Search

The account presented here is based on the fieldwork collected for a doctorate which comprised a case study of a journalism school for postagraduate journalism students. The research, on occupational socialisation, which was primarily carried out by participant observation took place over one academic year (1984/85) and followed a cohort of students through their training at the school. This paper Looks at the re-socialising function of the first term at journalism school, which because of the demands it makes upon the time and commitment of students is presented as a `Greedy Institution'. During their first term students are expected to discard their lay perspectives on journalism, and also the academic style which characterises their undergraduate education, in favour of the school's version of occupational practice. The paper also takes issue with the ways in which the researcher must fit in with the day-to-day requirements of practice demanded by the school and how, in many ways, her academic and research interests are incompatible with the task of re-socialisation which staff at the journalism school set out to achieve. The paper highlights how greedy institutions may have particular implications for the participant observer. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

It is argued that the discussions of the concept of strategy in papers by Crow (1989) and Morgan (1989) ignore the military origins of strategic thinking, and that more attention needs to be given to its diffusion from military to general social usage, as well as to specifically sociological uses. The paper then outlines a critique of strategic studies derived from the sociology of war. It argues that sociologists can learn, from the problems and current controversies of strategic studies, some of the limitations of strategic analysis as an approach in sociology. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article discusses problems associated with patriarchy. The concept of patriarchy has been both essential and problematic in the development of feminist thought, as the two papers by sociologists Malcolm Waters and S. Walby, published here, argue. In responding to their work, the author sketches the recent history of the concept and discuss a few of the issues raised by a reading of these papers. In the 1960s and 1970s, patriarchy provided the essential focus and the identification of the theoretical object for rapidly developing innovative thinking about the subordination of women. Feminists criticized social theory as inadequate for explaining this widespread phenomenon. Existing theory attributed women's domination by men either to nature or social necessity rather than to social-structural processes, unequal power, or exploitation. Further, theory had been produced from the perspectives of men, usually men associated with ruling classes, to whom women were generally invisible, unimportant, or uninteresting as social actors. Theorizing patriarchy was a first step to reconceptualizing the subordination of women and to correcting flawed social theory, even to achieving a paradigm revolution.

Over recent years a series of 'ankles has appeared, the aim of which has been to demonstrate an unjustifiable neglect of women in social stratification theory and research and, in turn, to level charges of 'intellectual sexism' against sociologists active in this area. The central concern of the present paper is to address certain of the major substantive issues which are raised in this literature, and to argue that they have not so far been adequately treated from either a theoretical or an empirical standpoint. In Pan I of the paper, an attempt is made to distinguish between two lines of theoretical argument on the position of the family within the system of social stratification which, in recent critiques, appear to have been unduly confined. These are the arguments of (i) structural-functionalists of mainly American provenance, and (ii) mainly European exponents of class analysis. In Pan II, empirical data are then presented, by reference to which the stance adopted by the latter can be illuminated and, moreover, substantially supported. In Pan III, an attempt is made to show, on the basis of the foregoing, that certain conceptual and methodological developments that have been proposed in order to adapt class analysis to the increased labour market participation of women, and especially of married women, entail serious difficulties. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The concern of this paper is to locate certain troubles and contradictions within Lucien Goldinann's avowedly sociological programme for the investigation of culture. It will be seen that these turn, generally, upon Goldmann's insistence on maintaining a central methodological position for the category of the subject and, more particularly, upon his conception of the subject as individual (rather than collective) subject. Part of these methodological troubles is seen to be connected with Goldmann's use of a metaphor connecting Piaget's individual/environment distinction with the distinction between social groups and history. To this degree, the paper is generally concerned with the severance of sociological studies of culture from psychologistic and belletrist preoccupations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

It is usually presumed that the function of education is that of selection and that this is the most important conception of education of which sociologists should be aware. This paper presents historical and comparative material from two contrasting societies-Graeco-Roman Antiquity and West Africa in the late Middle Ages-which shows that the selective function was relatively unimportant. The paper concludes by suggesting that educational conceptions take a variety of forms. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper presents a response to some criticisms by James Tooley of our research on parental choice The paper argues that many of Tooley's criticism are based on systematic misinterpretations and misreadings of our work, ignorance of the procedures of qualitative research and the we of untenable speculations about sampling, data collection and the interpretation of data It is suggested that Tooley's criticisms are ideologically driven and that if taken senously would make qualitative social research impossible [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Educational selection has been a central issue for Structural Functionalist, Marxist and Interpretative sociologists of education While knowledge about selection processes within schools has increased over the past two decades, as a result of ethnographic studies of schooling, the social process of collective teacher decision making, when teachers are engaged in institutional channelling, has been largely neglected This paper explores collective teacher decision making at a point of allocation through the medium of a case study of setting in one 9-13 years middle school The paper argues that the discussion concerning the recent initiatives of educational selection embodied in modularisation, pupil assessment, common examinations and national testing should be informed by research of teacher interaction at points of allocation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper is intended to place the other papers in this issue of the journal in a broader theoretical and political context. It considers some of the ways in which sociologists of education have approached the analysis of the curriculum and discusses the extent to which their work can be seen as a contribution to political struggles in and around the curriculum. It pays particular attention to the ways in which recent American and Australian work in this field has developed and to some of the criticisms that have been made of the political orientation of such work. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The paper argues that in recent years sociologists have neglected the processes of occupational socialisation of teaching, despite research interest in everyday life in other educational settings Shortcomings in the extant research on teacher socialisation and in the wider literature on professional socialisation are detailed to explain the lack of intellectual interest in teacher socialisation Finally, the paper offers some potential lines for the development of research on teacher socialisation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper uses data from the Scottish School Leavers Surveys to investigate trends in the transition from school at a time of deepening recession. The main change observed is the collapse of employment between 1979 and 1983. The paper also describes trends in the distribution of school-leaver employment, in its industrial and occupational composition, in patters of movement in the youth labour market and in the role of special programmes. Some of its general conclusions challenge ideas current among some British sociologists. First, youth unemployment (at least among recent school leavers) is no longer significantly connected with patterns of subemployment or frequent job-changing. Secondly, unemployment has not fundamentally changed the 'selective function' of education; credentials have retained their labour-market value in relative if not in absolute terms. Thirdly, the recent rise in school-leaver unemployment is very largely a result of the recession-the decline in the aggregate demand for labour-rather than of underlying structural changes that disadvantage young people; most recent changes in the transition from school to work are in principle reversible if the recession ends. The paper assesses the implications of these findings for the sociology of education, and concludes with a discussion of the possible impact of the Youth Training Scheme. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In this paper I shall deal with some issues raised by a sociologist interested in music education, Graham Vulliamy I shall draw on four of his papers. There will be certain areas of agreement between us recognition of the importance of Afro-American music in our century and its dominance in the popular tradition, that forms of analysis through notation are particularly inappropriate to an oral-aural tradition, that all music is bounded by particular styles and traditions and occurs within a socio-cultural context. I shall briefly examine two minor points of difficulty--that Vulliamy, overstates the 'freedom' of improvised music and the rigidity of notated music and that he confuses discussion by conflating the views of Meyer and Langer. There are three major issues to which we need to address ourselves The first of these is the assumption that pop music can be legitimised in school merely by establishing that different criteria are necessary The second arises in the attempt to provide appropriate tools of analysis by arguing, with Shepherd, that music has a kind of social referent This proposition is stated in several ways In some forms the proposition is acceptable but in others it is problematic. The third issue involves problems concerning the expressive and formal elements of music and the uses to which music is put, which ma, range from a signal for action (or reaction) to a meaningful symbol (a much more complex and rich form of response) Using the terms 'intensional' and 'engendered feeling' as though they were synonymous and the terms 'extensional' and 'embodied meaning' as though they were the same, some confusion is created, yet there are implications for music education which are not only theoretically important but vital in practical terms of teaching and learning in schools. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Over the last thirty years, it has regularly been asserted that the incidence of anorexia nervosa is increasing. The paper examines the background of this idea, traces its origins, and analyses the process whereby it became widely accepted within the medical and sociological literature. The study is based upon a citation list of all the epidemiological studies of anorexia nervosa with publication dates between 1960 and the end of 1990, which has been used to identify the most important publications on the prevalence and incidence of the disease. Scrutiny of the content of these key publications has allowed us to follow the emergence, and then the partial break-up, of a broad consensus - involving clinical psychiatrists and psychoanalysts, as well as medical sociologists and historians around the assertion that anorexia nervosa was increasing in incidence. In the course of this historical reconstruction, four distinctive patterns of citation behaviour were revealed. The paper also examines the changing nature of the explanation offered for the putative rise in the numbers of sufferers and suggests reasons why such a perspective upon the disease was widely supported by clinicians and by a variety of other commentators. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

What is the relationship between class, health and life-styles, and to what extent does health-related knowledge influence subsequent behaviour? These issues have been a source of considerable debate for medical sociologists and others concorned with promoting 'healthier' life-styles over the years, Yet despite a wealth of empirical material, there has been little attempt to theorise this relationship between class, health and lifestyles and the associated issues of structure and agency, accounts and action it raises. This paper attempts to rectify this lacuna through a critical discussion of the work of Pierre Bourdieu, and its relevance to the class, health and life-styles debate. In particular, attention is paid to Bourdieu's analysis of the logic of practice, his concepts of habitus and bodily hexis, and the search for social distinction in the construction of (health-related) life-styles. The paper concludes with a critical commentary on these issues and the relative merits of Bourdieu's analysis for the sociology of health and illness. It is argued that despite certain limitations regarding issues of agency and 'choice', Bourdieu's analysis does indeed shed important light on the health and lifestyles debate, and that further bridge-building exercises of this nature between mainstream theory and the sociology of health and illness are both necessary and fruitful. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article presents sociologist Bonnie Fox's comments on author's paper "Family Study in Canada." The paper was about historical change. It questioned how an area of Canadian life that figured so large in the initial sociological enterprise in Canada could later become peripheral to concerns of the few sociologists who ultimately decide which papers are published in the official journal, which topics deserve special issues of that journal. Most texts try to present the "state of the art" at the time of writing. The textbook remains the only place where knowledge in the field is codified and legitimated. It was precisely because most Canadian family sociology textbooks attempt to catalogue all the knowledge in the field that they seemed entirely appropriate for the purpose of establishing how the field has been constructed through the 1980s. Fox's sketch goes a little way toward including a few names of the many Canadian scholars who have made important contributions to the field but whose identities and ideas.

This article focuses on the cooperative initiative between the journal Social Compass and the International Society for the Sociology of Religion (ISSR). From its beginnings, the ISSR has made every endeavour to publish the papers presented at its meetings. This had the advantage of enabling members to prepare for active participation in the meetings. However, there were some disadvantages. The papers, once commissioned, were not subject to editorial review before publication. In addition, the only papers published were those to be delivered in plenary sessions. Cooperation between Social Compass and the ISSR ensures that conference proceedings will appear in subsequent issues of Social Compass. Each year, the first issue of Social Compass will carry papers delivered at the preceding ISSR conference. Two issues are devoted to each biennial conference. As a result of the cooperative initiative, the work of sociologists of religion will be more effectively integrated and the journal and conference will become mutually reinforcing. The journal will bring the work of a larger number of conference participants to the attention of a wider circle of scholars, while the conference will become an effective forum to stimulate and sustain support for the journal.

This paper has sought to redress the imbalance in the comments currently offered in interpretation of the work of Erving Goffman. These comments have suggested that the practices described by Goffman exhibit wily machiavellian manipulators at work. The reading of Goffman this paper suggests is that many of the practices include a great deal of tact and kindness; their importance to Goffman's work is easily explained once it is realized that he is an intellectual descendant, in considerable part, of Durkheim. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In a recent article in this journal Graham and Taylor discuss the development of demography and criminology and attempt to draw similarities between these 'sub-disciplines'.[1] The parallel development of these sub-disciplines is held to be comparable along several dimensions. The purpose of this comment it to point out what I perceive as an oversimplified and, in some cases, erroneous conception of demography. As a sociologist-demographer I claim no special competence in criminology; accordingly, my remarks are restricted to the characterization of demography as presented by Graham and Taylor.
Before examining specific points in the Graham-Taylor paper, several general remarks concerning their analysis are warranted. First, their conception of demography is extremely narrow and restricted. The sociologist unfamiliar with demography could easily form the impression, on the basis of their paper, that demography was primarily, if not exclusively, concerned with fertility and family planning. Other important topics such as mortality, population distribution and composition, population growth and decline, internal and international migration, urbanization, etc., are given only fleeting attention or are ignored altogether. Of course, any discussion must necessarily focus. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article presents comments on the research paper "Representing Biotechnology: An Ethnography of Quebec Science Policy," by Alberto Cambrosio, Camille Limoges and Denyse Pronovost, published in the journal "Social Studies of Science," vol. 20. The author criticize for the insufficient information given in the research paper by Cambrosio and colleagues. According to him Cambrosio and colleagues devoted little attention to interests of actors in determining what is included and what is excluded from the biotechnology dossier. Some of them are, focus on the process through which categories become legitimate, focus on the institutional is particularly important in the area of science policy-making, and others.

The four articles that appeared in the 1990 issue of the journal "International Sociology," by William Rogers Brubaker; Dongno Kim, Solomon Mombeshora and Nao Oyama, have won the first Worldwide Competition for Young Sociologists that the International Sociological Association (ISA) launched in 1988. The fifth winning paper, by Lu Jianhua, will be published in the March 1991 issue of the journal "International Sociology." All authors are under 35 years of age. Being the top winners of an international competition for young intellectuals, these papers could be read as indicators of the topics and ways of thinking characteristic of the rising generation. However, that they deserve first to be read for what they are: to put it simply, first-grade articles. Started three years ago in very hazardous conditions, this first Worldwide Competition ended up landing in its net a rich catch of 335 papers written in ten different languages and coming from all parts of the world. As such it was not only a competition; it was also an experiment, yielding unexpected and at times very surprising results. This is why it may be of interest to retrace, however briefly, its short history and salient features. The idea of such a competition was first put forward in March 1987 by Margaret Archer, who had in summer 1986 been elected President of the International Sociological Association for four years. Chairing the first meeting of the new Executive Committee, making people understand that ISA finances were quite low, she nevertheless expressed her wish to reach out towards the immense regions of the so-called Third Worlds where the ISA was little known.

This paper explores the importance of race and racial attitudes among sociologists by attempting to document the existence of what has been called a "black insiders doctrine" and showing that black sociologists are more likely than their white counterparts to subscribe to this doctrine. Data in this paper are based on a survey questionnaire administered during the winter of 1978. The findings show that: (1) race is a strong predictor in determining how sociologists perceive the role and characteristics of black sociologists and (2) black sociologists do not think highly of whites who study race relations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper outlines the career of Maurice F. Parmelee, sociologist, government official, nudist, and author of thirteen books, including the first American criminology text (1918). The contents of the latter are examined and contrasts with contemporary textbooks are noted. Parmelee's career is an anomoly, for although he published abundantly, he faded into sociological obscurity. Some conjecture is offered about scholarly career paths generally, drawn out of the Parmelee case. Finally, the paper argues that historical accounts of the development of American criminology are incomplete, for they fail to mention a number of early figures, including Parmelee. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper presents a critical examination of the papers by Colomy and Brown, West, and Ostrow. Each is considered in terms of how the author's work connects with topics addressed by Goffman and with his own theoretical and methodological approaches. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper depicts the career of the author as a complicated journey from European beginnings to American destinations. It emphasizes crucial turning points that finally led the author from antifascist radical intellectual to established member of the American sociological community. It attempts to show lines of divergence but also lines of continuity in his thought and contributions. This essay attempts to show the extent to which his background influenced the themes and orientations of his sociological work. The paper may be read as a contribution to the sociology of knowledge from the autobiographical point of view. It stresses the various stages of the author's career and attempts to show the extent to which these stages are reflected in his writings and general orientations. The paper closes with a bird's eye view of the recent past and the probable future of American sociological thought. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Why did dependency theory fail to take strong root among sociologists of Mexico over the sixties and seventies; and why, in contrast, did Mexico's sociologists tend to study social movements and the state instead? Using these questions as a starting point, this paper examines the divergent paths of research on Mexico taken by both Noah American and Mexican sociologists over the past several decades, in seeking the origins of these unique patterns, the paper assesses the nation's revolutionary history, the institutional training of Mexican and Noah American sociologists, the corporativist and collectivist structure of politics and society, the social and political activism of Mexican sociologists, and the ruling party's appropriation of dependency rhetorics for its own political purposes. These unique legacies, in combination with Mexico's history of rapid and concentrated urbanization, are then examined with respect to their impact on recent and forthcoming research. Among the highlighted studies are those that examine territorially based struggles in cities and regions and their reciprocal impact on identity, collective action, and political power. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

As a participant in the development of mathematical sociology over the past several decades, the author undertakes a personal and historical review of the field. A special effort is made to link early innovations and interests to recent developments. The paper deals successively with (a) the origins of mathematical sociology and its early achievements, (b) the cognitive interests and values of mathematical sociologists in relation to ideas associated with the founders of sociology, (c) the scope of mathematical contributions in terms of the general components of human action and society, and (d) the problematic specialty status of mathematical sociology. The paper concludes with some thoughts on the future of mathematical sociology. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article responds to sociologist Andy Pickering's comments, partly because of the inherent intellectual stimulation of exchanging ideas with such a distinguished colleague, but partly also because of the need for much greater interchange between the two fields, the sociology of environment and technology, on the one hand and the sociology of science on the other. Pickering's comments raise three important points about the analysis of Iron Mountain, Michigan. First, he praises what he calls papers symmetry in noting the importance of physical⁄environmental as well as social factors in understanding social outcomes. Second, he argues that people have not taken this point far enough, in large part because, he believes, the social is not sufficiently at stake in papers. Third, he argues that a fruitful antidote would be to trace the evolution of actual practices, in detail, over time.

The article presents a reply of gratitude for the criticisms offered by sociologist Laura Sanchez on the works which appeared in the "Journal of Marriage and the Family." The authors are indebted to Laura Sanchez for taking their work (1995) seriously and raising some nontrivial questions for discussion. She has motivated them to reread their own paper closely and critically, and a close reading of many of the works she cites has broadened their familiarity with the feminist literatures. They know that there is no true reading of the paper. They know what they intended to say and what the paper says to them as they reread it. The authors also recognize that any text is only one part of a reading; what a reader sees in a text is also a function of what she brings to her encounter with the text. Some of Sanchez's critique reflects deficiencies in the text--things they did not say as well as they might have--and they are grateful for a chance to clarify ambiguities. Other feminist writers seem to corroborate their view of the central concerns of feminist scholarship.

In this article, the author responds to the sociologist Bryan S. Turner's comments on his article related to the inter generational conflicts. Turner's interpretation, and suggestion that he was drawing attention away from structural issues, is rooted in a paradigm which is inadequate to the task of properly describing how life course processes are integral to general social arrangements. In his paper, the author took issue with the assumptions and arguments of age stratification and generational conflict theorists. These writers see age and generation related self interest as underpinning a growth in age based conflict. The dimensions of such conflict are seen to cleave around people's current relations to work and welfare. In his response to the author's paper Turner re-asserts the salience of intra-generational cohesion and inter-generational difference in shaping consciousness and action in efforts to secure social advantage. Turner insists that age and generation are important components of social stratification and should be incorporated in theory accordingly.

The paper argues that sociologists have constructed their accounts exclusive of nature. This pre-ecological sociology is critically examined and explained. It has resulted from disciplinary specialization and revulsion at biological determinism, with the trend away from systems sociology to human-agency sociology being an aggravating factor. Sociology as if nature did not matter has also been influenced by the assumption prevailing in modern societies of the plasticity of the relationship of humans to their natural environment. This sociology has been the sociological expression of modern societies careless of nature. The growing awareness that social constructions unleash dynamic processes of nature - processes beyond human control that bear on social action - has the potential of radically transforming such sociology. The paper proposes the reconstruction of sociology in which nature matters. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article presents John Goldthorpe's response to several comments about his paper which analyzed the uses of history in sociology. According to Goldthorpe, his main concern was to show that history and sociology necessarily differed in the nature of the evidence that they used or, more precisely, in the ways in which this evidence came into being. He claims that in his paper, he emphasizes that historians cannot hope to produce descriptions that are free of general ideas about social action, process and structure. His argument concerning the differences in evidence available to historians and sociologists is that the latter have the possibility of engaging in research that itself generates evidence, over and above, not as distinct from, that of exploiting relics. Goldthorpe clarifies the argument with which his paper began was that (i) pace Abrams and Giddens, history and sociology are not the same thing; (ii) that one important way in which they differ is the nature of the evidence on which historians and sociologists draw; and (iii) that sociologists, in being able to generate their own data in the present, rather than being restricted to the relics of the past, are in a position of advantage that should be recognized and not given up without good reason.

Alan Fox is one of the most prolific and original British sociologists of industry and employment. Fox's largely derivative writings on macro-sociology have received considerable attention in the literature. In comparison his original micro-sociological theory of the role played by trust in organizational integration has been neglected. This paper presents a critical evaluation of Fox's microsociological theory of 'trust dynamics' in organizations. The paper identifies conceptual, theoretical and methodological weaknesses in Fox's complex argument and concludes that Fox's theory is invalid. The paper also suggests that trust in organizational life is probably more significant as an aspect of 'social integration' than, as Fox contends, as an aspect of' 'system integration'. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper argues that the dominance of linear models has led many sociologists to construe the social world in terms of a "general linear reality." This reality assumes (1) that the social world consists of fixed entities with variable attributes, (2) that cause cannot flow from "small" to "large" attributes/events, (3) that causal attributes have only one causal pattern at once, (4) that the sequence of events does not influence their outcome, (5) that the. "careers" of entities are largely independent, and (6) that causal attributes are generally independent of each other. The paper discusses examples of these assumptions in empirical work, considers standard and new methods addressing them, and briefly explores alternative models for reality that employ demographic, sequential, and network perspectives. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In the course of research using Talcott Parsons's papers at the Harvard University Archives, Charles Camic read "Prolegomena to a Theory of Social Institutions" in manuscript form. Given sociologists' continuing interest in Parsons's ideas, Camic suggested that ASR make the paper widely available. We are pleased to do so in this issue. Camic's prologue places "Prolegomena" in the historical context of Parsons's work. Both James Coleman and Jeffrey Alexander have previously written about Parsons and were asked to comment on the implications of "Prolegomena" for our understanding of his theoretical contribution. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Policies designed to address the crisis of the Ph.D undersupply should take the diversity of size lost generation into account. To document this diversity, this paper Identifies eight general adaptations to the restricted opportunities for Ph.D.'s as then groups these types according to their ease of usefulness for resolving the crisis of undersupply. To facilitate the re-entry of lost generation sociologis this paper clarifies how institutional barriers foster a "Matthew Effect that works against re-entry The paper then concludes by recommending that universities re-place the retiring cohorts by rigorously selecting and training a limited number of new Ph.D.'s while employing full-time competent researchers and teachers from the lost generation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This collective effort (the order of authors is purely alphabetical) explores our particular Sociological perspective, explains the harriers we tire encountering in developing that perspective. and describes the strategies we are employing to create a participatory conditional environment. Our paper concludes that our alienation has decreased as our participation has increased. Now - three months after the paper went to the printer, developments in our department have to sonic extent reversed the sense of community and participation tee discuss below. Our task is larger than we first thought, though we still hope to succeed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper is an attempt to in form young sociologists in academic institutions about issues of tenure. Although there is room for debate concerning the nature of tenure, a basic conception of tenure is presented here which we believe is defensible under any set of economic or political circumstances. The misconceptions about tenure by young sociologists and the misconceptions about fundamental responsibilities of department chairs often lead to dissatisfied sociologists, demoralized departments, and hated administrators Sociologists should be aware of the way tenure is implemented at their institutions. Chairs not only should be informed but also should inform their department members about the tenure process. The paper is the result of experiences gained by the authors while serving on the Committee of the Freedom of Research and Teaching of the American Sociological Association. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article is taken from Chapter 6 of the publication A Lucky Journey: The Sociological Enterprise, 1931-1980, which reflects on the progress of the American Sociological Review (ASR) as a publication from 1958 to 1960. The local editorial staff of the publication began with a contingent of ten scholars. These ten scholars included representatives of various sub-fields in sociology and of related discipline as well as specialists on Soviet Russia, Africa, India and Japan. Most of the day-to-day labor on the Review was done by editorial secretary Betty Vogel, Michael Olmsted, and their nominal boss. Michael Olmsted was more than a first-rate book review editor, he evaluated papers in his special fields with sagacity and designed an attractive cover to replace what had long been the dismal front of the publication. Solicitation of papers by prominent sociologists helped to upgrade ASR as a scholarly journal. Another change was the introduction of a division of the Review on the Profession which included not merely the obituaries or communications pertaining to the sociological guild, but both solicited submitted articles on the occupation itself. This innovation, according to the author, was consistent with his own growing interest in the sociology of sociology.

The paper argues, by way of empirical example, that the long-accepted contention that participant-observation research can best be accomplished by strangers who become like natives is by no means the only or even best approach. Rather, natives can be trained to distance themselves from their own group, making use of inherently objective sociological and anthropological perspectives. Such natives-as-strangers are more likely to be cognizant of nuances in the cultural life being studied. Using the example of the author's research among Jews, the paper also outlines some of the risks of this native-as-stranger approach, foremost among them being the tendencies to take too much for granted and to become alienated from one's native group. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Implications of college-wide competency-based education (CBE) approaches for undergraduate sociology programs are discussed, using an established program for illustration. Five basic questions for sociologists considering involvement in CBE are addressed: (1) Are courses to be built upon content or competency? (2) Is it possible to achieve the ideal of integrating content and competency in evaluating student performance without relegating content to a secondary role? (3) Is it possible to alter one's conception of teaching from dispensing knowledge to facilitating learning? (4) Is it possible to alter one's conception of professional autonomy to meet CBE demands? (5) Is the education at CBE institutions comparable to that offered at traditional institutions, both in terms of learning and career opportunities? This paper examines some implications of college-wide competency-based education (CBE) approaches for undergraduate sociology programs and curricula, using an existing program for illustration. A major difficulty in delineating CBE's impact on academic programs is that the approach is not yet marked by a set of unifying conceptual or organizational principles, nor does an adequate definition or theoretical framework exist to guide generalization (Grant, 1979:11). For these reasons, the present paper is confined to issues arising from elements that appear to be common to CBE approaches in general.[1]. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article informs that the central idea of the paper is to revive sociological discussion of concepts of modernization and modernity in the context of the challenges facing now both East and West. The aim of their re-evaluation is not to cast the sociologist T. Parsons's theory of modernization away but to think about the modernization as about the source of tensions between life worlds and the pressure of economic and politic systems. Though modernization produces patologies in sociologist J. Habermas's sense, its meaning, steering and direction remains to be the central subject of the contest between social actors, mainly in the sphere of labour relations and social marginalization. The paper stresses the need to study of modernization from the microrsocial level, to rediscover individual and collective actors, and to observe recurrent conflicts between actors struggling for definition of meaning of modernization changes and for getting control over them.

No methodological critique should be seen as an attack on an existing study. Rather such critiques should be seen as a call to a community of scholars to re- examine or reassess work that may have seemed "finished." In view of the relatively low esteem accorded to sport sociology (at least in the United States) it may be proper to emphasize that the problems discussed above are by no means limited to the area of sport sociology indeed, they are to be found in the most respectable literature of fields more in the "mainstream" of sociology (see Deutscher, 1973; Hirsehi and Selvin, 1967). Hopefully, a continuing concern for better methodology among sport sociologists will help us to draw on the methodological wisdom of `general sociology" and other related fields without repeating the errors that have been made by scholars in those fields. A number of recent papers and exchanges in this journal and elsewhere have marked an apparent growth of interest in methodological issues among sport sociologists (e.g.. Loy and Seagrave, 1974; Albonico and Pfister-Binz, 1971; McPherson, 1975: WohI, 1975). This trend, especially the emergence of exchanges and discussions regarding the relative merit of different methodological approaches (ef. Wohl, 1975 and McPherson, 1975; Lenk and Lüschen, 1975), may be seen as a sign of maturation of sport sociology as a field of inquiry. Given the nature of sport Sociology such exchanges also provide an opportunity fox' cross-national and cross-disciplinary communication that is, perhaps, unparallelled in any other social science field. The purpose of this paper is to review some of the more significant works in the field in terms of certain methodological problems they present. it should be noted at this time that this review could not be comprehensive given the extensive Literature that exists. The material selected is characterized by two general criteria: 1) it is important in terms of its substantive or theoretical content; 2) it represents interesting methodological problem. Hopefully this paper will contribute to the apparent growth in consciousness of methodological issues among sport sociologists - and, perhaps further exchanges as well. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper discusses what a researcher can expect when doing qualitative research in an American Indian community. Despite an attempt to adequately prepare for fieldwork the author found that the research process differed in important respects from the qualitative methods literature. The paper chronicles key differences concerning gatekeepers and the research bargain, establishing rapport and gaining acceptance, the roles assigned to the researcher, the role of key informants and brokers, and several uniquely Indian processes the author experienced. The paper concludes with a summary of salient characteristics of research among American Indians and argues that such research takes longer, the research bargain is a matter of constant negotiation, gatekeepers are ubiquitous within the community, and the researcher needs to be prepared to make some accommodations to his or her hosts. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The goal of this paper is twofold. The first is to point out that American sociologists, as indicated in textbooks and published scholarly papers, often confuse the history of sociology as a profession with the history of social thought, so that the first is totally absorbed in the second with detrimental effects to both. The second goal concerns demonstrating that our understanding of sociology's growth in the U.S. during the late 19th century is not as accurate as it might be were documents of the period examined more carefully than has typically been the! case. As an example of this faulty historiography, the widely held contention that the University of Chicago sociology department was "the first" to be founded in the U.S. is shown to be untrue. A case is made for Frank Blackmar's efforts at the University of Kansas as prior to Small's, and in some ways equally fascinating regarding the scope and definition of the discipline in its earliest days. The point, then, of the paper is to help reinterest American sociologists in the history of their profession as distinct from the history of its ideology or theory. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper summarizes and critiques previous studies of the opinions of three groups (sociologists, nonacademic employers, and former sociology students) regarding the usefulness of sociological theory in nonacademic work. Existing studies show that: (1) most sociologists agree that sociological theory has much relevance to nonacademic employment; (2) nonacademic employers are somewhat skeptical and suspicious of the relevance of theoretical skills on the job; and (3) former sociology students have ambivalent opinions regarding the usefulness of theory to their careers. The paper concludes with a brief discussion of the origins of employer suspicions concerning sociology and a call for "truth in advertising" when sociologists discuss the marketability of sociology degrees with students. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

An earlier paper traced the effects of political pressures upon the structural arrangements of public bureaucracies. Contrary to expectations such pressures were found not to associate with various measures of bureaucratization. The present paper pursues the same set of hypotheses but makes a number of conceptual and methodological changes. The results of the analysis demonstrate that parts of the public bureaucracies are affected by political pressures but in specific rather than general ways. The thrust of the original hypothesis is thus supported but not the details. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article announces events and activities of interest to sociologists in Wisconsin as of January 1985. The Wisconsin Sociologist journal invites submission of papers for the Fall 1985 special issue of Voluntarism. Welcome are papers dealing with all varieties of voluntary action, such as community service, advocacy, reform, radical change and exchange of services and goods. All papers should follow the journal's style and format. Meanwhile, Professor Marylynn L. May of Beloit College is organizing a panel for the Law and Society annual meeting in San Diego, California from June 6 to 9, 1985. Papers analyzing a variety of types of conflict among a variety of types of professional/client relationships are welcome. Papers might also focus on the role of regulatory agencies as third parties in resolving conflict and disputing between professionals and clients. Also, the School of Social Welfare at the University of Wisconsin in Milwaukee has developed a new course sequence in correctional management. This sequence will be open to graduate students in both the criminal justice and social work programs and is designed to prepare individuals to assume mid-level management positions in correctional settings.

This paper explores the research programme that emerged among sociologists in response to the rise of the labour movement. It argues that by taking the rise of this movement seriously, sociologists in South Africa were forced to rethink and reconceptualise their research programme in a manner fruitful for the social sciences as a whole. Three propositions are advanced. Firstly, in response to the rise of labour, as well as the emergence of class theory in sociology, a research programme emerged in the 1970s that began to take labour seriously. Secondly, by taking labour seriously, sociologists were drawn beyond a study of the workplace and trade unionism to the social relationships which surround and shape the conditions under which labour lives and works. However, in my third proposition, the worldwide restructuring of work has drawn sociologists back to an examination of work and economic life. In the current economic crisis, a divide is emerging within the black working class that undermines labour's vision of working class unity. A new stratum of African workers is emerging, whose interests are in potential conflict with a growing underclass. But, the paper concludes, the emergence of a new labour elite is not inevitable; it depends on the goals unions adopt and the role unions play in the new democratic order emerging in South Africa. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper presents the kinds of applications of institutional data in sociological research, the difficulties encountered by researchers who use it, and the ways of overcoming these difficulties. An essential methodological feature of empirical sociology as of January 1988, in particular in Poland, is its domination by survey research. However, this fact is not only a feature of sociology, but a blemish on its face. What is reprehensible is obviously not the use itself of questionnaire data, but the fact that empirical sociology is dominated by them, that in concrete studies they are almost always the only kind of data collected, that only rarely is heir quality verified though comparison with data of another kind. So empirical sociology should boldly make use of forgotten, unappreciated, and undeveloped non-survey data collection methods. The author chiefly has in mind a bolder use than before of data contained in institutional sources: reports, statistics, and other documents. According to him, sociologists are even unaware of the existence of many institutional sources of importance for sociology, while they pass by others indifferently, instead of deriving knowledge from them about the society in which they live. The aim of this paper is to encourage sociologists to look into this source and to show how knowledge can be derived form it.

This paper introduces sociologists to intriguing findings by psychologists about the heuristics that people use in thinking about risk, the resulting biases in estimates, the preferences people exhibit for avoiding risk in some cases and seeking it in others, and the effects of variations in how choices are framed on the attractiveness of competing options. How important these psychological processes are in nonlaboratory settings depends on a series of factors (e.g. how important a decision is, how long a person has to make a decision, and whether competing actors offer alternative frames for the decision); these are outlined and illustrated here. Finally, the paper assesses the adequacy of this work as a foundation for a sociology of risk and discusses crucial issues (e.g. noncomparability of choices, risk seeking, and the role of supraindividual actors) that fall outside its purview but that would need to be incorporated into any sociological theory of risk. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]