Search

This article comments on the position papers in the June 1967 issue of Rural Sociology. The author asserts that the papers are a mark of growing maturity of the rural sociology profession. It took years before the state universities and colleges assumed the dominant role of that they have achieved in the development of rural sociology. Contributions of the early sociologists to the applied field are presented to emphasize their historical value.

The article presents announcements and news notes regarding the call for papers for 1970 annual meeting. Plans for the 1970 Rural Sociological Society meetings to be held in the Sheraton Park Hotel in Washington D.C. in August are progressing. Some guidelines have been established for the submission of papers for the 1970 program. Completed papers and an abstract of each paper must be submitted to the Program Committee no later than April 1, 1970. The theme for the 1970 annual meeting of the Rural Sociological Society is "Societal Change". Rural Sociological Society policy on participation will apply to all sessions other than general sessions; each author is limited to a single paper on the program unless he is a joint author of two papers; a sole author of one paper may also serve as chairman, discussant, or panel member of the same or one other session on the program; a person not listed as author or co-author of a paper may serve as a chairman, a discussant, or a panel member of two sessions or any combination thereof.

A unique feature of rural sociology as a discipline is the number of professionally trained staff members who are primarily engaged in applying sociological knowledge and skills to social problems. The purpose of this paper is to analyze this practitioner role. Particular attention will be directed to understanding certain conditions long associated with the role of the sociologists in Extension, i.e., low prestige compared to that of research staff, lack of relevant knowledge to approach some situations, barriers to communication between the researcher and the practitioner, and inappropriate graduate training for those who take on the applied role.

This article discusses several developments related to academic activities and appointments in field of sociology, from various universities and colleges in the U.S. Howard W. Been, the University of Kentucky's head of the Departments of Sociology and Rural Sociology, is in New Delhi, India, serving as a community development adviser to the Indian government. He is employed by the Ford Foundation. He is expected to return in July, 1959. John H. Mabry has been appointed associate medical sociologist in the University Medical Center and associate professor of sociology. He was formerly on the staff of the Upstate Medical Center in Syracuse, New York. In Mississippi State University, at the invitation of the Department of Sociology and Rural Life, a review panel visited in October to discuss and make recommendations about the research program. In Ohio State University, Robert M. Dimit, associate professor, has been promoted to the position of extension leader in research. He replaces Harold R. Capener, who is in India for two years as part of the Ohio State-India team. Dimit has recently completed a study of membership relations in the Ohio Farm Bureau Federation.

Rural areas continue to face a series of challenges; many are likely to have profound impacts on the vitality of these places over the long term. Of central concern is whether the rural sociological enterprise, a potentially vital source of information and guidance on such diverse issues, will be able to effectively respond to such challenges. The author argues that in order to strengthen its relevance and viability in coming years, the rural sociological profession must embrace three important shifts. First, it must modify the manner in which it engages in the production of new knowledge by pursuing a more balanced portfolio of investments in disciplinary and transdisciplinary research. Second, it must take a bold step to build bridges to new entities whose missions, goals, and values closely align with those of the Rural Sociological Society. And third, it must take a more proactive role in generating quality, scientifically sound information that is aligned with the needs of federal and state policy communities, particularly information that can better articulate how policies are likely to impact rural people and places. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Falk and Zhao (1989) have recently suggested that increased theoretical diversity characterizes the last decade of published research in Rural Sociology. We suggest that this claim is premature, given paradigmatic trends in the larger discipline of sociology. From a reanalysis of data sources and the use of an analytical framework based on the partial paradigm concept, we conclude that rural sociology is attempting to further integrate theory, methodology, and image of the subject matter within a positivistic partial paradigm framework. We further suggest that rural sociologists continue their pursuit of a reflexive understanding of the practice of social science as an integral part of their research agenda. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Approximately 75 rural sociologists who attended the annual meeting of the American Sociological Society were called into attend the special session conducted by Dr. George von Tungeln, Chairman of the Section on Rural Sociology, to hear the report of a special committee appointed in December, 1936, to consider ways and means of better organization for rural sociologists. The committee suggested certain changes to article VIII, Section 2 amendment of the American Sociological Society. The modified amendment now states that "A section of the society shall be composed of members of the society interested in a common field of sociological specialization, or may consist of an independent society or association devoted to a special field of sociology, a majority of whose members are members of the American Sociological Society. The constitution or by-laws of such an independent association must specify that it is a section of the American Sociological Society. Sections shall meet annually during the time of, and in the same city as the annual meeting of the Society."

The sociologist has for a number of decades been called upon to render practical service in fields of social maladjustment, especially in the fields of crime and poverty, and has for many years conducted researches and written books in the fields of normal social behavior and conditions, but by and large it has been only during the last eight years, beginning with the Hoover Commissions, and greatly increasing during the New Deal, that he has been called upon to render actual counsel and service in studying and guiding large public activity programs. Concerning the criticism and censure of sociology and the sociologist by other social scientists, there are probably two broad generalizations which will cover the situation. In the first place, sociology is always dealing with phenomena, which are also at least partially the phenomena of other social sciences, and sometimes with biological phenomena. The sociologist must therefore expect and should welcome the critical judgment on his work of these other scientists.

As reflected in rural Sociology textbooks, rural sociologists have typically believed that rural people in general and Farmers in particular, place a much lower value on formal education than do their urban counterparts (Bertrand, 1958:229; Rogers and Bertrand. 1972:152). Most of us have known this fact for so long that we do not remember where we learned it or in what studies this empirical generalization was first set forth. Thus, we argue that the notion of a lower priority among rural people for formal education has become part and parcel of our rural subdisciplinary wisdom. The purpose of this brief note is to question this traditional wisdom. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Interest in community satisfaction as a research topic has been increasing among rural sociologists. Although the concept is promising, it offers a set of conceptual problems which must be addressed prior to application and measurement. The purpose of this article is to offer some suggestions which might place community satisfaction within a useful theoretical framework. Specifically, it is argued that community satisfaction can be profitably viewed as one dimension of the definition of the situation, where satisfaction refers to definitional and community a situational component. The theoretical implications and operational possibilities of such a perspective are discussed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article discusses various developments and announcements related to sociology field. One of the News Notes presents information about the professional opportunities abroad, where the American educators have been approached for various positions. The s

The problem of change has been of continuing interest to rural sociologists. However, most of the concern for change has been directed toward specific topics such as family living, farm technology, rural institutions, and industrialization. There has been little attempt to relate change in these specific areas to general theories of social change. This has probably been due no less to failings on the part of students of rural life than to the inadequacy of existing theories of change. In a recent article, Wilbert Moore, attempts to show that social change is a respectable topic of concern for sociologists. He would move the chapters on social change from the end to a more central position in textbooks of sociology. Talcott Parsons, after dealing with the structural aspects of society, has become more concerned with its dynamic aspects. He is now teaching a seminar on "Societal Evolution," which is certainly an innovation in the curricula of sociology. These and many other efforts indicate a growing concern for the study of change on the part of sociologists.

There is a large potential demand for research of a sociological character for use in connection with decision making by action agencies (including those which reach or attempt to reach rural people), but relatively few individuals are employed as professional sociologists by federal or state agencies. If qualified sociologists do not meet this demand, others, perhaps less well qualified, will no doubt do so. Much of the research conducted by rural sociologists is potentially of interest to some action agency, but it appears that investigators frequently design their studies without consulting the agency to learn its problems. When this happens, the study may not be focused on the problems to which the agency is sensitive and the findings may be largely disregarded. No systematic studies have yet been made to find a scientific solution to the problem of how best to increase the use of sociological research in connection with decisions affecting agency policy, procedures, or organizational structure.

Extension work in rural sociology, carried on under the Smith-Lever Law enacted in 1914. is relatively new; the earliest efforts predated the enactment of the Law, however. Efforts under the law began earliest, probably, in New York Missouri, Iowa, and Wisconsin. Administrators are now lacing problems in human and group relationships as they never have before; the more specific and concrete the help offered by the rural sociologists, the more their assistance will be sought and used. Problems faced by extension rural sociologists (1) relate to the development of a program which will ñt into the terms of the Smith-Lever Law, (2) include efforts to reinterpret and make of practical use subject matter from the held of sociology which calls for judgment as to what subject matter to use, and (3) pertain to relating the work in rural sociology to other fields of extension work. The interests of the extension rural sociologist differ in degree only from those of the research worker or teacher; there is need for placing values upon findings so that they may be applied to practical situations in the field. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Sociology is on the spot primarily because of three things, first, sociology or the sociologist is at this time as never before being given opportunities to offer counsel and to render service in public, especially governmental programs. In the second place, the sociologist and his science are today being seriously criticized and even censured by other social scientists, especially the economists, because the sociologist refuses to answer dogmatically some of the specific inquiries put to him, and he fumbles considerably in his answers when he is willing to give them. In the third place, the sociologist is finding it difficult to reduce his knowledge to sufficiently lucid terms to convey to administrators and officials, and he finds it even more difficult to apply his knowledge to the specific situations with which he is confronted. The sociologist has for a number of decades been called upon to render practical service in fields of social maladjustment, especially in the fields of crime and poverty, and has for many years conducted researches and written books in the fields of normal social behavior and conditions.

The article presents a discussion on the use of the term "catalyst" in community development theory. A major lesson of social psychology is that the external world is perceived through the medium of concepts which facilitates observation and understanding. The use of term catalyst in community development is inadequate and misleading. A catalyst is an agent that induces a reaction without changing itself. In community development, the term catalyst is used to describe the roles played by community development specialists. But it falls far short of describing the role. Unlike the catalyst, the community development specialists are not inert as their presence is not sufficient to produce the result. They have to be active in educating and persuading a community to take action. They are concerned with stimulating action on several fronts on a continuing basis and with creating a self-generating process which will insure the continuation of action after their withdrawal. Unlike the catalyst, they can't expect the same reaction from all the communities. In fact, same community behaves differently at different times. A community development specialist does not remain unchanged by the experiences he goes through.

Many rural sociologists now have foreign assignments. Several of them had had previous assignments abroad and the majority of rural sociologists with foreign assignments have performed wholly or partially in fields other than rural sociology. Rural sociologists may take satisfaction in having rather ready opportunity to work abroad, sometimes as rural sociologists, but more often as administrators or supervisors, or at least only partially in their own field. A hurried and admittedly incomplete review reveals that there are now about 45 rural sociologists with foreign assignments. Well over half of these have full-time assignments, that is, one year or longer; and the remainder have part-time assignments, that is, less than one year. This same quick review shows that about 75 rural sociologists have held earlier assignments; approximately two-thirds of these had full- time assignments, and one-third, part-time. Of the present assignees, more than a third have had previous assignments abroad. Of the earlier assignees, about the same proportion had subsequent assignments.