but didn't completely communicate what the lawyer wanted.	Mastered/Exemplary Complex questions were not used so that the client felt comfortable enough to share their experiences.
Open Ended Questions Were the questions used for the interview open ended?	Developing Questions could be answered with a "yes" or "no".	Competent Most but not all questions were answered with "yes" or "no"	Mastered/Exemplary Questions led to a thorough discussion without "yes" or "no" answers.
Lawyer is neutral Lawyer did not take sides in the interview, but remained neutral	Developing Leading questions were given constantly.	Competent Some questions were leading and some responses of the client were received as leading.	Mastered/Exemplary The lawyer remained neutral, informative, and conducted a relevant interview.
Social Presence	Developing Lawyer rushed through the interview, speech was difficult to understand/hear. Did not pay attention or appear connected to client.	Competent Lawyer paid some attention to the client, speech was sometimes difficult to understand/hear. Connection to client vacillated.	Mastered/Exemplary Lawyer was polite and did not speak too fast or too slowly. Lawyer was attentive to the answers and questions of the client. Was very present and connected.
Effective Relationship Building Lawyer created a comfortable environment in which the client could feel at ease about disclosing their problems.	Developing Lawyer jumped in too soon and did not make the client feel at ease.	Competent Lawyer made some efforts to put the client at ease.	Mastered/Exemplary Lawyer allowed for sufficient small talk to make the client feel at ease before tackling the big issues.
Identified Client's main concern Lawyer's interview technique allowed Lawyer to identify the client's main concerns	Developing Failed to accurately identify the client's biggest concerns.	Competent Identified either the client's legal concerns or non-legal concerns but did not comprehensively identify both.	Mastered/Exemplary Learned about the client's problem through a system of questions, listening and followup. Identified client's legal and non-legal concerns.
Moral and Ethical Issues Recognized, clarified and responded to any moral or ethical issues present without judgment or prejudice.	Developing Client did not appear comfortable with the lawyer's questioning. Lawyer appeared judgmental or uncomfortable him/herself.	Competent Lawyer was able to discuss the difficult issues but didn't always identify them.	Mastered/Exemplary Lawyer comfortable talked about uncomfortable issues and made the client feel at ease about disclosing sensitive, personal information.
Client's Informed Choice Helped the client understand all of the relevant issues about his/her problem and the possible solutions. Discussed the legal, economic, social and psychological consequences.	Developing Lawyer bullied or overpowered the will of the client into a particular position. Lawyer focused only on the legal ramifications and not the other salient factors.	Competent Lawyer identified some of the non-legal issues and was otherwise helpful in leading the client in the decision-making.	Mastered/Exemplary Lawyer provided a thorough overview of the factors that client should consider and helped the client make his/her decision within imposing lawyer's own interest on the client.
Professional Readiness	Developing Student presents as a Student and not a lawyer. Student needs additional skills to be competent on the job and is not ready for interviewing without the presence of a supervising attorney.	Competent Student shows proficient skills for a law student and student's interviewing skills can still benefit from the input of a supervising attorney or mentor.	Mastered/Exemplary Student presents as an attorney and is practice ready. Student's interviewing skills would need very little revision or oversight from a supervising attorney.

Keywords:

criteria for interviewing skills

Subjects:

Communication

Types:

Writing

Discuss this rubric