Search

The tendency for many girls to be less proficient in mathematics than boys is accounted for by their anticipated family roles, i.e., by the cultural mandate that they be primarily committed to the gemeinschaft of the family. This encourages them to focus on the practical affairs of everyday life rather than to venture out to the hypothetical. Being tied to the gemeinschaft also means that they stay close to home, making less use of physical space, and therefore remaining inhibited in their spatial conceptualization. The restriction in the use of physical space together with their commitment to the gemeinschaft restricts their social space as well, i.e., helps keep their social relationships on a simple rather than on a complex level, thereby limiting their universalistic relationships in favor of particularistic ones. The three factors-concern with the practical, limited use of physical space, and the emphasis on particularistic relationships-combine to discourage the taste, and perhaps even the capacity, for the abstract thinking which is most needed in mathematics. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The section presents comments on articles featured in the August 1978 issue of The American Sociologist. Gerald D. Berreman claims that the ethics and responsibility in social science research are frustrating to discuss in print or in person: the issues are complex and highly contextual so that clear-cut rules-of-thumb are impossible to formulate; they are value-laden and controversial so that discussion often degenerates into preachment, accusation and defense. James D. Carroll noted that each of the articles is a useful contribution to the understanding of law, politics and administration of knowledge. From an analytical perspective, these papers fit well into conceptual frameworks suggested by such terms as "post-industrial society," "knowledge society," and the like. From a professional perspective, each of the papers addresses issues that researchers should be more familiar with, and that professional societies should have greater capacity to address on a systematic basis than is presently the case. From a legal perspective, the paper by Kathleen Bond addresses a constitutional question under the U.S. first amendment, which involves something of a paradox. Carl B. Klockars suggests a model of sociological research that begs the softening of a series of trained incapacities, which the sociological community has worked long and hard against substantial resistance to develop.