Combining the liberal and useful arts: Sociological skills in the global economy

The discipline of sociology remains vulnerable in an environment of economic uncertainty and global change. Constraints on higher education are likely to increase and recurrent pressures on traditional liberal arts programs will continue unabated. An older, more diverse, cost-conscious and career-minded student population will increasingly insist on clearer pathways to difficult and bewildering labor markets. But sociology’s weakness as a liberal art may be overcome by combining it with a more applied and practical orientation. The very forces that threaten the discipline’s institutional existence make it profoundly relevant and valuable in an age of social transformation. Based on a familiar Millsian conception of the sociological imagination, this article attempts to combine sociology’s liberal tradition with its role as a “useful art,” honed into the specific features of workplace change and the employment setting. It does so by suggesting five categories of emerging skills in the global economy and ways that sociology has a far reaching claim to their practice and development. The categories are: 1) the skills of knowledge workers; 2) skills in the learning organization; 3) skills in the technological context; 4) skills in the diverse and divided workplace; 5) change-making skills. The article concludes by urging those in the discipline to make sociology more of a useful art that has practical application in a changing world. An earlier version of this article was presented at the Sociological Practice Association 15th Annual Meeting, Denver, Colorado, June 11, 1993.     

The isolation of crime,law, and deviance from the core of sociology

The study of crime, law, and deviance is considered to be an isolated subarea of sociology that draws upon but does not contribute to the core of the discipline. Subareas, the specific and substantive topics of sociology, may be expected to make less obvious and direct contributions to the core than do theory, methodology, social organization, and social psychology as the major areas of sociology. And within subareas, studies that are readily applied may be considered less integrated and contributory to the discipline than the more “pure” or basic science subareas. This analysis examines the relationships between areas, subareas, and the core of sociology; the subject matter of sociological subareas; the actual versus perceptual isolation of crime, law, and deviance studies from the core; and the meaning of contribution. Measurement of contribution is limited to a survey ofSociological Abstracts, theCumulative Index of Sociology Journals, and the 1993 program for the American Sociological Association annual meetings. Comparing area and subarea publications and conference sessions suggests that, contrary to expectations, crime, law, and deviance research constitutes a significant portion of the available knowledge base. The perceived isolation of crime, law, and deviance from sociology may be explained by professional bias against applied studies of stigmatized populations. An earlier draft of this paper was presented at the 1992 American Sociological Association Annual Meetings.     

The impact of sociological orientation on pedagogy: A reconsideration of teacher training in sociology Ph.D. Departments

The emphasis in sociology Ph.D. programs continues to be on training researchers rather than teachers. This is a serious mistake, given the overwhelming proportion of students who go on to academic careers that require at least some time in the classroom. Departments that offer some type of graduate training in teaching focus almost exclusively on the students’ mastery of pedagogical strategies—tools, tips, and techniques for improving their instruction. But this approach neglects students’ assumptions about sociology as a discipline—or their sociological orientations—that underlie and inform their pedagogical choices. This paper explicates the relationship between sociological orientation and pedagogical practice, and asserts that graduate students need to consider their orientation to the discipline before stepping inside a classroom. This may be effectively accomplished through a required year-long seminar to be taken during the second year of graduate study. The first semester would be devoted to the issues, debates, and questions that currently characterize the discipline. The second would consider the “nuts and bolts” of teaching, and how pedagogical practice derives from sociological orientation. Students would also work as teaching assistants before, during, and after completing the seminar. They would then be required to teach at least one course of their choice before graduating. During this first teaching experience, each graduate student would work closely with a faculty mentor. An earlier version of this paper was presented at the 2003 annual meeting of the Eastern Sociological Society. I wish to thank Michael Lewis, Joya Misra, Afshan Jafar, Brian Kapitulik, and the editor of the American Sociologist for their help in improving this paper.     

“It’s not rocket science!“: High school sociology teachers’ conceptions of sociology

Since academic sociology’s birth in this country, sociologists have not been shy about publicly praising and ridiculing the discipline. Though sociologists have been the primary participants in the seemingly endless debates about sociology’s proper subject matter, methods, and purpose, there is another group that has also struggled over the past 95 years to formulate a conception of the discipline—high school sociology teachers. At this point, we know virtually nothing about what the thousands of high school teachers who offer sociology each year, actually think about the discipline. This paper uses questionnaire and interview data collected from high school sociology teachers to examine their thoughts on four topics: (1) sociology’s strengths, (2) its weaknesses, (3) whether high school students are capable of understanding the discipline, and (4) appropriate course objectives. The results indicate that high school teachers view sociology quite differently from academic sociologists, and that their conceptions are based primarily on “textbook sociology.” I conclude by discussing the far-reaching implications of teachers’ current thinking about the discipline. I wish to thank Larry nichols for offering helpful comments on an earliar draft of this paper.     

Gender differences in patterns of publication in leading sociology journals, 1960–1985

This paper examines the impact of the recent feminization of the sociological profession on gender differences in patterns of publication in leading sociology journals. Our findings show that women are better represented in the leading journals in an absolute sense, but continue to be underrepresented relative to men. Moreover, while women are better represented in the leading journals than in the past, they more often occupy marginal locations within the structure of the discipline. Finally, we discuss the likely implications of the feminization of sociology on the production of knowledge within the discipline as a whole. His interests include social theory, stratification, organizations, and the sociology of science. His interests include criminology, criminal justice, and the sociology of science. Ann M. Rotchford is a doctoral candidate in sociology at the State University of New York at Stony Brook. Her interests include organizations and sex stratification. An earlier version of this paper was presented at the 1988 Southern Sociological Society meetings.     

A Canadian rejoinder: Sociology north and south of the border

In response to the recent The American Sociologist special issue on Canadian sociology, this rejoinder dialogues with some of the perspectives offered there on the discipline north of the border with an eye towards lessons that American sociologists might learn from the Canadian experience. My reflections build on a larger analytic piece entitled “Canada’s Impossible Science: The Historical and Institutional Origins of the Coming Crisis of Anglo-Canadian Sociology” to be published soon in The Canadian Journal Sociology. Particular attention is paid to the different institutional arrangements of higher education in Canada and the United States, Anglo-Canadian reliance on the particularly English “weakness as strength” strategy for sociology, tensions between the cultural values of populism, egalitarianism, and excellence, and the trade-offs between professional and public intellectual work. A critique is offered of the “origin myth” of Canadian sociology as a particularly vibrant “critical sociology,” with discussion of Dorothy Smith's influence on sociology in Canada. His research interests are in sociological theory, the sociology of culture, and the study of intellectuals from the perspective of the sociology of organisations and professions. He is studying Edward Said as a “global public intellectual” as part of a Canadian government-funded interdisciplinary grant on “Globalization and Autonomy” at McMaster University. He is also working “Canadian professors as public intellectuals,” a project also funded by the Social Science and Humanities Research Council of Canada.     

Changes in the stratification structure of sociology, 1964–1992

Early sociological studies of the American higher education system noted that despite a widespread ideology of egalitarianism, both individuals and departments are highly stratified. Their main findings were that 1) the distribution of Ph.D. departments in any given field tended to cluster at the low end of the prestige hierarchy; 2) a few elite graduate programs graduated the vast majority of all Ph.D.’s awarded in the United States; 3) downward mobility for all but a handful of Ph.D.’s was inevitable; and 4) elite graduate programs protected their prestige through inbreeding. Since those studies there have been few attempts to document changes in the structure of stratification in scientific disciplines in general, and sociology in particular. I use longitudinal data on departments and individual data on recent sociology Ph.D.’s to study changes in the structure of the stratification system in sociology over the past 30 years. My results reflect a mixed picture of change and stability; while the distribution of departmental prestige, the production of Ph.D.’s, and inbreeding mechanisms have shifted since 1964, the pattern of placement of new Ph.D’s in doctorate-granting departments has changed very little. Portions of this paper were presented at the annual meeting of the Eastern Sociological Society, Baltimore, MD, March 1994.     

Reflections on public sociology: Public relations, disciplinary identity, and the strong program in professional sociology

Public sociology is an attempt to redress the issues of public engagement and disciplinary identity that have beset the discipline over the past several decades. While public sociology seeks to rectify the public invisibility of sociology, this paper investigates the limitations of it program. Several points of critique are offered. First, public sociology's affiliations with Marxism serve to potentially entrench existing divisions within the discipline. Second, public sociology's advancement of an agenda geared toward a “sociology for publics” instead of a “sociology of publics” imposes limitations on the development of a public interface. Third, the lack of a methodological agenda for public sociology raises concerns of how sociology can compete within a contested climate of public opinion. Fourth, issues of disciplinary coherence are not necessarily resolved by public sociology, and are potentially exacerbated by the invocation of public sociology as a new disciplinary identity. Fifth, the incoherence of professional sociology is obviated, and a misleading affiliation is made between scientific knowledge and the hegemonic structure of the profession. Finally, the idealism of public sociology's putative defense of civil society is explored as a Utopian gesture akin to that of Habermas’ attempt to revive the public sphere. The development of a strong program in professional sociology is briefly offered as a means to repair the disciplinary problems that are illustrated by emergence of the project of public sociology.     

Catholic Sociology in Ireland in Comparative Perspective

This paper examines the relationship between the Catholic Church and Irish sociology within a comparative framework. Drawing on archival and documentary research, this linkage is investigated at an institutional and intellectual level, across three stages of the “career” of Irish Catholic sociology, and employing comparisons with Catholic sociology in France, Germany, and the United States. I discern important sources of variation between the four cases including major intellectuals, organisational hosts, and publishing outlets. Irish Catholic sociology’s quite sudden movement in the direction of secular sociology in the 1950s is explained as a result of normative pressure to jettison its value-driven orientation as a result of more frequent interaction with the mainstream discipline via scholarly collaboration, the reforms of Vatican II emphasising engagement with the modern world, the demise of the broader Catholic Action movement of which it was a part, and changes in the national higher education environment.     

Classical theory,postmodernism, and the sociology liberal arts curriculum

This article presents classical theory as a modernist endeavor to apprehend the phenomenon of “unity of disunity.” It presents the three ways that classical theory comes to grips with the problem of wholes and parts: the holism of Durkheim, the dialectical materialism of Marx, and the pluralism of Weber. It argues that postmodernism liquidates, rather than solves, the unity of disunity problem by treating “wholes” as mere appearances. The article contends that postmodernism needs to be taken more seriously than it has been by sociologists but that, ultimately, the challenge presented by postmodernism validates the relevancy of classical theory. The article concludes that the postmodernist influence has diminished sociology’s relevance to real-world problems and, as a result, made the discipline less relevant for undergraduates. It calls for a revitalized sociology of sociology with the capacity to think through the trap formed by neoconservatism on the one side and the micro politics of postmodernism on the other.     

Caroline Bartlett Crane and the history of sociology: Salvation, sanitation, and the social gospel

This article investigates the relationship between Progressive era (1890–1920) social reform and the origins of American sociology with a view of the vital contributions of women in these endeavors. I observe the efforts of the first generation of sociologists to legitimate and delineate the field in the “social construction” of the discipline of sociology, as they attempted to combine Christianity, the social gospel, and socialism into a new and unique ideology. In this article I examine the archival material of Progressive era reformer, Caroline Bartlett Crane (1858–1935), a Unitarian minister and student in the sociology department of the University of Chicago in 1896, to address the relationship between theology, sociology, and social reform from a woman’s perspective.     

When Robert E. Park was (Re) writing “the city”: Biography,the social survey,and the science of sociology

Sociological production is a situated and embodied activity carried out by individuals inserted in actual social relations. Considering that this feature has an influence upon the content of scholarly literature and that it can be revealed in the scientific text itself, I propound a new interpretation of the writing process of Robert E. Park's “The City,” the famous paper he published initially in 1915. Customarily depicted as a manifesto for an autonomous urban sociology, I argue on the contrary that its general economy has to be linked to Park's biographical background. When he affiliated with the Sociology Department at the University of Chicago, Park was brought to teach a course on the social survey. “The City” was to be the academic expression of his point of view on the topic. Park's biographical encounters with some active promoters of the social survey approach are evidenced and their influence onhis 1915 essay is carefully analyzed, showing notably that curious intellectual omissions in “The City” can be traced back to these previous encounters. Park's latter texts, and the 1925 revised version of “The City” in particular, are shown to provide the interwar sociologists with a peculiar narrative about the history of sociology: Park's predecessors are deliberately confined in a pre-scientific stage of the discipline and Park's original essay is presented as a seminal research program destined to be later fulfilled by the newly established urban sociologists. The author wishes to thank the anonymous reviewers for their insightful and helpful comments on the first draft of the paper, Lawrence T. Nichols for his kindly editorial guidence, and Jacques Marquet and Felice Dassetto for their marerial support.     

North Central Sociological Association Presidential Address the Community College Conundrum: Pitfalls and Possibilities of Professional Sociological Associations

Abstract

This presidential address examines the “community college conundrum” within our discipline. Although it is reported that 44 percent of first-time undergraduate students attend community colleges, community college faculty are underrepresented in the American Sociological Association (ASA) and within our regional associations. This lack of participation has two roots: (1) our disciplinary lack of interest in studying community college education as a unit of analysis; and (2) the failure by sociologists to understand community college education as a social justice concern. Data for this study include an assessment of membership and participation in our disciplinary associations, content analysis of the journal Teaching Sociology, and a review of ASA syllabi sets. Findings reveal a common theme: community college sociologists are ignored and afforded a marginal status—a “less than” status—within our discipline. Recommendations include calling on the ASA and all sociologists to recognize the importance of community colleges in doing the work of “public sociology.”     

Altruism and social solidarity: Envisioning a field of specialization

Conclusion This article has presented a vision of what a field of altruism and social solidarity could potentially involve. An additional perspective on the nature of this field and how it could contribute to the discipline and to society is provided by the science of psychology. In the last decade a fundamental new orientation has developed in this discipline, growing from the pioneering work of Martin E.P. Seligman. Generally identified as “positive psychology” it represents a shift from a focus on trying to understand and find solutions to mental illness and various pathologies of thought and behavior in a “disease model” to a focus on human strengths, virtues, and other positive characteristics. This shift in focus is regarded as making a direct contribution to understanding what is best in human emotions and traits and how society can support the psychological flourishing of individuals. This new perspective in turn provides increased awareness of how the problems studied in the disease model can more effectively be prevented (Seligman, 2003, 2005). The importance of this focus on the positive for sociology and a call to action is stated by Seligman (2003): The third pillar of positive psychology is the study of positive institutions and positive communities.     

The many faces of sociology: Ambivalence and conflict in graduate education

This article addresses how the ambivalence of the discipline of sociology affects students’ understanding of it. We consider this ambivalence as multi-layered. The first level embodies the usefulness of sociology as a discipline and sociologists’ ambivalence toward their profession. The second involves applying a sociological perspective to our everyday lives. We discuss the administrative organization of our department, the examination structure, and the structure of asymetric power relations. We conclude that one possible solution toward resolving ambivalences both in our everyday lives and within the profession is to take our critical theoretical training seriously. with special interests in social psychology and qualitative research. She is planning a dissertation on how ideology affects the structure of battered women’s shelters. Barbara G. Brents is a Ph.D. candidate at the University of Missouri with special interests in political economy and aging. She currently is working on a dissertation entitled “The Class Politics of Age: The Social Security Act of 1935.”     

Sociology in the high school: Perceptions of those who teach it

The following research note reports two major findings of a more detailed study of the opinions, training, and practices of teachers of high school sociology in Texas. Two major findings of interest to the discipline emerge from the research: (1) high school teachers are only marginally prepared in the field of sociology itself; (2) teachers generally give sociology's reputation as a discipline a favorable rating, while at the same time showing concerns about whether or not they would recommend sociology as a college major. The implications of teacher attitudes and training for the discipline are explored.     

Critical sociologies and ressentiment: The examples of C. Wright Mills and Howard Becker

It is widely acknowledged that American sociology underwent a metamorphosis during the 1960s. This transformation was both paradigmatic and political. Advocates of critical theory, broadly understood, driven by a markedly leftist political sensitivity, took center stage in that turbulent decade and marginalized proponents of formerly authoritative frameworks such as Functionalism, in general, or Parsonsian action theory while casting suspicion upon sociological work presuming to be objective and value-free, i.e., “scientific.” Among the formidable figures who engineered this paradigm shift were C. Wright Mills and Howard Becker, both of whom have been elevated to iconic status. They are presumed to have helped lead professional sociology out of the dark ages and to have invigorated the discipline with a constructive humanism that attended to real social problems and which called for a better world, one committed to a genuine egalitarianism. In the final analysis, however, there is reason to doubt whether the works of Mills and Becker—and the metamorphosis they helped bring about—were at all constructive and humanistic. Rather, the evidence seems to suggest that the motive force behind Mills’ and Becker’s research was ressentiment. Following Max Scheler’s classic work on the subject of negative feelings in modern society, I argue that Mills and Becker were ultimately driven by an egalitarianism that was neither affirming nor loving. Rather, this egalitarianism was essentially leveling, content to forever dismantle social realities and lower entities presumed elite without ever reconstituting the world. Thus, Mills and Becker (and by extension large coteries of contemporary sociologists) were against many things, but for very little; the objects of their criticism were clear enough, but their meliorative agendas were either absent altogether, or, when pressed, incoherent from self-contradiction. And, as Scheler contended, critical sociological work bereft of an affirming voice contributes to the negation of value. The author is indebted to Harold J. Bershady and Richard Farnum who contributed to an earlier version of this paper. The author thanks editor Lawrence Nichols and the anonymous reviewers for their constructive criticisms.     

Questioning textbook truth: Suicide rates and the Hawthorne effect

Advocacy and interest groups routinely make fantastic and shocking claims in an effort to motivate the public to respond to what these groups perceive to be important but neglected social problems and/or incipient “crises.” When closer scrutiny impeaches these claims, these groups lose a measure of credibility, and the general public grows increasingly cynical of them and of the social sciences whose data and research presumably support the claim. Similar temptations and dangers may face sociology. I raise the possibility that the teaching of discredited findings and discoveries and the use of gimmicks that challenge conventional wisdom and common sense may turn our students off and trigger the same distrust and cynicism engendered by advocacy groups. Ironically, giving in to the temptation to shock and surprise rather than to inform and enlighten may foreclose the very real opportunities that exist for engaging our students and the public in the enterprise of sociology. He has been teaching introductory sociology for nearly thirty years, has published a number of articles on macrosociology and ecological-evolutionary theory, and is coauthor of the sixth, seventh, eighth, and ninth editions of Human Societies: An Introduction to Macrosociology. I thank Sang-moon Kim for his help in assembling and analyzing the introductory texts, and Paul Nisbet for his help in reviewing recent research on religion and suicide. A preliminary version of this paper was presented at the session, “Philosophical Foundations of Sociological Knowledge and Applied Sociology,” Joseph Gittler, organizer and présider, at the Annual Southern Sociological Society Meetings in 1995, in Atlanta, G A.     

Back to the future: Settlement sociology, 1885–1930

Between 1885 and. 1930, as sociology was becoming an academic discipline, sociology was also being practiced intelligently, innovatively, and self-consciously outside the academy in the social settlements that grew up in America’s major cities. In this paper, we first define and give a brief overview of the settlement movement in America; second, we show how the settlement workers were sociologists in their self-definition and action and in their relations with other sociologists; third, in the body of the paper, we describe the sociology done by the settlements in terms of the empirical research they undertook and the theory they created. Our argument is that settlement sociologists produced empirical studies that were both substantively significant and methodologically pioneer-ing; that they did so in terms of a coherent social theory unique in its focus on “the neighborly relation”; and that both their research and theory were part of a critical, reflexive, and activist sociology.