Search

C. Wright Mills' The Sociological Imagination (1959) represents one of the most influential texts of postwar American sociology. The title has become a catchphrase that stands for a style of thought that transcends both theoretical dogma and the constraints of mere methodological rule following. This article sets out to show that Mills' vision of the sociological imagination had more in common with the then dominant lines of scholarship than his broadside against Parsonian grand theory and Lazarsfeldian abstracted empiricism in the main part of the book would suggest. Among the tools that Mills introduced as fostering the sociological imagination were 2 × 2 tables. The article traces the use of such tables over time and across scholarly communities and shows that, contrary to Mills' own estimate, these tables describe a common nexus between his own work and that of Parsons and Lazarsfeld. All three scholars made ample use of this formal tool to construct sociological arguments at central places of their oeuvre. Given its shared use across otherwise divergent schools, the 2 × 2 table is a prime example for what historians of science have called paper tools, i.e. statistical formulas, algorithms, tables, diagrams, graphs, etc., that structure scientific research across different schools of thought and theoretical approaches. Drawing on the notion of paper tools, the article advances a post-Kuhnian perspective on the history of sociology that shifts the research focus from substantive ideas to formal tools and demonstrates elements of commensurability among presumably incommensurable schools of thought. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article analyzes the Amherst papers in relation to development of Parsons' theory. A careful analysis of the Amherst papers reveals that the basic ideas and philosophical principles that Parsons followed throughout his life were already in place, some more fully developed than others, yet forming an integrally coherent pattern to a surprising degree. The clear existence in Parsons's Amherst papers of a metatheoretical framework predating his later professional writing calls into question some still existing myths about radical breaks in the development of Parsons's theory. In one version of this mythology, Parsons began his theory as a voluntarist, then became a structural-functionalist, later moved on to become a systems-theorist and ended up as a social evolutionist. Despite such claims, Parsons always was a voluntarist, even during his so-called structural-functionalist middle period. The Amherst papers reveal an amazingly complex and logically coherent theoretical system-in the mind of a twenty-year-young man-and testify to an extraordinary scope of philosophical depth, and intellectual maturity.

This article comments on a paper by David Jenness, which focused on the efforts of the Consortium of Social Science Associations (COSSA) in organizing the social sciences in their own interest. The future of federal support for sociology will depend on the continued mobilization efforts of COSSA and upon public recognition of sociological contributions to the realization of two prime sets of values. Much has been written since 1981, when Reaganism became the guiding hand and official ideology at the federal level, of the need for new academic-industry partnerships. Most often, research training and subject-matter expertise were the initial factors to employment. Marketable skills opened opportunities that would have been shut to someone simply proclaiming sociology as his or her trade or profession. The virtues of a range of sociological skills are recognized much more readily: for information and intelligence, for systems analysis and design, for social trend analysis and forecasting, and in general for systematic scouting of the environment within which organized efforts in the public and private sectors operate, flourish, or decline. Herbert Costner once referred to this aspect of applied work as reconnaissance sociology.

This paper presents an account of the conditions and consequences of a university-level teaching experience in the sociology of fame centered on the case of Lady Gaga. When the course "Lady Gaga and the Sociology of the Fame" at the University of South Carolina was announced in the autumn of 2010, it became the number-one Lady Gaga news story, reported and discussed in a wide variety of internet sources and media outlets across the world. The unprecedented attention devoted to the course placed its instructor in an unexpected and unique position to experience various dimensions of contemporary celebrity culture while teaching on that very subject matter. This paper offers a sociological autobiography to discuss this experience as a manifestation of the reflexivity of social knowledge and the interplay between sociology and society.

Using fiction in teaching sociology involves what Harvey Sacks calls "sociological reconstruction". Numerous comments on teaching sociology provide advice and suggestions on the use of literature and "what counts" as "sociological" literature, including specific titles. This paper goes further: while the use of literature is a routine feature of sociological accounts, discerning the relevance of a novel, or a passage within a novel, to sociological themes is an analyst's achievement. It requires work both by the teacher and the student to recognize the relevance of fiction to sociology. Previous studies on fiction in sociology focus on the pedagogic aspects of using novels but fail to acknowledge the key problem of "sociological reconstruction" attempted through the use of novels. The paper explicates the crucial and generic issue of "corpus status", which is fore-grounded by the use of non-sociological materials in sociology.

According to a 2002 study by the U.S. Department of Education, the percentage of "traditional students" on college campuses is declining. Students increasingly are delaying enrollment, attending college part time, working full time, financially independent, and single parents. In this paper, we explore the extent to which sociologists are adapting their teaching to address these shifting demographics. Based on a content analysis of articles published over a 20 year period in "Teaching Sociology" that suggest strategies for teaching social class inequality we find that most authors assume that their students are "traditional." Most often this means that students are assumed to come from a privileged, middle class background, lack direct and substantial experience in the labor market, and enter college shortly after graduating high school. Accordingly, most articles advocate classroom strategies of "looking down," whereby students pretend to be in the shoes of those less fortunate. Examples include creating household budgets based on poverty wages, playing board games, or assuming the role of the poor for a day. These strategies run the risk of being ineffective, alienating, and potentially ethically suspect when used with non-traditional students, whose real life experiences may resemble these simulations. We conclude with recommendations for pedagogical approaches to teaching social class inequality that are more appropriate for, and inclusive of, students from diverse backgrounds. Our goal in this paper is to start a discussion about pedagogy, social inequality, and the non-traditional student.

In the following paper we argue that the conventional "Introduction to Sociology" survey course should be restructured because such courses try to survey an unsurveyable body of knowledge and they do not teach the application of sociological research. The conventional intro course should be replaced with an intro course that surveys the types of social dynamics that sociologists typically research and the methods they use to do so. We propose a semester-long intro course with four case study learning-units that are chosen for their coverage of the underlying sociological dynamics, methods, and core concepts. We contend that case study learning-units which concentrate on topical issues and core sociological concepts are better suited for an introduction course.

There has been renewed interest over the past 5 years among sociologists in empirically examining the status of sociology in high school. The few studies that have recently been conducted, however, have focused almost exclusively on high school sociology teachers. The nature and structure of the courses themselves have been largely ignored. Given the American Sociological Association's recent attempts to develop and implement an Advanced Placement course, it seems especially important to examine the characteristics of existing sociology courses. This paper uses the results of a national mail survey to describe and discuss three aspects of the nature and structure of a random sample of sociology courses that were offered during the 2005-06 school year: instructional materials and pedagogical resources, teaching techniques, and course content. I demonstrate that these aspects of the courses look remarkably similar across the country: Teachers rely overwhelmingly on standard introductory textbooks to structure their courses. They are also apt to utilize supplemental materials from textbook publishers and from newspapers and newsmagazines, and to use a combination of lecture and discussion in their sociology classes. The paper concludes with recommendations for future research.

How has sociology evolved over the last 40 years? In this paper, we examine networks built on thousands of sociology-relevant papers to map sociology's position in the wider social sciences and identify changes in the most prominent research fronts in the discipline. We find first that sociology seems to have traded centrality in the field of social sciences for internal cohesion: sociology is central, but not nearly as well bounded as neighboring disciplines such as economics or law. Internally, sociology appears to have moved away from research topics associated with fundamental social processes and toward social-problems research. We end by discussing strategies for extending this work to wider science production networks.

This paper examines the idea of sociological film that encourages sociological imagination, which refers to the capability to recognize the intersection of biography and history. The paper identifies six key dimensions of sociological film through a thematic analysis of different classic approaches to sociological imagination: sociological life, structure-actors relationship, critical perspective, academic awareness, fluidity of meaning, and promotion of sociological imagination. This paper provides concrete examples to demonstrate the distinctive features of sociological film and how it relates to, and differs from, other films that address social issues, including documentary films. The paper argues that sociological film is essential in fostering sociological imagination by offering a unique lens for analyzing and understanding social phenomena. Sociological film has the potential to inspire social change by increasing awareness about significant social issues and promoting critical thinking and reflection. The paper concludes by emphasizing the significance of collaboration between sociologists and filmmakers in advancing sociological imagination through the medium of sociological films. It highlights the importance of actively engaging with the public in visual research methods. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Discourse and ideology are interrelated concepts in social sciences and the humanities and are even occasionally employed interchangeably. This paper sheds light on their relationship in academic discourse and examines the role of sociology as a scientific field in its conceptualization. Using bibliometric analysis, we examined 15,716 academic publications mentioning "discourse" or "ideology" in their title and written in English by American and British scholars between 1966 and 2015. The investigation focused on the two terms' conceptual environment, areas of usage, journals, and the organizations to which the authors were affiliated. First, we conclude that although some sociology researchers have attempted to create a sociological definition for the concept of discourse, sociologists are not its most active users. The same is true for ideology. These concepts have established niches in other disciplines (political science and history for "ideology," and educational science and linguistics for "discourse"). Second, throughout the years, the field of discourse studies has become more diversified and fragmented than that of ideology. Third, the leading organizations in both fields are prestigious American and British universities, which indicates that discourse and ideology are elements of the intellectual elites' language. Fourth, the concept of discourse was more frequently applied than that of ideology in the years 2010–2015, and we expect that it will remain popular among scholars in the next decade. As for ideology, we believe that new social challenges could foster the rediscovery of this concept in the near future. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Recent reflections on the state of publications in sociology (Becker, 2003) suggest that article titles are getting longer. I test this hypothesis with data from ASR since inception and a wider sample of papers from Sociological Abstracts between 1963 and 1999. My results indicate a rapid and widespread increase in title length. Further analyses suggest that title length does not predict citation, suggesting that long titles are not an avenue for getting more readers. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The contribution is based on Robert Bellah's introduction to Emile Durkheim on Morality and Society (1973) and second on other references to the French sociologist in Bellah's work as well as in Bortolini's insightful remarks on the "homology" between Durkheim and Bellah. The publication of the book took place in a time of Durkheimian effervescence: Steven Lukes' Emile Durkheim.His Life and Work was published on the same year and a new Durkheimology appeared in the English-speaking world: attention shifted from methodology, as expressed in Suicide or in the Rules of Sociological Method, to morality with a focus on the moral basis on a non-pathological society. Bellah's statement is quite strong: Durkheim can "be seen as a theologian of French civil religion". The paper will examine's this point of view with respect to the state of French society at the turn of the century and Durkheim's social project. One side question concerns the choice of texts: the editor did not give enough weight to texts that might have strengthen Bellah's point of view, particularly l'Education morale. Bortolini mentions Bob's long and silent work on Durkheim and his critique of mainstream analysis of The Elementary forms of Religious Life, reducing religion to a mere projection of society (:142). The biographer insists on the ambivalent, if not contradictory, vision of Durkheim in Bellah's work, in which he finds a key to the interpretation of the oeuvre. The article focuses on how to account for its complexity, which is never as clear as in the interpretation of Durkheim's sociology in a post-rationalist direction. Bortolini's concept of role model/hero incarnated by the founding fathers (here Weber and Durkheim) is analyzed in connection with Parsons' reconstitution of a pantheon. The question of civil religion is reexamined in the light of the transatlantic transfers carrying different meanings of civil religion. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

An editorial is presented on sociologists conceptualizing and studying hope along with several other papers on diverse topics. Topics include refection on the state of historical consciousness in U.S. sociology, and a discussion of the recent trend toward the pre-registration and registration of research designs; and study of "social pathology" such as poverty, illness, racial/ethnic discrimination.

Despite being a decade into the 21st century, sociological theory continues to be taught at the undergraduate and graduate level in nearly every program in the United States as if it were still 1970. 40 years ago, it made sense to dichotomize theory into two courses--"classical" and "contemporary"--because the latter of the two only covered theory from about the 1930s to the "present." Today a literal and figurative "time crunch" has emerged that makes teaching theory difficult and at times, arbitrary based on the professor's training, mentor, ideological/epistemological biases, and structural factors like textbook choice and number of academic weeks allotted per course. That is, we spend a large amount of time debating who should be in or out, and not enough time preparing our students for the application of theory towards the ultimate goal: knowledge about the social world. Students, then, leave confused at how one uses theory, what theory actually is, and, often times, disengaged from theory because of the density with which some theories approach the social world. In the paper below, the "time crunch" and its tendency to produce a "lost generation" of theorists is examined. After elucidating how the "time crunch" constrains sociology, four possible solutions are presented. This list of solutions is neither definitive nor exhaustive, and is meant to generate a rich discussion about the direction the discipline should head in the new century.

Previous research has found that there is a good deal of stability in departmental prestige, but has not considered its long-term dynamics. This paper investigates a hypothesis implied by some accounts in the sociology of science and organizational theory: that there will be a permanent component of prestige associated with the department or university. The data are the ratings of graduate departments of sociology between 1965 and 2007 using a measure of prestige constructed from hiring patterns. There is no evidence of a permanent component for individual departments, but there is evidence of a permanent difference between departments in "elite" universities and those in other universities. Despite change in rankings within each group, the difference between the groups remained constant over the period. That is, there appear to be enduring barriers that limit the mobility of individual departments.

Although much overlooked by both sociologists and educators, Emile Durkheim's "The Evolution of Educational Thought" ("EET"; lectures from 1904-1905) not only provides extended insight into the developmental flows and disjunctures of Western education and scholarship from the classical Greek era to Durkheim's own time but also indicates the fundamentally sociological nature of these transformations. As well, and in contrast to the more heavily structuralist, Cartesian rationalist approach that Durkheim adopts in his earlier, better known works (especially "The Division of Labor in Society," "Rules of the Sociological Method," and "Suicide"), Durkheim's "EET" may be better characterized as a historically informed, sociological pragmatist approach to the study of education as a humanly engaged process. Given the extended amount of material covered in "EET" and the necessity of establishing in some detail Durkheim's position on the development of educational thought over the preceding 2000 years, it has been necessary to divide this material into smaller packages for the purpose of presentation. In the first six chapters of "EET" Durkheim addresses (a) the Greek and Latin foundations of educational thought in France, (b) the role that the early Christian church assumed in shaping and preserving education and scholarship, and (c) the nature and emphasis of the Carolingian Renaissance (8th and 9th centuries), along with its relevance for the development of universities in Europe. Following (1) an introduction to Durkheim's "EET," (2) a synopsis of the first six chapters of "EET," and (3) a highly compacted overview of the remaining 21 chapters of this volume, this paper concludes with (4) a commentary on the necessity of attending to the historical development of Western social thought for a sociological analysis of knowing and acting. An epilogue briefly considers (5) some ways that sociologists, classicists, and other students of the human condition may contribute to this exceptionally consequential venture.

It is a truism to remind ourselves that scientific theory is a human product subject to many of the same social processes that govern other social acts. Science, however, whether social or natural, pretends to claim a higher mission, a more sophisticated methodology, and more consequential and reliable outcomes than human efforts arising from other spheres. The present paper examines the propagation, ascension, acceptance, and demise of twentieth century criminological theories in the United States. Data from publications in peer reviewed journals over the last 30 years suggest that several non-scientific factors are most influential in determining which theories are tested, cited, and discussed in criminological circles.

In studies ranging from oracular practices and court proceedings to alternative philosophies, reality disjunctures, and a family's work in maintaining the normality of a severely retarded child, Mel Pollner put together something like a cabinet of curiosities exhibiting the social character of reasoning's worldly enterprises. At the same time, he felt that ethnomethodology--and, in particular, ethnomethodological studies of work--had taken a wrong direction, turning away from disciplinary sociology's sociological project. This paper, by examining the play of bridge, soccer, checkers, and chess, reconsiders this position and illustrates some of the peculiarities of a sociology of the witnessable social order.

The so-called "Bellah affair at Princeton" began in March 1973 when a harsh but nonetheless ordinary academic fight over the appointment of Robert N. Bellah as a permanent member of the Institute for Advanced Study at Princeton found its way to the wider public sphere. Using published and unpublished evidence, the paper shows how two different interpretations of academic freedom were put forward by Bellah's supporters and opponents, and how the sociological profession understood the episode as a disciplinary attack on the part of the hard sciences and historical disciplines. The emerging symbolic constellation led all the relevant actors to develop a shared interest in the rapid oblivion of the episode: the Bellah affair became a lose-lose game which all the players wanted to end as rapidly as possible.

The sociology review process is broken. There are too many reviews per paper and the norm that all papers go through a revise and resubmit process burns through reviewers, slows down the publication process, creates distorted papers as authors try to satisfy incompatible demands, and puts too high a premium on novelty over methodological rigor. Editors should get fewer reviews per paper and make editorial decisions. No new reviewers should be added in reviewing a revised manuscript. Peer review should not be treated as an opportunity to receive editorial assistance and mentoring and instead should be focused on ensuring that published papers are correct. Asking for large numbers of reviews will not solve the problem that sociologists do not agree on their standards. The reviewer problem points to larger questions about the structure of sociology as a field, the need for more venues for publishing solid empirical work, and the importance of replications. It also points to the structure of academic publishing in which for-profit publishers make money by selling to university libraries the products of the free labor of university professors. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Reflecting on my experiences as a graduate student, I argue that the terminology of public sociology should be dropped. The public sociology rhetoric is at odds with the fundamental professional reality in the discipline. Sociology, as a "hyper-professionalized" endeavor, primarily values abstract, explanatory theories, even if those theories make the world less descriptively comprehensible to people seeking to act in the world. Moreover, I question whether sociologists, as a professional class, should or can take on the public position as the partisan representatives of civil society and marginalized peoples. Instead, I argue for a greater openness within professional sociology to descriptive work, as well as more departmental supports for graduate students to pursue careers outside of sociology. Sociologists interested in public engagement should focus primarily on cataloguing and practical evaluation of engaged research tactics and community oriented teaching strategies, rather than theoretical discussions of what sociology can or should be.

This essay explores the question of why sociology departments, compared to other university departments, are often viewed negatively by higher-level administrators (deans, provosts, chancellors and presidents). We are asked to consider, as sociologists, how departments are ranked and evaluated by administrators. The characteristics of any good university department are identified (e.g., grants, support from alumni, publications, quality of teaching, national rankings, student enrollments); and, the characteristics of dynamic and healthy departments are outlined (e.g., student learning is primary; there is a commitment to the goals of the larger organization; leadership is provided by the unit to solve all-university problems; there is a focus on learning; faculty are productive; there are strong communication links across the organization). The question is posed and then systemically answered as to how sociology departments compare in terms of these standards. It is suggested that a major factor in terms of how and why sociology departments are negatively evaluated is the fact that sociology uses narratives of power and explanations of organizational behavior that are inherently oppositional, i.e., there is an "us" and "them" mentally that sometimes develops. Other reasons for organizational marginalization are identified such as the "canon wars" and their lingering effects, and the fact that the sociological enterprise has been diluted by the teaching of "sociology" in many other campus units, such as composition programs. Finally, questions are raised about how sociology, as an intellectual enterprise, differs from other disciplines in terms of pedagogy, the sequencing of courses, "grand" theory, and forms of apprenticeship. It is recommended that sociologists act positively to help the organizations within which they work to identify common problems and solve them. It is argued that sociology can and should "own" the area of civic engagement as a means of making a positive and distinctive contribution. Sociological "stories" grounded in the reality of everyday life are compelling. It is suggested that sociologists need to deepen connections with their communities and to offer real solutions to real problems.

Sociology exists in a dynamic academic environment that influences how students view and evaluate the discipline. This essay explores the changing academic context of sociology through the author's experience as a professor and department chair over a span of four decades. Increased co-curricular programming, changing student goals, and more competitive disciplinary neighbors present sociology departments with new challenges in attracting students. Central to these challenges is the erosion of sociology's once distinctive niche in the academic ecology. Questions and suggestions are explored regarding adaptive strategies that might enable sociology to find a niche wherein it can thrive.

In this essay, the authors present data collected in mixed-method and multi-phased projects that reveal some troubling contradictions within the discipline of Sociology. From a range of respondents, students through college presidents, several themes emerge that may not bode well for Sociology if left unchecked. Most important are the conflicting demands to provide large General Education classes while maintaining a robust, rigorous curriculum for Sociology majors; to meet university standards for scholarly production while allowing for work that is not within the traditional definitions of research; and to increase interdisciplinary collaboration without diluting the discipline.

In some respects, sociologists might seem to be the least obvious candidates for a deanship. They question authority and debunk bureaucracy. Yet they can be found in dean's offices serving successfully. This paper discusses the seeming contradiction between the discipline of sociology and the position of academic dean. It is argued that the discipline of sociology can prepare one to succeed at deaning in numerous ways, including transitioning into the role, resolving unavoidable role conflict, and adopting an administrator's perspective.

This paper traces the history of the development of programs in ethnomethodology at Boston University and Manchester University by offering comparisons with the ideal type model of "school," The Chicago School of Sociology. It focuses primarily on institutional structures and arrangements rather than shared theoretical or methodological perspectives. It shows that a small core faculty, aided by extended collegial and research relationships in the local area and with visiting and part-time faculty, can develop and sustain a program over several decades.

Through the in-depth analysis of the features of Huabei rural industrialization, the unique factory regime in Baigou, Hebei, and the resulting special workers, this paper reveals two dilemmas the migrant workers in Baigou and larger Hubei area face: Because of the interpersonal network of labor market, personalized trade, familial labor process, and patrimonial management, the workers are unable to become either industrial working class or citizens. Facing this special group of workers, we still believe in their power of self-liberation. Drawing on Touraine's action sociology and sociological intervention, and Burawoy's public sociology and praxis-oriented research, we modify "sociological intervention" according to the reality of Chinese society and propose the methodology of "strong sociological intervention" whose vehicle is "Baigou Migrant Worker Night School." The night school provided workers with courses of labor law, English, and computer based on their actual needs. Labor law is the core to evoke the self-consciousness of the workers. Through communications in the night school and workers' real living circumstances, we collected their true information and treated it as the source of sociological knowledge. After three sessions of night school training, workers showed changes in skills, social, and psychological aspects, laying a foundation for the growth of self-consciousness.

Higher education is in crisis, especially in the public sector. Over the past few years, tuition at state universities across the country has increased dramatically, their budgets have been slashed and federal funding for need-based financial aid has been reduced. The results are increased class sizes, fewer course offerings, more adjunct faculty and fewer working-class students at public colleges and universities. In Massachusetts, where we teach, these trends are particularly pronounced. In this paper, we describe "Crisis in Higher Education," a "critical" experiential course we offered to raise student awareness about the crisis and to encourage them to work for change on our campus. This course is an example of critical experiential education because it integrates classroom learning with political activism. This article describes the context and rationale for teaching the course, reports on students' responses to its form and content, and discusses what we learned from this experience.

This paper explores whether the field of sociology harbors a dismissive attitude towards religion. Specifically it examines whether introductory sociology textbooks present the classic secularization theory over the more recent religious economies explanation of religious change. The classical secularization thesis suggests that religion is declining in importance in modern societies and may disappear completely. The religious economies perspective proposes that religion has actually become more influential and dynamic over time. While both theories are well represented in the sociology of religion literature, we explore whether generalist sociology textbooks reflect this reality. This article provides a content analysis of 31 introductory sociology textbooks published between 2003 and 2006. We assess the presence and promotion of the above theories in these textbooks. Our analysis reveals that 20 (65%) of the 31 textbooks in our study present only secularization theory, while seven (23%) of the textbooks cover both secularization theory and religious economies theory. We assess the ramifications of such a lopsided arrangement and conclude by encouraging a more open dialogue on this issue.

Do women and men who have children during graduate school have access to the same institutional resources as non-parents? In the face of two greedy institutions, the academy and parenthood (especially motherhood), do they employ the same sorts of strategies in their quest to attain tenure-track jobs, and are those strategies successful? In this study we use a longitudinal survey of sociology Ph.D.s to investigate the availability and use of three types of resources and strategies during graduate school, and find that they all have important effects on the chances of obtaining a tenure-track position at a research or doctoral university. We find that some "institutional resources" are not equally distributed in graduate school, with mother's least likely to obtain them, but are significant for attainment of tenure-track positions. "Resource-based strategies," including presenting papers and publishing articles while in graduate school, have a positive and significant effect on all groups' attainment of tenure-track positions. "Family-based strategies" such as child-spacing strategies are also significant; women who have children during graduate school have lower odds of immediately obtaining tenure-track jobs at research and doctoral universities, although access to resources and the ability to use these resources helps significantly.

American sociology is a chaotic discipline. There is disagreement on foundational issues that give disciplines coherence. For example, sociologist disagree on the appropriateness of a scientific orientation, the role of activism and ideology in inquiry, the best methodologies to employ, the primacy of micro- versus macro-levels of analysis, the most important topics to study, and many other contentious issues. The recent call for a "public sociology" in which four wings of the discipline--policy (applied), professional (scientific), critical (ideological), and public (civic engagement) sociologies--are to be integrated is less of a remedy for what troubles sociology than an admission that we are a discipline divided (Burawoy, 2005). Among the social sciences, economics is the most coherent, with the other social sciences revealing varying degrees of incoherence or chaos. Sociology is probably the least integrated of the social sciences, although cultural anthropology has increasingly become much like sociology. In this paper, my goal is to offer an explanation for how sociology came to its present state and what, if anything, can be done to integrate the discipline. Let me begin by outlining what makes a discipline coherent.

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.

In 2000, a controversial article about hormones and gender roles was published to stimulate debate about whether and how biological knowledge should be integrated in sociological research. Two decades later, this so-called biosociology debate is more relevant than ever, as biological knowledge has become widespread across societies and scientific disciplines. Hence, we as sociologists are regularly confronted with biological explanations that challenge our own explanations. Whether this happens in the scientific arena, the classroom, media, or even at social events, these situations often force us, individually, to take a stance on whether to meet such explanations with dialogue or opposition. One could therefore expect that sociologists have an interest in discussing these issues with their peers, but their lack of participation in the biosociology debate suggests otherwise. This paper explores possible reasons for this absence and how sociologists' views on biosociology are influenced by key agents – sociological associations and journals. Smith's "A Sacred project of American Sociology", and Scott's "A Sociology of Nothing" served as theoretical tools in the paper. A qualitative content analysis of presidential addresses of four sociological associations was conducted. The analyses suggest that sociologist avoid biosociology for widely different reasons, including fear that biosociology legitimizes oppression. This avoidance is probably reinforced by the leftish politization of the sociological discipline and the rightish politization of society. Overcoming obstacles to engagement in biosociology is required to safeguard the scientific integrity of sociology and enable sociologists to provide relevant contributions to research on the Covid-19 pandemic and climate change. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper explores article production by the entire population of US undergraduate sociology departments. The available literature suggests that undergraduate programs publish little, that this is concentrated among relatively few--mainly liberal arts--departments, and that publication rates are increasing. We argue There are reasons to expect that social/economic presence, reward policies, student quality, and faculty quality, size, and workload will affect productivity. Tracing publication of articles across the 1990s, few undergraduate departments are represented in 30 journals deemed important on the bases of reputation and citation rates. Liberal arts schools do not predominate. "Ceteris paribus," public schools outpublished private schools. Publication rates have not increased. Social/economic presence, and student and faculty quality affect publishing, but salary, tenure structure, and workload do not. Finally, faculty size suppresses "per capita" publication.

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 on his 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 paper provides insights on the contemporary relevance of Talcott Parsons's writings by analyzing 20 textbooks from Austria, Germany, Great Britain and the United States, published in 1999–2019. Whether having knowledge of Parsons is helpful to today's students and other interested readers, and what knowledge, deserves consideration. Therefore , the paper asks: Which future gains of readers did textbook authors envision when they chose, in their own present, to discuss (or not) sociological writings from long ago? In order to understand what future opportunities authors wanted to create for readers, as well as how they chose to discuss Parsons to this end, the paper draws on Niklas Luhmann's notion of memory. The analysis reveals several key competencies that student and other interested readers might acquire through having knowledge of Parsons' writings and its critiques. These potentials would have gone unnoticed if authors had assessed Parsons's relevance only according to whether he adequately considered conflict or not, as has been done in many debates about his work until today. Moreover, through analyzing how authors remembered Parsons, I distilled two key selective criteria: First, what must be remembered in order to enable readers to acquire those competencies? Second, which memories would be impeding for readers and thus be better left out? These criteria are relevant for research, as well. Looking at the future, it would be desirable that sociologists let Parsons assist them in their research in many different ways, if possible. As a result, we might see a revival of Parsons that enables genuine advancement. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Presents extensive empirical evidence with accompanying explanations concerning the drastic decline in both the quantity and quality of sociology students. Suggests the proliferation of business programs and the rise of conservative ideology as the main culprits. Reviews the American Sociological Association's recommendations for curriculum redesign. (MJP)

Discusses and criticizes criminal justice's deviation from its roots in sociology and adaptation of a more career-oriented perspective. Maintains that the symbiotic relationship between law enforcement agencies and criminal justice as an academic discipline has corrupted the discipline and inhibited academic inquiry. (MJP)

Presents an affectionate portrait of the 84-year-old sociologist and renaissance man, Robert K. Merton. Merton's publications studied topics as diverse as historical scientific inquiry and contemporary racism. Not the least of his accomplishments was the creation of the focus group interview and the concept of self-fulfilling prophecy. (MJP)

Offers an insightful and perceptive portrait of the legendary sociologist C. Wright Mills by one of his former graduate students. Traces Mills's areas of interest from occupational characteristics to power groups leading to the publication of his seminal work, "The Power Elite." Discusses Mills's teaching styles and academic career. (MJP)

Christian Smith's paper 'The Incoherence of 'Culture' in American Sociology' is a valuable provocation that can prompt us to reflect on the role of concepts and on the role of agreement on the definition of concepts in scientific research. In this comment paper, I raise questions about Smith's empirical expectation that sociologists should agree on a concept of culture based on debates in the sociology of science. I also suggest that in terms of the future agenda for the sociology of culture, we should distinguish between dialogue and clarification on the one hand, which I agree is needed, and standardization on the other hand, which seems incompatible with open-minded empirical research. Rather than work on agreement on what culture is, we might work on clarifying relevant distinctions among dimensions of culture. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Urges sociologists to direct more attention toward computer usage because of computers' increasing importance in producing sociological knowledge. Criticizes professional ambivalence toward computer technology as inhibiting creative software development and adequate training of sociologists in computer methods. Concludes that sociology's ambivalence toward computers threatens the profession's ability to keep up in research and scholarship. (DK)

Discusses the falling enrollments in sociology departments. Suggests that the decline may be a result of quality of subject matter presentation, an increase in career-oriented students, and the development of social work and criminal justice into departments separate from sociology. Urges sociology departments to strengthen their political positions on campuses by fostering administrative protection of the discipline. (DK)

Argues that sociology's future is bright. Cites the field's younger, more diverse professoriate; the more qualitative, critical research that will result from reduced educational funding; and opportunities provided by global change. Suggests that the post-Cold War era, ecological crises, and economic transformation will present challenges to sociologists in the coming decades. (SG)

Urges standardization of basic concepts in sociology. Refutes claims that standard concepts are not needed and cannot be made because sociological concepts are too context dependent and sociologists too individualistic. Insists that standardization be limited to concepts used by the discipline as a whole. Suggests that a committee be established by the American Sociological Association. (DK)

Discusses reasons for the failure of the sociology department of Washington University, St. Louis, Missouri, to institutionalize radical sociology. Expounds on the dynamics of radical movements and the opposition they create. Describes the faculty conflicts involving questions of theory versus practice, revolution versus reform, and competing interpretations of Marxist philosophy. Examines contradictions of radical sociology. (RW)

Traces the history of the sociology department at Washington University, St. Louis, Missouri, from its position as a top department in the 1950s and 1960s to its decline in the 1970s, and termination in the 1990s. Criticizes the administration for allowing the department's prominence to decline. Maintains that the closure will hurt all social science disciplines at the university. (RW)

Provides a personal account of the history and politics of the sociology department at Washington University, St. Louis, Missouri. Discusses classes offered throughout the Vietnam War years, concentrating on the more radical course offerings. Describes the professors who taught these courses. Maintains that the closing of the department is the result of a conservative administration. (RW)

Traces the experiences surrounding the editorial review of a paper submitted to the journal, "Social Problems," that was later rejected, with the author claiming the review was not fair. Attempts to specify ethical dilemmas surrounding such an experience. Explains the ambiguity of the process from the editor's perspective. (NL)