OVERVIEW (See Attached Documents)
You will analyze 5 cases during this course. Note that each case can be found in your textbook’s
required readings. In evaluating your Case Analysis Assignments, instructors will apply the
Case Analysis Grading Rubric.
SMGT 503
SMGT 503
Case Analysis Assignment Instructions
Overview
You will analyze 5 cases during this course. Note that each case can be found in your textbook’s required readings. In evaluating your Case Analysis Assignments, instructors will apply the Case Analysis Grading Rubric.
Instructions
Based upon the assigned readings in the Learn section, you will answer all questions below in paragraph form using current APA formatting (Times New Roman, 12- point font, and double spaced). A title page and reference page must be included for each Case Analysis Assignment. All answers must be compiled in a Word document. Citations (minimum of 2) from the assigned reading and research and a minimum of 2 Scriptures are required in answering the questions. The length of the Case Analysis Assignment paper must be a minimum of 5 pages to maximum of 7 pages (this includes a title page and reference page).
The guidelines for analyzing ethical cases (and including level headings) are as follows:
Introduction
An introductory paragraph is designed to grab people's attention. It informs readers about the topic and why they should care about it but also adds enough intrigue to get them to continue to read. In short, the opening paragraph is your chance to make a great first impression.
Issues
What are the major moral or ethical issues raised by the case?
What are the major factual issues raised by the case?
What are the major conceptual issues raised by this case?
Who are the major stakeholders in this case?
How are the issues in this case related to making ethical decisions?
Options
What are the major views on the conceptual issues raised by this case?
What are the main alternative actions or policies that might be followed in responding to the ethical issues in this case?
What facts are unknown or disputed that might be relevant to deciding this case (may require research to determine some facts)?
Ethical and Moral Arguments
Determine which of the four moral standards (egoism, natural law, utilitarianism, and respect forpersons) apply to each case.
Identify the moral principles that can be invoked to support a conclusion as to what ought to be done ethically in this case or similar cases.
Determine whether the different ethical and moral standards yield converging or diverging judgments about what ought to be done.
Conclusion
Decide which of the identified options you would recommend or judge to be the ethically best way to deal with the issue presented in this case based upon which option has the strongest ethical reasons behind it.
Determine how a critic of your position might try to argue against it using other ethical reasons, and present a rebuttal or counter-argument in defense of your judgment.
Include 2 or more scriptures to support your decision.
Note: Your assignment will be checked for originality via the Turnitin plagiarism tool.
Page 1 of 2
Page 1 of 2
,
1
<Insert Title of Paper>
<Insert Your Name>
<Insert your School/Department> , Liberty University
<Insert COUR ###: Name of Course>
<Insert Professor's Name>
<Insert assignment due date as Month xx, xxxx>
2
<Insert Title of Paper>
(Below is an guide to completing the assignments)
Introduction (this is where you will introduce the case in your own words).
………………………………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………………………………………
……………………………………………………………………………………………..
Issues
(this is where you truly explain the major issues within each case, that you
are required to read from the textbook.)
………………………………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………………………………………
……………………………………………………………………….
The last issue
………………………………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………………………………………
……………………………………………………………………….
3
Options
The major viewpoint (list two or more viewpoints on how you are assessing the case).
………………………………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………………………………………
……………………………………………………………………….
.
……………………………………………………………………………………………
…
………………………………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………………………………………
……………………………………………………………………………….
Moreover, two alternative options will be explored for this case. The first
………………………………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………………………………………
……………………………………………………………………….
Ethical Arguments
Utilitarianism is the (use 2 ethical theories or moral standards to
support your statements). ………………………………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………………………………………
4
……………………………………………………………………….
Biblically human interaction suffices as well: “love you neighbor as yourself” (Matthew
22:39 NIV). Jesus also explains: “Just as you want others to do for you, do the same for them”
(Luke 6:31 NIV). These moral and biblical principles invoke a conclusion that would move
away from the lottery concept and birth a whole new one.
(Include two or more scriptures that apply/support your written work).
The option example
………………………………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………………………………………
……………………………………………………………………….
……………………………………………………………………………………………
…
………………………………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………………………………………
……………………………………………………………………………….
……………………………………………………………………………………………
…
………………………………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………………………………………
……………………………………………………………………………….
5
……………………………………………………………………………………………
…
………………………………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………………………………………
……………………………………………………………………………….
Conclusion
The conclusive ethical option (conclude your paper with a good conclusion)
………………………………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………………………………………
……………………………………………………………………….
………………………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………………………………………
……………………………………………………………………………….
………………………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………………………………………
……………………………………………………………………………….
6
(Include a total of two or more references per assignment.
Remember: If you list a reference, need to include an in-text citation to match the reference
listed on the reference page.)
References
Champion Jr. W., Karcher,R. T., Ruddell, L.S. (2020). Sports ethics (2nd ed.). Burlington,
MA: Jones & Bartlett Learning. ISBN: 9781284171303.
Malloy, D. C., Ross, S., & Zakus, D. H. (2003). Sport ethics: Concepts and cases in sport
and recreation (2nd ed.). Quebec, Canada: Thompson Educational Publishing,
Inc. ISBN: 1550771299.
7
- Introduction
- Issues
- Options
- Ethical Arguments
- Conclusion
,
Criteria Ratings Points
Content 15 to >13 pts
Advanced
Deep insights and critical thinking are displayed. Clear application of course concepts is made to personal situations.
13 to >12 pts
Proficient
Insights and deep thinking are displayed. Application of course concepts is made to personal situations.
12 to >0 pts
Developing
Superficial thinking and insights are displayed. Little application of course concepts is made.
0 pts
Not Present
15 pts
Content 20 to >17 pts
Advanced
All topics are thoroughly addressed and/or all questions are answered. Includes 2 or more scholarly citations from required reading and research and 2 or more scriptures to support statements.
17 to >16 pts
Proficient
All or most topics are generally, but not comprehensively addressed and all or most questions were answered. Includes 1 or more scholarly citations from required reading or research and 1 or more scriptures to support statements.
16 to >0 pts
Developing
Topics and/or questions were not addressed satisfactorily. Includes 1 scripture to support statements.
0 pts
Not Present
20 pts
Structure 5 to >4 pts
Advanced
All sources (information and graphics) are accurately documented in the desired format. Sources are listed in a reference page in current APA format. Paper is 5 to 7 pages.
4 to >3 pts
Proficient
All sources (information and graphics) are accurately documented, but some are not in the desired format. Sources are listed in a reference page in current APA format. Paper is 5 to 7 pages.
3 to >0 pts
Developing
Sources are not accurately documented or formatted. Sources are listed in reference page but not in current APA format. Paper is less than 5 pages.
0 pts
Not Present
5 pts
Case Analysis Grading Rubric | SMGT503_D01_202430
Criteria Ratings Points
Structure 10 to >9 pts
Advanced
Less than 2 current APA formatting, grammatical, spelling or punctuation errors are present. Multiple level headings are present. Title page and paper are in current APA format.
9 to >7 pts
Proficient
3 to 5 current APA formatting, grammatical, spelling, or punctuation errors are present. Level headings are present. Title page and paper are in current APA format.
7 to >0 pts
Developing
More than 5 current APA formatting grammatical, spelling, or punctuation errors are present. No level headings present. Title page is not included and the paper is not in current APA format.
0 pts
Not Present
10 pts
Total Points: 50
Case Analysis Grading Rubric | SMGT503_D01_202430
,
1 (Slip Opinion) OCTOBER TERM, 2017
Syllabus
NOTE: Where it is feasible, a syllabus (headnote) will be released, as is being done in connection with this case, at the time the opinion is issued. The syllabus constitutes no part of the opinion of the Court but has been prepared by the Reporter of Decisions for the convenience of the reader. See United States v. Detroit Timber & Lumber Co., 200 U. S. 321, 337.
SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES
Syllabus
MURPHY, GOVERNOR OF NEW JERSEY, ET AL. v. NATIONAL COLLEGIATE ATHLETIC ASSN. ET AL.
CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT
No. 16–476. Argued December 4, 2017—Decided May 14, 2018*
The Professional and Amateur Sports Protection Act (PASPA) makes it unlawful for a State or its subdivisions “to sponsor, operate, adver- tise, promote, license, or authorize by law or compact . . . a lottery, sweepstakes, or other betting, gambling, or wagering scheme based . . . on” competitive sporting events, 28 U. S. C. §3702(1), and for “a person to sponsor, operate, advertise, or promote” those same gam- bling schemes if done “pursuant to the law or compact of a govern- mental entity,” §3702(2). But PASPA does not make sports gambling itself a federal crime. Instead, it allows the Attorney General, as well as professional and amateur sports organizations, to bring civil ac- tions to enjoin violations. §3703. “Grandfather” provisions allow ex- isting forms of sports gambling to continue in four States, §3704(a)(1)–(2), and another provision would have permitted New Jersey to set up a sports gambling scheme in Atlantic City within a year of PASPA’s enactment, §3704(a)(3).
New Jersey did not take advantage of that option but has since had a change of heart. After voters approved an amendment to the State Constitution giving the legislature the authority to legalize sports gambling schemes in Atlantic City and at horseracing tracks, the leg- islature enacted a 2012 law doing just that. The NCAA and three major professional sports leagues brought an action in federal court against New Jersey’s Governor and other state officials (hereinafter New Jersey), seeking to enjoin the law on the ground that it violates
—————— *Together with No. 16–477, New Jersey Thoroughbred Horsemen’s
Assn., Inc. v. National Collegiate Athletic Assn. et al., also on certiorari to the same court.