Crj 331- case study 1: deviant behaviors
Donald Sterling, an American businessman and attorney, was the owner of the Los Angeles Clippers, a professional basketball franchise of the National Basketball Association (NBA) from 1981 to 2014. In April 2014, Sterling was banned for life from the NBA after private recordings of him making racist comments were made public. In this case study, you will investigate the manner in which social controls may have helped or hurt Sterling in his fight to maintain ownership of the Los Angeles Clippers.
Read the article titled “Donald Sterling built an empire and an image; words were his undoing”, located at: http://www.latimes.com/local/la-me-donald-sterling-20140803-story.html.
Write a three to five (3-5) page paper in which you:
- Determine whether or not you believe social controls played a significant role in Donald Sterling’s loss of ownership of the Los Angeles Clippers. Provide a rationale to support your position.
- Debate whether you believe that the social norms for men of Sterling’s age support the use of derogatory language when discussing a member of another race. Next, support or criticize whether the social norms of men Sterling’s age are reasonable in a very “politically correct” society. Provide support for your response.
- Argue for or against the theory that an “informal sanction” (i.e., ostracism by peers) would have deterred Sterling’s behavior. Next, specify whether or not the “informal sanctions” would have satisfied anyone who was offended by his comments. Provide a rationale to support your response.
- The $2.5 million fine that the NBA imposed on Donald Sterling was a formal sanction for his comments. Considering the fine, elaborate on the primary manner in which this formal sanction carried out the purpose of protecting the players and the league. Justify your response.
- Use at least three (3) quality academic resources in this assignment. Note: Wikipedia and similar type Websites do not qualify as academic resources.
Your assignment must follow these formatting requirements:
- Be typed, double spaced, using Times New Roman font (size 12), with one-inch margins on all sides; citations and references must follow APA or school-specific format.
Case Study 1: Deviant Behaviors
Criteria
Unacceptable
Below 60% F
Meets Minimum Expectations
60-69% D
Fair
70-79% C
Proficient
80-89% B
Exemplary
90-100% A
1. Determine whether or not you believe social controls played a significant role in Donald Sterling’s loss of ownership of the Los Angeles Clippers. Provide a rationale to support your position.
Weight: 10%
Did not submit or incompletely determined whether or not you believe social controls played a significant role in Donald Sterling’s loss of ownership of the Los Angeles Clippers. Did not submit or incompletely provided a rationale to support your position.
Insufficiently determined whether or not you believe social controls played a significant role in Donald Sterling’s loss of ownership of the Los Angeles Clippers. Insufficiently provided a rationale to support your position.
Partially determined whether or not you believe social controls played a significant role in Donald Sterling’s loss of ownership of the Los Angeles Clippers. Partially provided a rationale to support your position.
Satisfactorily determined whether or not you believe social controls played a significant role in Donald Sterling’s loss of ownership of the Los Angeles Clippers. Satisfactorily provided a rationale to support your position.
Thoroughly determined whether or not you believe social controls played a significant role in Donald Sterling’s loss of ownership of the Los Angeles Clippers. Thoroughly provided a rationale to support your position.
2. Debate whether you believe that the social norms for men of Sterling’s age support the use of derogatory language when discussing a member of another race. Next, support or criticize whether the social norms of men Sterling’s age are reasonable in a very “politically correct” society. Provide support for your response.
Weight: 25%
Did not submit or incompletely debated whether you believed that the social norms for men of Sterling’s age supported the use of derogatory language when discussing a member of another race. Did not submit or incompletely supported or criticized whether the social norms of men Sterling’s age were reasonable in a very “politically correct” society. Did not submit or incompletely provided support for your response.
Insufficiently debated whether you believed that the social norms for men of Sterling’s age supported the use of derogatory language when discussing a member of another race. Insufficiently supported or criticized whether the social norms of men Sterling’s age were reasonable in a very “politically correct” society. Insufficiently provided support for your response.
Partially debated whether you believed that the social norms for men of Sterling’s age supported the use of derogatory language when discussing a member of another race. Partially supported or criticized whether the social norms of men Sterling’s age were reasonable in a very “politically correct” society. Partially provided support for your response.
Satisfactorily debated whether you believed that the social norms for men of Sterling’s age supported the use of derogatory language when discussing a member of another race. Satisfactorily supported or criticized whether the social norms of men Sterling’s age were reasonable in a very “politically correct” society. Satisfactorily provided support for your response.
Thoroughly debated whether you believed that the social norms for men of Sterling’s age supported the use of derogatory language when discussing a member of another race. Thoroughly supported or criticized whether the social norms of men Sterling’s age were reasonable in a very “politically correct” society. Thoroughly provided support for your response.
3. Argue for or against the theory that an “informal sanction” (i.e., ostracism by peers) would have deterred Sterling’s behavior. Next, specify whether or not the “informal sanctions” would have satisfied anyone who was offended by his comments. Provide a rationale to support your response.
Weight: 25%
Did not submit or incompletely argued for or against the theory that an “informal sanction” (i.e., ostracism by peers) would have deterred Sterling’s behavior. Did not submit or incompletely specified whether or not the “informal sanctions” would have satisfied anyone who was offended by his comments. Did not submit or incompletely provided a rationale to support your response.
Insufficiently argued for or against the theory that an “informal sanction” (i.e., ostracism by peers) would have deterred Sterling’s behavior. Insufficiently specified whether or not the “informal sanctions” would have satisfied anyone who was offended by his comments. Insufficiently provided a rationale to support your response.
Partially argued for or against the theory that an “informal sanction” (i.e., ostracism by peers) would have deterred Sterling’s behavior. Partially specified whether or not the “informal sanctions” would have satisfied anyone who was offended by his comments. Partially provided a rationale to support your response.
Satisfactorily argued for or against the theory that an “informal sanction” (i.e., ostracism by peers) would have deterred Sterling’s behavior. Satisfactorily specified whether or not the “informal sanctions” would have satisfied anyone who was offended by his comments. Satisfactorily provided a rationale to support your response.
Thoroughly argued for or against the theory that an “informal sanction” (i.e., ostracism by peers) would have deterred Sterling’s behavior. Thoroughly specified whether or not the “informal sanctions” would have satisfied anyone who was offended by his comments. Thoroughly provided a rationale to support your response.
4. The $2.5 million fine that the NBA imposed on Donald Sterling was a formal sanction for his comments. Considering the fine, elaborate on the primary manner in which this formal sanction carried out the purpose of protecting the players and the league. Justify your response.
Weight: 25%
Did not submit or incompletely elaborated on the primary manner in which the formal sanction carried out the purpose of protecting the players and the league. Did not submit or incompletely justified your response.
Insufficiently elaborated on the primary manner in which the formal sanction carried out the purpose of protecting the players and the league. Insufficiently justified your response.
Partially elaborated on the primary manner in which the formal sanction carried out the purpose of protecting the players and the league. Partially justified your response.
Satisfactorily elaborated on the primary manner in which the formal sanction carried out the purpose of protecting the players and the league. Satisfactorily justified your response.
Thoroughly elaborated on the primary manner in which the formal sanction carried out the purpose of protecting the players and the league. Thoroughly justified your response.
5. 3 references
Weight: 5%
No references provided
Does not meet the required number of references; all references poor quality choices.
Does not meet the required number of references; some references poor quality choices.
Meets number of required references; all references high quality choices.
Exceeds number of required references; all references high quality choices.
6. Clarity, writing mechanics, and formatting requirements
Weight: 10%
More than 8 errors present
7-8 errors present
5-6 errors present
3-4 errors present
0-2 errors present
