From socgrad-relay@UCSD.EDU Sun May 1 07:01:30 1994 sendmail 8.6.9/UCSD-2.2-sun Sun, 1 May 1994 06:59:54 -0700 for socgrad-list Sun, 1 May 1994 06:59:52 -0700 for Date: Sun, 01 May 94 09:37:30 EDT From: "T.R.YOUNG" <34LPF6T@CMUVM.CSV.CMICH.EDU> Organization: Central Michigan University Subject: ORGANIZED CRIME AND SOLIDARITY SUPPLIES To: GRADUATE STUDENTS IN SOCIOLOGY THIS IS THE SECOND IN A SERIES FOR THOSE GRAD STUDENTS LINKED TO SOCGRAD. IN THIS ONE, I WANT TO MAKE THE GENERAL POINT THAT ORGANIZED CRIME DEALS IN THOSE GOODS AND SERVICES WHICH, IN MOST SOCIETIES HAVE BEEN USED FOR THOSE 'DRAMAS OF THE HOLY' IN WHICH HUMAN BEINGS INGEST PSYCHOGENS OR ENGAGE IN EUPHORIC ACTIVITY. DRUGS, SEX, PORNOGRAPHY, ESOTERIC FOODS, ALCHOHOL, DANCE AND DANGER HAVE ALL BEEN USED IN VARIED SOCIETIES TO GENERATE A STATE OF 'BLISS' WHICH IS THEN TAKEN TO BE PROOF DEMONSTRATIVE OF A 'HOLY SPIRIT.' IN PATRIARCHICAL SOCIETIES, SOLIDARITY SUPPLIES ARE OFTEN RESERVED FOR MALE BONDING CEREMONIES...WOMEN MAY BE 'USED' IN SUCH CEREMONIES BUT MAY NOT BE PART OF THE SOLIDARITY ITSELF. ORGANIZED CRIME ARISES TO PRODUCE AND DISTRIBUTE SOLIDARITY SUPPLIES UNDER SPECIAL CIRCUMSTANCES: A. WHEN DOMINATE CULTURES FORBID THE USE OF ANY SOLIDARITY SUPPLY OTHER THAN THEIR OWN...THUS ALCOHOL IS LEGAL; MARIJUANA NOT B. WHEN ALL SOLIDARITY SUPPLIES ARE FORBIDDEN AS FORMS OF CULTURAL CRIME. MIDDLE CLASS PROTESTANTS VIEW SUCH ACTIVITIES AS BARBARIC AND USE THE LAW MAKING/ENFORCING APPARATUS TO FORBID SUCH USE. SOME SAY THAT SUCH OPPOSITION TO DRINKING, GAMBLING, PROSTITUTION AROSE FROM OWNERS WHO WANTED WORKERS SOBER, FRUGAL, AND PUNCTUAL ON MONDAY MORNING C. WHEN EXCLUDED MINORITIES CAN 'REUNITE PRODUCTION AND DISTRIBUTION' BY ENTERING MARKETS NOT ALREADY MONOPOLIZED BY ESTABLISHED BUSINESS D. WHEN THE EUPHORIA FROM SOLIDARITY SUPPLIES CAN REDEEM THE BLEAK AND ALIENATED LIFE OF THOSE EXCLUDED FROM FAMILY, WORK AND CHURCH. IN GENERAL, OPPOSITION TO SOLIDARITY ACTIVITY AND THE DRAMAS OF THE HOLY IN WHICH THEY ARE FOUND IS PART OF THE 'SECULARIZATION/RATIONALIZATION' OF MODERN SOCIETY AGAINST WHICH BOTH PRE-MODERN AND POSTMODERN SENSIBILITY REBELS. END OF MINI-LECTURE. NEXT WEEK I WILL BE IN COLORADO; THE WEEK AFTER, I WILL DISCUSS SOME ELEMENTS OF POSTMODERN PHIL/SCIENCE. T.R. From socgrad-relay@UCSD.EDU Sun May 1 12:48:35 1994 sendmail 8.6.9/UCSD-2.2-sun Sun, 1 May 1994 12:47:22 -0700 for socgrad-list Sun, 1 May 1994 12:47:20 -0700 for Date: Sun, 01 May 94 14:38:42 CDT From: vijayan Subject: T.R's minilecture on political economy and geneder relations. To: Hello oll T R Young in his mini lecture on gender relations and political economy raised a few interesting generalizations. He says, in low tech socieities, children are ' net energy accumulators' -- These socieites encourage high birth rate. Second, childre are 'essential as social secureity for the aged'. Where children provide social security to the aged, high birth rate is likely to previal, he suggests. In addition, I think, from the point of view of politi cal economy, state support for for birth control (or the poltical will for birth control) is an important factor.Saudi Arabia , for example isa high tech society. A large proportion of the social security of the aged is provided by the government in cash and kind. Yet the birth rate remains very high. I would argue that state support for bith contro is a very imp determinant. ..I wonder at what levels of state support, infant mortlaity rates and social secuaity su pport for the aged will the birth rate decline? Shouldn't a threshold hypothesi s be a part of the demogahic transition theory? ... From socgrad-relay@UCSD.EDU Sun May 1 13:21:42 1994 sendmail 8.6.9/UCSD-2.2-sun Sun, 1 May 1994 13:20:23 -0700 for socgrad-list Sun, 1 May 1994 13:20:21 -0700 for Sun, 01 May 94 16:20:38 LCL Date: Sun, 1 May 1994 16:15:37 -0400 (EDT) From: "Toby J. Ewing" Subject: NSF funding for grad student research To: blovitts@nsf.gov Hello: I read Barbara's comments on research. I have a related question. In the April 1994 edition of the ASA's Footnotes there is a list of NSF Doctoral Dissertation Improvement Awards for 1993. I thought it was interesting that the awards are apparently listed in terms of the faculty advisors' names with the students' names in parentheses. Can someone explain why the students' names are in parentheses? Does the NSF award these funds only to faculty advisors? If so, what is the rationale. Does the ASA see the faculty members working with the students as somehow spokespersons for the grants? If the students are an aside, as would be suggested by the use of the parenthesis, why include their names at all? Can someone help straighten me out here? Thanks. Toby Ewing, Syracuse University (tjewing@mailbox.syr.edu) From socgrad-relay@UCSD.EDU Sun May 1 13:36:48 1994 sendmail 8.6.9/UCSD-2.2-sun Sun, 1 May 1994 13:35:50 -0700 for socgrad-list Sun, 1 May 1994 13:35:49 -0700 for Date: Sun, 1 May 94 15:35:47 CDT From: "joanna grace farmer" To: socgrad@UCSD.EDU Subject: subscription Yes, I'd like to subscribe to socgrad. My address is "jgfarmer@uc.edu" From socgrad-relay@UCSD.EDU Sun May 1 18:04:34 1994 sendmail 8.6.9/UCSD-2.2-sun Sun, 1 May 1994 18:02:56 -0700 for socgrad-list Sun, 1 May 1994 18:02:54 -0700 for From: blovitts@nsf.gov To: "Toby J. Ewing" Subject: Re: NSF funding for grad student research Date: 1 May 94 20:57 EST The dissertation adviser is responsible to the administration of the award, the graduate student is responsible for doing the research and writing the dissertation. If for any reason the funds get misused, the faculty member is the one responsible for answering to the Foundation. The underlying assumption is that the faculty member knows how to administer an award and the graduate student doesn't. In order to make sure that things get done "properly" the Foundation "bets" on the adviser instead of the student. Being the principal investigator (PI) on a grant basically means that that person is the contact person with the Foundation and that that person takes responsibility for administration and oversight of the award. The are plenty of awards made where the person(s) are really doing the work is someone other than the PI. The PI gets "credit" like getting to put the receipt of an award on his or her resume, but s/he also gets all the administrative headaches. Barbara From socgrad-relay@UCSD.EDU Sun May 1 18:06:32 1994 sendmail 8.6.9/UCSD-2.2-sun Sun, 1 May 1994 18:05:03 -0700 for socgrad-list Sun, 1 May 1994 18:04:59 -0700 for From: blovitts@nsf.gov To: vijayan , Hello oll Subject: Re: T.R's minilecture on political economy and geneder relations Date: 1 May 94 21:02 EST T R Young in his mini lecture ... Is T.R. a he? I assumed that T.R. signed off with T.R. purposely to avoid gender categorization. Just an observation ... Barbara From socgrad-relay@UCSD.EDU Mon May 2 07:00:16 1994 sendmail 8.6.9/UCSD-2.2-sun Mon, 2 May 1994 06:57:31 -0700 for socgrad-list Mon, 2 May 1994 06:57:28 -0700 for From: RALPH@cati.umd.edu Mon, 2 May 94 9:57:24 +1100 Organization: Survey Research Center, UMCP To: socgrad@UCSD.EDU Date: Mon, 2 May 1994 09:56:59 EDT Subject: Re: science?? > > On Fri, 29 Apr 1994, Andrew Regan wrote: > > > > > For example, should we as Sociologists form our discipline on the > > >natural sciences format? I just feel that sociology can not achieve this > > >with the natural science model, we need to wake up! Any comments! > > >Andrew > > nick replied: > > > > I already weighed in on this issue some months ago, when it took the form > > of a "should we take the principle of objectivity to heart when conducting > > sociological research?" I then said that such an orientation was > > essential to the creation of cumulative and verifiable theory, as well as > > for salvaging any remaining credibility our discipline might be able to > > garner from our colleagues in the sciences..."natural" and "social" alike. > > > Gerhard Lenski wrote a probing thesis on just this subject in the > April > > '88 issue of ASR, although I enjoy van den Berghe's related criticism of > > sociology (Sociological Forum, vol. 5, No. 2, 1990) because he is no > > shrinking violet and his argument is full of piss and vinegar. > > > > The *real* lamentation is not that sociology has "failed to wake up" to > > the horrors of a natural science model. Quite the opposite. > > Sociological theory is in an incoherent mess precisely because its > > practicioners fail to review and live up to the central tenets of the > > scientific enterprise--the formulation of falsifiable theory and > > hypotheses, explicit identification of relevant biological and > > environmental constants, etc. > > > > Well, I've registered my argument in this debate. The difference between > > "hard" and "soft" science is spurious, and created by the "softies" as an > > ultimately feeble explanation for what they have failed to contribute in > > the pursuit of a theory of human behavior. Much of what we do is only > > slightly above the realm of barroom gossip--animated, thought-provoking, and > > thoroughly unverifiable. > > > > Nick McRee > > The University of Texas at Austin > > > > some comments: > 1) I am very ambivalent about the idea of cumulative theory. Thomas > Kuhn's "Structure of scientific revolutions" was the stepping stone > in that direction. The notion of accumulation of knowledge is part > of science's ideology by which practitioners justify their actions. > The same notion goes for verification of theories. Anyone reading > sociology of scientific knowledge (or social studies of science), > should at least get the notion that what happens in research is less > rational (in a scientific sense) than what science's ideology makes > us believe. > 2) Why should sociology live up to the `central tenents of the > scientific enterprise'. The last thing we need is a religious faith > towards the current model of science with its claims to objectivity > and neutrality.. As sociologists (or other thinkers) we should treat > science as we treat any other belief systems in society; i.e., as > just that: a belief system. > 3) Maybe our contributions are slightly above barroom gossip; however, > most sociological research is rather concerned about its > scientificity and in the process fails to say anything meaningful > besides correlation coefficients. More importantly, what we have to > say will not become `better' or `more important' just because we use > more accepted methods. > 4) I believe what sociologists and other thinkers need to be most > concerned about is reflexivity. If we do not realize how we > construct knowledge through our research (be it quantitative or > qualitative) we will never understand what we are actually doing. > > Ralph > > > > > From socgrad-relay@UCSD.EDU Mon May 2 07:34:12 1994 sendmail 8.6.9/UCSD-2.2-sun Mon, 2 May 1994 07:31:56 -0700 for socgrad-list Mon, 2 May 1994 07:31:53 -0700 for From: LEE@cati.umd.edu Mon, 2 May 94 10:30:37 +1100 Organization: Survey Research Center, UMCP To: socgrad@UCSD.EDU Date: Mon, 2 May 1994 10:30:26 EDT Subject: Chomsky Steve Harvey commented: > Personally, I have mixed feelings about Noam Chomsky: He identifies > real issues, that often go unidentified in popular discourse. But he also > borders on what I call the "good-guy/bad-guy fallacy," that is, the fallacy of > identifying systemic social problems as artifacts of some "villainry," > creating causes to which heroes may rise. > Chomsky tends to belong to the camp that depicts the voracious > greed and exploitation of corporate power as a "cancer" marring an > otherwise healthy being (though the "healthy being" is fully > implicit, and never referred to), and perhaps TR rightly considers > this a naive Rousseauean orientation. Reply: As a reader of Chomsky's books, interviewers, and having seen him speak twice in person, my understanding of his viewpoint is that yes, people are basically decent at their core. However, there is a dialectic that I think he recognizes, which is that at the core of every person is a potential monster. His historical and political analyses are essentially structural in nature because it is organized social systems and processes that shape the general behavioral direction that persons become involved in that can either hurt others or not hurt others. I don't see too much that is naive nor that is necessarily Rousseauean about that position. Chomsky's personal philosophy seems to rest on the assumption that people have some ability to make choices, even within the constraints of their environmental limitations ----- moral choices. Although this may be a "simple" idea, familiarity with his work in language and cognitive development lends more depth to this assumption. Chomsky's moral outrage does in fact put blinders on his analyses. He does not pretend to some ideal of objectivity. With the vast majority of the "experts" who get the bulk of public attention concerning the vital issues he discusses, his verbose indignation is actually a blessing. While I do not idolize Chomsky (he is quite arrogant), I do think his scholarly contributions are more important than most other public intellectuals on the American scene. Lee Martin From socgrad-relay@UCSD.EDU Mon May 2 07:42:52 1994 sendmail 8.6.9/UCSD-2.2-sun Mon, 2 May 1994 07:40:45 -0700 for socgrad-list Mon, 2 May 1994 07:40:42 -0700 for Date: Mon, 02 May 94 10:29:27 EDT From: Steve Harvey Subject: contemplation To: SOCGRAD@UCSD.EDU Understanding science as merely a belief-system does not ipso facto imply that it is not a useful belief-system. Kuhn's thesis does not reject the notion of "progress" in the subtlety of our understandings; it simply rejects the notion of science as an accumulation of *facts*. Scientific and political revolutions are not free-floating implementations of new fancies, but rather thresholds that result from intense focus on the anomolies produced by the previous system. It's not so much that we *should* be more reflexive (we have plenty of navel- gazing already), or that we *should* be more rigorously scientific (there are plenty of institutionalized rewards in place for that already), but that we should have more cross-paradigmatic dialogue, we should be less easily indoctrinated into seeing things in one way and rejecting other ways, and we should each follow our own passion. -steve From socgrad-relay@UCSD.EDU Mon May 2 07:59:53 1994 sendmail 8.6.9/UCSD-2.2-sun Mon, 2 May 1994 07:58:23 -0700 for socgrad-list Mon, 2 May 1994 07:58:09 -0700 for Date: Mon, 02 May 94 10:46:35 EDT From: Steve Harvey Subject: Chomsky To: SOCGRAD@UCSD.EDU In response to Lee's comments: I basically agree with you, from a "stage two" vantage point. My point was that righteous indignation is *itself* an indica- tion of certain assumptions about the world. The very invocation of concepts such as the "good" and "evil" within each person are evidence of the kind of world-view which can be critiqued from what I called a "stage three" vantage point. -steve From socgrad-relay@UCSD.EDU Mon May 2 08:30:54 1994 sendmail 8.6.9/UCSD-2.2-sun Mon, 2 May 1994 08:29:12 -0700 for socgrad-list Mon, 2 May 1994 08:29:10 -0700 for Date: Mon, 2 May 94 10:29:08 CDT From: "chuanli deng" To: socgrad@UCSD.EDU From: Kenneth Deng The University of Chicago I wonder if anybody is doing some research in Game Theory. I would like to chat with her or him. My e-mail address is: cdeng@midway.uchicago.edu Thanks From socgrad-relay@UCSD.EDU Mon May 2 09:39:00 1994 sendmail 8.6.9/UCSD-2.2-sun Mon, 2 May 1994 09:35:09 -0700 for socgrad-list Mon, 2 May 1994 09:35:03 -0700 for (5.65+UW94.4/UW-NDC Revision: 2.30 ) id AA00804; Date: Mon, 2 May 1994 09:34:57 -0700 (PDT) From: Robert Duniway Subject: Re: Ethical Sociology To: George Mason George, Thanks for your obviously well thought out post. I want to suggest, however, that sociology would be best served by the expansion of applied researchers. Sociology is perceived as an impractical, purely intellectual exercise in many quarters (including, apparently, among many university administrators). Pschology, economics, and social work, on the other hand, have carved out applied jurisdictions. The downside of such applied work is that it often falls flat on its face. One of the upsides is that it often falls flat on its face, and draws a lot of attention when it does. Can you imagine a better incentive for making methodological advances? As for funding, the applied research in economics and psychology tends to strengthen, not weaken, the fields ability to attract basic research funding. The natural sciences have been claiming for years that basic research eventually leads to practical technological advances, if not directly, then at least through decendants of descendents. Psychologists and economists are gaining the same sort of halo effect when claiming that their work, even at teh basic research level, will benefit society. If we had applied sociologists engaged in (pardon my rhetoric) social engineering, and if the wheels didn't fall off quite so often, there would also be more support for unapplied research than currently exists. I know in our department the demographers and the criminologists get teh lions share of research dollars. Marco sociologists and theorists seldom get money. Over i our psychology department Ellen Langer attracted a pile of money to study human memory when it became obvious that her work had immediate implications for court procedings. It makes sense that people are more interested in funding research they think might be useful, but far from hurting a discipline, I think it speeds up (and sometime redirects) learning. Bob Duniway - University of Washington From socgrad-relay@UCSD.EDU Mon May 2 10:26:38 1994 sendmail 8.6.9/UCSD-2.2-sun Mon, 2 May 1994 10:22:45 -0700 for socgrad-list Mon, 2 May 1994 10:22:43 -0700 for (5.65+UW94.4/UW-NDC Revision: 2.30 ) id AA08597; Date: Mon, 2 May 1994 10:22:04 -0700 (PDT) From: Robert Duniway Subject: Re: Methodology To: Joya Misra Joya, I spend entirely too much time thinking about methods and methodology, so I am apt to pontificate a bit. Consider yourself warned. We have a wonderful department for studying methods. Wonderful because it contains both people like Herb Costner and Adrain Raftery (one former and one current editor of SMR) and Howie Becker. We can get to the cutting edge of statistical analysis, and also learn about participant observation, analytic induction, and the role of rhetoric. Having spent some time wallowing in this trough, my current understanding of methods is very catholic. One conclusion I have reached is that neither methods nor theory need distort our research. What distorts our research is an irrational commitment to one particular tool or one particular world view. I operate on the assumption that the world is complicated, that my information gathering and processing capacity is not adequate to consider every detail of any situation, and that a choice of methodology and/or theoretical orientation (cf. David Wagner) will focus my attention on some details at the expense of noticing others. I also realize that to avoid incuring the cost of lost details I must give up the notion that I can understand, even partially, the subject I am considering. The choice of a method/theoretical orientation is a pragmatic choice. If I want to learn something about why teenage girls do or do not get pregnant and drop out of school, I would consider several different ways of gaining information. Would answers to survey questions be meaningful measures? Would interviews be better? Should I go out and do field work? Where? Should I focus on the characteristics of schools? Of neighborhoods? Family demographics? The class structure of nations? The moral values of the girls who do or do not become pregnant? The girls' knowledge of contraception? The attitudes of the boys fathering these children? The real and perceived economic consequences? Birth order? Astrological sign? Physical attractiveness? Use of drugs? Favorite music? Do I have any hypotheses I would like to consider? Is there a canventional accout I want to support or challenge? Asking such questions is a crucial step in research. It would also be an obvious step, except for the fact that many researchers are committed to particular research tools and a particular theoretical orientation. They tend to skip this step, and go imediately to collecting data and testing hypotheses. Whether that is approapriate or not depends on what motivates their research. If they just want to demonstate that marxist accounts can fit a wide variety of phenomena, or that rational choice models work pretty well, then they are on the right track. If the researcher has some other end in mind, however, they should consider alternative means, and choose the most promising. If I want to study teenage pregnancy because I want to suggest ways of discouraging it, then my task is to identify the risk factors, expecially the risk factors that can be altered (we can rule out astrological sign on the grounds that we can't really do anything about it, and don't need to bother making a case for its implausibility). If we want to study teenage pregnancy because we want to give our audience a sense of the experience, a greater empathy, we would do a different sort of research, and would not be so concerned about a general theoretical framework, only about a coherent account. I'll get off my soapbox now. To sum up, I think good research needs to be pragmatic and flexible, both in methodological and theoretical approach. There is no such thing as THE correct methodology (although there are clearly incorrect methods), only more or less approapriate tools for achieving a research objhective. Bob Duniway - University of Washington From socgrad-relay@UCSD.EDU Mon May 2 10:47:12 1994 sendmail 8.6.9/UCSD-2.2-sun Mon, 2 May 1994 10:35:25 -0700 for socgrad-list Mon, 2 May 1994 10:35:23 -0700 for Date: Mon, 2 May 1994 10:35:12 -0700 (PDT) From: Robert Duniway Subject: Re: Research To: Andrew Regan On Fri, 29 Apr 1994, Andrew Regan wrote: > > Along with Gibbons concern about how funding dictates research, I think it > would be an interesting question to find out which types of social science > research have been funded at the NSF, and to what ends the results of > these studies have been applied. For example, do the results foster > intellectual freedom for all individuals, or do the results foster > efficiency for those who fund the research? You could always exercise your intellectual freedom by not spending taxpayers' money and doing whatever you felt like. I think it would be irresponsible of NSF not to consider the relative value of different research proposals, including the possibility of improving the efficiency of government social programs. You raise a point worth considering, but I don't think you should push it all that far. I don't recall from the social ethics courses I took in college any convincing argument about our having a right to get money in order to do whatever it is we happen to want to do. No one has a right to an NSF grant. Many proposals are turned down. If you have a problem with the criteria used to award grants, can you propose a better alternative? Could you make your case to the majority of the voters or taxpayers? Bob Duniway - University of Washington From socgrad-relay@UCSD.EDU Mon May 2 11:03:05 1994 sendmail 8.6.9/UCSD-2.2-sun Mon, 2 May 1994 10:52:52 -0700 for socgrad-list Mon, 2 May 1994 10:52:50 -0700 for Date: Mon, 2 May 1994 10:52:33 -0700 (PDT) From: Robert Duniway Subject: Re: Research To: Andrew Regan On Fri, 29 Apr 1994, Andrew Regan wrote: > I like the way this discussion is going, and it raises still more > questions and issues for me. For example, should we as Sociologists form > our discipline on the natural sciences format? Or can we create bold new > theories and methods that can give Sociology some autonomy? I just have > a sense that sociology can become much more than it already is. I just > feel that sociology can not achieve this with the natural science model, > we need to wake up! Any comments! Which natural science model did you have in mind? When people use this phrase I get the impression they really mean physics/chemistry. Biology and Geology are natural sciences too. Biology in particular offers an interesting model of multiple methods/ multiple levels of analysis science which sociologists would benefit from considering. Another alternative, which Andrews post seems to suggest, it that we could abandon the slow theoretical arguments adjudicated with data approach of science, in favor of ??? I think Steve Harvey could just repost one of his many messages explaining why such a general complaint is inadequate without putting forward and arguing in favor of some actual alternative. Bob Duniway - University of Washington From socgrad-relay@UCSD.EDU Mon May 2 13:35:20 1994 sendmail 8.6.9/UCSD-2.2-sun Mon, 2 May 1994 13:33:11 -0700 for socgrad-list Mon, 2 May 1994 13:33:09 -0700 for Date: Mon, 02 May 94 16:07:57 EDT From: Steve Harvey Subject: ecclecticism v. theory-building To: SOCGRAD@UCSD.EDU Bob makes some good points on behalf of theoretical and methodological ecclecticism, but misses one argument in favor of pushing a particular theory as far as it can go, even if alternative theories are more immediately "useful": By taking what one considers to be the most analytically powerful theory available (in the long run, the choice of which theory may not matter much, if researchers are dilligent in examining anomolies as they arise), and trying to explain as much observed phenomena with that theory as possible, the Kuhnian process of scientific evolution and revolution are augmented. In other words, one cost of ecclecticism is that it allows people to cut and paste disparate theoretical orientations to address a given problem, thus obscuring the anomolies that might arise in any given one of those orienta- tions. When anomolies are met in an ecclectic approach, they are addressed not by examining and ultimately transforming a given paradigm, but by borrowing from another one which has different anomolies. To the extent that science *is* cumulative, it is so as a result of the process that starts with paradigmatic integrity, progresses through long stages of "normal science," and reaches "revolutionary" thresholds *as a result of pushing a single paradigm as far as it can go*. Augmenting this process is just one possible agenda that we as sociologists may pursue; addressing current problems with ecclectic mixtures of the best current understandings of the relevant phenomena is another. Generally, good theory-building involves a bit of "tunnel-vision," as counter- intuitive as that may seem, and good pragmatism requires just the opposite, a healthy willingness to cut and paste. The aspect of theory-building that requires broad knowledge is the challenge any given theory faces to address phenomena that alternative theories seem to address more adequately. In this sense, it's important to know and understand alternative theoretical orienta- tions, but not necessarily to hop from theory to theory to address disparate phenomena. Theoretic syntheses can be wonderful advances in theory-building, but usually one takes one of the theories being synthesized as a "base." The ultimate goal, in theory-building, is theoretical integrity. -steve From socgrad-relay@UCSD.EDU Mon May 2 22:45:58 1994 sendmail 8.6.9/UCSD-2.2-sun Mon, 2 May 1994 22:44:44 -0700 for socgrad-list Mon, 2 May 1994 22:44:43 -0700 for Date: Tue, 3 May 94 00:44:13 EST From: eschaefe@bach.helios.nd.edu (elizabeth schaefer) To: socgrad@UCSD.EDU Subject: ethical sociology In light of our recent conversation about ethical sociology, I thought this quotation might stir up the action: "The origins of academic social science in America were in a discipline known as "moral philosophy." Fine (1956) reports that the first volume of the _American Journal of Sociology_ was dedicated by its editor in 1895 to the support of 'every wise endeavor to insure the good of men' (p.265). And among the expressed goals of the American Social Science Association, founded in 1865, was 'to learn patiently what *is* - to promote diligently what *should* be' (Id., 348). How far we have come." (Craig Haney, in "The Play's the Thing: Methodological Notes on Social Simulations" _The Research Experience_ pg. 180) How far have we come? Elizabeth From socgrad-relay@UCSD.EDU Mon May 2 22:57:27 1994 sendmail 8.6.9/UCSD-2.2-sun Mon, 2 May 1994 22:56:34 -0700 for socgrad-list Mon, 2 May 1994 22:56:32 -0700 for Date: Tue, 3 May 1994 00:52:37 -0500 (CDT) From: Michael Gibbons Subject: ethics To: socgrad beth's post reminds me of what we can learn from dated material and the normative orientation it betrays to us. there is always something to learn about what people thought was important at the time. it reminds us just how relative what we hold dear and moral is. the fine line to walk is the one balancing human good and its pursuits and our notion of human good and our pursuits. and yet, it must be done. which leads to another question: how far can we get from our own norms when looking for the more basic human good? responses? michael From socgrad-relay@UCSD.EDU Mon May 2 23:37:16 1994 sendmail 8.6.9/UCSD-2.2-sun Mon, 2 May 1994 23:36:10 -0700 for socgrad-list Mon, 2 May 1994 23:36:09 -0700 for Date: Tue, 3 May 94 01:35:52 EST From: eschaefe@bach.helios.nd.edu (elizabeth schaefer) To: socgrad@UCSD.EDU Subject: norms and the human good Michael, Do you mean how far can we get from our individual norms or our disciplinary norms, like methods or theories? Being a theorist-wanna-be, I play with theories I sometimes disagree with, just for the practice of thinking the way they thought. When I play these games, I don't really think of how the assumptions of the theory may carry through to "real" people. For example, a woman gave a paper at the Midwest Meetings, which criticized people who use Durkheimian theory. Her argument was that Durkheim fundamentally devalued women by claiming that women were excluded from the group he called "social beings." Women are not considered "social beings," according to this woman's interpretation of Durkheim. Well, one of the things I had been playing with was an application of Durkheim's theory of social forms - actually, I was attempting to expand his model to include new forms. This woman said to do this was to subordinate women, because women were assumed to be non-social within the model. I still haven't resolved this issue, so I'm curious what you think about this situation. Are we bound by the assumptions that once tarnished a theory, or can we somehow overcome these assumptions? Are we left to trash everything that was created from something ugly? I guess, it's just the Heidegger syndrom, all over again. How do we judge a seemingly moral philosophy, which was created by a monster? Elizabeth From socgrad-relay@UCSD.EDU Tue May 3 05:50:43 1994 sendmail 8.6.9/UCSD-2.2-sun Tue, 3 May 1994 05:49:21 -0700 for socgrad-list Tue, 3 May 1994 05:49:19 -0700 for Date: Tue, 3 May 1994 07:36:59 -0500 (CDT) From: Michael Gibbons Subject: Re: norms and the human good To: elizabeth schaefer Beth, When I questioned our ability to go beyond our own assumptions in trying to examine and create moral systems, I was thinking of our personal assumptions. But I do not see why the same would not be applicable in our discipline. Since I only read _Suicide_ once, I do not have a tight grasp of old Emile, but unless his subjugation of women was built into his theory, I don't understand what his personal bias has to do anything. Since we, in our society, do recognize women as social that would change the categories and effectively neutralize Durkheim's bias. But perhaps this is a simplistic understanding of what is going on. I'm kind of shaky with Durkheim. Durkheim's point that strikes me the most is his characterization of religions and religious groups as an alternate set of realities which we use to deal with the realities of the world we live in. This is a poor presentation of a good idea, but it incorporates into religion just about anything we would care call metaphysical, and it would also incorporate the belief in kknowledge, science, and their pursuits that mark the atheism of our own community of intellectuals. It does a great job of pulling together those who don't believe in any god but approach the world in a logical way, and those who wouldn't dare miss a daily bible reading, and those whose practices I don't understand and identifies something that unites the different groups. Now I am rambling. Sorry. :) michael From socgrad-relay@UCSD.EDU Tue May 3 05:55:34 1994 sendmail 8.6.9/UCSD-2.2-sun Tue, 3 May 1994 05:54:10 -0700 for socgrad-list Tue, 3 May 1994 05:54:07 -0700 for Date: Tue, 03 May 94 08:46:44 EDT From: Steve Harvey Subject: response to Beth To: SOCGRAD@UCSD.EDU Life is a dirty business. If one feels compelled to use only that which is pure and has never been tarnished, one will find that they have no resources of any kind at their disposal. Since we have no direct and unmediated relationship with "reality," and since our ideas reflect our biases and limitations, all ideas can be found to have inherent biases. Virtually all theories are rejected by *someone* on the basis of their impurities. -steve From socgrad-relay@UCSD.EDU Tue May 3 07:54:53 1994 sendmail 8.6.9/UCSD-2.2-sun Tue, 3 May 1994 07:53:19 -0700 for socgrad-list Tue, 3 May 1994 07:53:16 -0700 for From: blovitts@nsf.gov To: George Mason , socgrad@UCSD.EDU Subject: Re[2]: Research Date: 3 May 94 10:44 EST George, I hope you know that I meant no ill will in my responses about the funding of research. Let me try to respond to some of your questions. I do not even know what NSF is- NSF is the National Science Foundation. If is a federal agency that is a primary source of federal funding for basic and applied research in the sciences, engineering, and social sciences. Our budget for FY 94 is about $3.1 billion dollars. First, how are research grants (funding) divided at NSF. NSF is divided into 7 directorates: Mathematical and Physcial Sciences Engineering Computer and Information Sciences and Engineering Biological Sciences Geological Sciences Social, Behavioral, and Economic Sciences Education and Human Resources Each directorate is broken down into roughly 5-6 divisions which tend to correspond with major academic disciplinary areas, e.g., MPS has a division for Astronomy. Within each division are programs. I cited two programs in the Social Sciences Directorate in an earlier post. Second, how many grants are given to each category. Each program has its own budget and it is up to the program officer to determine how the funds are allocated, that is, how many grants can be made relative to the budget. NSF makes several thousand grants a year. Lastly, what are the values of these grants. Grants range in size from a few thousand dollars to several million. In Canada .. there does not seem to be an equivable argument for the number of grants given by each of the granting agencies Things are not equitable here either. The Social Sciences Directorate, I believe, has the smallest budget. (Budget information is in the public domain, I just don't feel like looking for it right now.) However, until about three or four years ago the Social Sciences directorate was part of the Biological Sciences directorate. The creation of a separate directorate is/was a big political statement about the importance of research in the social sciences. FYI, the first and current head of that directorate is Cora Maret, a black female sociologist from the University of Wisconsin. Thus, by the time a graduate student attempts to receive some form of grant (excluding monies allocated for RA work), there simply is too little to go around (and too little to be spend on methodological concerns of sociologists at the expense of cancer research or any other profitable endeavour). NSF and most other federal agencies do not fund graduate students directly, although money is often provided for graduate students to work on faculty's research. NSF does have dissertation support for graduate students in the social sciences, and I think I provided a fair amount of detail on it in another post. Without actually knowing the number of grants or their values given by NSF, I would hazard to guess that the medical and 'hard' sciences are given precedence. Would this be the case? NSF does not support any clinical or medical research. That is the domain of the National Institutes of Health, and they do have a huge budget which Congress always augments annually. Yes, the hard sciences do receive more funding than the "soft" sciences, but this is a political process. The money comes from Congress. If we want more money in the social sciences, then social scientists have to be better lobbists and politicans. Hope this helps. Barbara From socgrad-relay@UCSD.EDU Tue May 3 10:11:09 1994 sendmail 8.6.9/UCSD-2.2-sun Tue, 3 May 1994 10:08:22 -0700 for socgrad-list Tue, 3 May 1994 10:08:20 -0700 for Date: Tue, 3 May 1994 10:08:10 -0700 (PDT) From: Robert Duniway Subject: Re: ecclecticism v. theory-building To: Steve Harvey I would like to push Steves argument about taking one theoretical paragigm as far as possible in order to make obvious the anomolies that can lead to a paradigm shift. I think Steve is being a bit too optomistic about the theoretical coherence of sociology (See, we are not really the same person with two accounts. We can and do disagree.). Kuhn's account fits best in fields where there is something like a dominant theory. Particle physics or evolutionary biology seem to be what he has in mind. In Kuhn's account a pardigm becomes dominant because it best accounts for the facts as known within the discipline. As the paradigm is applied to new substantive problems, it will fit imperfectly, resulting in the recognition of anomolies. Anomolies will be explained away if they can be, but if they become to significant to ignore the intellectual community is ripe for a shift to a new paradigm that can account for such anomolies. What Steve is proposing is that we should adopt a particular paradigm and push it to its limits in order to acheive a paradigm shift. In the social sciences, however, we have not settled into a dominant paradigm. Rational choice may be the dominant paradigm in micro-economics, and a case could even be made that it has lead to a crisis and is shifting (e.g. various accounts of bounded rationality). In sociology (which I think is actually several specialties too small to get their own department) there are very few issues dominated by a particular paradigm. If a rational choice theorist notes irrational behavior when studying labor market discrimination, the response is not likely to be an evolution of rational choice theory, but a loud chorus of "I told you so." from marxists, sociobiologists, institutional theorists, social learning theorists, etc. As the intrepid rational choice theorist moves further from her economic base, and starts studying social movements, the family, or deviance, they will be viewed more as interlopers to be explained away rather than disciples of the most analytically powerful paradigm. I see no history of Kuhnian style paradigm shifts in sociology as a broad discipline (even if you think structural-functionalism dominated at one time, it was not repleaced with any particular new dominant paradigm), and the event is hard to find even in narrow subdisciplines. I'll stick with Wagner's account of theory, in which multiple theoretical orientations are applied to multiple substantive domains, and those that are most successful are emulated. Microeconomics is dominated by rational choice theory not for philosophical reasons, but because the approach has been more useful than competing approaches, and more useful than no approach at all. Social sciences progress, to the extent they do, not by moving toward some sort of Grand Unified Theory, but by acheiving more experience with which approaches are or are not useful in various substantive domains. To reach that goal the field benefits most from competing accounts, the development and attempted application of new accounts (either through synthesis, lifting paradigms from other substantive domains, elaboration of existing theories, or an attempt to account for observed anomolies), and publicizing both successful and unsuccessful efforts. Finally, the ultimate goal of theory building is not theoretical integrity, but theoretical power. Integrity is one foundation of power, but there are many others. You correctly identify precision, by which I assume you mean the ability to derive unambiguous predictions. The feasibility of operationalizing (measuring) theoretical concepts also effects power. Ultimately, power is a measure of how well the theory does what you want it to do, so it is possible that there are multiple theories, equally valid, which are the most powerful tools for acheiving different objectives. Bob Duniway - University of Washington, Dept. of Sociology From socgrad-relay@UCSD.EDU Tue May 3 10:44:23 1994 sendmail 8.6.9/UCSD-2.2-sun Tue, 3 May 1994 10:39:51 -0700 for socgrad-list Tue, 3 May 1994 10:39:47 -0700 for Date: Tue, 03 May 94 13:20:08 EDT From: Steve Harvey Subject: theory-building: response to Bob D. To: SOCGRAD@UCSD.EDU Bob- My argument does not rely on single-paradigmatic agreement throughout the field of sociology. In fact, I have often argued in favor of sociology's present ecclecticism *discipline wide* (though I have also argued that that ecclecticism would be more fruitful if we underwrote it with a more coherent cross-paradigmatic lexicon). My argument applies to individual endeavors as they contribute to paradigmatic growth and transformation within *each* paradigmatic sub-community. Sociology may not be a single-paradigm discipline, but rational choice sociology is (there can be lively debate and differing agendas even within single paradigms). Similarly, Frankfurt School sociology, structural marxist sociology, symbolic interactionist sociology, and network analysis sociology each represent single paradigm enterprises, that are amenable to single paradigm progressions (of course, there are also possibilities for syntheses, such as between semiotics, Frankfurt School, and symbolic interactionism, or between stochastic learning models and rational choice models -though the latter is already largely integrated among formal theorists). I have no "optimism" concerning the theoretic coherence of sociology. Nor do I have a moral commitment to theoretic integrity (it depends on one's agenda, as I said in the first place). My argument is that *one* does not contribute to the growth of theoretic power, scope, and accuracy (to further specify our [Bob's and my] more-or-less agreed upon criteria for theory -I have some meta-theoretic reservations about those criteria, but that's another story...) by cutting and pasting among available theories *unless* they do so as a process of synthesis, creating a newly integrated theory. The multi-paradigmatic status of the discipline doesn't alter this in any way, any more than does the fact that biology pushes one (or more) paradigm(s) while physics pushes another. As Bob said, it's as reasonable to consider sociology as several fields all thrown together, in which case each one is a single-paradigm discipline (by definition, if we divide the field along paradigmatic cleavages), and each is amenable to single-paradigm development. -steve harvey@uconnvm From socgrad-relay@UCSD.EDU Tue May 3 11:24:12 1994 sendmail 8.6.9/UCSD-2.2-sun Tue, 3 May 1994 11:22:15 -0700 for socgrad-list Tue, 3 May 1994 11:22:11 -0700 for From: bb05246@bingsuns.cc.binghamton.edu (John Hollister) Subject: no subject (file transmission) To: gay/lesbian/queer@bingsuns.cc.binghamton.edu, social@bingsuns.cc.binghamton.edu, science@bingsuns.cc.binghamton.edu, list@bingsuns.cc.binghamton.edu, socgrad@UCSD.EDU Date: Tue, 3 May 1994 14:11:06 -0400 (EDT) Hi y'all, GLQSOC-L, the gay/lesbian/queer social science list, is finally working. I hope that it will facilitate coordination and communication among sociologists, anthropologists, historians, political scientists, psychologists and anyone interested in these approaches to anti-homophobic research by/for/about lesbians, bisexuals, gays, queers, trans*, trade, dykes, uranians, etc. etc. I am looking forward to debate and discussion about differences in our theories, methods, insights. I hope that scholars will find it a helpful place to discuss their work. Please feel free to post announcements, calls for papers, job openings, or whatever will strengthen the infrastructure of our field. May the Queer God(dess) protect the list from prolific drivelmongering, chain letters, abusive flamewars, 'phobes, and misdirected subscription requests. To subscribe, send the message: sub glqsoc-l Your Name to the address: listserv@bingvmb.bitnet or listserv@bingvmb.cc.binghamton.edu Any suggestions, problems or questions, ask me: John Hollister bb05246@bingsuns.cc.binghamton.edu From socgrad-relay@UCSD.EDU Tue May 3 12:13:12 1994 sendmail 8.6.9/UCSD-2.2-sun Tue, 3 May 1994 12:03:37 -0700 for socgrad-list Tue, 3 May 1994 12:03:33 -0700 for Date: Tue, 03 May 1994 02:02:59 -0500 To: socgrad@UCSD.EDU From: ghougham@medicine.bsd.uchicago.edu (Gavin Hougham) Subject: Thanks to Barbara; research in context I've been following the discussions here on theory, methodology, funding, ethical research, gendered vs. non-gendered agendas, etc., etc.,... First, I have to register public thanks to Barbara at NSF for spending what must be a fair amount of time educating us all on the largest public funding source sociologists are likely to interact with. Let me also register a comment that some of this discussion, while informal and well-intentioned, strikes me as somewhat naive to the realities of how ANY money is spent. Someone mentioned that we are all pretty much free to do whatever we want IF we don't expect someone else to pay for it. Yes and no. Certain kinds of research using secondary materials, publically available documents, or certain kinds of *unobstrusive measures* can be done as creatively as one can imagine. Some other research simply can NOT be done outside of well defined and maintained boundries. I am a soc grad student doing a dissertation requiring intimate and personal access to a certain class of hospital patients and their families, and there is simply no workable access strategy that DOES NOT require working within institutional parameters. You can argue all you like about whether this is *good* or not, but at the risk of seeming the reactionary that I am NOT, many of these *barriers* to research have been erected for very compelling reasons. For example, how many of us would want or allow (if asked) a bunch of green graduate students wandering into our parents' hospital rooms unfettered to ask them all kinds of probing or potentially threatening questions. If you were in the room at the time how kindly would you take to being asked to leave so that you could do your all important RESEARCH? I am no Luddite but when I hear the discussion veering towards unreflexive criticism of (shudder...) having to live and work within a social space that is not ours alone, I do get impatient. :) Access to populations to do what may be very well designed and *important* research comes at the cost, perhaps, of justifying our work within larger intellectual, political and social contexts. When we interview people, remember that we are not MERELY sucking information in with no consequences to others. With all the talk I hear about reflexivity, surely we can attempt to locate or contextualize what we do or WANT to do, without negating the very structures within which we are embedded. Our work is socially located and thus has social consequences. I think it only reasonable to expect that social institutions (NSF, NIH,...) and structures (Institutional Review Boards, ...) have been erected to take account of these consequences. Finally, for truth in labelling purposes, I am a sociologist type, but I and several other soc graduate students are funded indirectly through NIH, NIA and private foundation grants to our respective PI's (gerontologists, medical ethicists, and research sociologists) working in a large university based hospital. There is a fair bit of *sociology* being done corollary to other projects. Again, a thank you to Barbara should be extended for her *NSF 101* notes. Gavin --------------------------------------------------------------------- Gavin Hougham University of Chicago Department of Sociology 1126 East 59th Street Chicago, IL 60637 E-mail: gwh2@midway.uchicago.edu Office: Department of General Internal Medicine (312) 702-6735 From socgrad-relay@UCSD.EDU Tue May 3 16:58:17 1994 sendmail 8.6.9/UCSD-2.2-sun Tue, 3 May 1994 16:55:56 -0700 for socgrad-list Tue, 3 May 1994 16:55:49 -0700 for Tue, 03 May 94 19:55:55 LCL Date: Tue, 3 May 1994 17:06:02 EDT From: RNSPRAGG@suvm.acs.syr.edu To: socgrad@UCSD.EDU Subject: WANTED Graduate Students --RENEE E. SPRAGGINS SOCIOLOGY DEPARTMENT, SYRACUSE UNIVERSITY -- --100 SIMS IV, SYRACUSE, NY 13244-1230, USA (315)443-9053,2346 -- --BITNET: RNSPRAGG@SUVM INTERNET: RNSPRAGG@SUVM.ACS.SYR.EDU -- WANTED GRADUATE STUDENTS !!!! To participate in a survey about the "graduate life experience". I am in the process of writing a paper about the "Politics of Survival: The Black Experience in Graduate School". To better get at the differences in experiences among ALL graduate students, I have constructed a questionnaire. However, I NEED graduate students to participate. The respondents need not be African-Amrerican. All responses are encouraged and welcomed ( and appreciated). If interested or you know of anyone who might be, please contact me at the above address (RNSPRAGG@suvm.acs.syr.edu) ASAP! Thnak you for your support! Renee Ericka Spraggins From socgrad-relay@UCSD.EDU Tue May 3 19:06:52 1994 sendmail 8.6.9/UCSD-2.2-sun Tue, 3 May 1994 18:43:12 -0700 for socgrad-list Tue, 3 May 1994 18:42:55 -0700 for Date: Tue, 3 May 1994 20:35:37 -0500 (CDT) From: Michael Gibbons Subject: p&d ethic To: socgrad i admit that some of my disgruntlement with the establishment, to borrow a sixties term, has influenced some of my posts. of course steve is right when he says that we must work with the system we have in order to keep our theory grounded as well as avoid another bosnia in our backyard. so my big question is: how far can we take the progress and development ethic considering the huge human and environmental toll it's taken of us already? we still look for answers along the lines of this ethic but i don't feel that we can continue "growing and improving" forever. it _seems_ obvious that our resources aren't infinite and i wonder if at some point we are going to have to return to sticks and rocks. ideas? just want to see if anyone else out there wonders about the inevitability of it all coming back to haunt us. michael From socgrad-relay@UCSD.EDU Tue May 3 19:08:37 1994 sendmail 8.6.9/UCSD-2.2-sun Tue, 3 May 1994 19:02:07 -0700 for socgrad-list Tue, 3 May 1994 19:01:49 -0700 for Date: Tue, 3 May 1994 21:00:16 -0500 (CDT) From: nick mcree Subject: Re: WANTED Graduate Students To: RNSPRAGG@suvm.acs.syr.edu > WANTED GRADUATE STUDENTS !!!! > To participate in a survey about the "graduate life experience". > If interested or you know of anyone who might be, please contact me at the > above address (RNSPRAGG@suvm.acs.syr.edu) ASAP! I think there might be selectivity and confidentiality problems with conducting a survey in this manner. I'm willing to participate if you can find a way to get around these problems. Nick McRee The University of Texas at Austin From socgrad-relay@UCSD.EDU Tue May 3 19:51:32 1994 sendmail 8.6.9/UCSD-2.2-sun Tue, 3 May 1994 19:50:06 -0700 for socgrad-list Tue, 3 May 1994 19:50:03 -0700 for Date: Tue, 3 May 1994 21:39:31 -0500 (CDT) From: Andrew Regan Subject: Re: p&d ethic To: Michael Gibbons Gibbons again brightens up the discussion with his musings on the progress & development ethic. What do you exactly mean by that michael? What is progress anyway? Do you mean the sudden influx of golfcourse building, and shopping mall cancer that has manifested itself upon our earth? Is it a good thing to progress and develop shit at the expense of our resources? While we streamline our means of production, who does it really benefit? What kind of rationality is it when our sciences build an atomic bomb capable of destroying the world in order to defend a nation? You can't tell me that scientific methods is so incredible, when the end of the research funded by the government actually destroys the world in which it was supposed to save. Isn't the progress and development ethic doing the same thing to our world, that is destroying it? Just some musings to facilitate a good heated discussion! Peace, Love, hmmmm. Drew From socgrad-relay@UCSD.EDU Tue May 3 20:07:09 1994 sendmail 8.6.9/UCSD-2.2-sun Tue, 3 May 1994 20:04:48 -0700 for socgrad-list Tue, 3 May 1994 20:04:45 -0700 for Date: Tue, 3 May 1994 21:52:12 -0500 (CDT) From: Michael Gibbons Subject: p&d To: socgrad to answer regan's question i think of the progress and development ethic as the paradigm that the western world has been built upon. i mean specifically, here in the great usa, the continuous subjugation of more and more land to the construction of giant houses in which, semi-conscious cogs spend four hours of their day waiting to be recharged to go back and turn the wheels once more. i am reacting to the consistent failing of small family farms because the individual farmer didn't have a thousand acres or four hundred head to milk. i am reacting to the whole notion that we need to increase the number of factories so that the lower classes can have jobs, with the greatest result being greater resources exploited, and more dehumanized workers. i agree that our quest for greater efficiency is kind of like shooting our society in the foot. it seems that we strive to streamline our production abilities so that we can keep the gnp pumped up and growing. but this results in people losing jobs to computers, to other workers. then we wonder why there is a lack of low skill work. we can't have happy consumers for all our shit, which seems so important, when none of the consumers can afford the shit. so what good is the extra efficiency and surplus crap, especially in light of the enormous costs to our environment which has to come back and bite us in the ass sometime? somehow, i think i am mssing something. michael From socgrad-relay@UCSD.EDU Tue May 3 21:11:54 1994 sendmail 8.6.9/UCSD-2.2-sun Tue, 3 May 1994 21:08:02 -0700 for socgrad-list Tue, 3 May 1994 21:07:53 -0700 for Date: Tue, 03 May 94 23:33:17 EDT From: Steve Harvey Subject: progress... To: SOCGRAD@UCSD.EDU In response to Michael and Drew: Having traveled in parts of the world where people live in bamboo huts and work in the paddies, I can agree that we have lost as well as gained by "improving" the quality of life. But don't over- romanticize the lot of the "simple villager." Life can be hard, uncertain, and cheap. But that's not what I want to address. Nor do I want to address the interesting debate between Marxists and neoclassical economists as to whether the proletariat was better or worse off for the industrial revolution in 18th and 19th century England. The two points I want to address are the reference to "progress" as though it's some master-plan that "we" collectively choose or don't choose, and the equation of "progress" to industrialization. The second point first: "Public bads", such as pollution, are collective challenges that we either face and surmount, or fail to face and surmount. This is the same logic of "progress" that, in its present form, developed with modernity (forward-looking, problem-solving, rational-planning-oriented), and, in other forms, has existed in all times and places (tradition-bound, unintentional-trial-and-error-accretions-of-survival-enhancing-innovations). What makes the identification of, and call to address, these problems any less a "logic-of-progress" orientation than the medieval farmer's desire to squeeze a bit more food from a small strip of land? It's moot to wonder if "we all would have been happier" had we remained simple and poor (as many today *do* remain) and never "let it go so far." It never was a product of central- planning (which is my first point), and so it never was *a* choice. The world is far more chaotic than that. So, the first question is, what do "we" do with what we now have on our hands? And the second question is, how do we implement whatever good ideas we might come up with, that is, how do we put *a* choice into effect which affects the behaviors (and well-being) of billions of people? Rather than wondering whether "progress" has gone too far, wonder about what to do with the world with which we are faced. Or, if you eschew this notion of "progress" which has caused so much damage, *don't* wonder about what to do with the world with which we are faced. Your choice. Steve harvey@uconnvm From socgrad-relay@UCSD.EDU Tue May 3 21:28:35 1994 sendmail 8.6.9/UCSD-2.2-sun Tue, 3 May 1994 21:27:06 -0700 for socgrad-list Tue, 3 May 1994 21:27:03 -0700 for Date: Tue, 3 May 94 23:26:49 EST From: eschaefe@bach.helios.nd.edu (elizabeth schaefer) To: socgrad@UCSD.EDU Drew and Michael, I somehow think your questions verge on rhetorical regarding the p&d cycle. If so, it's utterly appropriate, because the information we really have regarding environmental degradation is variable, indeed. The latest quote (if you'll bear with me michael, because I know I've said it before) is: there's a 50-50 chance that the temperature of the Earth will increase between 1-5 degrees over the next ten years. This is the kind of information our policy makers are dealing with, when they confront decisions regarding environmental degradation. Lots of people, including me, are doing work in this particular area of the sociology of science. One of the latest concepts developed by the United Nations Conference on Environment & Development (UNCED) is the precautionary principle. In essence, it asserts that there is a premium on a cautious and conservative approach to human interventions in complex environmental systems - that we should avoid things that threaten "serious and irreversible" injury. At the Rio Conference on the environment, one of the US representatives spoke on behalf of Bush, saying the economic institutions of the US were not up for debate. Basically, indicating that our government was willing to continue the p&d trend, regardless of its effects on the environment. In fact, the US was not one of the hundred-odd countries that signed the Rio agreement. Fortunately, the current administration quickly corrected that political/ethical faux pas, and we are now supporters of the Agenda 21 document. I think this country is being challenged by the creative efforts of others. For example, Germany has a "green dot" law, which stipulates that producers are responsible for the packaging of their products for their life-times. You wouldn't believe how secondary packaging, like boxes for tooth paste tubes, quickly disappeared. There are many people working to implement a similar law in the US, called extended manufacturer's responsibility (or something like that). I don't know how quickly these changes will show a positive impact on the overall biosphere; but I think there will be innovative developments in industry to minimize their effects on the environment. They don't want to do it, believe me; but it's reaching a point where they'll have no choice. Of course, this doesn't mean there will be more jobs or less p&d. But, maybe, it won't have such devistating results for the Earth. Elizabeth From socgrad-relay@UCSD.EDU Tue May 3 21:33:07 1994 sendmail 8.6.9/UCSD-2.2-sun Tue, 3 May 1994 21:31:25 -0700 for socgrad-list Tue, 3 May 1994 21:31:22 -0700 for Date: Tue, 3 May 1994 23:15:40 -0500 (CDT) From: Michael Gibbons Subject: progress To: socgrad yes the plight of the human is a difficult one, be it the forty-year life expectancy of the under-devloped world or the incessant exploitation of the overdeveloped world. most of the people reading this post probaboy can in one way or another attribute their quality of life to some facet of modern medicine. somehow, though, it seems that the human species has got itself into a bind, which is characterized by the p & d ethic. we must strive to somehow achieve a balance that will enable us to straddle the fence a little bit. it is clear to me that many of the problems faced by the modern world are the same things that were the solutions for the "primitive" world. i am operating on my own ethic which recognizes that the most destructive animal to walk the earth is the human. and the consequences of ignorant destruction will be very human indeed. if we cripple the ecosystem that supported us thus far, we won't be able to retreat far enough into technology to spare ourselves the same fate we so light-heartedly handed out to so many other species. and no the progress and development ethic is nothing that a few conspirators sat around and dreamed up to make themselves rich. but i do think that this ethic supports capitalism so well that they have to go hand in hand. i also ponder if it is not a (watch out he's gonna say it!) *natural* extension of our species' adaptive skill. without our brains our line of primate would have frozen, starved, or been snacked upon to extinction long before we could have dreamed up argumentative e-discussion groups. so who knows? but it does seem that we would be afforded more sustainable options if we could recognize that this is just one normative orientation that we happen to have our entire economy based on and explore our options for other categories. michael From socgrad-relay@UCSD.EDU Tue May 3 21:36:40 1994 sendmail 8.6.9/UCSD-2.2-sun Tue, 3 May 1994 21:34:01 -0700 for socgrad-list Tue, 3 May 1994 21:33:59 -0700 for Date: Tue, 3 May 1994 23:33:32 -0500 (CDT) From: Michael Gibbons To: socgrad beth speaks it well. From socgrad-relay@UCSD.EDU Tue May 3 22:11:32 1994 sendmail 8.6.9/UCSD-2.2-sun Tue, 3 May 1994 22:09:50 -0700 for socgrad-list Tue, 3 May 1994 22:09:48 -0700 for Date: Wed, 4 May 94 00:09:05 EST From: eschaefe@bach.helios.nd.edu (elizabeth schaefer) To: socgrad@UCSD.EDU Subject: the grand plan I think Steve's right that we have to figure out what we're going to do to minimize the problems we already *have*. I also agree that nostalgic bantering about 'the good ol' days' doesn't bring us any closer to a contemporary solution. However, I think we need to be aware that there are people out there resisting solutions, and they're using the current array of scientific information to get away with it. We're working with probabilities, now, rather than certainties of environmental disaster, which causes stagnation for policy makers. There's so much pressure coming from industry to resist the high capital investments associated with clean-up or changing technology, and policy makers are not deaf to their pleas. At this point, I hope the peer pressure coming from the rest of the world will out-weigh this resistance. So, even if there's no grand plan to continue with manifest destiny to its disasterous extreme, there's still a group of powerful people playing societal engineer. Elizabeth From socgrad-relay@UCSD.EDU Wed May 4 06:35:29 1994 sendmail 8.6.9/UCSD-2.2-sun Wed, 4 May 1994 06:33:41 -0700 for socgrad-list Wed, 4 May 1994 06:33:38 -0700 for Date: Wed, 04 May 94 09:09:54 EDT From: Steve Harvey Subject: environmentalism To: SOCGRAD@UCSD.EDU There are two basic obstacles facing the environmental movement: the fact that most people do not experience the consequences of pollution immediately, and project those consequences into the indefinate future; and the fact that it is the product of billions of individual choices, and can only be overcome through the collective action of billions of people. The first is a "discounting parameter," meaning that the dread people feel toward pollution decreases at an exponential rate with the distance in the future they perceive it to have consequences that are relavant to them, and their commitment to addressing it also decreases at the same exponential rate. The second is a classic collective action problem, or n-person prisoner's dilemma, in which the marginal cost of each person's (or each corporation's) effort not to pollute is far higher than the marginal return of *their* individual effort. People can indeed change the calculus that polluting firms face by boycotting, etc., but for the most part consumers are complicit in the act. There is a sustained demand for the products of pollution (the same products made in environmentally sound ways would cost much more). In order to address environmental conservation issues, these two basic dilemmas must be faced all over the world. For instance, taxing pollution, or creating "pollution allotments" that firms can sell to one another (and that limit the amount of pollution spewed into the atmosphere to levels far below those that presently exist) are plausible responses. There is another problem: Pollution is not produced only in the developed nations. Developing nations are also major polluters. But, producing in environmentally sound ways is expensive, and developing nations are not eager to be told by wealthier countries that they should conform to the environmental sensibilities of developed nations. These are a few of the basic parameters of the problem, "on the ground." Again, the lofty sociological rhetoric of how "capitalism" has run amuck, etc., etc., tells us little about the real dynamics of the situation. (Power can indeed be brought into the above outline, by looking at the ways in which groups of people "benefit" differentially from the products of pollution, and how those that benefit most organize to protect their interests). -Steve harvey@uconnvm From socgrad-relay@UCSD.EDU Wed May 4 07:17:59 1994 sendmail 8.6.9/UCSD-2.2-sun Wed, 4 May 1994 07:15:46 -0700 for socgrad-list Wed, 4 May 1994 07:15:44 -0700 for From: blovitts@nsf.gov To: socgrad@UCSD.EDU, elizabeth schaefer Subject: Re: (none) Date: 4 May 94 09:11 EST there's a 50-50 chance that the temperature of the Earth will increase between 1-5 degrees over the next ten years. This is the kind of information our policy makers are dealing with, when they confront decisions regarding environmental degradation. Herein lies the problem (perhaps even a good paper or thesis). Our policy makes are dealing with scientific problems -- more than half the bills that come before Congress have science and technology content -- but our policy makers do not have backgrounds in science or technology. Do I need to say more? Several years ago I tried to find out the level of "scientific literacy" of Congress. All I wanted was a simple count of the number of elected officals who had at least a bachelor's degree in science or engineering. The data didn't exist. I finally went through a book of the biographies of the standing Congress and using a very loose definition of scientific background determined that only about 2-5% (of 535 people) were potentially knowledgeable. John Glenn, I believe, is/was the only science Ph.D in Congress. A note on methods: Most members of Congress cite where they got their degrees, but not all cite what they got them in. By loose, I mean that I counted having attended a military academy, since the curricula there are heavily engineering/technology based, and I generously included degrees in things like Agriculture Education and Agricultural Economics in my definition. Barbara From socgrad-relay@UCSD.EDU Wed May 4 07:53:07 1994 sendmail 8.6.9/UCSD-2.2-sun Wed, 4 May 1994 07:49:05 -0700 for socgrad-list Wed, 4 May 1994 07:49:00 -0700 for From: S-ENDER@bss1.umd.edu Wed, 4 May 94 10:48:58 +1100 Organization: University of Maryland,College Park To: socgrad@UCSD.EDU Date: Wed, 4 May 1994 10:47:59 EDT Subject: Re: environmentalism steve says >There are two basic obstacles facing the environmental movement: the >fact that most people do not experience the consequences of >pollution immediately, and project those consequences into the >indefinate future; ...do you mean people do not experience the ill health effects? and what about localized pollution and the unsitelyness (not to mention smell) of local rivers, creeks and brooks as well as `sick buildings' and the like?...these are experienced in present time and space contexts? does your model apply at the local level? morten From socgrad-relay@UCSD.EDU Wed May 4 07:54:24 1994 sendmail 8.6.9/UCSD-2.2-sun Wed, 4 May 1994 07:51:31 -0700 for socgrad-list Wed, 4 May 1994 07:51:23 -0700 for From: S-ENDER@bss1.umd.edu Wed, 4 May 94 10:51:15 +1100 Organization: University of Maryland,College Park To: blovitts@nsf.gov, socgrad@UCSD.EDU Date: Wed, 4 May 1994 10:50:48 EDT Subject: politrics and degrees barbara, is it true ronald reagan double majored in sociology and economics? morten From socgrad-relay@UCSD.EDU Wed May 4 08:05:08 1994 sendmail 8.6.9/UCSD-2.2-sun Wed, 4 May 1994 08:01:28 -0700 for socgrad-list Wed, 4 May 1994 08:01:22 -0700 for Date: Wed, 04 May 94 10:53:04 EDT From: Steve Harvey Subject: addendum to Barbara... To: SOCGRAD@UCSD.EDU I wonder how many Congresspeople have degrees, or ample training, in economics, given that economics is another major substantive area on which Congress routinely legislates (e.g., our old friend NAFTA). Perhaps a "rational" distribution of specialized knowledge-areas and expertises in Congress would include certain numbers of economists, natural scientists, community planners and social-workers, and even a couple of sociologists wouldn't hurt (though the nebulous conceptualizations of traditional sociology don't translate well into policy initiatives). Unfortunately, people vote according to much different criteria; esp., how well candidates can create an appearance of confidense and moral righteousness. That skill may not be the one which contributes best to good governance.... Steve harvey@uconnvm From socgrad-relay@UCSD.EDU Wed May 4 08:19:30 1994 sendmail 8.6.9/UCSD-2.2-sun Wed, 4 May 1994 08:16:26 -0700 for socgrad-list Wed, 4 May 1994 08:16:21 -0700 for Date: Wed, 04 May 94 11:03:34 EDT From: Steve Harvey Subject: response to Morten To: SOCGRAD@UCSD.EDU Morten- I could have been more specific. I said "most people," but more accurately I should have said "most of the effects." The wealthier people are, and thus the more likely they are to be involved in centralized decision making processes, the less likely they are to be suffering the immediate ill-effects of pollution. The poorer people are, the more salient to them are "more pressing" concerns, such as eating. For instance, "60 Minutes" last Sunday reported on a woman in a small industrial town who is protesting the operation of a waste- conversion plant within a few yards of a school and residential neighborhood. Many of the townspeople *do not* support her, because the town is economically debased, and they are grateful for the jobs. The point here is not that the plant "should" operate in that town and location; the point is that one of the underlying problems is the immediate priorities people are facing. Pollution and environmental degradation is a cumulative problem, the largest effects of which are felt years after the acts which produce those effects. Such problems incur special time-horizon issues such as the one I mentioned. The fact that some people in some places feel intense immediate effects certainly belongs in any total specification of the issue, but in broad brush-strokes, the dilemmas I identified are two of the most highly salient. (For instance, how how many people experience the direct immediate effects of global warming?) Steve harvey@uconnvm From socgrad-relay@UCSD.EDU Wed May 4 08:34:49 1994 sendmail 8.6.9/UCSD-2.2-sun Wed, 4 May 1994 08:32:25 -0700 for socgrad-list Wed, 4 May 1994 08:32:20 -0700 for Date: Wed, 4 May 1994 11:36:03 -0500 To: socgrad@UCSD.EDU From: danryan@minerva.cis.yale.edu (Dan Ryan) Subject: Re: science in congress content-length: 1569 Not so much as a rebuttal as an amendment, I respond to Barbara... ...BB writes: >Herein lies the problem (perhaps even a good paper or thesis). >Our policy makes >are dealing with scientific problems -- more than half the bills that come >before Congress have science and technology content -- but our policy makers do >not have backgrounds in science or technology. Do I need to say more? > >...etc... Well, yes, I'd say, we do. I think we might want to be careful not to over-valorize science here. Almost all of my education and work prior to going to grad school in soc -- and I showed up rather late in life -- was in mathematics, physics, chemistry and computer science, and, well, those communities are not fountains of intellectual breadth, crossdisciplinary understanding, foresight, capacity for seeing big pictures, etc., etc. Consider the phenomenon mentioned -- global warming. Physical scientists look just like social scientists as they debate whether and how much and how to study and is it important enough to fund studies and so on amidst political winds blowing from environmentalists of varying stripes, industries, governments, etc. I realize that Barbara wasn't advocating a science background litmus test, but let's admit that while scientific ignorance or naivete among lawmakers may be a problem, so is political naivete, overspecialization, professional chauvinism and such among scientists. A legislature full of scientists might be even scarier than one full of lawyers or bumpkins of other types. Cheers, Dan (the silent one) From socgrad-relay@UCSD.EDU Wed May 4 08:52:16 1994 sendmail 8.6.9/UCSD-2.2-sun Wed, 4 May 1994 08:48:32 -0700 for socgrad-list Wed, 4 May 1994 08:48:29 -0700 for Date: Wed, 04 May 94 11:44:56 EDT From: Steve Harvey Subject: Congressional Qualifications To: SOCGRAD@UCSD.EDU I agree with Dan. So WHAT qualities would we most desire in our government representatives? If we were to design a course called "voter training", what would its content be? Steve harvey@uconnvm From socgrad-relay@UCSD.EDU Wed May 4 09:52:59 1994 sendmail 8.6.9/UCSD-2.2-sun Wed, 4 May 1994 09:48:28 -0700 for socgrad-list Wed, 4 May 1994 09:48:24 -0700 for (5.65+UW94.4/UW-NDC Revision: 2.30 ) id AA05956; Date: Wed, 4 May 1994 09:48:11 -0700 (PDT) From: Robert Duniway Subject: Re: theory-building: response to Bob D. To: Steve Harvey Steve, Drat, I thought we could actually sustain a difference of opinion here! ;) If you split domains by paradigm, rather than by substantive area, then I agree there are many benefits to pushing the paradigm until anomolies become apparent, and refining the theoretical framework appropriately. Your last post suggested that expanding the scope of a theory ought to be one goal of theory building. I think there are trade offs here. By expanding scope you create a common language for discussing a variety of topics. By delimiting a narrow scope you can develop a more precise model of what you are studying, but may have trouble communicating that understanding outside a narrow field of specialists. For example, consider the difference between rational choice based economics and econometrics. Many of the ideas in econometrics are craft knowledge, techniques for solving particular modeling problems. If your task was to construct a predictive model of activity in the textiles industry over the next six months given proposed changes to tariff structures, you would probabbly be better off dealing with econometric models rather than rational choice models. If, on the other hand, your task was to argue for or against such a change in congress you might leave the econometricians home with their computers. I am harping on this point because of your other post concerning economic knowledge among members of congress. While it would certainly be comfoting if members of the banking committee knew somethiong about finance, it is more the role of the staffers to have particular expertise. In ideal circumstances (certainly not in our present system) evidence and argument for and against a particular piece of legislations would be assesses by people with the skills to judge the merit of such arguments, and the legislators would make judgements based on a summary of the evidence provided by a reliable source (ideally someone in their own staff who shares their political values, but who has the integrity to pass along all crucial information). Congress deals with too wide a variety of issues for its members to become experts on the decisions they make. Their role is more one of taking the interests of their constituents into account, and making reasonable judgements given the evidence presented to them. Bob Duniway P.S. Yes, I know they actually worry about things like getting re-elected, striking appealing poses, raising money for the next campaign, and writing diaries about each others sexual predilictions. I'm just suggesting that even in an ideal scenario it is more important that they be capable of making intelligent judgements than that they have particular expertise. From socgrad-relay@UCSD.EDU Wed May 4 10:05:30 1994 sendmail 8.6.9/UCSD-2.2-sun Wed, 4 May 1994 10:02:47 -0700 for socgrad-list Wed, 4 May 1994 10:02:38 -0700 for From: blovitts@nsf.gov To: socgrad@UCSD.EDU, S-ENDER@bss1.umd.edu MMDF-Warning: Parse error in original version of preceding line at Note2.nsf.gov Subject: Re: politrics and degrees Date: 4 May 94 12:18 EST Sorry, I have no idea, but the economics part seems to ring a bell. Any Reagan scholars out there who know the answer? Barbara barbara, is it true ronald reagan double majored in sociology and economics? morten From socgrad-relay@UCSD.EDU Wed May 4 10:05:35 1994 sendmail 8.6.9/UCSD-2.2-sun Wed, 4 May 1994 10:02:51 -0700 for socgrad-list Wed, 4 May 1994 10:02:48 -0700 for From: blovitts@nsf.gov To: SOCGRAD@UCSD.EDU, Steve Harvey Subject: Re: addendum to Barbara... Date: 4 May 94 12:26 EST I didn't keep a count of degrees outside of the sciences but the backgrounds of members of Congress are, not surprisingly, predominantly in economics, political science, government, and law. Of course, there are people with other assorted backgrounds, for instance, Barbara Milkuski, who was both a nun and a soical worker. But for the most part our elected officals are intellectually concentrated in the above areas. I'll let you ponder the group-think implications. Barbara ______________________________ Reply Separator _________________________________ Subject: addendum to Barbara... Author: Steve Harvey at NOTE Date: 5/4/94 10:53 AM I wonder how many Congresspeople have degrees, or ample training, in economics, given that economics is another major substantive area on which Congress routinely legislates (e.g., our old friend NAFTA). Perhaps a "rational" distribution of specialized knowledge-areas and expertises in Congress would include certain numbers of economists, natural scientists, community planners and social-workers, and even a couple of sociologists wouldn't hurt (though the nebulous conceptualizations of traditional sociology don't translate well into policy initiatives). Unfortunately, people vote according to much different criteria; esp., how well candidates can create an appearance of confidense and moral righteousness. That skill may not be the one which contributes best to good governance.... Steve harvey@uconnvm From socgrad-relay@UCSD.EDU Wed May 4 10:18:56 1994 sendmail 8.6.9/UCSD-2.2-sun Wed, 4 May 1994 10:10:48 -0700 for socgrad-list Wed, 4 May 1994 10:10:35 -0700 for From: S-ENDER@bss1.umd.edu Wed, 4 May 94 13:10:31 +1100 Organization: University of Maryland,College Park To: , socgrad@UCSD.EDU Date: Wed, 4 May 1994 13:10:09 EDT Subject: Re: presidential qualifications >I agree with Dan. So WHAT qualities would we most desire in our >government representatives? If we were to design a course called >"voter training", what would its content be? i read an article in _society_ that argued that "success" in the presidency (n=41) is postively correlated with social class...for example, the two least successful presidents, nixon and jackson (?), were from lower working class backgrounds (of course lincoln is an outlyer)...any speculation on clinton's success? so would high social class be a "quality" of future presidents? would we include social historical evaluation in voter training? morten From socgrad-relay@UCSD.EDU Wed May 4 10:30:17 1994 sendmail 8.6.9/UCSD-2.2-sun Wed, 4 May 1994 10:24:33 -0700 for socgrad-list Wed, 4 May 1994 10:24:29 -0700 for From: saraht@aol.com To: socgrad@UCSD.EDU Date: Wed, 04 May 94 13:23:59 EDT Subject: Re: politrics and degrees >From Comptons Encyclopedia (on America Online): "Although not considered a serious student, he graduated in 1932 with an A.B. degree in economics and sociology." [from Eureka College]. Sarah Tarpley saraht@aol.com Cornell University Department of Sociology From socgrad-relay@UCSD.EDU Wed May 4 11:05:59 1994 sendmail 8.6.9/UCSD-2.2-sun Wed, 4 May 1994 10:56:04 -0700 for socgrad-list Wed, 4 May 1994 10:55:58 -0700 for From: blovitts@nsf.gov To: socgrad@UCSD.EDU, Dan Ryan Subject: Re[2]: science in congress Date: 4 May 94 13:41 EST Dan, I agree completely with your comments. I would no more want a legislature full of scientists that didn't understand policy than one full of policy people who don't understand science, which is, I'm afraid, what we currently have. True, scientists can't agree on issues like global warming, but they at least understand the underlying science, which, I'm afraid, too many of our legislators don't. One relevant anecdote: A number of years ago a state legislator in Wisconsin tried to ban ecoli from the state as a way of stopping recombinant DNA research. For those folks on the net who may need some explaining, we all carry ecoli around in our colons. It would be pretty hard to keep it out of the state. Barbara Not so much as a rebuttal as an amendment, I respond to Barbara... ...BB writes: >Herein lies the problem (perhaps even a good paper or thesis). >Our policy makes >are dealing with scientific problems -- more than half the bills that come >before Congress have science and technology content -- but our policy makers do >not have backgrounds in science or technology. Do I need to say more? > >...etc... Well, yes, I'd say, we do. I think we might want to be careful not to over-valorize science here. Almost all of my education and work prior to going to grad school in soc -- and I showed up rather late in life -- was in mathematics, physics, chemistry and computer science, and, well, those communities are not fountains of intellectual breadth, crossdisciplinary understanding, foresight, capacity for seeing big pictures, etc., etc. Consider the phenomenon mentioned -- global warming. Physical scientists look just like social scientists as they debate whether and how much and how to study and is it important enough to fund studies and so on amidst political winds blowing from environmentalists of varying stripes, industries, governments, etc. I realize that Barbara wasn't advocating a science background litmus test, but let's admit that while scientific ignorance or naivete among lawmakers may be a problem, so is political naivete, overspecialization, professional chauvinism and such among scientists. A legislature full of scientists might be even scarier than one full of lawyers or bumpkins of other types. Cheers, Dan (the silent one) From socgrad-relay@UCSD.EDU Wed May 4 14:53:50 1994 sendmail 8.6.9/UCSD-2.2-sun Wed, 4 May 1994 14:49:45 -0700 for socgrad-list Wed, 4 May 1994 14:49:40 -0700 for Date: Wed, 4 May 94 16:49:32 CDT From: "j.wise" To: socgrad@UCSD.EDU Subject: unsubscribe Sorry to bother y'all. I tried the listserv unsubscribe method, but I'm still getting mail from this list, so I must not know how to do it right. Will someone please either unsubscribe me or send me instructions again so I can try another time. Thanks. -Judy From socgrad-relay@UCSD.EDU Wed May 4 19:51:30 1994 sendmail 8.6.9/UCSD-2.2-sun Wed, 4 May 1994 19:50:00 -0700 for socgrad-list Wed, 4 May 1994 19:49:57 -0700 for Date: Wed, 4 May 1994 20:49:49 -0600 (MDT) From: UTSUMI TERUO Subject: e-mail networks discussing Japanese culture. To: socgrad@UCSD.EDU I am looking for e-mail discussion groups dealing with Japanese culture, Japanese society, Oriental culture, Oriental society, etc. If you know anything, let me know it please. I will highly appreciate your information. My e-mail address is as foolows: utsumi@osiris.colorado.edu Thanks. Teruo. From socgrad-relay@UCSD.EDU Wed May 4 22:19:05 1994 sendmail 8.6.9/UCSD-2.2-sun Wed, 4 May 1994 22:17:54 -0700 for socgrad-list Wed, 4 May 1994 22:17:52 -0700 for Date: Thu, 5 May 94 00:17:32 EST From: eschaefe@bach.helios.nd.edu (elizabeth schaefer) To: socgrad@UCSD.EDU Subject: science and policy On the one hand, Barbara brings up the point that policy makers aren't educated scientists, yet they are faced with making decisions which require scientific information. On the other hand, Dan points out that what scientists study is influenced by politics. One of the hot issues under debate in the UNEP is whether these two groups should function independently or merge under one umbrella. The two sides of the debate are fascinating. One camp argues for a separatist arrangement, wherein scientists work independently to produce scientific knowledge, which is then reported to policy makers - who, then, of course, are left to make decisions with the reduced- form "knowledge." The other side wants a non-separatist arrangement, wherein scientists and policy makers jointly set the scientific research agenda and evaluate results. The non-separatist side has won so far, but either arrangement raises interesting questions re: the production of knowledge. If policy makers have as much power as I get the impression they do, one must ask how the non-separatist arrangement effects which topics are pursued by scientists. The up side, however, seems to be that dialogue is encouraged between scientists and policy makers - allowing for clarification of ideas throughout the process of decision making. Within the separatist arrangement, the biggest danger is that policy makers will make decisions based upon interpretations of scientific reports - without on-going clarification from the scientific community. Either way, we're faced with political agendas. I know what Steve is saying, when he says environmental degradation is the function of the behavior of billions of people. However, I see these pending policy issues exerting tremendous influence over the direction that behavior will turn. For instance, the World Bank has come under incredible scrutiny, because their recent funding has not produced noticable environmental improvements (as defined by Agenda 21). These people seem to be done talking, and they now want to see action. I don't know where, exactly, the pressure is coming from; but "sustainable development" strategies have become a high-ranking priority within the international organizations. I think policy making is the right place to be when it comes to this particular topic, because there's a good chance that these policies will, indeed, change the way our system operates. Elizabeth From socgrad-relay@UCSD.EDU Thu May 5 06:09:54 1994 sendmail 8.6.9/UCSD-2.2-sun Thu, 5 May 1994 06:07:40 -0700 for socgrad-list Thu, 5 May 1994 06:07:38 -0700 for Date: Thu, 5 May 1994 07:46:41 -0500 (CDT) From: Michael Gibbons Subject: environ To: socgrad steve had pointed out that the consumer is complicit in the chain of economics that ends or begins with exploitation of resources. i feel it necessary that here is a good place to point out a reason why people so commonly feel powerless in our society. there is no way to avoid the system and the products that result in environmental degredation. the consumer can do her homework, make herself knowledgeable about companies, and still end up partaking in other companies that are just as unconscienable in their actions, just better at hiding the truth. the end result being the consumer, despite her integral position in the chain of production and consumption, can not make decisions that carry any weight. this, i think, is the antithesis of any democracy. case in point: mitsubishi. they are one of the biggest trashers of rain forests, right? so we decide not to buy mitsubishi cars or electronics. oops better trade in that hyundai too. then when you start to trace the multinational conglomerate that is mitsubishi, you realize there is no where to turn without supporting their sorry butts. this is the way it is in our world, and to say that all we have to do, as consumers, is stop supporting the exploitive companies, is to decieve ourselves about the power that individuals *don't* have. another point i initially brought up in relation to the progress and development ethic that has not been discussed is the cost in human terms. are more factories the answer to our economic problems? and if so, what about the dehumanization of these jobs? i don't even think factories are such a good thing. in all the summer jobs i have had, i look at them as indentured servitude that will not last longer than about three months. this is what gets me through them. at these jobs, there is always quite a few people who aren't moving up the occupational or career or life ladders and as such are there for real employment. conservatives would sit back and smile saying that it was great these poor proles have jobs, knowing that they themselves didn't have to go plant trees for some rich bastard the next morning. now i want to say that not only is this not right or acceptable considering the little (and i mean very little) reward they reap. and the backcone of capitalist production, the factory is the most dehumnanizing of all. how are we to deal with this without simply saying it's better than other systems? what it seems to me is that these guys are the ones who are busy overproducing in rotten workplaces so that the powerful can accumulate their produce. this is again, one of those business degree questions: if we have nothing to input on these questions, i am going to go get an accounting degree and partake of the system. fire away michael From socgrad-relay@UCSD.EDU Thu May 5 07:45:07 1994 sendmail 8.6.9/UCSD-2.2-sun Thu, 5 May 1994 07:43:24 -0700 for socgrad-list Thu, 5 May 1994 07:43:21 -0700 for From: blovitts@nsf.gov To: socgrad@UCSD.EDU Subject: Re: science and policy Date: 5 May 94 09:57 EST ---------------------------- Forwarded with Changes --------------------------- From: blovitts at nsf6 Date: 5/5/94 9:40AM To: elizabeth schaefer at NOTE Subject: Re: science and policy ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Text item: Text_1 The American Association for the Advancement of Science (a prior stomping ground of mine) has a program that tries to bring the science and the policy camps together. The program is the AAAS Congressional Fellows program, which, in theory if not practice, should be open to Sociologists, but I don't have any data. Anyway, the program is, I believe, for post docs and/or young faculty. Science/Social Science Ph.D's get a decent stipend (it used to be $30,000, it may be higher now) to go work on the Hill for a year. (Many get Potomac fever and never return to academe.) This program has been effective in bringing needed scientific expertise to Congress. AAAS also has another program which may be of interest to people on the net as it relates to another often hot debate area. The program is Mass Media Fellows which places people with Science/Social Science degrees (I don't think a Ph.D is required) in "internships (?)" in print and broadcast news. Both programs are highly successful and mutually enlightening. For more information, you can contact AAAS at 1333 H Street, NW, Washington, DC 20005. (202-362-6400). In fairness to Congress, Congress does have a research division, Congressional Research Service (CRS), which researches scientific and other issues for members of Congress upon their request. I interviewed there once. They are cushy, highly desireable jobs. The positions are filled with Ph.Ds and ABDs. The environment is very academic, in fact, CRS is located in the James Madison Building of the Library of Congress. CRSers spend about half their time researching and writing reports for Congress and are encouraged to do their down research and publish in refereed journals when they are not working directly on an issue for Congress. So Congress does have a few good sources of information, but if their own backgrounds in science are lacking, I still (personally) believe that their ability to fully digest the issues is somewhat limited. -- The ecoli incident always comes to mind. Barbara From socgrad-relay@UCSD.EDU Thu May 5 08:28:42 1994 sendmail 8.6.9/UCSD-2.2-sun Thu, 5 May 1994 08:27:03 -0700 for socgrad-list Thu, 5 May 1994 08:26:58 -0700 for Date: Thu, 05 May 94 11:13:56 EDT From: Marni Hancock Organization: Emory University - Atlanta, Georgia, USA Subject: VOTER EDUCATION CLASS To: SOCGRAD@UCSD.EDU Hi y'all! I wouldn't offer a voter education class at all. I'd have voter qualification criteria as proposed by Robert Heinlein in one of his novels. I'd widen the opportunities for paid public service as is currently offered by the military services to include many forms of service which would offer forms of service compatible with almost everyone's moral/religious ethic (conservation work, health care, etc.) and limit voting and elected office to those who cared enough about their nation/world to volunteer for 2 years of paid service where they were most needed (location-wise) with the service "selected" from a list of services the individual indicates a willingness to perform. I think this would overcome concerns about class/race/gender bias in any education program -- particularly in program design and in evaluation of students -- and, because the participants would receive room, board, and an adequate stipend, it would be viable for any one of any class, etc., to participate and gain the franchise. What do you think? What would be the problems? Would it work? Marni Hancock SOCAW059@EMUVM1.CC.EMORY.EDU or SOCAW059@EMUVM1.BITNET From socgrad-relay@UCSD.EDU Thu May 5 08:53:35 1994 sendmail 8.6.9/UCSD-2.2-sun Thu, 5 May 1994 08:50:21 -0700 for socgrad-list Thu, 5 May 1994 08:50:13 -0700 for From: Melissa R Herman Subject: assault weapons To: socgrad@UCSD.EDU (socgrad network) Date: Thu, 5 May 1994 08:50:10 -0700 (PDT) HI folks, I don' like to clutter up everyone's mail with political posturing, but I feel so strongly about this I thought I'd let everyone know: IF A HUNTER NEEDS AN UZI OR A STREETSWEEPER TO HIT A DEER OR A DUCK, SHE OR HE DOESN'T HAVE VERY GOOD AIM. Call your US Representative today, they're voting this afternoon. The congressional switchboard will connect you with your representative: 1-202-224-3121. -- Melissa Herman manoki@leland.stanford.edu Department of Sociology Stanford University From socgrad-relay@UCSD.EDU Thu May 5 10:09:06 1994 sendmail 8.6.9/UCSD-2.2-sun Thu, 5 May 1994 10:05:16 -0700 for socgrad-list Thu, 5 May 1994 10:05:13 -0700 for Date: Thu, 5 May 94 12:05:02 EST From: eschaefe@bach.helios.nd.edu (elizabeth schaefer) To: socgrad@UCSD.EDU Subject: hunters and uzis Melissa, I'm not sure I understand what we're voting on here. Are you suggesting that uzis are on the streets because of hunters? Tell me more about the bill in question. Thanks, Elizabeth From socgrad-relay@UCSD.EDU Thu May 5 11:06:39 1994 sendmail 8.6.9/UCSD-2.2-sun Thu, 5 May 1994 11:01:28 -0700 for socgrad-list Thu, 5 May 1994 11:01:26 -0700 for Date: Thu, 5 May 1994 12:01:18 -0600 (MDT) From: "Joe Hopper, University of Colorado" Subject: looking for . . . To: Socgrad Looking for: ANN BRANAMANE SANDRA GODWIN DAN WEBER DAVID YAMANEE to discuss theory conference in San Diego. Please respond to me directly. Joe Hopper hopperj@colorado.edu From socgrad-relay@UCSD.EDU Thu May 5 11:59:37 1994 sendmail 8.6.9/UCSD-2.2-sun Thu, 5 May 1994 11:56:46 -0700 for socgrad-list Thu, 5 May 1994 11:56:42 -0700 for Date: Thu, 05 May 94 14:21:49 EDT From: Steve Harvey Subject: response to Michael... To: SOCGRAD@UCSD.EDU Michael- Saying that one of the dilemmas involved in environmentalism is that the problems are perpetrated by lots of independent decision-makers does not imply that each of these decision-makers has the "power" to halt pollution by choosing not to pollute: Just the opposite, individuals can only address such collective problems by "first" devising institutions of mutual commitment by which solutions can be implemented. I often argue that virtually *all* social phenomena *can be* fruitfully analyzed in these terms (language, culture, religion, politics, economics, etc.). That consumers "have no where to turn" to make environmentally conscientious choices (leaving aside questions of the validity of the statement) is a part of the dynamic I'm discussing. But to attribute this lack of alternatives to simple malice of big business acting against the will of the people is a gross oversimplification. Big business is itself a product of both "global" and "local" collective action arrangements: global in that they provide goods broadly consumed, and local in that a disproportionate share of those goods (i.e., profits) are captured by "the owners of the means of production." There are too many "either/or" propositions embedded in the notion that "the people" are innocent, and corporate greed is to blame. Certainly, *greed* is to blame, but I think it's fair to say that consumer greed plays a certain role as well. How many consumers actually engage in boycotts? Better yet, how many working class people who invest their savings choose the lower yields of PC investments (lists of which are not difficult to find)? The problem, to a large extent, is the "rational" realization that no one individual's action on its own has a very measuarable impact, and so why should one choose to be a "sucker" (which, in game theory, is the technical term for contributing to a public good when others don't)? It is, however, "rational" for people to seek ways of committing one another to the desired collective behavior. So people will, sometimes, support legislation which will "guarantee" (to whatever extent possible) that others will play ball as well. We understand that it is only by first changing the incentives such that the "right" choice is the personally most beneficial choice (e.g., not to comply results in fines or imprisonment, or complying results in social approval or some other selective incentive), that we are able to resolve collective action problems. When we look at problems of this nature, we need to consider 1) by what mechanisms the incentives of all relevant actors (individual and corporate) can be restructured such that the desired collective good (in this case, reduced levels of pollution and environmental degradation) can be produced, and 2) by what political action such mechanisms can be implemented. It is when we get to number 2 that corporate power becomes most salient, since many corporations have strong interests in blocking the implementation of such mechanisms, which would be costly for them. There are many subtleties and nuances to such dynamics as those outlined above, but they are not well illuminated by the nebulous and self-gratifyingly "good v. evil" typifications that are often invoked to explain the challenges facing humanity. steve From socgrad-relay@ucsd.edu Thu May 5 12:53:55 1994 sendmail 8.6.9/UCSD-2.2-sun Thu, 5 May 1994 10:19:42 -0700 for socgrad-list Thu, 5 May 1994 10:19:39 -0700 for Date: Thu, 5 May 1994 12:17:52 -0500 (CDT) From: Michael Gibbons Subject: uzi To: socgrad you guys should see me when i hunt. i think an uzi would help. michael From socgrad-relay@ucsd.edu Thu May 5 12:53:58 1994 sendmail 8.6.9/UCSD-2.2-sun Thu, 5 May 1994 10:24:32 -0700 for socgrad-list Thu, 5 May 1994 10:24:28 -0700 for Date: Thu, 05 May 94 12:23 EST To: socgrad From: PATTYO%IRISHMVS.CC.ND.EDU@UICVM.UIC.EDU Subject: uzis Elizabeth and others: There is a bill to be voted on today to ban 16 (I think) types of automatic and semi-automatic weapons. The NRA, as usual, is against this ban, as it is "people who kill people, not guns" and a "slipery slope" to banning all guns, etc. I hope this clarifies things a bit. Best, Patty pattyo@irishmvs.cc.nd.edu From socgrad-relay@UCSD.EDU Thu May 5 13:35:52 1994 sendmail 8.6.9/UCSD-2.2-sun Thu, 5 May 1994 13:32:37 -0700 for socgrad-list Thu, 5 May 1994 13:32:32 -0700 for Date: Thu, 05 May 94 16:07:49 LCL From: "Sabrina M. Neeley" To: socgrad@UCSD.EDU I'm in the process of creating two doctoral level directed readings courses for myself; one course on the interdisciplinary construction/use of demographic in dicators - primarily for business, urban planning, health and human services, a nd education use, and the second course on Contemporary American Society. The S merican Society class will focus on urbanization, changing family structures, p opulation structural changes, changes in work structures, and the role of the m ass media. Does anyone know of any courses like these that are taught anywhere? I'm also looking for suggestions for books/articles that relate to these subjects, popul ar and/or academic in nature. Any help or suggestions would be greatly appreciated. You can send the message s directly to me at: PA101787@utkvm1.utk.edu Thanks :) Sabrina Neeley University of Tennessee, Knoxville From socgrad-relay@UCSD.EDU Thu May 5 14:47:00 1994 sendmail 8.6.9/UCSD-2.2-sun Thu, 5 May 1994 14:41:44 -0700 for socgrad-list Thu, 5 May 1994 14:41:41 -0700 for Date: Thu, 05 May 94 16:41 EST To: socgrad From: PATTYO%IRISHMVS.CC.ND.EDU@uicvm.uic.edu Subject: game theory question Could anyone supply me with some basic references on "game theory?" It's come up a number of times on this list and, to be honest, I don't know what it refers to! Thanks! Patty pattyo@irishmvs.cc.nd.edu From socgrad-relay@UCSD.EDU Thu May 5 14:54:13 1994 sendmail 8.6.9/UCSD-2.2-sun Thu, 5 May 1994 14:49:57 -0700 for socgrad-list Thu, 5 May 1994 14:49:54 -0700 for From: S-ENDER@bss1.umd.edu Thu, 5 May 94 17:49:53 +1100 Organization: University of Maryland,College Park To: socgrad@UCSD.EDU Date: Thu, 5 May 1994 17:49:16 EDT Subject: Re: uzis >Elizabeth and others: >There is a bill to be voted on today to ban 16 (I think) types of >automatic and semi-automatic weapons. The NRA, as usual, is against >this ban, as it is "people who kill people, not guns" and a "slipery >slope" to banning all guns, etc. I hope this clarifies things a bit. >Best, >Patty >pattyo@irishmvs.cc.nd.edu call them luddites, but it seems those who favor the bill are technological determinists (i.e. uzi technology is an independent social force and humans are dependent on its functions); those in disfavor of the bill place blame at the individual level (i.e., a person is responsible for killing someone else with the uzi)...at a more sociological level, it seems the pro-gun lobby might do better to argue that banning weapons allows the state to be the sole bearer of arms and to use such weapons for social control purposes (or am i being naive?)....similarly, the anti-gun lobby might argue on a more sociological (post-structuralist?) level that the pro-gun lobby keeps the debate focused on urban areas by framing the discourse as some urban, underclass, black-american, problem where uzi's are spilling into the suburbs...i'm not convinced automatic weapons in the inner city do most of the killing, rather the problem seems to be that hand-guns purchased by suburbanites to protect themselves from some perceived threat, who eventually kill their spouses (or kids) in a moment of jealous rage is probably the norm? morten `i eat everything i kill' ender From socgrad-relay@UCSD.EDU Thu May 5 17:40:15 1994 sendmail 8.6.9/UCSD-2.2-sun Thu, 5 May 1994 17:38:24 -0700 for socgrad-list Thu, 5 May 1994 17:38:21 -0700 for From: bb05246@bingsuns.cc.binghamton.edu (John Hollister) Subject: call for papers To: psn@csf.colorado.edu, wsn@csf.colorado.edu, socgrad@UCSD.EDU Date: Thu, 5 May 1994 20:38:39 -0400 (EDT) Call for papers for a volume on: "Capitalism and Lived Experiences: Understanding the Politics of the Informal Sector" to be edited by Michaeline Crichlow (St. Lawrence University) During the 1970s and 1980s the industry of development studies received a filip with studies of the informal sector. The state regulates and taxes and measures a large portion of the economy, but an increasing portion evades the state, and is perceived in terms of an embarassment, even a nuisance. The concept thus highlighted in many ways the rupture between the state and civil society. The distinguishing feature of the informal sector lies in its constant juxtaposition to the formal. It is used as a descriptive device. Thus many analysts focussed on the mix of activities that define the nonstate regulated occupations. Others seeking to escape the construct's explicit resemblance to modernization's bipolarities e.g. traditional versus modern treated it as a set of processes, e.g. "a process of income generation" but nonetheless characterized by its unregulation. Still others cited the restructuring of capital, or the unintended consequences of state policy. In spite of the diversity of studies on the informal sector, the troubling aspect remained their enduring similarity, manifest in their inability to transcend that construct. The use of the concept presupposes dualism, and the view that the informal sector was indeed an aberration of capitalist development. This proposed volume will seek to transcend current invocations of that construct. Contributions will draw upon studies that focus on the multidimensional character of capitalism. That is to say they will treat the informal sector as intrinsic to capitalism and not as an aberration or a deviation from the formalization of wage relations globally. Thus the focii will encompass market relations, the retaliations of working peoples against the state, as well as the countless configurations of capitalist production as it encounters specific communities of the world with their own peculiar societal configurations. Thus the papers will highlight the multilinear even erratic movement of capitalist development and offer new insights for the reconstruction and tracing of the zig-zags of the working of capital, and the varied responses and initiatives of working peoples. Through theoretical discourse as well as case studies, the papers in this volume will therefore seek to make manifest the inadequacies of the construct "informal sector". Papers should be 35 pages long including bibliography and all illustrations. Please include a brief biography. The deadline for submission of abstracts of at least one page in length is May 18th. You will be notified within two weeks whether your paper has been accepted and of the deadline for the final paper. Please direct all questions to Michaeline Crichlow, Department of Sociology, St. Lawrence University, Canton NY 13617. Fax #315-379-5803; Email: MCRI@SLUMUS.bitnet Telephone # 315-379-5120 From socgrad-relay@UCSD.EDU Fri May 6 09:57:08 1994 sendmail 8.6.9/UCSD-2.2-sun Fri, 6 May 1994 09:54:28 -0700 for socgrad-list Fri, 6 May 1994 09:54:19 -0700 for From: S-SCHUBERT@bss1.umd.edu Fri, 6 May 94 12:54:16 +1100 Organization: University of Maryland,College Park To: socgrad@UCSD.EDU Date: Fri, 6 May 1994 12:53:40 EDT Subject: auguste comte and congresspeople socgradders, i think i'd feel more comfortable with a congressperson who did a degree in the sociology of science rather than in one of the sciences. "other" dan From socgrad-relay@UCSD.EDU Fri May 6 10:56:52 1994 sendmail 8.6.9/UCSD-2.2-sun Fri, 6 May 1994 10:53:17 -0700 for socgrad-list Fri, 6 May 1994 10:53:08 -0700 for Date: Fri, 06 May 94 12:51:07 CDT From: KLOSKY@vm1.nodak.edu Organization: North Dakota Higher Education Computer Network Subject: Trying to find... To: Socgrad list Thought I might ask if anyone knows where Sheldon Stryker is these days... Does he have an e-mail address? You know, the usual type of info requested... Thanks, SKEE From socgrad-relay@UCSD.EDU Mon May 9 13:07:47 1994 sendmail 8.6.9/UCSD-2.2-sun Mon, 9 May 1994 13:04:34 -0700 for socgrad-list Mon, 9 May 1994 13:04:32 -0700 for Date: Mon, 9 May 1994 13:04:09 -0700 (PDT) From: Jill Thomas Subject: Mail Order Prides/Prostitution To: socgrad@UCSD.EDU We've been looking into the international trafficking of women and can find very little on the topic of mail order brides/slaves, though advertisements for such abound in publications like Soldier of Fortune. If anyone knows of research, activists, references of any kind re: mail order brides, I'd appreciate your input. (Of particular interest to us is the complicity of the military in this "enterprise.") Thanks.....Jill (M.A.I.S., Oregon State) thomasji@ucs.orst.edu From socgrad-relay@UCSD.EDU Mon May 9 14:45:03 1994 sendmail 8.6.9/UCSD-2.2-sun Mon, 9 May 1994 14:33:36 -0700 for socgrad-list Mon, 9 May 1994 14:33:31 -0700 for Date: Mon, 9 May 94 17:32 EDT From: "I don't think this will reduce confusion" Subject: Re: Mail Order Prides/Prostitution To: thomasji@ucs.orst.edu >We've been looking into the international trafficking of women and can >find very little on the topic of mail order brides/slaves, though >advertisements for such abound in publications like Soldier of Fortune. >If anyone knows of research, activists, references of any kind re: mail >order brides, I'd appreciate your input. (Of particular interest to us >is the complicity of the military in this "enterprise.") I find myself asking: Why do you suspect "the complicity of the military in this enterpirse?" 1 U.S. military prescence in S.E. Asia, where most mail-order brides come from, is minimal by supermilitary power status. 2) Why should _any_ military (U.S. or otherwise) care about mail-order brides? The mail-order bride biz is a small scale, low profit operation. It serves no obvious geo-political purpose nor is it highly profitable like gun running or narcotic trafficking. 3) Mail order brides would appear to fall more under the jurisdiction of U.S. Marshalls (border patrol) and Customs. Finally, a suggestion for research material. _Write_ the mail-order bride companies requesting information. At the least you will receive some sort of promotional material, with luck your name will be sold and all sorts of potentially relevent material and, perhaps, other associated enterprises will soon be delivered to your door. Jetaway Dave From socgrad-relay@UCSD.EDU Mon May 9 16:45:29 1994 sendmail 8.6.9/UCSD-2.2-sun Mon, 9 May 1994 16:43:59 -0700 for socgrad-list Mon, 9 May 1994 16:43:58 -0700 for Date: Mon, 9 May 1994 16:33:58 -0700 (PDT) From: Jiannbin Lee Shiao Subject: Re: Mail Order Prides/Prostitution To: Sociology Graduate Student List On Mon, 9 May 1994, I don't think this will reduce confusion wrote: > I find myself asking: Why do you suspect "the complicity of the military in > this enterpirse?" > 1 U.S. military prescence in S.E. Asia, where most mail-order brides come from, > is minimal by supermilitary power status. I would argue that the complicity of the US military is incredibly blatant, though the question is open whether the complicity is merely historical and no longer institutionally present. I'm familiar with the Asian "mail order bride" business, though I know that some of the "sending countries" are not in Asia or the Pacific Rim. I believe it was the US and European military presence in Asia from the nineteenth century and onwards that set up the dynamic of white/Western men using Asia as a "feminized" object for treatment no longer acceptable in the U.S./Europe. > 2) Why should _any_ military (U.S. or otherwise) care about mail-order brides? > The mail-order bride biz is a small scale, low profit operation. It serves no > obvious geo-political purpose nor is it highly profitable like gun running or > narcotic trafficking. The US military cared only that "our boys" had easy sexual access (later also "safe access" given the advent of HIV) to local, dare I say, semi- colonized populations. I doubt that it's a mere coincidence that the sites of US "intervention"/military-condoned-prostitution have been the "sending countries" for women in mail-order-bride enterprises. Parallel to this view is the question of why certain countries sent immigrants to the U.S., especially before WWII. Answer: push and pull was coordinated, especially by "Western imperialism". > Finally, a suggestion for research material. _Write_ the mail-order bride > companies requesting information. At the least you will receive some sort of > promotional material, with luck your name will be sold and all sorts of > potentially relevent material and, perhaps, other associated enterprises will > soon be delivered to your door. In addition to Dave's suggestion, I would suggest checking with the UCLA Asian American Studies Center. Amerasia Journal's annual bibliography might be useful. Jill, I'll take a look at this past year's AAAS conference schedule (it'll give me a chance to get my copy back from a friend) and see if I can find you anyone doing recent work in the area. This topic has a long history in Asian American Studies, though as a sociologist, I would have preferred more institutional studies than discursive studies. tha j'ster From socgrad-relay@UCSD.EDU Tue May 10 04:38:20 1994 sendmail 8.6.9/UCSD-2.2-sun Tue, 10 May 1994 04:37:21 -0700 for socgrad-list Tue, 10 May 1994 04:37:19 -0700 for From: S-ENDER@bss1.umd.edu Tue, 10 May 94 7:37:13 +1100 Organization: University of Maryland,College Park To: Jill Thomas , socgrad@UCSD.EDU Date: Tue, 10 May 1994 07:37:03 EDT Subject: Re: Mail Order Prides/Prostitution i have recently purchased, but have yet to read, cynthia enloe, _sexual politics at the end of the cold war: the morning after_ (1993)...which appears to place women in a position of social force in international politics...one chapter deals with the prostitute, the soldier and the state...might be a resource... morten From socgrad-relay@UCSD.EDU Tue May 10 07:38:43 1994 sendmail 8.6.9/UCSD-2.2-sun Tue, 10 May 1994 07:36:03 -0700 for socgrad-list Tue, 10 May 1994 07:36:00 -0700 for Date: 10 May 1994 09:21:53 CDT From: To: Subject: Q for politics of gender people What's the general take on this sexual harassment suit filed against President Clinton? Is the woman who filed it held in the same esteem as Anita Hill and the women who filed the suit(s) against Sen. Packwood.? I am just curious as to whether there has been any work done on political stratification of gender. What I mean by this is are specific acts interpreted differently depending on the person being accused or is the act interpreted on its own merits. Dave From socgrad-relay@UCSD.EDU Tue May 10 10:05:26 1994 sendmail 8.6.9/UCSD-2.2-sun Tue, 10 May 1994 10:02:54 -0700 for socgrad-list Tue, 10 May 1994 10:02:51 -0700 for Date: Tue, 10 May 94 12:17:21 EDT From: Steve Harvey Subject: sexual harrassment, similarities and differences To: SOCGRAD@UCSD.EDU The uncomfortable but reasonable starting place for addressing this widely held (implicitly or explicitly) comparison between the Anita Hill case and the Paula Jones case, and the possible hypocricies of reactions involved, is that the similarities between the cases should neither be overstated nor understated and the significance of the different types of responses from feminists and the left in general should neither be exagerated nor ignored. The two most important differences are 1) Anita Hill worked in close proximity to, and had continual interaction with, Thomas, whereas even the most basic question of whether Jones ever met Clinton is in dispute and is as-yet-unsupported by any evidence, and 2) Hill has a prosperous carreer, and had much to lose and little to gain by risking her reputation in the way that she did, whereas Jones has nothing to lose and everything to gain by making false accusations. If the latter point sounds "classist," it is never-the-less a structural fact. The similarities are that there is (by the nature of the crime) little evidence in either case, and people seem inclined to believe in either case whatever best serves their political agenda. The lesson is, as Confucious put it: "To know what one knows, and to know that one doesn't know what one doesn't know, this is knowledge." While I "believed" Anita Hill, I also cringed at the rampant certainty among people who had far too little information to be quite so certain (on either side, I might add). Clarence Thomas was absolutely correct: It *was* a high-tech lynching. That fact is irrespective of his guilt or innocence (not all lynching victims are innocent). There is a very delicate balance to be struck between political activism, and the tyranny of the masses. We can and should insist that these kinds of accusations be investigated, we can and should organize watch-dog groups to be on hand to make sure that such investigations are done in earnest, but we should not rally ignorance to the cause of condemning the accused. I say "ignorance," because people rally to the "significance" of the case from a generic point of view, not to the particular facts on hand. Our comfort with trial by public opinion is irresponsible and noxious in the extreme. We dissuade many talented and committed people from ever entering public life, for they know that to be accused is to be hung. Even if they are innocent, they will have to live with the indignity of being subjected to mass contempt by those who "know" that they are guilty. This may be an inescapable reality to some extent, but we should not claim it as a virtue. No matter how tempting and politically convenient it may be, suspending wisdom and assuming "knowledge" where knowledge cannot possibly exist does not best serve the ultimate good. Steve From socgrad-relay@UCSD.EDU Tue May 10 11:53:40 1994 sendmail 8.6.9/UCSD-2.2-sun Tue, 10 May 1994 11:50:41 -0700 for socgrad-list Tue, 10 May 1994 11:50:38 -0700 for Date: Tue, 10 May 1994 14:50:37 -0400 (EDT) From: Jennifer Glanville To: socgrad@UCSD.EDU unsub jenni@gibbs.oit.unc.edu From socgrad-relay@UCSD.EDU Wed May 11 06:16:13 1994 sendmail 8.6.9/UCSD-2.2-sun Wed, 11 May 1994 06:14:15 -0700 for socgrad-list Wed, 11 May 1994 06:14:13 -0700 for Date: Wed, 11 May 94 09:13:31 EDT From: AMOHOLLA@kentvm.kent.edu Subject: unsub To: socgrad@UCSD.EDU unsub From socgrad-relay@UCSD.EDU Wed May 11 11:46:03 1994 sendmail 8.6.9/UCSD-2.2-sun Wed, 11 May 1994 11:42:24 -0700 for socgrad-list Wed, 11 May 1994 11:42:22 -0700 for Date: Wed, 11 May 1994 11:42:21 -0700 From: Laura Miller To: socgrad@UCSD.EDU Subject: how to unsubscribe Too much email in your life? If you want to unsubscribe from Socgrad, send a message to: listserv@ucsd.edu (if you're on Internet) or LISTSERV@UCSD.BITNET (if you're on BITNET) and in the body of your message, type: unsub socgrad Remember to send the message to listserv, NOT to Socgrad itself. Any problems or questions can be directed to lmiller@ucsd.edu From socgrad-relay@UCSD.EDU Sat May 14 07:51:21 1994 sendmail 8.6.9/UCSD-2.2-sun Sat, 14 May 1994 07:49:37 -0700 for socgrad-list Sat, 14 May 1994 07:49:35 -0700 for Date: Sat, 14 May 94 09:49 EST To: SOCGRAD@UCSD.EDU From: UHOBBIT%IRISHMVS.CC.ND.EDU@uicvm.uic.edu Subject: SUB ME BABY SUB SOCGRAD From socgrad-relay@UCSD.EDU Mon May 16 11:30:08 1994 sendmail 8.6.9/UCSD-2.2-sun Mon, 16 May 1994 11:28:26 -0700 for socgrad-list Mon, 16 May 1994 11:28:24 -0700 for Date: Mon, 16 May 94 13:28 EST To: SOCGRAD@UCSD.EDU From: UHOBBIT%IRISHMVS.CC.ND.EDU@uicvm.uic.edu Subject: EMAIL THIS IS RELATED TO SOCIOLOGY BECAUSE I NEED THE INFORMATION FOR MY MASTERS THESIS I AM CURRENTLY WORKING ON. MY QUESTION IS HOW TO FIND A PROFESSORS E-MAIL ADDRESS (OR ADDRESS FOR THAT MATTER). tHE PROFESSOR IS DAVID FRISBY HE IS AT GLASGOW UNIVERSITY. FIRST QUESTION: WHERE IS GLASGOW UNIVERSITY? SECOND QUESTION: HOW DO I GET AHOLD OF THIS GUY VIA THIS WONDERFUL TECHNOLOGY OF EMAIL? DAVE BRUNSMA From socgrad-relay@UCSD.EDU Mon May 16 12:00:17 1994 sendmail 8.6.9/UCSD-2.2-sun Mon, 16 May 1994 11:58:48 -0700 for socgrad-list Mon, 16 May 1994 11:58:45 -0700 for From: S-SCHUBERT@bss1.umd.edu Mon, 16 May 94 14:58:40 +1100 Organization: University of Maryland,College Park To: socgrad@UCSD.EDU Date: Mon, 16 May 1994 14:58:28 EDT Subject: socy of religion socgradders, an undergrad is thinking of going on to grad school, with a concentration in the socy of religion. does anyone have any suggestions i can pass along about good programs/researchers? "other" From socgrad-relay@UCSD.EDU Mon May 16 12:35:29 1994 sendmail 8.6.9/UCSD-2.2-sun Mon, 16 May 1994 12:32:27 -0700 for socgrad-list Mon, 16 May 1994 12:32:23 -0700 for Date: Mon, 16 May 1994 22:32:44 +0300 (EET DST) From: Marko Toivanen Subject: Re: EMAIL To: UHOBBIT%IRISHMVS.CC.ND.EDU@uicvm.uic.edu On Mon, 16 May 1994 UHOBBIT%IRISHMVS.CC.ND.EDU@uicvm.uic.edu wrote: > THIS IS RELATED TO SOCIOLOGY BECAUSE I NEED THE INFORMATION > FOR MY MASTERS THESIS I AM CURRENTLY WORKING ON. MY > QUESTION IS HOW TO FIND A PROFESSORS E-MAIL ADDRESS (OR > ADDRESS FOR THAT MATTER). tHE PROFESSOR IS DAVID FRISBY > HE IS AT GLASGOW UNIVERSITY. FIRST QUESTION: WHERE IS GLASGOW > UNIVERSITY? SECOND QUESTION: HOW DO I GET AHOLD OF THIS GUY > VIA THIS WONDERFUL TECHNOLOGY OF EMAIL? > DAVE BRUNSMA > 1. If I remember correctly, it should be in Glasgow, Scotland, United Kingdom. 2. One of the methods I have used so far - because I don't know any better or even any others - is to ask from those whose email address indicates that they are from the appropriate university. It has not by now been so very successful, but has, in some cases worked. Then you could try to notice the appropriate person's email address somewhere, but that demands extreme amount of luck. A variation of the above is to try to find out persons and their email addresses, who would know (about) the appropriate person. This demands considerable amounts of luck, too. I have by the above methods found out a few email addresses of a few persons I needed to find, but they most certainly are not very efficient. I hope someone who knows better and more efficient methods will share them. Marko Toivanen mtoivane@cc.joensuu.fi From socgrad-relay@UCSD.EDU Mon May 16 12:49:31 1994 sendmail 8.6.9/UCSD-2.2-sun Mon, 16 May 1994 12:48:13 -0700 for socgrad-list Mon, 16 May 1994 12:48:10 -0700 for Date: Mon, 16 May 1994 15:48:05 -0400 (EDT) From: James Cassell Subject: Re: socy of religion To: S-SCHUBERT@bss1.umd.edu On Mon, 16 May 1994 S-SCHUBERT@bss1.umd.edu wrote: > socgradders, > > an undergrad is thinking of going on to grad school, with a > concentration in the socy of religion. does anyone have any > suggestions i can pass along about good programs/researchers? > > "other" > You might send this query to SSREL-L@UTKVM1.UTK.EDU--Scientific Study of Religion. I'm not familiar with the group, but gather there are a number of sociologist who study religion among the subscribers. Best, Jim ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Jim Cassell jwcassell@UNC.EDU Institute for Research in Social Science Phone: 919-962-0782 University of North Carolina-Chapel Hill Fax: 919-962-4777 Chapel Hill, NC 27599-3355 USA From socgrad-relay@UCSD.EDU Mon May 16 12:51:10 1994 sendmail 8.6.9/UCSD-2.2-sun Mon, 16 May 1994 12:49:30 -0700 for socgrad-list Mon, 16 May 1994 12:49:27 -0700 for Date: Mon, 16 May 94 14:49 EST To: SOCGRAD@UCSD.EDU From: UHOBBIT%IRISHMVS.CC.ND.EDU@uicvm.uic.edu Subject: SHOUTING PEOPLE HAVE ASKED ME WHY I AM SHOUTING. REFERRING I SUPPOSE TO MY CAPITAL LETTERS. WELL, IT HAS TO DO WITH WHEN I GET INTO ME SERVER AT NOTRE DAME I HAVE TO USE CAPS INTIALLY AND I ALWAYS FORGET TO TURN THEM OFF OK!!!!!!! ANYWAY, I'LL TRY TO REMEMBER, P[LUS I TALK LOUDLY ANYWAY SO I WOULD NEED TO CHANGE THE FONT SIZE IN ORDER FOR MY TYPING TO REPRESENT SHOUTING FOR ME. From socgrad-relay@UCSD.EDU Mon May 16 12:52:30 1994 sendmail 8.6.9/UCSD-2.2-sun Mon, 16 May 1994 12:50:21 -0700 for socgrad-list Mon, 16 May 1994 12:50:17 -0700 for Date: Mon, 16 May 94 14:50 EST To: SOCGRAD@UCSD.EDU From: UHOBBIT%IRISHMVS.CC.ND.EDU@uicvm.uic.edu From socgrad-relay@UCSD.EDU Mon May 16 14:13:22 1994 sendmail 8.6.9/UCSD-2.2-sun Mon, 16 May 1994 14:11:17 -0700 for socgrad-list Mon, 16 May 1994 14:11:14 -0700 for by Isis.MsState.Edu (8.6.8.1/6.0c-FWP); Date: Mon, 16 May 1994 16:11:01 -0500 (CDT) From: "Clark D. Hudspeth" Subject: Re: EMAIL To: UHOBBIT%IRISHMVS.CC.ND.EDU@uicvm.uic.edu > QUESTION IS HOW TO FIND A PROFESSORS E-MAIL ADDRESS (OR > ADDRESS FOR THAT MATTER). You might want to try a program called Gopher, if your server has it on line. Type 'gopher' at your prompt. This gets you into gopher, which is a menu driven go-for. There will be a menu somewhere for 'other gopher sites' or something. If Glasgow has one it will be listed. Choose this option and it will transfer you to the Glasgow gopher server. There should be an option to search gopherspace (the option will be named diferent things on different servers). Choose this option, and it will ask you what you want to seaerch for. Tell it addresses or try the professors name, or Glasgow may even have addresses as a main menu. Some places do. Good luck. Gopher is a wonderful tool....when you get to know it 8^> Quentin From socgrad-relay@UCSD.EDU Mon May 16 18:08:10 1994 sendmail 8.6.9/UCSD-2.2-sun Mon, 16 May 1994 18:06:45 -0700 for socgrad-list Mon, 16 May 1994 18:06:42 -0700 for Date: Tue, 17 May 1994 04:07:20 +0300 (EET DST) From: Marko Toivanen Subject: Re: EMAIL To: Jean Czerlinsky On Mon, 16 May 1994, Jean Czerlinsky wrote: > I saw your message on socgrad, and if you'll forgive my idle curiosity, I > was wondering what / where ".fi" in your email address means. I've seen > lots of suffixes but not that one. > Jean Czerlinski > > > You're forgiven. If I can figure out what "edu" stands for, I have a hell of a time with figuring out the abbreviations of U.S. universities in your email addresses. "fi" means that my email address is in Finland, the promised land of qualitative research. :) Finland it the country between Sweden and Russia, Sweden is the country between Norway and Finland, Norway is the country between the North Sea and Sweden, the North Sea is the sea between the United Kingdom and Norway. So now you know where Finland is. ;) Marko Toivanen mtoivane@cc.joensuu.fi From socgrad-relay@UCSD.EDU Wed May 18 07:50:39 1994 sendmail 8.6.9/UCSD-2.2-sun Wed, 18 May 1994 07:49:07 -0700 for socgrad-list Wed, 18 May 1994 07:49:02 -0700 for Date: Wed, 18 May 94 09:48 EST To: socgrad@UCSD.EDU From: UHOBBIT%IRISHMVS.CC.ND.EDU@uicvm.uic.edu Subject: The vaccuum which is socgrad.,.,. Where is everybody? Usually there are twenty messages a day on this thing. Let's talk about the difference between teaching and instructing. Or what can we learn about communication from pedagogy and what can we learn about teaching from communication strategies? Just trying to get it on with my e-mail. Dave Brunsma From socgrad-relay@UCSD.EDU Wed May 18 09:04:03 1994 sendmail 8.6.9/UCSD-2.2-sun Wed, 18 May 1994 09:01:20 -0700 for socgrad-list Wed, 18 May 1994 09:01:13 -0700 for Date: Wed, 18 May 94 11:56:06 EDT From: Alan Subject: Soc. of Religion To: socgrad@UCSD.EDU Speaking as someone who possesses an interest in the Sociology of Religion, I t hink one who is considering grad. school in this area needs to decide for him/h erself whether they are more interested in the applied end (congregational stud ies, membership stats, etc.) or more theoretical issues. This will also dictat e what your secondary areas are (whether Theory or Demography, etc.) b/c if you look at the Employment bulletins, you usually have to sell yourself on somethi ng broader than Soc. of Religion. If this person has any more questions, they can contact me. Also, the SSsrel-l list is a good one to be on, and you can su bscribe by sending a message to listserv@utkvm1. From socgrad-relay@UCSD.EDU Wed May 18 10:59:56 1994 sendmail 8.6.9/UCSD-2.2-sun Wed, 18 May 1994 10:57:59 -0700 for socgrad-list Wed, 18 May 1994 10:57:57 -0700 for Date: Wed, 18 May 94 12:53:30 CDT From: KLOSKY@vm1.nodak.edu Organization: North Dakota Higher Education Computer Network Subject: Vaccuum To: Socgrad list It is the summer time... Most of us (I image) are either starving, or working outside the university setting. People go home for the summer, or go on vacations. Basically, as a list dedicated to students, the summer becomes problem... I know that what I have said above has little to do with sociology, and more to do with SKEE's creatation of reality in his own mind, but how do you do research on a group of people who aren't there? It is like asking the students that show up for class where everyone else is. They don't KNOW because they are the ones that chowed up! SKEE (trying to give Dave something to read and respond to) From socgrad-relay@UCSD.EDU Wed May 18 11:39:37 1994 sendmail 8.6.9/UCSD-2.2-sun Wed, 18 May 1994 11:36:06 -0700 for socgrad-list Wed, 18 May 1994 11:36:04 -0700 for Date: Wed, 18 May 94 13:32:40 CDT From: KLOSKY@vm1.nodak.edu Organization: North Dakota Higher Education Computer Network Subject: sorry To: Socgrad list I just recieved my own mailing to SOCGRAD, and I have to say that I can not believe the number of typos and mistakes that I made. I wish I could say that I am using a new system, or that my mailer messed up, but this is not the case. I am simply losing the ability to type clearly because of my thesis I think. I am sorry for the mistakes, and hope that you all still respect me! :) SKEE From socgrad-relay@UCSD.EDU Wed May 18 16:56:40 1994 sendmail 8.6.9/UCSD-2.2-sun Wed, 18 May 1994 16:55:09 -0700 for socgrad-list Wed, 18 May 1994 16:55:06 -0700 for Date: Wed, 18 May 94 19:45:51 EDT From: Marni Hancock Organization: Emory University - Atlanta, Georgia, USA Subject: SUMMER-TIME To: SOCGRAD@UCSD.EDU Hi--I've also wondered where all the messages were going. Its funny how addictive email can be. For those of us who have "permanent" residences where we go to school (mine is shared with a spouse and a couple of teenaged sons), I have some sociological questions. 1.) What is a vacation? Is there a good operational definition of the term? How would I know one if I saw one? 2.) Can someone explain the concept of "spare time" in such a way that even I might understand it? 3.) Can anyone explain the specific differences between being a graduate student and being an indentured servant? OOPS--I've got a visitor--see ya later. Marni Hancock SOCAW059@EMUVM1.CC.EMORY.EDU From socgrad-relay@UCSD.EDU Wed May 18 23:14:30 1994 sendmail 8.6.9/UCSD-2.2-sun Wed, 18 May 1994 23:13:10 -0700 for socgrad-list Wed, 18 May 1994 23:13:09 -0700 for Date: Wed, 18 May 1994 23:13:02 -0700 (PDT) From: Erin Giltner Subject: Re: SUMMER-TIME To: Marni Hancock Gosh it must be nice to be on a semester system. I still have three weeks of papers and finals to look forward to. As to your questions: 1. Vacation is when students only go to work not to school and only have program meetings, not discussions over papers, term projects etc. You have to look quick to see a vacation, however. They run past pretty quick. 2. I can't much help you on the free-time issue. I've never seen one of those before! :-) 3. Indentured servants have a fixed term of servitude. Grad school is eternal. Also,I think that there are limits to the things you can do to indentyred servants. I'm pretty sure you can't kill them but grads you can bury alive (in papers that is). This has been a great study break - THANKS! Erin On Wed, 18 May 1994, Marni Hancock wrote: > Hi--I've also wondered where all the messages were going. Its funny > how addictive email can be. For those of us who have "permanent" > residences where we go to school (mine is shared with a spouse and a > couple of teenaged sons), I have some sociological questions. > 1.) What is a vacation? Is there a good operational definition of the > term? How would I know one if I saw one? > 2.) Can someone explain the concept of "spare time" in such a way that > even I might understand it? > 3.) Can anyone explain the specific differences between being a > graduate student and being an indentured servant? > OOPS--I've got a visitor--see ya later. > Marni Hancock SOCAW059@EMUVM1.CC.EMORY.EDU > From socgrad-relay@UCSD.EDU Thu May 19 07:07:27 1994 sendmail 8.6.9/UCSD-2.2-sun Thu, 19 May 1994 07:06:28 -0700 for socgrad-list Thu, 19 May 1994 07:06:26 -0700 for Date: Thu, 19 May 1994 09:02:59 -0500 (CDT) From: Michael Gibbons Subject: Re: SUMMER-TIME To: Marni Hancock indentured servitude is a good example, or maybe even a sort of welfare for ta's. we're at a state funded university. we get about the same amount of money. our job descriptions sound like they had to think of something to say we actually do. the only real difference is that we fall under the deserving poor because we do some work whereas peole's attitudes towards nonworking welfare recipients is that of the undeserving poor. so i suppose welfare for grad ta's is acceptable but welfare for single poor mom's isn't. strange world we live in. michael From socgrad-relay@UCSD.EDU Thu May 19 07:38:46 1994 sendmail 8.6.9/UCSD-2.2-sun Thu, 19 May 1994 07:37:40 -0700 for socgrad-list Thu, 19 May 1994 07:37:39 -0700 for Date: Thu, 19 May 94 9:37:26 CDT From: penny ann edgell becker To: socgrad@UCSD.EDU Subject: soc. of religion I know this is a few days late -- I sent a reply directly to the person who requested information, and forgot to forward it to the list as a whole -- so here are some thoughts, in case anyone else out there wonders where to go/send students for soc. of religion. Emory has a good program -- their chief sociologist of religion, however, will be leaving for Hartford Seminary's Center for Social Research next year -- but STeve Tipton is still there, and some other people who are interested in more "applied" work like congregational studies. Some places, like University of Chicago, Berkeley and Yale would be good places for more academically oriented soc. of religion -- they don't necessarily have lots of faculty working in that area, but they have good divinity schools or history departments with interesting people who do cross-disciplinary work. At Yale, the PRogram for the Study of Non- Profit organizations has some sociology of religion people -- Rhys Williams, for example -- but check there to see how long he'll be around. Santa Barbara has some people who do sociology of religion -- they also have good culture and organizations people, both helpful in most empirical studies of religion -- good people to have on a dissertation committee. Princeton has Bob WUthnow and the Center for the STudy of AMerican Religion -- it's probably the pick of the litter, if you can get accepted. And living in Princeton as a grad student is no picnic. There are also smaller schools that have on ly one or two faculty in the area -- Notre Dame has Mark Chaves and Loyola of Chicago has Fred Kniss -- there are other places like this -- if you read someone's work and particularly like it, you could check out their school -- If I've left out anything, I hope others will fill in the blanks. Penny Edgell Becker University of Chicago Dept. of Sociology pab2@midway.uchicago.edu From socgrad-relay@UCSD.EDU Thu May 19 11:59:12 1994 sendmail 8.6.9/UCSD-2.2-sun Thu, 19 May 1994 11:55:52 -0700 for socgrad-list Thu, 19 May 1994 11:55:50 -0700 for Date: Thu, 19 May 1994 11:55:49 -0700 From: Laura Miller To: socgrad@UCSD.EDU Subject: TA training A couple of us grad students in my department have been charged with the task of coming up with some recommendations for TA training. One thing we'd like to get a sense of is how many sociology departments out there offer some kind of course or seminar (especially for-credit) on teaching/TAing. If your department does, could you let me know? Any other comments on how your department handles TA training would also be appreciated. Thanks. Laura Miller U.C. San Diego lmiller@ucsd.edu From socgrad-relay@UCSD.EDU Thu May 19 12:37:45 1994 sendmail 8.6.9/UCSD-2.2-sun Thu, 19 May 1994 12:33:26 -0700 for socgrad-list Thu, 19 May 1994 12:33:25 -0700 for Date: Thu, 19 May 1994 12:33:22 -0700 (PDT) From: Dean Barry Subject: Re: TA training To: Laura Miller I don't know if a Canadian context is relevant here but the University of British Columbia has a TA training programme. It is supposedly manadatory for first year TA's but many unfortunately find a way to get out of it. When I took it, it was a 2 day intensive session which involved discussion of TA concerns, problems, and questions. It also involved skills training on writing lesson plans, use of AV, dealing with psycho undergrads (and profs!!) and contractual demands and union issues. We had to do 3 practice lessons which were videotaped and reviewed by other TA's. It was intensive but it was a lot of fun and eduacational too. I believe the Department of Part-time Studies put it on, and it is subsidized by Grad Studies (I think). We didn't get any credit for it. Oddly enough, this type of training isn't available to prof's here (although I don't know too many who would take advantage of it). cheers, D.B. From socgrad-relay@UCSD.EDU Thu May 19 13:10:41 1994 sendmail 8.6.9/UCSD-2.2-sun Thu, 19 May 1994 13:09:07 -0700 for socgrad-list Thu, 19 May 1994 13:09:05 -0700 for Date: Thu, 19 May 1994 03:08:36 -0500 To: socgrad@UCSD.EDU From: ghougham@medicine.bsd.uchicago.edu (Gavin Hougham) Subject: Re: TA training Re: >A couple of us grad students in my department have been charged with the task >of coming up with some recommendations for TA training. One thing we'd like >to get a sense of is how many sociology departments out there offer some >kind of course or seminar (especially for-credit) on teaching/TAing. If >your department does, could you let me know? Any other comments on how >your department handles TA training would also be appreciated. Thanks. A recent issue of Footnotes (April, May ?), the ASA's monthly newspaper/newsletter, had an article on this very topic. Someone from the home office did a survey of soc depts, and as I remember it, training for teaching/TA'ing was really all over the place in terms of focus, time, goals, etc. You might want to scope Footnotes for this and many other articles on the discipline. At the University of Chicago, there are very few TA positions available as most undergraduate teaching (in the social sciences at least) is done by the profs themselves. Subsequently, TA jobs are often of the discussion group leader/term paper mentor type. Training tends to be ad hoc. For RA jobs here (of which there are tons), you go in with some interests and skills, and depending on who you work for, you end up as either a glorified gopher, or more likely ( and with a little luck) as a co-author on a paper or two. Not everyone can end up as a co-author with someone like Andy Abbott, Jim Coleman, Ed Laumann (I know, I'm name dropping...) but it does happen with some regularity. As a consequence, teaching experience is usually obtained off campus here, at a smaller community college perhaps. Gavin --------------------------------------------------------------------- Gavin Hougham University of Chicago Department of Sociology 1126 East 59th Street Chicago, IL 60637 E-mail: gwh2@midway.uchicago.edu Office: Department of General Internal Medicine (312) 702-6735 From socgrad-relay@UCSD.EDU Thu May 19 13:32:06 1994 sendmail 8.6.9/UCSD-2.2-sun Thu, 19 May 1994 13:30:31 -0700 for socgrad-list Thu, 19 May 1994 13:30:27 -0700 for From: S-ENDER@bss1.umd.edu Thu, 19 May 94 16:30:23 +1100 Organization: University of Maryland,College Park To: ghougham@medicine.bsd.uchicago.edu (Gavin Hougham), socgrad@UCSD.EDU Date: Thu, 19 May 1994 16:30:08 EDT Subject: Re: TA training >A recent issue of Footnotes (April, May ?), the ASA's monthly >newspaper/newsletter, had an article on this very topic. Someone >from the home office did a survey of soc depts, and as I remember it, >training for teaching/TA'ing was really all over the place in terms >of focus, time, goals, etc. You might want to scope Footnotes for >this and many other articles on the discipline. ...i read that article with interest since we have some 400 soc undergrads here at maryland and noticed in that article only 5% of sociology departments have graduate students teaching their own classes...any idea what kinds of schools that percentage represents? all soc departments? graduate departments terminal master's? ph.d programs? the percent seems very small, no? morten From socgrad-relay@UCSD.EDU Thu May 19 13:49:14 1994 sendmail 8.6.9/UCSD-2.2-sun Thu, 19 May 1994 13:46:45 -0700 for socgrad-list Thu, 19 May 1994 13:46:42 -0700 for From: SarahT@aol.com To: socgrad@UCSD.EDU Date: Thu, 19 May 94 16:45:52 EDT Subject: Re: TA training The Cornell Soc department doesn't offer anything per se, but the Cornell Grad School does offer a Saturday workshop at the beginning of every semester. You get to pick 2 workshops: one for the morning and one for the afternoon, and you can come back every semester to get the full range of workshops. The workshops themselves are taught by experienced grad students, mostly, and cover the range from lecturing, leading group discussion to conducting labs, etc. Every attendee gets a notebook that has the basic information for each workshop, so that we walk away with a reference to consult later. And they throw in a free breakfast and lunch to boot. ;) I have recommended the workshops up and down around the department -- they were really valuable for me. Sarah Tarpley Sociology Department Cornell University From socgrad-relay@UCSD.EDU Thu May 19 14:08:18 1994 sendmail 8.6.9/UCSD-2.2-sun Thu, 19 May 1994 14:06:41 -0700 for socgrad-list Thu, 19 May 1994 14:06:38 -0700 for Date: Thu, 19 May 1994 17:03 EDT From: SCOTT BLAKE Subject: Re: TA Training To: socgrad@UCSD.EDU Out here at Brandeis, the Graduate School does an annual workshop on TA'ing. I consists of three days, free lunch, and a morning and afternoon session. Topics include: Grading, Leading Discussions, Lecturing, Leading a Lab (mostly for the scientists), Administrative Proceddures and Referrals, Ethnicity and Gender in the Classroom. The sessions are usually run by two faculty/admin tpyes (as appropriate) and one or two advanced grad students. In my somewhat limited experience, there are around 20 TA's in the audience. These things are done seminar style The department itself does not do any training However, ext year, I and a professor are organizing a series of workshops on issues like syllabus design, reading selection, grading, and creative teaching techniques. I welcome any and all suggestions you folks might have for materials that would be helpful. Scott Blake blake@binah.cc.brandeis.edu "Imagination is more important than knowledge." --Albert Einstein From socgrad-relay@UCSD.EDU Thu May 19 14:34:21 1994 sendmail 8.6.9/UCSD-2.2-sun Thu, 19 May 1994 14:32:55 -0700 for socgrad-list Thu, 19 May 1994 14:32:52 -0700 for From: bb05246@bingsuns.cc.binghamton.edu (John Hollister) Subject: sex roles To: socgrad@UCSD.EDU Date: Thu, 19 May 1994 17:31:54 -0400 (EDT) Hi, I've been asked to teach a class titled 'sex roles in modern society'. Anyone have any suggestions as to how to structure such a course? I anticipate a class of frosh who are racially diverse but mostly female. They probably expect a 'porn is bad', 'it's all a conspiracy of straight white men' sort of class, and believe that Marxism was discredited by the collapse of the USSR. I want them to think for themselves and to understand the social processes that constructed them. Are there any good introductory textbooks? Any good readings about the strains on second-generation immigrants? Anyone have any experience teaching these: Bernardo and O'Neill _Male/Female Roles_ Maxine Baca Zinn, Bonnie Thornton Dill _Women of Color in US Society_ Hochschild/Machung _The Second Shift_ Anderson _Thinking about Women_ Kathy Gerson _Hard Choices_ Peter Stearns _Be a Man_ Torne _Gender Play_ Kimmel _Men's Studies Modified_ Ehrenreich _The Hearts of Men_ Rubin _Worlds of Pain_ Connell _Gender and Power_ Nielson _Sex and Gender in Society_ Weeks _Sexuality and its Discontents_ Klein _Little Big Men_ Majors and Billson _Cool Pose: Dilemmas of Black Manhood in America_ Any others? Any good critiques of the usefulness of role theory? Thanks, John Hollister bb05246@bingsuns.cc.binghamton.edu From socgrad-relay@UCSD.EDU Thu May 19 15:23:07 1994 sendmail 8.6.9/UCSD-2.2-sun Thu, 19 May 1994 15:19:58 -0700 for socgrad-list Thu, 19 May 1994 15:19:55 -0700 for Subject: TA training To: socgrad@UCSD.EDU Date: Thu, 19 May 1994 17:19:53 -0500 (CDT) From: Elizabeth Schaefer At Notre Dame, we have TA workshops at the beginning of each semester. These are sponsored by the Graduate Student Union. In addition, our department offers a course in teaching for up to three credit hours. For those who TA for Intro., there is an orientation given by the instructor. I'll be taking that this Fall, so we'll see how much it helps. Elizabeth From socgrad-relay@UCSD.EDU Thu May 19 18:45:44 1994 sendmail 8.6.9/UCSD-2.2-sun Thu, 19 May 1994 18:44:30 -0700 for socgrad-list Thu, 19 May 1994 18:44:26 -0700 for Date: Thu, 19 May 94 21:33:10 EDT From: Marni Hancock Organization: Emory University - Atlanta, Georgia, USA Subject: TA INSTRUCTION To: SOCGRAD@UCSD.EDU Emory requires a 3-5 day workshop for each student in the graduate school of arts and sciences which introduces the student to the various aspects of teaching and is similar to some of the other workshops already described. Students take this prior to the start of their second year in grad school and are reimbursed for attendance. I was required to take the workshop which I found to be profoundly boring BECAUSE I came into grad school (this time) with 9 years of full time collegiate teaching experience. I believe the program would have been VERY helpful had I taken it prior to my first teaching experience. In addition, the Dept. of Soc. requires a graduate level course on teaching sociology in which the students, among other things, design a 2 credit undergraduate course they plan to teach the following semester. The students then teach their courses and have both education and experience in teaching when they complete their grad. work. During their first thru third years the students also TA for one or more instructors which includes conducting seminar groups, grading tests and papers, and doing a lecture or two. In other words, Emory is attempting to require an emphasis on the art and science of teaching as well as the emphasis on scholarship/research which is such an important part of graduate education. If anyone wants more specific information about this program, drop me a line and I'll see what I can get from the faculty most involved in the program. S'long y'all, Marni Hancock SOCAW059@EMUVM1 From socgrad-relay@UCSD.EDU Fri May 20 07:23:33 1994 sendmail 8.6.9/UCSD-2.2-sun Fri, 20 May 1994 07:22:04 -0700 for socgrad-list Fri, 20 May 1994 07:22:01 -0700 for Date: Fri, 20 May 94 08:41 EST To: socgrad@UCSD.EDU From: UHOBBIT%IRISHMVS.CC.ND.EDU@uicvm.uic.edu Subject: Thinking and Doing. I recently had a professor tell me that, as sociologists (when we get a job), we are paid to Think, NOT to Do. I was wondering other people's ideas on this. This is a rehashing of possibly many tensions: qualitative vs. quantitative; to involve theyself in policy applpicatory work vs. to not involve thyself in such things. Elizabeth Schaefer from the University of Notre Dame is working on this very issue, an issue which, I believe, is at the very portal which all academic disciplines must go through to get into their "next phases", but more than a phase it is a necessity. I thought about these words from this professor and thought, "these words will probably haunt me for the rest of my life." And that is probably true. For now I think that there is possibly a very fine line between Thinking and Doing within academia. Does not thinking imply doing? I mean, by me thinking and through my thought I put together facets of the world ideas (including my own thought I put together facets of the worldofideas(including my ownwhich are prob ably but unconscious facets of those) into a cohesive whole which is fresh and new, or maybe that rehashes an old argument in a new light which looks more applicable (notice word) to our modern/postmodern view of things? sIs not this practice "Doing". I believe research and writing a paper and making an argument is all an aesthetic practice to which we all bring our different aesthetics to and thus produce different (but usually compatible on some level) works. This production, via thinking, seems like "Doing". So if this professor says we are paid to "think" not "do", I'm not sure I can totally agree with him since the two things seem quite analogous... I think this is what Elizabeth is working on, I am interested in everyones ideas on this... will it haunt me (us) forever? Is haunt a relatiuve term? What does the Crash Test Dummies' song mean? Later, DAve Brunsma From socgrad-relay@UCSD.EDU Fri May 20 08:44:01 1994 sendmail 8.6.9/UCSD-2.2-sun Fri, 20 May 1994 08:37:31 -0700 for socgrad-list Fri, 20 May 1994 08:37:28 -0700 for Subject: Thinking and Doing To: socgrad@UCSD.EDU Date: Fri, 20 May 1994 10:37:26 -0500 (CDT) From: Elizabeth Schaefer Dave, You'll have to tell me in private who made that rediculous statement to you. My opinion is that thinking *is* doing. I guess, the difference lies in what we do with our thoughts. My experience with the sociologists I've met suggests most are in this field to *do* something - whether their goal is to develop a new theory or to actively reform a social program. That's my devil's advocate position. Now, if you're referring to the difference between theory and application, I can perhaps understand this professor's statement. We're not all interested in heading for Washington, D.C. with a programme for implementation. Sometimes, our largest contribution might be an ability to describe what we see. When this is the case, it seems the sociologist's responsibility would be to document her/his findings, leaving the implementation to those with policy training. This sounds like a conversation regarding knowledge for the sake of knowledge vs. knowledge for the sake of action. I value both, but I think our minimum responsibility is to publish our ideas, enabling others to evaluate and utilize them. Publication is a valuable action and, in my opinion, an appropriate goal for sociologists. We need critical theorists as much as we need policy analysts, and not everyone can do both. Elizabeth From socgrad-relay@UCSD.EDU Fri May 20 11:30:40 1994 sendmail 8.6.9/UCSD-2.2-sun Fri, 20 May 1994 11:24:37 -0700 for socgrad-list Fri, 20 May 1994 11:24:33 -0700 for Date: Fri, 20 May 1994 11:24:22 -0700 (PDT) From: Robert Duniway Subject: Re: Thinking and Doing To: Elizabeth Schaefer People were complaining about a lack of traffic on socgrad, so let me fire off one of my favorite polemics and see if it stirs things up. One of the greatest weaknesses of academic sociology is that many sociologists are proud of having little or no practical value. Philosophers are paid to think, not to do, but you'll notice that by and large they aren't paid very much. Sociologists range from those who closely approximate the careers of philosophers (most of whom are not paid very much), to those who do applied demographic, strategy, or policy research. People who spend their days collecting and analyzing big national data sets don't interact much (intellectually at least) with people who do field work or deconstruct social features. I take a class with Howie Becker or Gary Hamilton, and they act as if the entire field is about doing the type of work they do, and ignore the fact that what they do is often not an effective approach to informing policy decisions that might require information about the number of homeless families, the distribution of educational attainment by geographic and ethnic divisions, or the degree of polarization over the use of old growth forests. I have just been reading some grounded theory stuff, including Glaser and Strauss' 1967 book, and I can't help but notice that they are producing accounts simply to be intellectually satisfied. When they talk about continuing to conduct research until reaching saturation, they ignore the fact that frequently what is called for is timely information. Apparently they are not inclined to soil their work with such practical concerns. There are two serious flaws with taking the intellectual high ground in this way. First, being able to independently pursue our intellectual interests requires that we have the resources to support ourselves. Unless we are living off our own accumulated wealth, someone is supporting us. Those providing resources to support sociologists frequently ask why they should continue to do so. The most convincing answer is to point to the useful application of sociological research. In our department, as I suspect is true of many others, the demographers and criminologists have a much easier time attracting money than the rest of us. Anyone care to guess why that is? Second, the object of sociological study presumably is society, yet many academic researchers have a very limited view of what makes up our present society. One great way to expand your thinking is through wrestling with a tangible social issue. In attempting to provide leverage for social policy, the researcher is forced to own up to the limits of her current level of understanding. Much sociology is post hoc account making, but what policy decisions require are predictions of the impact of alternative actions. Sociologists generally don't like to have our ignorance so nakedly exposed, so we tend to retreat into constructing stylish intellectual accounts of the world, verified through a selective use of data. We would learn a lot more if, through attempting to do, we expose what we do and do not know. That would give us something to think about. All those who I have offended with my arrogance, fire away! Bob Duniway - University of Washington P.S. - Second polemic I will admit that there is another way in which sociologists can attract resources. It is the journalism route. We can write in an authoritative manner about subjects of interest to some readers, and sell those books or articles as informative and thought provoking glimpses on the world. Many people have made careers using this approach, so I can't deny that it is feasible. I would point out, however, that it is evaluated first and foremost for the quality of presentation. Entertainment may be a worthwhile product, and those sociologist who provide it may be handsomely rewarded. However, we should not be confused about the content of their thinking. Popularity does not equal verity, and in the absence of application how reliable are the standards of peer review, citation, or book sales? From socgrad-relay@UCSD.EDU Fri May 20 11:36:35 1994 sendmail 8.6.9/UCSD-2.2-sun Fri, 20 May 1994 11:34:03 -0700 for socgrad-list Fri, 20 May 1994 11:34:01 -0700 for Date: 20 May 1994 13:27:00 CDT From: To: Subject: Someone Tell Jupiter to Duck I seem to remember a discussion a while ago about the lack of respect for sociological research. Along this line, I have a question for y'all. According to astronomers, Jupiter is about to be hit by a comet. This is fun stuff. Superhero comic book type material. Does sociology have anything that can compare to it? If so, what? It must be something that the public would be interested in, not just sociologists. I can't think of anything at the moment. Dave From socgrad-relay@UCSD.EDU Fri May 20 11:59:45 1994 sendmail 8.6.9/UCSD-2.2-sun Fri, 20 May 1994 11:56:19 -0700 for socgrad-list Fri, 20 May 1994 11:56:14 -0700 for From: JWL3697@utarlg.uta.edu Date: Fri, 20 May 1994 13:55:33 -0600 (CST) Subject: Re: sex roles To: bb05246@bingsuns.cc.binghamton.edu I do not want to sound judgemental, but is there a differecnce between sex role and gender role. To me, the sex role of human female is to bear and give birth to a new human being whereas the male is to disseminate his genetic lineage. Thus the sex role relates to one's biological aspect. As for gender role which relates to one's social aspects: for example, the traditional gender role for male is the primary breadwinner of the household. I cannot believe that sociologists of the 21st century are still using sex role in SOCI. My mother always says,"never give advice when you are not ask". But i cannot help. I would go to my dept and clarify what do they want me to teach - sex roles or gender roles. I know students are going to confront me with the same very issues Good luck Jwl. From socgrad-relay@UCSD.EDU Fri May 20 12:33:14 1994 sendmail 8.6.9/UCSD-2.2-sun Fri, 20 May 1994 12:30:07 -0700 for socgrad-list Fri, 20 May 1994 12:29:58 -0700 for Date: Fri, 20 May 94 14:48:26 EDT From: Steve Harvey Subject: the practical and the aesthetic To: SOCGRAD@UCSD.EDU Hmm. "Where's the beef?" eh? In some ways, I think a fair measure of the degree to which a "civilization" has a value to its population is the degree to which it promotes and facilitates aesthetic and "consciousness-raising" activities. We, as sociologists, pay considerable attention to the mundane demands of life, and the inequitable distribution of sustenance. And this is certainly an integral part of the picture. But neither the rich nor the poor thrive on bread alone. It is the celebration of life's wonder and beauty which is often our highest pleasure. When this can be accomplished in comfort, and embellished with access to sensual pleasures and luxuries, all the better. But a resident of the meagerest hovel can still take solice in the folds of a colorful tale or a reassuring religion, and this is more than mere "entertainment." This is the juice of life. The pragmatic approach has its place, but it should not usurp the place of more aesthetically motivated endeavors. Certainly, we need to do the best we can to effectively organize our political economy, to provide as much to as many as possible (to put it in utilitarian terms), and to accomodate our long-term collective needs as well (e.g., environmental preservation). But we also fancy ourselves as something more than amoebae, existing to exist (or rather, to reproduce). We have seasoned our collective existence with concepts of beauty and meaning in life. It is irrelevent (and basically nonsensical to debate) whether this is a "truth" or a delusion. It is our way of deriving value from life, above and beyond the blind biological imperatives from which we are spawned. Those "colorful tales" I mentioned above are not just ways to pass the time around the evening fire. They are ways to make sense of the universe, of the world, of the existence in which people find themselves. Is it so absurd that some sociologists should choose to define their role in much the way a villlage lore-master might have defined his or her role in times gone by (and places still hidden in the folds of the present)? Is it so absurd that we should strive to set aside *some* public funds for such endeavors? What is life without beauty, and mystery, and wonder? And why cannot some of us who "wonder" for a living do so in such a way as to satisfy this particular aspect of life? Do those popularized works have to pass sterile litmus tests, or is it enough that they are informed attempts to invoke wonder among the population at large? Certainly, there are priorities, and I am speaking of what might seem to be mere luxuries of life. But, while I would not want to divert overly large portions of public resources to aesthetic endeavors and to popular "education", I think it is easy to undervalue these public goods. We could perhaps live happier and richer lives on less matter and more substance than many now do. In my adult life (of about 17 years now), I have never lived on more than $15,000 in any given year, and often far less than that. And I have always felt very "wealthy," very fortunate to enjoy so much of what life has to offer. I believe one reason is that an appreciation of beauty and a sense of wonder don't cost much, but satisfy greatly. If I could found or contribute to one social move- ment, it would be to bring that spirit to every deprived (materially or otherwise) household and street corner. Many of our ranks I'm sure despise such a sentiment, considering it an attempt to distract the downtrodden from their real plight, to appease the exploited rather than defusing the means of their exploitation. But I have always believed that such critiques are based on an emotionally gratifying but unrealistic view of life. No one was born with guarantees of justice or even of sustenance, neither in human society nor in nature (the former of which is, of course, a mere extension of the latter). We can and should strive to "create" a just and compassionate society, but we should not be so distracted by its absence that we refuse to celebrate life as it is. Steve harvey@uconnvm From socgrad-relay@UCSD.EDU Fri May 20 12:40:32 1994 sendmail 8.6.9/UCSD-2.2-sun Fri, 20 May 1994 12:38:58 -0700 for socgrad-list Fri, 20 May 1994 12:38:52 -0700 for Date: Fri, 20 May 94 13:40 EDT From: "Pamela M Paxton" To: socgrad@UCSD.EDU Subject: thinking and doing Elizabeth mentions that publishing our thoughts IS acting. That by getting our ideas and results into the intellectual arena, we can have an impact. But publish them where? I think realistically we need to understand that very few people READ journals. Most likely we are speaking to less than fifty people when we publish something in a journal. Do we need to think about trying to get our thoughts out to other arenas as well - publishing in magazines or newspapers too? There is no academic reward to this but it may have a bigger impact. Also, how about interdisciplinary work? Do we need to make an effort to learn about other discplines and instruct them about ours? What I'm trying to point out is that getting an idea out into the intellectual arena to truely have it be an ACT, may involve more work and less rewards than simply publishing or presenting it. I think alot of academics tend to overlook this. Pam From socgrad-relay@UCSD.EDU Fri May 20 14:53:20 1994 sendmail 8.6.9/UCSD-2.2-sun Fri, 20 May 1994 14:48:54 -0700 for socgrad-list Fri, 20 May 1994 14:48:52 -0700 for From: BREKHUS@zodiac.rutgers.edu Date: Fri, 20 May 1994 17:43:29 -0400 (EDT) Subject: Re: sex roles To: socgrad@UCSD.EDU John, For critiques on role theory you might consider the following sources: Lopata and Thorne. 1978. "On the Term 'Sex Roles'" in SIGNS Spring 1978 pp. 718-721 Barrie Thorne "Gender...How is it Best Coceptualized?" in an edited volume by Laurel Richardson and Verta Taylor called "Readings in Sex & Gender" 1981: D.C. Heath & Co. Gerson and Peiss. "Boundaries, Negotiation, Consciousness: Reconceptualizing Gender Relations" pp. 317-331 in April 1985 SOCIAL PROBLEMS v. 32. One of the critiques raised in these articles is that the term 'roles' masks questions of power, inequality, and social structure by overemphasizing socialization and the individual. The term roles implies a sort of "separate but equal" mentality. Notice we don't teach classes in "Race Roles" or "Class Roles" for instance. As for sources on masculinity, I just read an interesting article in the May 1994 Atlantic Monthly called "The Code of the Streets" that talks about the Catch-22 of having 'street toughs' in an urban inner-city neighborhood. The article is by Elijah Andersen and students I suspect would find it fascinating. The one danger with this source is that it may reconfirm the blacj gangsta stereotype, so a nice contrast to it would be Mitchell Duneier's "Slim's Table: Race, Respectability, and Masculinity" published in 1992 by the University of Chicago Press. Chapter 2 entitled "Black Men: Transcending Roles and Images" and Chapter 4 "The Standard of Respectability" are probably sufficient if you don't want to assign the whole book. These are ethnographies but I think they lend themselves well to more structural arguments. Also the fact that Duneier's informants hold to middle-class standards of masculinity, respectability, etc. but are still not well-to-do should challenge the 'cultural values' argument that adopting middle-class values is what poor men need in order to get ahead. You could also contrast these articles with Martin and Hummer's "Fraternity Rape on Campus" article and provoke discussion by asking how the values of the gangsta's in Anderson's community differ from the values of masculinity in the white upper-middle class fraternity culture studied by Martin & Hummer? My answer would be that they don't differ much but their different social locations allow the masculine values of the frat culture to be seen as "normal" and "acceptable" by many whereas the same values when manifested in street gangs are seen as "pathological." One could be deliberately provocative and argue that the masculine bonding cultures of street gangs and fraternities have much in common (indeed I think it's been done but I don't know the source). I've never taught using any of the books on your list. I've read Connell and think it may be too difficult for all but the most sophisticated undergraduates at the frosh level. Wayne Brekhus brekhus@zodiac.rutgers.edu From socgrad-relay@UCSD.EDU Fri May 20 14:55:32 1994 sendmail 8.6.9/UCSD-2.2-sun Fri, 20 May 1994 14:51:21 -0700 for socgrad-list Fri, 20 May 1994 14:51:18 -0700 for From: Laura Miller Subject: Re: TA training (fwd) To: socgrad@UCSD.EDU Date: Fri, 20 May 94 14:51:17 PDT Forwarded message: >From socwawx@gsusgi2.gsu.edu Fri May 20 07:33:35 1994 Date: Fri, 20 May 1994 10:18:32 -0400 (EDT) From: "William A. White" Subject: Re: TA training To: Laura Miller Laura, You can post this to the newsgroup if you want. At Georgia State University, students are given an option between choosing a teaching seminar or a research seminar. Most students opt for the research seminar. I recently took the teaching seminar and learned quite a bit, but my professor and myself both came away from the experience realizing that the seminar can be improved. Basically, it is up the the student and the professor to develop a program. There is no set criteria for the seminar. I chose to work with one of my dissertation committee members hoping to learn a bit about his style. Though we intended to work together in an undergraduate theory course, it ended up being cancelled, so I joined him in his graduate advanced theory course. What made this an interesting (and difficult) course for me was that I was the "TA" for my peers. This is not the norm, but I needed the credit, so we continued with the project. We met before the quarter began to examine the syllabus and the readings. Prior to each class, we discussed the topic and what his expectations were for the lecture and discussion. I kept up with the readings and was given the opportunity to give three lectures in the course. He critiqued each of my lectures and made some very helpful suggestions. At the end of the quarter, we met for a final session where he made some final comments on the class and my lecture style. In order to teach in the department as a Graduate Teaching Assistant, we must take the teaching seminar. I know that by being a "shadow" to my professor in his course, I had the opportunity to analyze his style and understand how he approached the material in the course. I also came to understand that the classroom, at both the undergraduate and the graduate level, depends on solid interaction between student and instructor. A class is really more rewarding if the students are interested in the subject matter and engage in a dialogue with each other and the instructor. In reality, it is up to the instructor to create an atmosphere for dialogue. If you take a teaching seminar, I suggest that if you have the opportunity to give lectures in the course, you have yourself videotaped. This will give you an idea of not only how you are presenting the material, it also gives you the perspective the students see. I believe that we at GSU will begin to incorporate videotaping of student lectures as part of the normal teaching seminar requirements. Hope this helps, and I'd be interested in hearing other comments on the subject. By-the-by, I am now teaching a course on Race and Ethnic Relations and feel that the seminar helped me develop a "style" in presenting the topic to the students (undergraduate). Bill Sakamoto White Georgia State University socwawx@gsusgi2.gsu.edu From socgrad-relay@UCSD.EDU Fri May 20 17:39:20 1994 sendmail 8.6.9/UCSD-2.2-sun Fri, 20 May 1994 17:37:10 -0700 for socgrad-list Fri, 20 May 1994 17:37:09 -0700 for Date: Fri, 20 May 1994 17:32:37 -0700 (PDT) From: Jiannbin Lee Shiao Subject: Re: Thinking and Doing To: Sociology Graduate Student List Regarding Bob's post on "academic" vs. "practical" sociologists... I think there is a danger here of defining quantitative sociology as the only "practical" sociology. The fields you mention such as demography are only "practical" because policy makers can use their numbers out of context from the research to support their preconceived agendas. If you buy this, then "practical" only means useable by government and corporate elites. On the other hand, I agree with you on how having theoretical satiation as your only goal is incredibly limited, and outright elitist as well. If Western anthropology and botony began as the province of wealthy Europeans who had funds for travel or land for non-subsistence planting, what did sociology begin as? Is this in Edward Shil's (name?) history of our discipline? Laura did you read this our first year? I think I skipped it. :-) What I mean is that sociology may have that disengaged bent because it may have begun as a leisure activity. To tie up, I'll make the conjecture that those "journalistic" sociologists that Bob mentions in his second polemic are the "practical" qualitative sociologists. If "practical" means useful for someone else, then as demographic statistics are useful to governments, Arlie Hochschild's *The Second Shift* is useful to publishers. Certainly both may be useful for policy-targetted constituencies and for the public minority who read books, but they never get funded save through unequally available markets. And of course, beyond "practical" there's "organic sociologists" as Gramsci advocated, working within social movements, rather than with a "benign" state or business. So I don't think practical and quantitative coincide, and I'm a demographer as well as a discourse analyst, so no "damn mushy qual people" flames please. :-) Of course, my response might be nowhere in the ballpark of the kind of discussion Bob was hoping to spark. :-) tha j'ster From socgrad-relay@UCSD.EDU Fri May 20 17:49:27 1994 sendmail 8.6.9/UCSD-2.2-sun Fri, 20 May 1994 17:47:13 -0700 for socgrad-list Fri, 20 May 1994 17:47:11 -0700 for Date: Fri, 20 May 1994 17:42:40 -0700 (PDT) From: Jiannbin Lee Shiao Subject: Re: Someone Tell Jupiter to Duck and Mail Order stuff To: Sociology Graduate Student List On 20 May 1994 SSQLHUNT@vmd.cso.uiuc.edu wrote: > According to astronomers, Jupiter is about to be hit by a comet. This is fun > stuff. Superhero comic book type material. Does sociology have anything that > can compare to it? If so, what? It must be something that the public would > be interested in, not just sociologists. I can't think of anything at the > moment. Wellll, how about the South African modernization/democratization project? Can Mandela create a truly multiracial government? And if so, how much can his state power influence corporate power? This sounds like a political sociology or marxist sociology thing to me! Or does some other discipline have the corner on this "comet"? By the way, if this is Jetaway Dave, (how many Daves are there here?) I'm still working on a response to your questions about mail order bride industry and the military. I'm just majorly backlogged with an ugly Census analysis. Yes, I'm between batch jobs right now. On the same note, Jill, my friend hasn't given back my Asian American Studies conference programs. Do you still need names/cites or am I too late? tha j'ster From socgrad-relay@UCSD.EDU Sun May 22 14:11:08 1994 sendmail 8.6.9/UCSD-2.2-sun Sun, 22 May 1994 14:09:46 -0700 for socgrad-list Sun, 22 May 1994 14:09:45 -0700 for From: CXS3063@utarlg.uta.edu Date: Sun, 22 May 1994 16:09:43 -0600 (CST) Subject: schools To: socgrad@UCSD.EDU Hi. I'm currently a student at U of Texas at Arlingtion and am looking for a good program {Ph.D.}. I am most interested in Demography and plan to apply to U of Washington and Duke. Do any of you attend either of these universities? Do any of you have any suggestions about other demography programs? Thanks in advance. -Cathy S-S. e-mail cxs3063@utarlg.uta.edu From listserv@ucsd.edu Sat May 21 23:59:47 1994 sendmail 8.6.9/UCSD-2.2-sun Sat, 21 May 1994 23:47:26 -0700 for lmiller@ucsd.edu Date: Sat, 21 May 1994 23:47:26 -0700 From: ListServ@ucsd.edu (The Subscription Robot) To: lmiller@ucsd.edu Subject: socgrad->lmiller@ucsd.edu periodic subscription verification To unsubscribe, send mail to LISTSERV@UCSD.EDU saying unsub lmiller@ucsd.edu socgrad in the body of the message. If you wish to remain subscribed, DO NOTHING. Just discard this message. From socgrad-relay@UCSD.EDU Sun May 22 17:15:13 1994 sendmail 8.6.9/UCSD-2.2-sun Sun, 22 May 1994 17:14:04 -0700 for socgrad-list Sun, 22 May 1994 17:14:02 -0700 for Date: Sun, 22 May 1994 19:13:57 -0500 (CDT) From: nick mcree Subject: Re: schools To: CXS3063@utarlg.uta.edu On Sun, 22 May 1994 CXS3063@UTARLG.UTA.EDU wrote: > Hi. I'm currently a student at U of Texas at Arlingtion and am looking for > a good program {Ph.D.}. I am most interested in Demography and plan to > apply to U of Washington and Duke. Do any of you attend either of these > universities? Do any of you have any suggestions about other demography > programs? Thanks in advance. > -Cathy S-S. > e-mail cxs3063@utarlg.uta.edu > > Jeez, Cathy, have you thought of coming just a bit south? UT-Austin is one of the cheapest buys in the U.S., and the demography program is first-rate. Austin offers a specialization in Demography--and to be honest, that is where all of the funding is in our department, too. (another factor to consider in moving is that Austin, except for the damned heat, is one of the best places in the country to live. Of course, I'm from Oregon, so I opine that the same holds true of Seattle, should you decide to go to UW) UT-Austin Sociology Department Address is: Department of Sociology 336 Burdine Hall 21700 The University of Texas at Austin Austin, TX 78705 Further details? Ask away. Nick McRee From socgrad-relay@UCSD.EDU Sun May 22 22:08:43 1994 sendmail 8.6.9/UCSD-2.2-sun Sun, 22 May 1994 22:07:20 -0700 for socgrad-list Sun, 22 May 1994 22:07:19 -0700 for Date: Sun, 22 May 1994 22:03:22 -0700 (PDT) From: Jiannbin Lee Shiao Subject: Re: schools To: CXS3063@utarlg.uta.edu Cathy, hello there. I just finished the methodology and statistical data analysis courses for the MA in Demography here at UC Berkeley. I can't say that I really know demography programs nationwide, but I love the atmosphere in Demog. at Cal which is just incredibly supportive and friendly, much cozier than my own department (sociology) even though I hear soc here is pretty cozy for a research place. :-) Feel free to ask me any questions. I can forward your request to the demography alias if you wish. tha j'ster From socgrad-relay@UCSD.EDU Mon May 23 09:35:05 1994 sendmail 8.6.9/UCSD-2.2-sun Mon, 23 May 1994 09:31:01 -0700 for socgrad-list Mon, 23 May 1994 09:30:57 -0700 for Date: Mon, 23 May 1994 09:30:51 -0700 (PDT) From: Robert Duniway Subject: Re: Thinking and Doing To: Jiannbin Lee Shiao On Fri, 20 May 1994, Jiannbin Lee Shiao wrote: > Regarding Bob's post on "academic" vs. "practical" sociologists... I think > there is a danger here of defining quantitative sociology as the only > "practical" sociology. The fields you mention such as demography are only > "practical" because policy makers can use their numbers out of context > from the research to support their preconceived agendas. If you buy this, > then "practical" only means useable by government and corporate elites. I am not quite so partisan. However, I think that those making fund available to researchers ought to ask themselves how useful the product of proposed research will be for those providing the funds. In the case of government funded research, funds are privided directly by government agencies, and indirectly by takes collected on economic activity. The government is charged with promoting the general welfare, providing for defense, ensuring domestic tranquility, etc., and research that would assist in securing these ends seems to be money well spent (and also seems in the interest of the economic activity responsible for providing the funds to the government). The qualitative/quantitative debate is not the point. The information for some reason vs. Knowledge for Knowledge Sake division concerns me, and I mentioned criminology not because it is exclusively quanitative (it isn't), but because the object of study is largely to inform public response to disruptive criminal activity. > To tie up, I'll make the conjecture that those "journalistic" sociologists > that Bob mentions in his second polemic are the "practical" qualitative > sociologists. If "practical" means useful for someone else, then as > demographic statistics are useful to governments, Arlie Hochschild's *The > Second Shift* is useful to publishers. Certainly both may be useful for > policy-targetted constituencies and for the public minority who read > books, but they never get funded save through unequally available markets. I certainly recognize the value of good journalism. First, it is entertaining. Second, it provides a glimpse of experiences the reader may never have herself. Third, it can advance community discourse on a particular topic (even when he community response is to reject the claims of the journalist). What I was suggesting, however, by my reference to journalism is that there is a finite market for public attention, and plenty of people interested in obtaining it. Given that reality, do we need ethnographers who cannot support themselves as either writers or as researchers capable of providing information useful enough to others that someone would be willing to pay for their help? [Note: Some ethnographers or fieldwork researchers do useful research. I am not denying that they exist. I am merely asserting that many academic researchers do work of little value, and that qualitative researchers have a bad habit of acting as if their irrelevence is a sign of intellectual purity rather than a vice. Quantitative researchers who do useless research are also plentiful, but most of them try to argue that they really are producing useful results. I have a few polemical statements about that, but should reserve them for a different thread.] > So I don't think practical and quantitative coincide, and I'm a > demographer as well as a discourse analyst, so no "damn mushy qual people" > flames please. :-) Wouldn't think of it. I combine qualitative and quantitative data all the time. > Of course, my response might be nowhere in the ballpark of the kind of > discussion Bob was hoping to spark. :-) > > tha j'ster > Bob Duniway - University of Washington From socgrad-relay@UCSD.EDU Mon May 23 13:07:48 1994 sendmail 8.6.9/UCSD-2.2-sun Mon, 23 May 1994 13:05:37 -0700 for socgrad-list Mon, 23 May 1994 13:05:34 -0700 for Date: Mon, 23 May 1994 13:04:01 -0700 (PDT) From: Jill Thomas Subject: mail order brides To: SOCGRAD to : tha j'ster not too late yet...will need by 5/31 though. thanks for keeping it in mind. there is, i'm finding, a rather loud "silence" around this issue...the gentlemen doth PROTECT too much? jill From socgrad-relay@UCSD.EDU Mon May 23 14:27:11 1994 sendmail 8.6.9/UCSD-2.2-sun Mon, 23 May 1994 14:23:56 -0700 for socgrad-list Mon, 23 May 1994 14:23:52 -0700 for From: XGWALTERS@ccvax.fullerton.edu Date: 23 May 1994 14:22:50 -0800 (PST) Subject: the end To: socgrad@UCSD.EDU to all people on socgrad that helped me out. thanks. thought this list was interesting for a little while. to: S-Schubert, sorry I guess I was rate busting on here. next time I get on here you'll get a message thats really outstanding!!!! anyway everyone have good summers. greg Xgwalters From socgrad-relay@UCSD.EDU Mon May 23 16:18:21 1994 sendmail 8.6.9/UCSD-2.2-sun Mon, 23 May 1994 16:16:21 -0700 for socgrad-list Mon, 23 May 1994 16:16:13 -0700 for Date: Mon, 23 May 94 19:14 EDT From: "I don't think this will reduce confusion" Subject: Re: mail order brides To: thomasji@ucs.orst.edu >to : tha j'ster >not too late yet...will need by 5/31 though. thanks for keeping it in >mind. there is, i'm finding, a rather loud "silence" around this >issue...the gentlemen doth PROTECT too much? I would say that this gentleman hath been WAITING too much. I responded more than a week ago and haven't seen boo since. Perhaps the lady hath not a CLUE too much? Jetaway Dave From socgrad-relay@UCSD.EDU Mon May 23 16:33:55 1994 sendmail 8.6.9/UCSD-2.2-sun Mon, 23 May 1994 16:31:49 -0700 for socgrad-list Mon, 23 May 1994 16:31:47 -0700 for Date: Mon, 23 May 1994 16:31:30 -0700 (PDT) From: Jill Thomas Subject: Re: mail order brides To: "I don't think this will reduce confusion" Dave....I didn't mean you. I was noting the general absence of information on this subject in the literature (note: gentleMEN, plural, referring sarcastically to the powers that be in academia and publishing). I'm sorry if that was less than clear...Jill On Mon, 23 May 1994, I don't think this will reduce confusion wrote: > >to : tha j'ster > > >not too late yet...will need by 5/31 though. thanks for keeping it in > >mind. there is, i'm finding, a rather loud "silence" around this > >issue...the gentlemen doth PROTECT too much? > > I would say that this gentleman hath been WAITING too much. I responded more > than a week ago and haven't seen boo since. > Perhaps the lady hath not a CLUE too much? > > Jetaway Dave > From socgrad-relay@UCSD.EDU Mon May 23 16:59:27 1994 sendmail 8.6.9/UCSD-2.2-sun Mon, 23 May 1994 16:58:04 -0700 for socgrad-list Mon, 23 May 1994 16:57:56 -0700 for Date: Mon, 23 May 94 19:56 EDT From: "I don't think this will reduce confusion" Subject: Re: mail order brides To: thomasji@ucs.orst.edu Sorry, Over-reacted. Jetaway Dave From socgrad-relay@UCSD.EDU Tue May 24 11:18:44 1994 sendmail 8.6.9/UCSD-2.2-sun Tue, 24 May 1994 11:14:04 -0700 for socgrad-list Tue, 24 May 1994 11:14:02 -0700 for Date: Tue, 24 May 1994 14:09 EDT From: SCOTT BLAKE Subject: Sarah@Cornell To: socgrad@UCSD.EDU Sorry to clutter up the list, but I had to thank Sarah for some information and I managed to misplace her actual address. Thank you, Sarah! -Scott Blake From socgrad-relay@UCSD.EDU Wed May 25 01:30:10 1994 sendmail 8.6.9/UCSD-2.2-sun Wed, 25 May 1994 01:27:07 -0700 for socgrad-list Wed, 25 May 1994 01:27:05 -0700 for Date: Wed, 25 May 1994 01:17:29 -0700 (PDT) From: Jiannbin Lee Shiao Subject: Students from Hell To: Sociology Graduate Student List Hello fellow socgradders, esp y'all who've been TAs, I need to vent, but maybe I can turn my post into an actual topic. It's late at night, and I can't sleep because I'm thinking about an incredibly annoying episode earlier today. At the university "gym", after I said hi to a former student of mine, he proceeded to harass me about the grade I gave him a year before. He got an A- for the class, but wanted an A. This is the same student who harassed me and the professor the summer after the course about the same issue. Today, he decided to lecture to me that "good teaching requires flexibility" and that he was an integral part of my section. Translation, "I think I was hot shit in your section so you should have given me special treatment." ARGH! Anyone else? Not to turn socgrad into a trash students fest, but sometimes, one bad apple really can spoil your memories of the whole bunch. :-( tha j'ster From socgrad-relay@UCSD.EDU Wed May 25 06:15:27 1994 sendmail 8.6.9/UCSD-2.2-sun Wed, 25 May 1994 06:13:34 -0700 for socgrad-list Wed, 25 May 1994 06:13:29 -0700 for Date: Wed, 25 May 94 09:00:59 EDT From: Marni Hancock Organization: Emory University - Atlanta, Georgia, USA Subject: STUDENTS FROM HELL To: SOCGRAD@UCSD.EDU Regarding students who think they "should" have gotten a better grade-- it is my feeling that they are still in adolescence (sp?) (regardless of their chronological age) which makes it their job to try to "make" you feel guilty and change the grade and its your job to make sure their efforts don't work. :) Consider it part of the non-curricular contribution your institution of higher learning makes to the future of the world and learn to "enjoy" finding creative ways to foil their attempts to manipulate the system. Most of all, never let them sense that they've had any impact whatsoever on your personal sense of well- being. If enough of us can pull this off, more of these students will mature a little during college and have better lives in the long run. Work off your frustrations (and these half-grown children are frustrat- ing) in the gym and keep on trucking! Have a great summer! Marni Hancock SOCAW059@EMUVM1 From socgrad-relay@UCSD.EDU Wed May 25 06:44:39 1994 sendmail 8.6.9/UCSD-2.2-sun Wed, 25 May 1994 06:43:03 -0700 for socgrad-list Wed, 25 May 1994 06:43:01 -0700 for Date: Wed, 25 May 94 09:41 EDT From: "I don't think this will reduce confusion" Subject: Re: Students from Hell To: pachinko@uclink.berkeley.edu -- Wed, 25 May 1994 01:17:29 -0700 (PDT) All the time. With close to 500 "ex's" (minus graduating seniors) floating around campus, its hard to avoid a few grumpies. What's worse is that I generally do not even recognize the student. One started pestering me at a bar while I was trying to down a few quick tequila shots during a combination commemencment / birthday party. Jetaway Dave From socgrad-relay@UCSD.EDU Wed May 25 07:13:57 1994 sendmail 8.6.9/UCSD-2.2-sun Wed, 25 May 1994 07:11:34 -0700 for socgrad-list Wed, 25 May 1994 07:11:31 -0700 for Subject: Students from To: socgrad@UCSD.EDU Date: Wed, 25 May 1994 09:11:29 -0500 (CDT) From: "John J. Maurer" Next time you see this student or another like him, inform him/her that the education system is like a market economy. A Cultural Market. Be sure to let him/her know that your class is part of that culture economy and you do not superficially inflate grades. Continue by telling them in your opinion this system is meant to be a meritocracy and a grade given is a grade earned. Not a grade that is inflated to meet a popular market value. Also tell him/her they should be proud of the A- or any other grade you may have given them because they can be insured that in your classes the grade they receive is real and NOT superficial. Tell them that you feel grading by merit is the fairest and most democratic way of measuring a students performance. Then ask them if they'd prefer to receive a score that reflected what the culture market has set for them or if they prefer to earn it. Because it is just as likely that this "market" could experience deflation as well and I'm sure in that case they would beg for an A-. I realize that someone such as the student describe could not focus their attention long enough to listen to this explanation but you could try. If they think you're making this theory up as you speak, refer them to Randall Collins' _Credential_Society_ or a number of recent (even popular) press articles on grade inflation. From socgrad-relay@UCSD.EDU Wed May 25 08:00:55 1994 sendmail 8.6.9/UCSD-2.2-sun Wed, 25 May 1994 07:59:27 -0700 for socgrad-list Wed, 25 May 1994 07:59:24 -0700 for Date: Wed, 25 May 1994 10:56:58 -0400 (EDT) From: "William A. White" Subject: Re: Students from Hell To: socgrad@UCSD.EDU I say give 'em all "A's." That way, they'll never bother you. >) (Just a joke. Hey, it's the end of the quarter!) Bill Sakamoto White socwawx@gsusgi2.gsu.edu Georgia State University From socgrad-relay@UCSD.EDU Wed May 25 10:34:35 1994 sendmail 8.6.9/UCSD-2.2-sun Wed, 25 May 1994 10:33:29 -0700 for socgrad-list Wed, 25 May 1994 10:33:26 -0700 for Date: Wed, 25 May 1994 13:09:31 -0400 (EDT) From: alan bruce Subject: Re: STUDENTS FROM HELL To: Marni Hancock The topic of students hassling student teachers to get a better grade is one that has been bothering me for some time and this gives me a chance to get it off my chest. I had a student last semester who missed getting a C by a half point. I thought about it for some time (in fact I am still thinking about it and have considered upgrading his grade) but finally gave him the D that his points total deserved. This may sound a little tough but my reasoning went as follows. The student had had the opportunity to increase his grade throughout the semester as I offered "bonus" points on tests throughout the semester and so I felt that I had been more than generous and so did not feel obliged to be more so. Also, the student had a term paper which he handed in 2 or 3 weeks late. He had already told me that it was going to be a couple of days late because he didn't have time to do it as HE WAS BUSY PRACTICING SPORTS FOR HIS FRATERNITY. He claims that he gave the paper to his girlfriend and she must have put it in the wrong pigeon hole, hence its lateness. I did not take off as many points as I should have done for the paper being so late as it wasn't a bad paper and I didn't want to discourage him as the paper sounded like he might actually have been interested in the topic...mind you, he probably wasn't. Anyway, I think that I was generous once again here and this also made me feel less obliged to round up his score and give him the higher grade. That's about it, and I'm still not sure what to do about it...I got a note from him in which he "emplored" me to increase his grade to a C as if i didn't this would really screw up his GPA. Well, I didn't and I think that I was right to do this, I don't think I was hard on him and certainly won't give in to any crap like this. It was only a half point but I felt that he had plenty of chances to avoid the D. If anyone has read this far, I would appreciate it if you let me know what you think =) In any case, writing this has been in some way theraputic. Alan. Alan S. Bruce.............................abruce@andy.bgsu.edu Grad. Student and Scottish Person, Bowling Green State University, Ohio. From socgrad-relay@UCSD.EDU Wed May 25 11:11:27 1994 sendmail 8.6.9/UCSD-2.2-sun Wed, 25 May 1994 11:09:34 -0700 for socgrad-list Wed, 25 May 1994 11:09:30 -0700 for From: S-ENDER@bss1.umd.edu Wed, 25 May 94 14:09:22 +1100 Organization: University of Maryland,College Park To: alan bruce , SOCGRAD@UCSD.EDU Date: Wed, 25 May 1994 14:09:03 EDT Subject: Re: STUDENTS FROM HELL >That's about it, and I'm still not sure what to do about it...I got a >note from him in which he "emplored" me to increase his grade to a C >as if i didn't this would really screw up his GPA. Well, I didn't >and I think that I was right to do this, I don't think I was hard on >him and certainly won't give in to any crap like this. It was only a >half point but I felt that he had plenty of chances to avoid the D. >If anyone has read this far, I would appreciate it if you let me know >what you think =) In any case, writing this has been in some way >theraputic. alan... one recommendation; provide him with a letter: to whom it may concern...that evaluates his work for the entire semester...at the end of the letter, explain to whomever it may concern that his grade was close to a `c' but unfortunately calculated out to `d' work and that explains why his overall gpa is .00001 lower... ...this discussion is interesting for me...i have a student who missed an `a' by .2 percentage points (and i reassessed all her work, she blew the final) and she left a message on my answering machine just this afternoon...should i return the call? morten From socgrad-relay@UCSD.EDU Wed May 25 12:02:11 1994 sendmail 8.6.9/UCSD-2.2-sun Wed, 25 May 1994 11:54:35 -0700 for socgrad-list Wed, 25 May 1994 11:54:30 -0700 for Date: 25 May 1994 13:48:50 CDT From: To: Subject: Grade Inflation Perhaps it's simply occupational folklore, but I seem to remember hearing that sociology had a larger degree of grade inflation than other disciplines. Is this true? Also, shouldn't we be more concerned with the students feelings when determining grades than with their actual performance, or does this only apply to grade (read the e, folks) school? ;^) Dave (Not that one, one of the other ones) From socgrad-relay@UCSD.EDU Wed May 25 12:19:27 1994 sendmail 8.6.9/UCSD-2.2-sun Wed, 25 May 1994 12:07:35 -0700 for socgrad-list Wed, 25 May 1994 12:07:07 -0700 for Date: Wed, 25 May 94 15:03:13 EDT From: Joya Misra Organization: Emory University - Atlanta, Georgia, USA Subject: STUDENTS FROM HELL To: SOCGRAD@UCSD.EDU If only students put as much effort into earning good grades as they do in trying to get you to give them good grades...mine seem tireless, creative, etc. when trying to get a better grade than what they earned. from dissertation wasteland, joya From socgrad-relay@UCSD.EDU Wed May 25 13:20:11 1994 sendmail 8.6.9/UCSD-2.2-sun Wed, 25 May 1994 13:14:58 -0700 for socgrad-list Wed, 25 May 1994 13:14:49 -0700 for Date: Wed, 25 May 94 15:14 EST To: socgrad@UCSD.EDU From: TERESA%IRISHMVS.CC.ND.EDU@uicvm.uic.edu Subject: those darn students I've had a bit of nagging and begging from studetns regarding grades, but no calls or notes asking for me to raise their grades. I tell students early on in the semester that As ('A' grades) are hard to come by and most be 'exellent/excellent' work through out the semster. (sorry for the typos...i can't make corrections at home). I hand out a sheet explaining what must be accomplished to receive a particular grade. ND has a reputation for hard grading so perhaps this helps to keep the complaining to a minimum. anywaty the expectations are clear and they know what they have to do in order to get a cetrtain grade. I like the idea of giving the studetnt a written account of his or her accomplishments/work in the course. I would think that should clear up any misunderstanding. If not, then maybe you are dealing with an immature person and all the explaining in the world won't help. You coudl fall back on one of my 'old' professor's tricks. "well, I could review your papers and exams again... I can't guarantee though that this weill help you. It is quite possible that if I review your work MORE carefully, I might find more problems than I found originally..." I'm not crazy about that approach , but what ho do you think? aagain, sorry for the awful typos!!! Teresa Elston Notre Dame From socgrad-relay@UCSD.EDU Wed May 25 14:48:22 1994 sendmail 8.6.9/UCSD-2.2-sun Wed, 25 May 1994 14:44:10 -0700 for socgrad-list Wed, 25 May 1994 14:44:06 -0700 for From: Jeremy Straughn Subject: Grade Hasslers To: socgrad@UCSD.EDU Date: Wed, 25 May 94 16:44:03 CDT Mailer: Elm [revision: 70.85] > While reading the flurry of frustrations from teaching assistants about > all those pesky students who think they can (and in many cases are able > to) increase their grades via harrassment or disputation, I couldn't help > feeling a certain sympathy for students in the helpless position of > submitting to the sometimes capricious will of course instructors in the > area of grading policy. I have twice held TA positions that involved > grading, so I am also acquainted with its "hellish" aspects--TAs too > often unfairly bear the brunt of student dissatisfaction over grading > policy, as well as over a whole host of other top-down decisions executed > by the instructor responsible for the course. My conclusion: students > are entitled to the clearest possible statement of grading policy at the > outset of the course, including the a full description of all required > work and criteria for grading and an explanation of how these criteria > are to be applied. Students should in principle be able to feel confident > that their final grade is entirely the result of their own effort and > ability in relation to the course material and not of the error, prejudice, > or inconsistency of their grader's judgment. Naturally, there will be > those "adolescent" students who insist on contesting any grade that is not > to their liking. And, in any case, ambiguity in the statement of grading > policy is no excuse for rudeness or belligerence. Nevertheless, it is my > experience--both as one who has graded others' work and one who has been > subjected to others' grading practices--that a clear statement of a grading > policy at the course's outset and its cosistent application reduces the > incidence of grade complaints. Students often complain in an attempt to > exercise the control they feel they lacked during the grading process. > Unfortunately, too many instructors fail to counter the impression that > they merely hand out grades on a whim. (This is especially a danger when > the criteria for performance are inherently difficult to specify, such as > in grading papers, essay exams, class participation, and the like.) > Making an effort to specify them anyway and to be clear about any > shortcomings in the students performance will both fulfill (what I believe > is) the obligation of the instructor to the student and protect the > instructor (to some extent) from student unrest. This is, of course, > not easy. > Does this seem unreasonable? > Jeremy Straughn > University of Chicago > strau@cicero.spc.uchicago.edu > > > > From socgrad-relay@UCSD.EDU Wed May 25 15:11:58 1994 sendmail 8.6.9/UCSD-2.2-sun Wed, 25 May 1994 15:04:57 -0700 for socgrad-list Wed, 25 May 1994 15:04:54 -0700 for From: CXS3063@utarlg.uta.edu Date: Wed, 25 May 1994 17:04:51 -0600 (CST) Subject: Re:Students From Hell To: socgrad@UCSD.EDU Alan, In response to your post, I think that you made a sound decision in reporting the student's earned grade of "D". I know how infuriating it can be to have your "chain" yanked by students. Before I returned to school to begin graduate work, I took a job as a teacher's asst. in a private psych. hospital. In this environment, chain yanking was not only frequent, but could easily be considered the modus operendi. There is a definite difference between undergrad. students and institutionalized high school students (I am now less likely to be the recipient of flying objects), but nevertheless I learned a valuable lesson in my previous position which has been quite useful in my current position. At the hospital we in the education dept. had an informal motto: "We have standards...all of them low... but we do have standards." I relay this to you and others, Alan, not to suggest that we have low standards, but that we do have standards and that we should stick to them. Be up front about what they are, make them your policy and stick to them. When confronted by "um...er...what if's.." simply restate the appropriate policy/standard. One of our faculty folks told me to never put myself in the position of judging the relative validity of any excuse, and I think that was some of the best advice I've ever received. Give students all the rope that you can and they will either climb it or use it to hang themselves. Oh... and one more thing - someone (I don't know who because I accidentally deleted the post) suggested that you reply to the student's letter. I agree 100%. Good luck, Alan and try not to get so upset. I know it's hard. -Cathy S-S. UT-Arlington. From socgrad-relay@UCSD.EDU Wed May 25 16:37:09 1994 sendmail 8.6.9/UCSD-2.2-sun Wed, 25 May 1994 16:30:52 -0700 for socgrad-list Wed, 25 May 1994 16:30:46 -0700 for From: tombrown@cats.ucsc.edu Date: Wed, 25 May 1994 16:30:38 -0700 To: abruce@andy.bgsu.edu, SOCAW059@emuvm1.cc.emory.edu Subject: Re: STUDENTS FROM HELL He missed a passing grade "by a half point"? Is your grading system really that accurate? I'd have given it to him. After all, a C grade indicates an average student, and average students do occasionally turn papers in late. I appreciate the need to "maintain standards" and all, but I really doubt that any grading system is accurate to the half point--especially in sociology. From socgrad-relay@UCSD.EDU Wed May 25 17:50:37 1994 sendmail 8.6.9/UCSD-2.2-sun Wed, 25 May 1994 17:49:33 -0700 for socgrad-list Wed, 25 May 1994 17:49:32 -0700 for From: XCHUFF@ccvax.fullerton.edu Date: 25 May 1994 17:48:53 -0800 (PST) Subject: STUDENTS/GRADES FROM HELL To: SOCGRAD@UCSD.EDU I guess I'll put my two cents in to this discussion... I personally feel that the whole arguement about percentages of a point deciding a grade is absurd! A point or two should make a difference, but does half a point really make that student go from an "average" to "below average" student? On the other hand, if extra points are offered, then grades should stand as they are. I also feel that all instructors should be very clear about what they expect from their students from day one. This avoids confusion later on in the semester and everyone knows exactly what is expected from them to earn the grade that they desire. I see no excuses for late papers, or at least for sympathy from late papers! Todd Huff From socgrad-relay@UCSD.EDU Wed May 25 18:08:29 1994 sendmail 8.6.9/UCSD-2.2-sun Wed, 25 May 1994 18:07:29 -0700 for socgrad-list Wed, 25 May 1994 18:07:28 -0700 for Date: Wed, 25 May 1994 18:07:26 -0700 From: Laura Miller To: socgrad@UCSD.EDU Subject: thanks for the info Thank you to all who gave me information on how your department handles TA/teacher training. There's quite a wide range of policies/programs for training out there. At a later date I may take some of you up on your offers of further details on what your department does. Re the students from hell issue: this problem frequently depresses me because of the degree of arbitrariness that's inherent to grading (and if you don't believe that, then take a student paper, distribute it among your fellow TAs, and see the variety of grades it will get). But I also get as mad as anyone at the students who raise such a fuss over their grades, and tend to be a relatively tough grader myself. I think what I most object to is that most students appear to think, or at least act as though they think the grading system represents a true meritocracy, or a true measure of their abilities and accomplishments. It may just be ornery of me, but I refuse to engage in massive grade inflation as long as students continue to believe that that A really corresponds to the work they've done. Anyway, I've found that the more I comment on papers, the fewer complaints about grades I get. I think students are justified to be unhappy when they receive a low grade with no indication of what they did wrong. Laura From socgrad-relay@UCSD.EDU Wed May 25 19:36:12 1994 sendmail 8.6.9/UCSD-2.2-sun Wed, 25 May 1994 19:35:20 -0700 for socgrad-list Wed, 25 May 1994 19:35:16 -0700 for Date: Wed, 25 May 94 22:11:15 EDT From: Alan Subject: Social Roles and grading To: socgrad@UCSD.EDU >From the abyss of dissertation, family and religious obligations, and papers, h ere goes some comments after catching up on 10 days of E-mail. First, for critiques of the concept of "role", one need not even go into th e gender literature. My undergraduate dept. head, may he rest in peace, used to always skip the chapter on status and role in intro. textbooks (as well as the chapter on methods) because he argued that they don't really exist. The pr oblem with this concept to me (and taking an area exam in Social Psychology was really fun in this respect) is that it assumes that actors think in terms of behavioral compliance to organizational demands, and that these sorts of things are somehow universalized across groups versus very localized among and withing groups of actors. We don't all act as if we live within formal org anizations, and 25-30 years after Ethnomethodology, most formal organizations are not all that formal. In fact, Universities may be atypically formal. Secondly, with respect to grades, I make it very clear in the beginning of the course what kind of performance throughout the semester will be required to receive a particular grade with the proviso that if I am doing my job, the students are doing their jobs, etc., everybody should be receiving A's, and nobody should ever receive less than a B+. However, it is also made very clear that unless I ask a question which I later judge to be unfair, I do not manipulate test scores and paper scores to effect these results. Thirdly, with respect to think vs. do dichotomy, what one is doing is rehashing the pure/applied debate, and what is usually at stake in these debate s is not the worth of asking particular research questions or utilizing particular research methods, it is a particular notion of what an academic is, and the security of a person's stature as a social scientist. Coming from somebody, who along with my colleague Steve Harvey tends to be far more theoretically oriented than almost all of the faculty here at The University of Connecticut, there is a difference between theory as guiding practice, and theory as contemplation because one wants to prove to the world that they are somehow "serious" thinkers. Strange as it may seem to most of us, who fit in the former category, one must understand that in light of how the discipline of Sociology emerged in the first place in terms of proving itself as a serious science, the latter discourse still exists, and is in many respects tightly guarded. One only needs to look at how "Methodology" as a specialization is treated in many a Sociology dept. P.S., I have adapted my original Sociology instructor's disdain for the chapter s on roles and methods, and even delete the chapter on Theory b/c of the often simplistic view of academic politics conveyed in these chapters. The truth is that distinctions between "pure" and "applied", "quantitative" and "qualitative" and one's theoretical orientation, as trivial as they may seem, decide many a tenure case and promotion decision in the real world. From socgrad-relay@UCSD.EDU Thu May 26 01:00:08 1994 sendmail 8.6.9/UCSD-2.2-sun Thu, 26 May 1994 00:57:11 -0700 for socgrad-list Thu, 26 May 1994 00:57:09 -0700 for Date: Thu, 26 May 1994 00:47:09 -0700 (PDT) From: Jiannbin Lee Shiao Subject: mail order brides and military...finally! To: Sociology Graduate Student List Dave I thought this thread would be of interest to everyone on socgrad, and besides I've lost your address :-) so here's my belated reply to your response. :-) On Tue, 10 May 1994, I don't think this will reduce confusion wrote: > Complicity is the state of being an accomplice in wrongdoing. This would > imply active, offical, involvement on the part of the US military in the mail > order bride business. Do you have any proof that being part of the mail order > bride business is the offical policy of the US military? Probably not. I > would not be the least suprised that memebers of the US (and other) militaries > are involved, but that is an entirely different issue than the complicity on > the part of the US military. Rather than stress official policy, I think maintaining distinctions, between (1) official policy, (2) unofficial sanction, and (3) impact, is more important. "Complicity" is a very different thing in each of these realms, and I think the above definition is too narrow to capture a whole range of sociological phenomena. I have no proof of military support of the mail order bride business, but I would like to know why there's such similarity in the gendered/national discourses on Asia among military involvement, mail order brides, and economic imperialism. Have you seen the play *M. Butterfly*, not Puchini's opera? I'm not saying we should rest with cultural studies accounts showing the similarities among "Orientalist" discourses, but if you don't see the similarities then I suppose the project of even looking for complicity might seem irrelevant. > I would date a permanent US military prescence in Asia as 20th century, not > 19th century. The first permanent US bases were established in the Phillipines > early in the 20th century, which is an entirely different time frame than that > implied by "from the nineteenth century and onwards." I don't recall whether I said "permanent" military presence. If I did, my apologies. The Opium War (1839-1842) would be my first date for European military involvement, and (Commodore?) Perry's "opening" of Japan in 1853 for the US would be my first US date, both of which are in the 19th century. > US and European military establishments may have been a precondition for the > "feminized" dynamic that you mention. Then again, so might have been trade. I don't think (speaking as a faintly rabid marxist :-) ) that we can separate "trade" and "military" interventions so clearly. As we all know, markets are not "free" much less "natural", and the opening of Asian markets for Western trade, be it in drugs or cheap labor, required force and the justification of the use of force. I think it is from the latter -the belief that Asia was a "willing rape victim" to a masculinized West- that resonates with the mail order bride industry. I'm not a Russia expert, but I would suspect that a lot of the mail order bride ideology there also revolves around the parallel construction of "Russia(n women)" as being so desirous of "America(n men/culture/ capitalism/etc...)" that US involvement is justified as selfless rescue rather than selfish plundering. Oh Laura, goddess of Central Asia (in my dept. at least), what dost thou say? :-) > It is very doubtful that the purpose of military intervention was to create a > new supply, as it were, of "feminine" women for european and u.s. males. At > the turn of the century, and even still today, there is a quite adequate supply > of native-born women who conform to "feminine" norms of behavior. Then I misspoke. You're absolutely right, this "turn to Asian/Russian women" is probably more a post-1970s-feminism sort of thing. If *Madama Butterfly* were written today, perhaps it would end with Pinkerton staying with Butterfly and "escaping" his wh ite wife, rather than taking Butterfly's child to be raised by his wife and abandoning her to commit suicide. Hmmm.... :-) > The part about US immigration policy confuses the hell out of me. Immigration > from Asian countries was, in practical terms, stopped after the passage of the > Chinese Exclusion Act of 1879? (give or take a couple of years). Give or take 45 years. Chinese were kept from immigrating after 1882, Japanese after the Gentlemen's Agreement of 1907, but other Asians not until 1924. What I meant about the coordination of push and pull was the role played by Western capitalist expan sion/intervention. Not every country "sent" emigrants to the U.S. but many non-European countries did so only after Western invasion massively disrupted life in the former. I'm not saying the U.S. or Europe was *directly* responsible for the Taiping Rebellion for example, but the introduction of opium did do to China what crack has done to African American communities in the past few decades. A major root of the Japanese migration to the Americas was the Meiji Restoration's land consolidations that left droves of peasants in poverty, all done in order to modernize the country so as not to fall under Western powers as had their neighbor China. And of course, African slavery in the Americas and Asian slavery in South Africa are the clearest economic/military coordinations of large scale migration. Now, none of what I've written makes sense if you define "military" narrowly as a particular bureaucratic structure and legacy of a particular nation-state. However, I agree with you that this definition is the most useful for a study, but leaving out the longer view, the broader context if you will, is (and I'm gonna make enemies here) tantamount to just doing a narrow political science and not a more revealing sociology. :-) Sorry to have taken so long to get back to y'all on this. Whew! tha j'ster From socgrad-relay@UCSD.EDU Thu May 26 05:49:54 1994 sendmail 8.6.9/UCSD-2.2-sun Thu, 26 May 1994 05:45:40 -0700 for socgrad-list Thu, 26 May 1994 05:45:38 -0700 for Date: Thu, 26 May 1994 08:38:22 -0500 To: socgrad@UCSD.EDU From: danryan@minerva.cis.yale.edu (Dan Ryan) Subject: A few lines about parts of points content-length: 0 Hi ya'll -- I despise wasting valuable time worrying about or quibbling about grades, and one way I (nearly) eliminated the "but I'm just 0.002 away from a C-" type comments was to point out that all the numbers that went into the calculation were already inflated by local cultural forces (so to speak) and the "benefit of the doubt" attitude taken by the TA and so forth. If they still didn't cross a magic threshold, well, that's the way it is. This doesn't deal with issues like natural variation in evaluators, the possible non-linearity of quality measures and so forth, but these aren't usually what come up in the midst of the "student from hell" phenomenon anyway. Another approach that's worked for me, is what I call the "matter of fact" approach to grades. I think I posted an example of this last year in the form of an essay grading scale. More on that later or soon. Cheers, Dan From socgrad-relay@UCSD.EDU Thu May 26 07:01:28 1994 sendmail 8.6.9/UCSD-2.2-sun Thu, 26 May 1994 06:57:50 -0700 for socgrad-list Thu, 26 May 1994 06:57:48 -0700 for From: blovitts@nsf.gov To: socgrad@UCSD.EDU Subject: The Grade of "D" Date: 26 May 94 09:51 EST Text item: Text_1 NPR radio has been doing a series on Taft High School in Chicago and focusing in on its efforts to reform itself. Yesterday evening's piece focused on the school's efforts to come to grips with the "D" grade. I thought the discussion might inform, if not spark more, discussion on socgrad. As a little background, the school has adopted outcomes based education and initially dropped the "D" as a grading option since, in effect, any student who "earns" a D has not mastered the material. This, of course, created a moral dilemma at the school for some faculty who either 1) felt the need to reward students who did make an honest effort even though they had clearly not mastered the material or 2) were conflicted about failing a student who showed improvement over the course of the year but were still not up to grade level. [I'll interject a little personal opinion here and opine that this dilemma should not apply to undergraduates since they chose to attend college voluntarily (for the sake of nonargument, let's not get into those who were "forced" to go by parents) and putatively have the intellectual and motivational stuff to be in college and do well.] One argument raised against the D was that it is based on faulty and out moded educational theory, that of the normal curve, which we all know "dictates" that intelligence and ability and therefore grades should follow a normal distribution. Using a normal curve creates expectations among teachers about students' ability to achieve, and having the D optional allows teachers to believe that some students are not capable of mastering the material. This teacher argued for getting rid of the normal curve and the D. The dilemma at Taft was "resolved" by one teacher who compared Ds to anchovies on pizza. When you order a pizza you have the option of having it with or without anchovies. Likewise, this teacher felt that the teachers in the school should have the option of using or not using the D as a grading option. The faculty ultimately voted on this issue and adopted the faculty option position. Personally, I found the discussion quite interesting. I had never thought deeply about the D grade before, but a D does indicate that the student has not mastered the material. In graduate school, we are not allowed to get Cs, and I find myself believing that intellectually able undergraduates should not be allowed to get Ds. It is, in effect, a meaningless grade, that is too often awarded for a teacher's personal feelings about a student rather than their academic performance. Of course, this raises the issue of whether or not effort should be rewarded with a passing grade when a student clearly has not mastered the material. None of this resolves the orignal issue of awarding a D because a C was missed by a half a point, but perhaps it does raise the issue of whether or not that student and others who socgradders give Ds have mastered the material -- and raises the issue of whether or not D is a meaningful and/or legitimate grading option, especially at the college level. What say you all? Barbara From socgrad-relay@UCSD.EDU Thu May 26 07:45:13 1994 sendmail 8.6.9/UCSD-2.2-sun Thu, 26 May 1994 07:37:58 -0700 for socgrad-list Thu, 26 May 1994 07:37:54 -0700 for Date: Thu, 26 May 94 10:17:02 EDT From: Steve Swinford Subject: grades To: socgrad@UCSD.EDU As a side note, I thought I would share my grading experiences. For the past 2 semesters, I have taught an upper division (400 level) course for mainly junior and senior sociology majors. Luckily, the two classes were pretty sharp coming in, so I did not have but one or two students per class who did "really" poorly on papers and exams. However, there were exceptions. The first day of class, I inform the students that I do not grade on class attendance since they are mature enough to know whether or not they should show up (I admit, a leap of faith on my part). Low and behold, the ones who rarely showed up were always at the bottom of the scale! When the students who never show up questioned their grades (and they were the only ones who ever have questioned me) I merely suggested to them that maybe they should have been there more often. Just because I do not take attendance (I see it as a waste of class time) does not mean they do not need to show up. In fact, one of the no-shows was upset that I had essay questions on the tests over films we had viewed in class! How dare I test on material not in the book! By the way, I have a 1,000 point grading scale and, if the student is within 10 points of a grade, I round up because 10 points in my grading system is worth 2 multiple choice questions from the exams. In fact, now that I think of it, maybe I'm too easy! Steve Swinford - Bowling Green State U. From socgrad-relay@UCSD.EDU Thu May 26 08:29:29 1994 sendmail 8.6.9/UCSD-2.2-sun Thu, 26 May 1994 08:23:11 -0700 for socgrad-list Thu, 26 May 1994 08:23:08 -0700 for Date: Thu, 26 May 94 10:49:07 EDT From: Steve Harvey Subject: grades To: SOCGRAD@UCSD.EDU This is mostly in response to Barbara's post, but is relevant to the rest of the discussion as well. *Assuming that a grading system is the most effective method of teaching and accediting individuals*, I think we should do away with letter grades altogether and replace them with a straight numerical score, say, between zero and one hundred. Every exam score, course grade, and cumulative grade point average can be consistently represented by such a score. I'll explain the benefits (and someone else can chime in to explain the pitfalls!) below, but first I'd like to address Barbara's question: Eliminating the "D" grade doesn't really accomplish anything, except to narrow the range of *gradation* available. If a "D" meant "the lowest acceptable performance to pass this course," then that is what a "C" will mean if the "D" is eliminated. Changing the standards for passing a course is a completely separate issue from changing the fineness of gradation. We can add an "E" and still make it harder to pass, or eliminate the "D" and make it easier to pass. There is no necessary connection between the number of designated levels and the meaning of each level. Barbara's question can be restated as "Should we make the present requirements for a "C" grade the standard for passing?" And to all of these questions I have one answer: If we wish to establish a truer meritocracy (and it is debatable whether this is indeed the way we wish to go. "Meritocracy" is ultimately no more just than any other stratification system, but it may at least work better, and it *does* SEEM more just), we need not concern ourselves with arbitrary (e.g., discrete) distinctions such as "pass/fail" or "A or B." If everybody is scored on a continuum (of course, a continuum approximated by discrete integers, but more "continuous" than letter grades), then future employers or grad departments or St. Peter or whoever will have a precise measure (suspending for the time being any discussion of the arbitrariness of the evaluations in the first place) by which to compare candidates. A GPA of 22 out of 100 (.22) is pretty dismal, and it doesn't really matter whether having any points at all wrongly indicates some mastery of material that the student really never mastered at all. The .22 tells the story clearly enough (as does, in fact, a GPA of 1.5 in the present system). Such a system of fine gradation has several advantages: It allows the truly excellent to be distinquished from the very good (unlike now, where a fairly broad range of talent is indistinguishable in the "straight A" category). It eliminates the bogus concept of "failure," and replaces it with "relatively poor performance" (I think it's less offensive, truer, and more appropriate to designate someone as "about this talented on a continuum of the range of talent found in this society" rather than "a failure"). And it creates stronger incentives from top to bottom: Everybody knows that every point counts. It may also (though this is certainly debatable) reduce anxiety: there are no abrupt thresholds to worry about. One point here or there *is always* just one point. Well, that's my take on the subject. -Steve harvey@uconnvm From socgrad-relay@UCSD.EDU Thu May 26 09:25:36 1994 sendmail 8.6.9/UCSD-2.2-sun Thu, 26 May 1994 09:21:29 -0700 for socgrad-list Thu, 26 May 1994 09:21:12 -0700 for Date: Thu, 26 May 94 11:46:38 EDT From: Steve Harvey Subject: meritocracy To: SOCGRAD@UCSD.EDU Hi again. I thought I'd clarify why I said that a meritocracy is ultimately no more just than any other system of stratification: At present, we know that many accidents of birth determine life chances: Race, gender, geographical location, etc. The notion of "meritocracy" is that such arbitrary categorizations should not determine life chances, a person's "merit" should (it is no coincidence that straitification systems throughout history and around the world have been legitimated by claims that people occupy their strata according to merit: e.g., nobles are nobles because they have noble blood, that is, are born meritorious, not because they are lucky). Were we to completely "rationalize" society, and succeed in establishing a true meritocracy, we would be faced with a troubling fact which is now simply not salient enough for us to focus on: People are born with varying capacities. In a true meritocracy, a mentally disabled individual would have very poor life chances. Most of what we call "mental disability" is simply the far end of a continuum of mental accuity: People are found all along this continuum. Our natural endowments at birth are as arbitrary and beyond-our-control as our race or gender. Furthermore, no matter how egalitarian a society we may manage to create, there will always be a diversity of environments and life experiences (of subtle sorts) which will further differentiate people's endowments. In fact, the truest of all meritocracies is an all out "survival of the fittest." I don't think that's what we're really aiming for. The ideal, perhaps, is that people should be rewarded according to their *effort*, not according to their actual performance relative to others. In a literal sense, perhaps this IS the truest meritocracy (forget about what I said about "survival of the fittest".... I was just reaching. What I REALLY meant is....). However, we not only don't measure that at present, we don't have any credible *means* to measure it. A really bright person can always pretend to be a less bright person who's working incredibly hard. So, it's a pretty tricky issue. (Even the ability to "work hard" is to some extent arbitrarily distributed. Some people may be born with or develop -by no fault of their own- poor concentration, or other propensities which are expressed as "laziness." At the bottom of all this, as at the bottom of a great many issues, is the old "free will vs. determinism" debate, to which there is no real resolution. Both are true, depending on what perspective one takes in the moment. Think of all the positions on social issues that are defined by where one chooses to draw the line between the extent to which one's circumstances are determined, and the extent to which one has the freedom to exert effort within those circumstances). -steve harvey@uconnvm From socgrad-relay@UCSD.EDU Thu May 26 10:43:28 1994 sendmail 8.6.9/UCSD-2.2-sun Thu, 26 May 1994 10:35:53 -0700 for socgrad-list Thu, 26 May 1994 10:35:50 -0700 for (5.65+UW94.4/UW-NDC Revision: 2.30 ) id AA00527; Date: Thu, 26 May 1994 10:35:43 -0700 (PDT) From: Robert Duniway Subject: Re: meritocracy To: Steve Harvey On Thu, 26 May 1994, Steve Harvey wrote: > The ideal, perhaps, is that people should be rewarded according to their > *effort*, not according to their actual performance relative to others. I attended a middle school that tried using effort grading. In my case it resulted in my being given Cs and Ds in sixth grade math, even though during the year I completed all of the ninth grade and half of the tenth grade math curriculum. Still, the teacher knew I wasn't living up to my potential. Her evidence was that I was frequently talking to other students in class. What she didn't take into account was that much of my talking involved helping them with their math, so I wasn't living up to my potential because I was being useful. > Some people may be born with or develop -by no fault > of their own- poor concentration, or other propensities which are expressed as > "laziness." At the bottom of all this, as at the bottom of a great many issues, > is the old "free will vs. determinism" debate, to which there is no real > resolution. Both are true, depending on what perspective one takes in the > moment. Think of all the positions on social issues that are defined by > where one chooses to draw the line between the extent to which one's > circumstances are determined, and the extent to which one has the freedom to > exert effort within those circumstances). When you speak of fault you are acting as if the ability to do otherwise is the only basis for holding someone accountable for their actions. Another perspective is to hold people accountable for who they are, as demonstrated by what they actually do, and to treat them accordingly. By looking for the "real underlying causes" of the personalities and actions of individuals we don't acknowledge the individuals existence qua individual. Much of the work in psychology focuses on the damaging consequences of not being able to adequately develop a sense of self, and if you take the Mead/Blumer line of thinking seriously, then a sense of self depends largely on being recognized by others. As far as grades are concerned, I have to somewhat contradictory opinions. First, grades are always going to be a reflection of how well the student's performance matches the instructor's expectations, not the students merit per se. I was learning a lot of math in sixth grade, and knew more about the subject than my classmates, but I was not meeting the teachers expectations that I look like I was working hard in issolation. When I teach I usually start the class by revealing this dirty little secret to the students (many of whom have already figured that out) and then trying to be as accurate and specific as possible about what my expectations are. Second, we will always be judged by how well we meet the expectations of others (bosses, spouses, traffic cops), so it can be useful for students to learn that there are consequences for participating in an interaction that places expectations on them and not living up to them. Bad grades are not fatal. I failed a class in eighth grade, and I failed a class in college, and I still managed to graduate, find a job, get married, get into grad. school, and generally feel okay about myself. I also received one C+ in college that I really don't think I deserved, but to appeal my grade I would have had to go to the hospital where the instructor was following a nervous breakdown (I am not making this up). Somehow it didn't seem that important. I suggest that those of you who worry about the fact that students might not actually deserve the grade you assigned cut yourselves some slack. It is the pattern of grades in a transcript that matters, not a single grade, and that low grade you don't let that student complain his/her way out of may actually be a valuable part of their education. Bob Duniway, University of Washington (Where my high grades and faculty evaluations reflect a painfully developed work ethic.) From socgrad-relay@UCSD.EDU Thu May 26 12:11:44 1994 sendmail 8.6.9/UCSD-2.2-sun Thu, 26 May 1994 12:07:55 -0700 for socgrad-list Thu, 26 May 1994 12:07:53 -0700 for Date: Thu, 26 May 1994 11:59:50 -0700 (PDT) From: Laura Lee Adams Subject: Re: grades To: Steve Harvey I don't know if changing the system would do any good. Then we'd have even more inanity as a student complained that she got a 48 instead of a 49 in the class. It's maddening enough to have a student whine, rant, yell, and plead with you to change their grade from a B+ to an A- (when I already gave her the benefit of the doubt and probably gave her a B+ when she really deserved a B), but given time, students and teachers will adjust to any system, even a 1000 point system, so that there is a distinct sense of what a 980 means versus a 920 versus a 720. I know someone who graded on a 1000 point system and a student wouldn't leave him alone over 4 points on a mid-term. It's hopeless. The best we can do is let them know how to get an A and let them know why they didn't get one. A clear rationale (as well as giving them the benefit of the doubt) has been my best defense against whiners. -Laura A. From socgrad-relay@UCSD.EDU Thu May 26 13:07:57 1994 sendmail 8.6.9/UCSD-2.2-sun Thu, 26 May 1994 13:05:05 -0700 for socgrad-list Thu, 26 May 1994 13:04:56 -0700 for From: BREKHUS@zodiac.rutgers.edu Date: Thu, 26 May 1994 16:02:28 -0400 (EDT) Subject: minimizing grade complaints To: socgrad@UCSD.EDU I'd like to second the many people who've said be upfront early about your grading standards (also include a detailed description on the syllabus), and be as explicit as possible about what an "A" is "C" is etc. On papers it's good to say something like "This is a pretty good paper because.....however, to get an A you must also improve on.....and do the following." If you tell them exactly what they needed to do to get the next grade it's harder for them to complain if they didn't do it. You've set the terms of the debate by being explicit about what's missing. It's also a good idea to tell students that grades aren't a measure of their self-worth, their intelligence etc. They're simply a measure of how well they've met the expectations of a certain assignment. If you're going to grade hard then you need to offer a reason why students should take your class. I tell them the trade-off for my expecting more of them is that I will also put in extra effort (meaning I will arrange my schedule to meet with any student at a time they can meet, I will do everything possible to make the class interesting etc.) I tell them if they want an easy grade, there are enough classes that offer that..and if that's all they want they should take one of those classes and drop this one. After each assignment I also write down all student grades add them and write down their present course status at the bottom (what grade you would get if the semester ended today). Many students who complain at the end of the semester do so because they don't closely monitor their progress. IF you let them know every step of the way, their final grade is less likely to be a surprise. Besides you can then say "Look all along you've been doing D work and you've had plenty of opportunities during the semester to come talk to me, the semester's over now..it's too late to improve on this class etc." I also require students to meet with me twice a semester to discuss their progress. This allows them to talk about how they're doing...what grade they're getting during the semester. Finally, I state explicitly on the syllabus that if you're upset with how you're doing in the class, I will be glad to tell you what you need to do to improve your grade during the semester (and the earlier you come to me the better off you'll be). When the semester's over it's too late. Make this clear early on. It's also a good idea to grade some stuff very early in the semester so students can drop if they decide they don't want to put in the effort you require. In Intro classes I also show the movie "Stand and Deliver" when we do the chapter on education. One of the latent functions of this movie is to show the effectiveness of tough grading standards in getting students to live up to high expectations. Of course many of these suggestions require extra work that detract somewhat from more "important" things like our research, but if one expects students to do more than go through the motions of trying to get the best grade and take your class seriously, then one must also be willing to do more than go through the motions, and take their own class seriously. If we're only goingto treat teaching as a distraction from our research than it's hardly fair to expect students to treat our class as anything more than a distraction from their real college experience in clubs, and partys, and sporting events etc. Just a few rambling ideas... Wayne Brekhus--Rutgers From socgrad-relay@UCSD.EDU Thu May 26 13:35:40 1994 sendmail 8.6.9/UCSD-2.2-sun Thu, 26 May 1994 13:33:13 -0700 for socgrad-list Thu, 26 May 1994 13:33:10 -0700 for From: Melissa R Herman Subject: grades & the larger picture To: socgrad@UCSD.EDU (socgrad network) Date: Thu, 26 May 1994 13:33:07 -0700 (PDT) It seems to me that there are some larger issues involved in the grading debate--larger than what is fair, what is reasonable, how the student in a particular situation feels, etc. What is the social effect of grading policies? What message does it send to other high schools and to colleges if a high school eliminates the D? If we give Ds we legitimate credit for effort as well as correctness. We end up passing students who can't really do the work even though they tried hard. We make it impossible for employers to distinguish between competent high school graduates and incompetent ones-- nobody employing a HS grad looks at his/her transcript, after all. If a school passes/graduates too many incompetent people it should eventually weaken the value of the school's diploma for the competent people. Schools have financial incentives to give Ds if giving Ds keeps more students in school (although I don't know of any evidence that it does). The American public school system places great value on effort, staying in school regardless of what you learn (hopefully you'll eventually learn something if you stay in long enough), passing students along with their age-cohort so they don't lose self-esteem, and other things which have nothing to do with academic skills--or practical skills, for that matter. On a related topic, I must add that Stanford has the worst grade inflation I've ever seen (in my admittedly limited experience). We don't have F's. That is, when a student fails a course it just disappears from her transcript and it's as though she never took it. She can take it again for a new grade, but she doesn't have to. This setup causes students to beg for an F whenever they think they're going to get a D. The university's reasoning (which, I should mention, is under reconsideration at the moment) is that a transcript should reflect a student's "academic progress." Not failure. Does anyone else find this disturbing? -- Melissa Herman manoki@leland.stanford.edu Department of Sociology Stanford University From socgrad-relay@UCSD.EDU Thu May 26 14:57:03 1994 sendmail 8.6.9/UCSD-2.2-sun Thu, 26 May 1994 14:53:00 -0700 for socgrad-list Thu, 26 May 1994 14:52:55 -0700 for Date: Thu, 26 May 94 17:41:47 EDT From: Joya Misra Organization: Emory University - Atlanta, Georgia, USA Subject: GRADES To: SOCGRAD@UCSD.EDU I think I stole this idea from Dan (from whom I also stole the essay- grading he posted once), but I have students write a paragraph or two explaining why they think they deserve more points on their paper/test/ etc. if they feel that they do. This forces the student to make a well- developed argument, allows me to write comments explaining why I accept or reject this argument, and allows me to avoid having the student *in my face* with his/her complaints. It seems to work pretty well, especially because I also let them know that when they ask me to re- evaluate their grade, I may decrease their points if their "argument" convinces me that their understanding of the issue is actually less than I initially thought. In practice, grades rarely change, either up or down, but students seem to really appreciate the fact that I have a structure in place to address these kinds of concerns. joya From socgrad-relay@UCSD.EDU Thu May 26 15:51:46 1994 sendmail 8.6.9/UCSD-2.2-sun Thu, 26 May 1994 15:50:11 -0700 for socgrad-list Thu, 26 May 1994 15:50:06 -0700 for Date: Thu, 26 May 1994 18:54:37 -0500 To: socgrad@UCSD.EDU From: danryan@minerva.cis.yale.edu (Dan Ryan) Subject: Stanford's lack of Fs content-length: 1184 Melissa writes >...I must add that Stanford has the worst grade inflation...We don't have >F's. That is, when a student fails a course it just disappears from her >transcript and it's as though she never took it. She can take it again for >a new grade, but she doesn't have to. This setup causes students to beg >for an F whenever they think they're going to get a D. The university's >reasoning (which, I should mention, is under reconsideration at the moment) >is that a transcript should reflect a student's "academic progress." >Not failure. Does anyone else find this disturbing? On the one hand, it sounds like a poorly thought out compromise (some systems should be replaced, not fixed). On the other, perhaps one shouldn't care. Students will probably learn something the next time. I'd definitely not entertain any F requests except in writing (how many folks want to go on record?). I'm all in favor of only recording "successes" (having gone to a completely nongraded college), but I think it needs to be coupled with a simplifying of the scale at the other end (such as satisfactory/competent and excellent, or something like that). DJR From socgrad-relay@UCSD.EDU Thu May 26 15:51:50 1994 sendmail 8.6.9/UCSD-2.2-sun Thu, 26 May 1994 15:50:04 -0700 for socgrad-list Thu, 26 May 1994 15:49:59 -0700 for Date: Thu, 26 May 1994 18:54:29 -0500 To: socgrad@UCSD.EDU From: danryan@minerva.cis.yale.edu (Dan Ryan) Subject: Written grade petitions and judgement content-length: 2749 A quick followup on Joya's note. An added advantage of requiring grade change requests in writing is that -- even apart from the "it could also lower your grade" caveat (which I've used, but am still meditating on the wisdom (and necessity) of) -- it balances costs and potential benefits a little... In the usual arrangement, you teach, student works (or doesn't), exam or paper is graded, student complains after class, in office hours, or on your answering machine. And why not? Whining is easy and sometimes it works (a near zero investment produces potential big payoff -- the junk bonds of teaching and learning). I explain that I'm much less likely to think carefully about a petition and much more likely to come up with a bogus defense of my grade when I'm put on the spot than when I can read over their request when I have the time set aside to do so. (Students seemed to appreciate this admission.) I make clear that the petition has to convince me that the answer or paper meets the assignment better than the grade suggests I think it does, not just say they think it was better than the grade or that they feel I screwed them over. This process is helped by having passed out a sheet on which I specify which of my judgements correspond to what grade. For example, on a short answer, I might say that 4 = A better answer than I could come up with 3 = On the mark, complete and correct. 2 = Suggests understanding without clear demonstration 1 = Suggests misunderstanding without clear demonstration 0 = Demonstrates misunderstanding, lack of knowledge, etc. This way, the grade I give is an expression of a judgement I've made and the student knows just what that judgement is and thus just what s/he has to argue against in the petition. Sometimes I mention that making judgements I'm willing to stand by is part of what I'm paid for. A side benefit is that sometimes students have enlightening experience of trying to defend the indefensible and realising that they really could write things much more clearly. Other times, they actually learn the material better by trying to prove that what they wrote really does say what it was supposed to. Cheers, Dan P.S. I favor the above type point schema over the "points for mentioning this, points for mentioning that" approach because, I think, it makes optimal use of what I'm good at, making judgements, rather than concealing my judgements behind a cloak of faux objectivity. Another way to look at it is that it reproduces one notion of open public discourse in the grading process, rather than pretending that that process is somehow akin to measuring weight or height. From socgrad-relay@UCSD.EDU Thu May 26 16:28:51 1994 sendmail 8.6.9/UCSD-2.2-sun Thu, 26 May 1994 16:23:19 -0700 for socgrad-list Thu, 26 May 1994 16:23:18 -0700 for From: tombrown@cats.ucsc.edu Date: Thu, 26 May 1994 16:23:15 -0700 To: manoki@leland.stanford.edu, socgrad@UCSD.EDU Subject: Re: grades & the larger picture Melissa writes: On a related topic, I must add that Stanford has the worst grade inflation I've ever seen (in my admittedly limited experience). We don't have F's. That is, when a student fails a course it just disappears from her transcript and it's as though she never took it. She can take it again for a new grade, but she doesn't have to. This setup causes students to beg for an F whenever they think they're going to get a D. The university's reasoning (which, I should mention, is under reconsideration at the moment) is that a transcript should reflect a student's "academic progress." Not failure. Does anyone else find this disturbing? ========================================================== Not at all. I see no reason to record an individual's failures as long as they do no harm to others. The only reason to do so seems unnecessarily punitive to me. Are we really in the business of stigmatizing young people? Remember that college students are not only engaged in scholarly endeavors, they are also undergoing a maturation process. Some mature faster than others. Reward students for being responsible and mastering their assignments. But why punish them for taking a little longer to grow up? Believe me, failing a class, being placed on academic probation, or having to drop out of college is punishment enough, without having the school further stigmatize them for life by recording their failures as they passed through post-adolescence. From socgrad-relay@UCSD.EDU Fri May 27 06:52:43 1994 sendmail 8.6.9/UCSD-2.2-sun Fri, 27 May 1994 06:50:45 -0700 for socgrad-list Fri, 27 May 1994 06:50:43 -0700 for From: blovitts@nsf.gov To: SOCGRAD@UCSD.EDU, Steve Harvey Subject: Re: grades Date: 27 May 94 09:37 EST I'm replying to the issues put forth by Steve in the following paragraph: If everybody is scored on a continuum (of course, a continuum approximated by discrete integers, but more "continuous" than letter grades), then future employers or grad departments or St. Peter or whoever will have a precise measure (suspending for the time being any discussion of the arbitrariness of the evaluations in the first place) by which to compare candidates. A GPA of 22 out of 100 (.22) is pretty dismal, and it doesn't really matter whether having any points at all wrongly indicates some mastery of material that the student really never mastered at all. The .22 tells the story clearly enough (as does, in fact, a GPA of 1.5 in the present system). Such a system of fine gradation has several advantages: It allows the truly excellent to be distinquished from the very good (unlike now, where a fairly broad range of talent is indistinguishable in the "straight A" category). It eliminates the bogus concept of "failure," and replaces it with "relatively poor performance" (I think it's less offensive, truer, and more appropriate to designate someone as "about this talented on a continuum of the range of talent found in this society" rather than "a failure"). And it creates stronger incentives from top to bottom: Everybody knows that every point counts. It may also (though this is certainly debatable) reduce anxiety: there are no abrupt thresholds to worry about. One point here or there *is always* just one point. This is all well and good if students had an _incentive_ to get good grades, but the reality is employeers do not look at grades much less ask for transcripts (I can point you to references, and even horror stories of a company that did request transcripts from high schools and had an amazingly low compliance rate) when making hiring decisions and open admissions policies at some colleges guarantees that anyone holding a diploma can be admitted to some college somewhere. I'll grant Steve the benefit that he did not hear the piece on Taft High School, but the issue is a bit more fundamental than construed by Steve for teachers who have to decide whether or not to pass a high school student with a D who cannot write a grammatical sentence. Passing them with a 1.0 is a disservice to both the student and to society. The argument that I was making with respect to Ds versus Cs, is that Cs do represent some form of mastery, Ds are often awarded for showing up and handing in some assignments, which in many cases are sub-subsatisfactory and do not represent mastery of the course material. Is awarding a student credit for something the student did not truly accomplish fair to the student? There are a lot of illiterate adults in our society who, in retrospect, have become very bitter with a system that kept on passing them through and graduated them without the fundamental skills to compete in our society? Barbara From socgrad-relay@UCSD.EDU Fri May 27 07:13:08 1994 sendmail 8.6.9/UCSD-2.2-sun Fri, 27 May 1994 07:10:48 -0700 for socgrad-list Fri, 27 May 1994 07:10:46 -0700 for From: S-ENDER@bss1.umd.edu Fri, 27 May 94 10:10:44 +1100 Organization: University of Maryland,College Park To: socgrad@UCSD.EDU Date: Fri, 27 May 1994 10:10:12 EDT Subject: Re: grades & the larger picture i too think there is another, more latent issue here with grades; i'll call it socialization...let's be reflexive for a moment...isn't the goal in many of our social problem and introductory soc courses to implicate groups, organizations and social structures as social forces that impede the healthy social development of individuals, groups, organizations and social structures? by the end of a semester (quarter), we hope we've influenced our students enough to think socially and indeed question the authority of groups, orgs, and structures...then, faced perhaps with their first opportunity to change the system (change their grade), we shoot them down with our rationalized and bureacratic *fairness*...might it not be better to simply, after a little struggle, let them *win* the negotiation for a higher grade? might this not be a lesson in itself (especially for working class background students who are less apt to question authority)? am i being naive? morten From socgrad-relay@UCSD.EDU Fri May 27 07:17:17 1994 sendmail 8.6.9/UCSD-2.2-sun Fri, 27 May 1994 07:15:09 -0700 for socgrad-list Fri, 27 May 1994 07:15:06 -0700 for From: blovitts@nsf.gov To: socgrad network , Melissa R Herman Subject: Re: grades & the larger picture Date: 27 May 94 10:08 EST On a related topic, I must add that Stanford has the worst grade inflation I've ever seen (in my admittedly limited experience). We don't have F's. That is, when a student fails a course it just disappears from her transcript and it's as though she never took it. She can take it again for a new grade, but she doesn't have to. This setup causes students to beg for an F whenever they think they're going to get a D. The university's reasoning (which, I should mention, is under reconsideration at the moment) is that a transcript should reflect a student's "academic progress." Not failure. Does anyone else find this disturbing? The benefit or lack thereof, ultimately rests with the motivations of the student. Let me join the other respondents with a personal story. I was a psychology major in college. During my senior year I took a nonmajors economics course because I didn't know anything about economics and wanted to learn something. The course was taught by an instructor who didn't believe in using a textbook or any other supporting material, just his pearls of wisdom. Needless to say, I didn't do all that well in the class -- actually I was getting Cs. As I was graduate school bound and didn't want to mess up my GPA, I went to see the instructor about the situation. I did NOT ask that my grade be increased -- I was getting what I probably deserved -- I simply stated my case that I was taking the course because I genuinely wanted to learn something about something I knew nothing about and didn't want to be penalized for it. The bargain we struck was if my final grade was a C or less than I would get a Pass instead of a letter grade and therefore my GPA would not be adversely affected -- I got a "P" in the course. Moral: The non-use of the F allows students to take academic "risks" for the sake of knowledge (which hopefully was the intent of the policy), but unfortunately the unintended consequence is also abuse of the system. Barbara From socgrad-relay@UCSD.EDU Fri May 27 07:48:41 1994 sendmail 8.6.9/UCSD-2.2-sun Fri, 27 May 1994 07:46:58 -0700 for socgrad-list Fri, 27 May 1994 07:46:56 -0700 for From: LEE@cati.umd.edu Fri, 27 May 94 10:46:53 +1100 Organization: Survey Research Center, UMCP To: socgrad@UCSD.EDU Date: Fri, 27 May 1994 10:46:33 EDT Subject: grades Performance on tests is not necessarily a good measure of what a student learns or how they are changed by participating in a college course. Reflecting on my own experience, the vast majority of information, facts, figures and so forth I had to reproduce on hundreds of tests as an undergraduate was relatively unimportant compared to simple lessons and values that were never tested (or are simply untestable or ungradable). The most significant personal changes and life-changing ideas I experienced as an undergraduate sometimes only revealed themselves to me and how I was effected by them over a period of months, years, or continuously meshing with new things I'm learning everyday. Ex post facto grading? And also, some people are just good test-takers while others are not. A psychology professor (Stuart Katz) at U. of Georgia has done some interesting research on test-taking. Although I don't recall the details, he found in one study a situation something like over half the undergraduates who had only the responses from SAT verbal questions to review answered "correctly" a high percentage of the time without having to see the question. I suppose when I teach my first class in the fall I will be flexible (and probably "easy") in grading because in the long run grades are more political than reflective of what happened to the student. I am going to try my best to earnestly communicate the message---and facilitate the definition of the situation in class--- that we must be students rather than just pupils. Pupils vie after grades, students focus on learning. I know, really idealist maybe, can't escape the grading game, but hey---it's an ideal that I expect will help keep me on the emphasis of what we are all in the classroom for rather than expending too much energy on evaluation that in the long run doesn't speak much about the substance of change experienced. Lee Martin From socgrad-relay@UCSD.EDU Fri May 27 08:17:44 1994 sendmail 8.6.9/UCSD-2.2-sun Fri, 27 May 1994 08:16:10 -0700 for socgrad-list Fri, 27 May 1994 08:16:06 -0700 for Date: Fri, 27 May 94 10:24:25 EDT From: Steve Harvey Subject: grades and graduations To: SOCGRAD@UCSD.EDU I should have made myself more clear: I was musing over a conceivable alterna- tive system, which would then generate alternative reactions to and uses of that system. If there were no discrete grades, no failures, and no question of whether one "graduates" or fails to graduate, then diplomas become meaningless in and of themselves. Again, I was outlining a system in which all students are simply evaluated on a continuum: By "no discrete grades," I also imply a reduction in the importance of discrete degrees. All one would have to do to "graduate" high school is stay enrolled for four years (which is close enough to the way it is now to not much matter). But by making this de jure rather than de facto, colleges and employers would know that the most relevant information at their disposal is the students score (along with teacher comments, etc.). Colleges that now take in anyone with a high school diploma can continue to take in anyone who has reached that age. I see nothing wrong with that. The US has one of the highest levels of enrollment in higher education of any country because we do have such low standards, and that's fine, because employers know that different degrees from different colleges have different meanings. In the meantime, everybody has access to as much education as they want. Why not? We can apply the same system to college. There would no longer be any question of graduating or not graduating. There would only be a score, and after you have compeleted a minimum set of requirements, you can apply to the next level, or go out into the work force. Again, employers would know that a diploma has no special meaning, only the score does, and people would be widely distributed along the range of possible scores. This is far more informationally rich than the present system, and eliminates many of the dysfunctions of the present system that Barbara is addressing. A prospective employer would look at a number which represents the student's overall performance throughout that stage of education, not at whether or not that student sat through that stage of education. In fact, a student who did not complete all requirements (say, spent three years in college) but obtained a very high score for those three years would look better on paper than a student who *did* complete all requirements but had an abysmal score, as it should be. The arbitrary distinctions would be eliminated, and even the arbitrariness of grades is reduced, since with such fine gradation there is more opportunity for statistical "normalization" of all the separate arbitrary grades an individual receives. Frankly, *if* we choose to go with a system which evaluates and rewards individual performance, then I think it's clear that the system I've outlined is more rational (and more effective) than the system that now exists. It provides prospective employers with more information about the relative scholastic performance of prospective employees at no additional cost of effort to the employer; it "shuffles" no one throught the system, because "getting through" is no longer the salient consideration; it rewards students precisely for their effort (rather than dumping them in sprawling and meaningless categories of performance, which, as I know from personal experience, can be a definite disincentive to working hard). Now, I'm not arguing that the system I've outlined is necessarily preferable to the one that now exists, nor that there may not be alternative values that need to be considered. It could be that it is precisely the "failings" of the present system which make it preferable to the more rational system I've outlined. It may be that we don't want to create too precise a system of evaluation and differentiation, because it contributes to the over-competitive and stress-laden nature of our social world. It may be that we want to temper such considerations of incentives and evaluations with considerations of facil- itating an ability to kick back and enjoy life (after all, what's the purpose of it all if we don't enjoy it as much as possible?). It may be that the very sloppiness of the present system keeps it "human" (and humane). What I'm proposing may be just one more bar in Weber's iron cage. On the other hand, the iron cage, in the end, may turn out to be a portal into a deeper and richer liberation of spirit and celebration of life, as we increasingly discover that human creativity is our most vital resource, and continue to find ways not to squander it. Steve harvey@uconnvm From socgrad-relay@UCSD.EDU Fri May 27 08:24:12 1994 sendmail 8.6.9/UCSD-2.2-sun Fri, 27 May 1994 08:22:42 -0700 for socgrad-list Fri, 27 May 1994 08:22:37 -0700 for From: BREKHUS@zodiac.rutgers.edu Date: Fri, 27 May 1994 11:20:01 -0400 (EDT) Subject: The grade of "D" To: socgrad@UCSD.EDU My hunch is the only effect of eliminating the "D" grade will be that more students who haven't mastered the material will receive C's instead of F's rather than D's instead of F's. If we change the grading scale we've done nothing to address the "real" problem. The problem isn't a poor grading system, it's that instructors and institutions find it easier to pass unsatisfactory students who put in a decent effort than failing them. Taft's attempts to eliminate the grade of "D" appear to be little more than a cynical way of avoiding addressing the more fundamental problems. Minor tinkering with the grading system allows them to avoid addressing the merits of measuring a school's success by it's drop out rate, and allows Taft to deflect blame away from itself and its instructor's and on to a "faulty grading system." Just another example of tinkering for "impression management" while avoiding addressing any real issues. Wayne Brekhus From socgrad-relay@UCSD.EDU Fri May 27 08:55:01 1994 sendmail 8.6.9/UCSD-2.2-sun Fri, 27 May 1994 08:52:33 -0700 for socgrad-list Fri, 27 May 1994 08:52:27 -0700 for From: BREKHUS@zodiac.rutgers.edu Date: Fri, 27 May 1994 11:51:38 -0400 (EDT) Subject: letting students win the negotiation To: socgrad@UCSD.EDU Morten, Letting students win would give them the misleading impression that peaceful pluralism by a person/group with limited social power against a group/person with substantially more social power is the most effective way to acheive social change. I usually assign an article called "The Meek Don't Make It" by Gamson that uses a study of 70 some protest movements to show that groups with less power are most effective when they make the costs/risks of maintaining present conditions so high to the powerful that the costs instigated by the protestors begin to outweigh the benefits of not giving into the protestors demands. In the real world of social change one must be able to organize others to the cause, and willing to fight like hell So if a student organized a mass picket around my office, or a sit down strike in my office, or developed a small well-armed regiment and stormed my office I would be dutifully impressed that they had learned something about social change and I would change their grade : ). Wayne Brekhus Rutgers From socgrad-relay@UCSD.EDU Fri May 27 09:03:49 1994 sendmail 8.6.9/UCSD-2.2-sun Fri, 27 May 1994 09:02:19 -0700 for socgrad-list Fri, 27 May 1994 09:02:17 -0700 for From: blovitts@nsf.gov To: SOCGRAD@UCSD.EDU, Steve Harvey Subject: Re: grades and graduations Date: 27 May 94 11:52 EST Text item: Text_1 Okay Steve, for the sake of argument, all the issues you have been raising about grades are about an ideal system in an ideal world. However, in numerous posts you have argued with needing to start with the system as it is and move it toward and ideal state. Can you bring these two positions into harmony on the issue at hand? Barbara From socgrad-relay@UCSD.EDU Fri May 27 09:28:47 1994 sendmail 8.6.9/UCSD-2.2-sun Fri, 27 May 1994 09:27:14 -0700 for socgrad-list Fri, 27 May 1994 09:27:12 -0700 for Date: Fri, 27 May 1994 09:27:06 -0700 (PDT) From: Robert Duniway Subject: Re: grades To: LEE@cati.umd.edu On Fri, 27 May 1994 LEE@cati.umd.edu wrote: > I suppose when I teach my first class in the fall I will be > flexible (and probably "easy") in grading because in the long run > grades are more political than reflective of what happened to the > student. I am going to try my best to earnestly communicate the > message---and facilitate the definition of the situation in class--- > that we must be students rather than just pupils. Pupils vie after > grades, students focus on learning. I know, really idealist maybe, > can't escape the grading game, but hey---it's an ideal that I expect > will help keep me on the emphasis of what we are all in the classroom > for rather than expending too much energy on evaluation that in the > long run doesn't speak much about the substance of change experienced. Lee, Be sure to let us know how it turns out. Maybe I'm a bit too cynical, but I suspect you will find much resistance to your changing of the situation definition. Some of your students will respond, and some will simply spend less time working in your class since they can receive the grade they are used to without much effort. Bob Duniway, University of Washington From socgrad-relay@UCSD.EDU Fri May 27 09:37:18 1994 sendmail 8.6.9/UCSD-2.2-sun Fri, 27 May 1994 09:35:18 -0700 for socgrad-list Fri, 27 May 1994 09:35:13 -0700 for Date: Fri, 27 May 94 12:24:58 EDT From: Steve Harvey Subject: response to Barbara To: SOCGRAD@UCSD.EDU I'm not proposing "an ideal system in an ideal world," but rather an ideal (type) system in *the real world*, exactly as it is. None of my suggests assume a world that doesn't exist. I don't assume that people are ready to leap into self-effacing communal relationships; I don't assume students are going to suddenly be driven by the beauty and wonder of existence; I don't assume that we are about to allocate responsibilities and rewards according to some magically algorithm which transcends present methods. Rather, I assume that people will be driven by the same types of incentives that they are presently driven, and conjecture as to what institutional framework will best align those individual incentives with collective well-being. I have always argued that there are two basic components to social innovation: 1) identifying in precise terms, with careful consideration of social dynamics according to basic underlying assumptions of human behavior, a viable and effective social institutional innovation, and 2) identifying political processes by which such an innovation can be realized, given the real interests of all relevant actors. In my recent posts, I have engaged in #1, admittedly the easier of the two. That is entirely consistent with the agenda I have always presented. Steve harvey@uconnvm From socgrad-relay@UCSD.EDU Fri May 27 09:46:39 1994 sendmail 8.6.9/UCSD-2.2-sun Fri, 27 May 1994 09:44:31 -0700 for socgrad-list Fri, 27 May 1994 09:44:29 -0700 for From: SarahT@aol.com To: SOCGRAD@UCSD.EDU Date: Fri, 27 May 94 12:43:52 EDT Subject: Re: Grades I have not had a lot of problems with students requesting grade changes. I have not taught my own courses, but have done most of the grading for some courses I TA'd for. I make it a policy to make *lots* of comments on quizzes and exams. If a student loses even one point on a question, I write a short comment about what they needed to do in order to make that point. Even the best exams have red markings all over them. ;> There have been only 2 cases where students have come to me about their grade. In both cases, the student wanted 1 extra point on 1 question on the exam. In one case, the student had squished up their writing into a small space so that it was difficult to interpret (I hate that). She deciphered it for me, and ended up with another point. The other student came to my office, sat down, and "explained" what they were saying in their answer. I pointed out to them that had they written their eloquently spoken statement into their exam, they surely would have gotten maximum points. I couldn't, however, give maximum points based only on their written answer. While writing lots of comments on exams takes extra time, it has helped me make sure that a) students know exactly where they stand on that exam, b) students have information showing them where their weak points are in the course so they can better prepare for the next exam, and c) the points I give out on questions are realistic and reflect my expectations for the question. In the middle of grading a huge exam, I remind myself how annoying it was as an undergrad to get back an exam with a 'B' and no comments at all explaining where this grade came from. Keep discussing this, folks, I'm learning lots of good stuff about grading in courses... the day is fast approaching that I'll be teaching one of my own. :) Sarah Tarpley Cornell University saraht@aol.com From socgrad-relay@UCSD.EDU Fri May 27 09:49:14 1994 sendmail 8.6.9/UCSD-2.2-sun Fri, 27 May 1994 09:47:47 -0700 for socgrad-list Fri, 27 May 1994 09:47:41 -0700 for Date: Fri, 27 May 94 12:42:29 EDT From: Steve Harvey Subject: teaching To: SOCGRAD@UCSD.EDU On a different note, I emphasize on the first day of class several things, such as that learning is a participant sport, that everybody embarasses themselves when they participate and noone else really cares or remembers a day latter (and, with little effort, I manage to demonstrate what I mean), and that if students "get into it" the grades will take care of themselves and the student's life will be far more pleasant. When students complain to me about grades, I always give them a break if they have any decent point to make, and I always emphasize that one grade on one test isn't really as important as they think it is, and isn't really worth as much stress as it causes. Steve From socgrad-relay@UCSD.EDU Fri May 27 10:28:48 1994 sendmail 8.6.9/UCSD-2.2-sun Fri, 27 May 1994 10:26:21 -0700 for socgrad-list Fri, 27 May 1994 10:26:17 -0700 for Date: Fri, 27 May 94 13:14:20 EDT From: Steve Harvey Subject: culture and politics To: SOCGRAD@UCSD.EDU Since Barbara brought up my "agenda," I thought I'd clarify that I actually have two interrelated agendas when it comes to social change, one political and the other cultural. Though the two are intertwined and ultimately converge, there is reason to make a conceptual distinction between them. My political agenda, as I stated, is one of incremental reform through the identification of viable institutional innovations and viable means of implementing them. My cultural agenda involves sparking the human imagination wherever and whenever possible. The latter only affects our real conditions in life when it translates into the former (or, usually tragically, translates into an attempt to "break with history"), and the former contributes to human (and perhaps Gaian) development to the extent that it is inspired by the latter. -Steve harvey@uconnvm From socgrad-relay@UCSD.EDU Fri May 27 12:09:18 1994 sendmail 8.6.9/UCSD-2.2-sun Fri, 27 May 1994 12:07:13 -0700 for socgrad-list Fri, 27 May 1994 12:07:06 -0700 for Fri, 27 May 94 12:07:05 GMT-7 To: socgrad@UCSD.EDU From: "KARRY" Organization: Urban and Public Affairs Date: Fri, 27 May 1994 12:07:08 PST Subject: Sociology of religion X-pmrqc: 1 I'm very interested in the sociology of religion, particularly Protestant denominationalism in the United States. If anyone can help me with information or ideas please send them to me. Lets talk. Karry From socgrad-relay@UCSD.EDU Fri May 27 16:29:47 1994 sendmail 8.6.9/UCSD-2.2-sun Fri, 27 May 1994 16:27:15 -0700 for socgrad-list Fri, 27 May 1994 16:27:14 -0700 for Date: Fri, 27 May 1994 16:25:23 -0700 (PDT) From: Jiannbin Lee Shiao Subject: Re: The Original Grade Post and The Grade of "D" To: Sociology Graduate Student List Wow, when I posted that original story about my incident, I had no idea we'd be discussing it at such length! :-) To clarify matters about why the student's grade was an A- and not an A: it basically came down to his attendance record, not his intellectual work per se. In fact, his exams and papers were very good, but his attendance was really bad. Last summer he demanded to know what days I thought he had missed. I agreed with him that if he had doctor's notes or other legitimate excuses that then the attendence portion of his section grade needed to be lifted, so I gave him the list of dates. He never came back with the excuses. Instead, he now calls me out for being "inflexible". I agree with the posts about clear initial expectations, as well as with the poster who admits to his/her class that its meeting expectations, not merit, that governs their grades. "Which is why" at the beginning of the course, I created and handed out to all my students a one page single spaced policy statement on how their section grade would be calculated so that they knew I was not going to play favorites. 1/3 for weekly journals, 1/3 for group presentation, and 1/3 for attendence, with the expectations for each grading level (A/B/C) laid out for each third of the section grade. Despite all my efforts, however, I still feel responsible for his rather strategic incomprehension about his grade. I think this is why I systematize and explain everything about the grades I give; I have an overdeveloped sense of (or irrational compulsion for) responsibility. :-( On 26 May 1994 blovitts@nsf.gov wrote: > As a little background, the school has adopted outcomes based > education and initially dropped the "D" as a grading option since, in > effect, any student who "earns" a D has not mastered the material. I think I've used and been encouraged to use the "D" grade as something BELOW an "F". An F allows a student to retake the class, while a D eliminates that option. Thus, I've used the D for students who think they can get by without attending any sections, turning in papers that are obviously taken from another class, and still expect to pass. So yes, I pass them (if they take the letter grade option), but with a D. For example, I once had a student who turned in a paper he had written for another class the previous semester. What boggles my mind is that in that previous class, I was his TA. HUH? tha j'ster From socgrad-relay@UCSD.EDU Fri May 27 21:23:58 1994 sendmail 8.6.9/UCSD-2.2-sun Fri, 27 May 1994 21:23:03 -0700 for socgrad-list Fri, 27 May 1994 21:23:02 -0700 for Subject: simplicity is God To: socgrad@UCSD.EDU Date: Fri, 27 May 1994 23:23:00 -0500 (CDT) From: "John J. Maurer" WHOA! We Sociologists are a bit wordy, whew! Believe me, I'm not pointing fingers here. I am also guilty of hoopla. Whenever I've taken a non-soc writing course I've gotten the third degree for choosing the long road over the short path. My God I'm finally realizing we're all the same. I'm sure I'll get flamed for this but sometimes it's humbling to be a bit critical of ourselves. This critique does not necessarily reflect the recent and sometimes wordy discussion on Grades and TA'ing. But occassionally it has reminded me of the frustration I've sometimes felt when reading some theorists work. This is also often the very reason I've avoided textbooks (even in lower level courses) whenever possible. Often the author of the writing will often see how many times one can say the same thing. It assumes the reader is an idiot and gives them little oppurtunity to reflect on the discourse and formulate ideas from it. This is not to say that it is not sometimes necessary to take a little time to explain an idea in a little more depth. But, sometimes, I get the feeling an author is formulating their own ideas as they write, filling in the blank spots with bullshit (definition of bullshit: saying ANYTHING with no regard to whether what is said has any hint of empirical truth or hypothesis). Another thing that can sometimes piss me off is, when someone will change their position in mid-sentence/thought and say something along the lines of "uh, what I just said probably isn't true, I was just playing around with the idea". If the reasons behind such copouts is lack of self-assuredness then for God's sake get some guts or shut up. I truly hope this doesn't offend anybody. I have just been guilty of some of the things I've been bitching about. uh, I guess what I just said really isn't true, I was just venting ============================================================================= Simplicity is God- Einstein? You have two ears and one mouth, listen twice as much as you speak. -anonymous Sioux woman ============================================================================= From socgrad-relay@UCSD.EDU Fri May 27 22:06:25 1994 sendmail 8.6.9/UCSD-2.2-sun Fri, 27 May 1994 22:05:13 -0700 for socgrad-list Fri, 27 May 1994 22:05:11 -0700 for Subject: Re: The Original Grade Post and The Grade of "D" To: pachinko@uclink.berkeley.edu (Jiannbin Lee Shiao) Date: Sat, 28 May 1994 00:05:07 -0500 (CDT) From: "John J. Maurer" > Wow, when I posted that original story about my incident, I had no idea > we'd be discussing it at such length! :-) To clarify matters about why > the student's grade was an A- and not an A: it basically came down to his > attendance record, not his intellectual work per se. In fact, his exams > and papers were very good, but his attendance was really bad. You've got to be kidding me? A college student skipped class? Unfriggin'believable! It's a good thing you showed him! HelllOoooo? I'm sorry but, what the hell are you thinking? If a student misses class usually they are already punished by their grades suffering from missing important discussions. If he was able to still show recallable knowledge from the class then so be it. This New info you just gave me shed's your specific argument in a whole new light for me . I believe you were wrong for what you did and although I may not have gone as far is student did show such understanding of the course then, it wasn't the material that was causing him to skip class. Perhaps it was the way it was being taught. I don't believe you sound like a "bad" instructor, you are probably either following administration rules and regs. or you may just feel frustrated at wanting to teach to a repeatingly absent audience. It's a common mistake. I want to stress this is not a personal shot at you, I just have conflicting views on this common approach of instructors who rightfully feel frustrated at students who put their education second when it comes to investing their time. If you feel you have to have some way to "encourage" students to come to class, structure your course to have a few pop quizzes that are announced one class time in advance. This way the student will perhaps reconsider skipping so often. Just my opinion-jm Last summer he demanded to know what days I thought he had missed. I agreed with him > that if he had doctor's notes or other legitimate excuses that then the > attendence portion of his section grade needed to be lifted, so I gave him > the list of dates. He never came back with the excuses. Instead, he now > calls me out for being "inflexible". > > I agree with the posts about clear initial expectations, as well as with > the poster who admits to his/her class that its meeting expectations, not > merit, that governs their grades. "Which is why" at the beginning of the > course, I created and handed out to all my students a one page single > spaced policy statement on how their section grade would be calculated so > that they knew I was not going to play favorites. 1/3 for weekly > journals, 1/3 for group presentation, and 1/3 for attendence, with the > expectations for each grading level (A/B/C) laid out for each third of the > section grade. Despite all my efforts, however, I still feel responsible > for his rather strategic incomprehension about his grade. From socgrad-relay@UCSD.EDU Sat May 28 09:35:39 1994 sendmail 8.6.9/UCSD-2.2-sun Sat, 28 May 1994 09:31:39 -0700 for socgrad-list Sat, 28 May 1994 09:31:38 -0700 for Date: Sat, 28 May 94 11:31:07 CDT From: "Doug Goodman" To: socgrad@UCSD.EDU Subject: Subscription info Please tell me how to subscribe to your discussion list for graduate students in Sociology. Thanks Doug Goodman dougg@molbio.cbs.umn.edu From socgrad-relay@UCSD.EDU Sat May 28 09:36:51 1994 sendmail 8.6.9/UCSD-2.2-sun Sat, 28 May 1994 09:35:27 -0700 for socgrad-list Sat, 28 May 1994 09:35:26 -0700 for Date: Sat, 28 May 94 11:34:56 CDT From: "Doug Goodman" To: socgrad@UCSD.EDU Subject: No Subject subscribe Foucault dougg@molbio.cbs.umn.edu From socgrad-relay@UCSD.EDU Sat May 28 09:40:21 1994 sendmail 8.6.9/UCSD-2.2-sun Sat, 28 May 1994 09:38:46 -0700 for socgrad-list Sat, 28 May 1994 09:38:45 -0700 for Date: Sat, 28 May 94 11:38:14 CDT From: "Doug Goodman" To: socgrad@UCSD.EDU Subject: No Subject subscribe habermas dougg@molbio.cbs.umn.edu From socgrad-relay@UCSD.EDU Sat May 28 09:40:46 1994 sendmail 8.6.9/UCSD-2.2-sun Sat, 28 May 1994 09:39:24 -0700 for socgrad-list Sat, 28 May 1994 09:39:22 -0700 for Date: Sat, 28 May 94 11:38:52 CDT From: "Doug Goodman" To: socgrad@UCSD.EDU Subject: No Subject subscribe sociology dougg@molbio.cbs.umn.edu From socgrad-relay@UCSD.EDU Sat May 28 09:42:21 1994 sendmail 8.6.9/UCSD-2.2-sun Sat, 28 May 1994 09:40:41 -0700 for socgrad-list Sat, 28 May 1994 09:40:39 -0700 for Date: Sat, 28 May 94 11:40:08 CDT From: "Doug Goodman" To: socgrad@UCSD.EDU Subject: No Subject subscribe Adorno dougg@molbio.cbs.umn.edu From socgrad-relay@UCSD.EDU Sat May 28 10:01:25 1994 sendmail 8.6.9/UCSD-2.2-sun Sat, 28 May 1994 10:00:21 -0700 for socgrad-list Sat, 28 May 1994 10:00:19 -0700 for Date: Sat, 28 May 94 13:00 EDT From: "I don't think this will reduce confusion" Subject: Re: No Subject To: dougg@molbio.cbs.umn.edu Hey! Stop it! Your not subscribing to the list, rather you are filling up our mail spools. If I remembered I'd tell you how to subscribe to the list. Try sending the same stuff to Majordomo@_______ wherever the home server is. Jetaway Dave From socgrad-relay@UCSD.EDU Sat May 28 11:21:45 1994 sendmail 8.6.9/UCSD-2.2-sun Sat, 28 May 1994 11:20:23 -0700 for socgrad-list Sat, 28 May 1994 11:20:21 -0700 for From: S-ENDER@bss1.umd.edu Sat, 28 May 94 14:20:19 +1100 Organization: University of Maryland,College Park To: socgrad@UCSD.EDU Date: Sat, 28 May 1994 14:20:00 EDT Subject: Re: The Original Grade Post and The Grade of "D" >the student's grade was an A- and not an A: it basically came down to >his attendance record, not his intellectual work per se. In fact, >his exams and papers were very good, but his attendance was really >bad. do any schools have a policy on attendance? if attendance is soooo important, how can we justify college video and correspondance courses? morten From socgrad-relay@UCSD.EDU Sat May 28 12:21:50 1994 sendmail 8.6.9/UCSD-2.2-sun Sat, 28 May 1994 12:20:43 -0700 for socgrad-list Sat, 28 May 1994 12:20:42 -0700 for From: XCHUFF@ccvax.fullerton.edu Date: 28 May 1994 12:19:13 -0800 (PST) Subject: Re: attendance on grades To: socgrad@UCSD.EDU I am attending California State University, Fullerton and I don't think that our college has any specific guidlines regarding how an instructor has to deal with attendance. I know I have had classes where I got points for attending and it was impossible to get an "A" if you missed more than a class. I have also had classes where I showed up only for the tests and got an "A". I'm not sure how common this is across the country, but I know that I had some undergrad classes where the instructor would lecture straight from the textbook. This seems like an insult to the students intelligence and is also a waste of time. The only thing missing is tinkerbell telling you when to turn the page! In a case like that, it seemed like my time was better spent studying at home, rather than hearing about what I had just read the night before. Once again, if the instructor wants to place importance on attendance, they should let the class know that on day one. If a student is going to constantly be absent from class, then they will probably miss some important information (as was pointed out by someone earlier) and their grade will reflect that lack of knowledge. Punishing them once more for missing class doesn't seem fair. It is also important to look at why you would punish someone for missing class if they had done good work on tests and papers. Is the idea to learn as much information as possible, or to play grade school teacher and scold a student for missing class. I tend to go more with the earlier idea... -TODD- From socgrad-relay@UCSD.EDU Sat May 28 12:38:14 1994 sendmail 8.6.9/UCSD-2.2-sun Sat, 28 May 1994 12:37:07 -0700 for socgrad-list Sat, 28 May 1994 12:37:05 -0700 for Date: Sat, 28 May 94 15:27:37 EDT From: Steve Harvey Subject: attendance To: SOCGRAD@UCSD.EDU I think there's a subtlety to the attendance question that may be getting lost. Todd reasonably asks why people should be penalized for missing class if they get good grades on the exams. One of the problems is that we have classes filled with students of diverse talents and skills, and are supposed to grade them "fairly," that is, all by the same standard. So, some students can get A's *on what they already know and understand before the semester begins*, while others must struggle. For those who must struggle, the grade-according- to-exam-performance approach makes sense: they will indeed pay a price for missing class, without the price being artificially added. For those who are ahead of the curve, the teacher wishes there were some way to encourage them to learn, in spite of the fact that they are not highly pressured by the challenge of getting an A in the class. Also, their pressence is invaluable to the class dynamics as a whole. Their absence is a bit like middle-class flight from the inner-city, leaving them more comfortable but the community deprived of what they have to offer. Of course, just punishing them for not attending does seem a bit draconian in this scenario, so if the teacher is encouraging their attendance in spite of the fact that they can get an A without attending, she better do so with at least as much carrot as stick: give them something to come for. Steve harvey@uconnvm From socgrad-relay@UCSD.EDU Sat May 28 13:41:33 1994 sendmail 8.6.9/UCSD-2.2-sun Sat, 28 May 1994 13:40:19 -0700 for socgrad-list Sat, 28 May 1994 13:40:17 -0700 for From: S-ENDER@bss1.umd.edu Sat, 28 May 94 16:40:17 +1100 Organization: University of Maryland,College Park To: socgrad@UCSD.EDU Date: Sat, 28 May 1994 16:39:49 EDT Subject: Re: attendance is interaction ...the reason i ask the attendance question is because i've been told, but never seen the actual policy, that we can't penalize students for not attending class here at maryland...(bta, we are ordered to excuse students or not hold exams on specific religious holidays)...i circumvent attendance by giving credit for participation...its kind of hard to participate if your not there...i consider everyone enrolled in the course responsible for contributing to the definition of the situation and my philosphy is that the face-to-face feature of classrooms is an essential and the smaller the class size the better... ...i agree with steve that some students know most of the subject being shared (this is especially true of seniors who take intro level courses to boost their gpa), but they can and should be held responsible for educating (contributing to the situation) their freshman and sophomore peers... ...i'm concerned with todd's preference for information over attendance...this relates to my point about video and correspondance courses...being somewhat of a luddite, i'm concerned the information highway will displace us intro course instructors with videos courses, interactive remote satelitte tele-courses and the like...distance learning is powerful movement in the u.s. and it is being pushed, i think, by those with economic interests over a concern for educational interests (e.g., have you guys scene the bell atlantic commercials using anticipatory socialization to make electronic mediated interaction pallatble to the masses?)...returning to attendance, i think baudrillard would call this the death of the social (of the classroom), i think we need to defend attendance, ideally it would be to follow steve's idea of "giving them something to come for...", pragmatically, how about credit for interacting rather than penalities for not? morten `you'll never find cliff-notes for my course' ender >their attendance in spite of the fact that they can get an A without >attending, she better do so with at least as much carrot as stick: >give them something to come for. From socgrad-relay@UCSD.EDU Sat May 28 14:46:15 1994 sendmail 8.6.9/UCSD-2.2-sun Sat, 28 May 1994 14:45:23 -0700 for socgrad-list Sat, 28 May 1994 14:45:18 -0700 for 28 May 94 21:43 GMT Date: Sat, 28 May 94 16:19 EST From: Carla To: Socgrad I would like to be on the list for socgrad. Is there anything you want ASA to do to publicize, or it is the right size now? From socgrad-relay@UCSD.EDU Sat May 28 15:43:22 1994 sendmail 8.6.9/UCSD-2.2-sun Sat, 28 May 1994 15:42:29 -0700 for socgrad-list Sat, 28 May 1994 15:42:27 -0700 for From: XCHUFF@ccvax.fullerton.edu Date: 28 May 1994 15:41:02 -0800 (PST) Subject: Re: attendance on grades To: socgrad@UCSD.EDU I was concerned over Morten's concern about my supposed preference for information over attendance...perhapes an explanation on my views... I think the ideal classroom would have students that were there to learn as well as to contribute their knowledge to the class. In my experiences in lower level classes, it seemed that many students would cram for their exams and would forget everything in a month. Classrooms were a minimun of forty students and there was very little interaction between instructor and student. The instructor taught and the student listened. Once I got into grad school, this suddenly changed... interaction was expected and classes were small. Attendance and participation is mandatory and I have found that I learn almost as much from fellow students as I do from the instructor. The "grad school" style of learning is by far the best way to learn. The only time I would prefer information over attendance is in the case of instructors that stand at the blackboard, do not expect interaction and lecture straight from the book. In my opinion, these instructors are wasting the student's time. In a world where tuition is rising rapidly, classes and instructors are being cut left and right, this ideal type of class is soon going to disappear from all but the top colleges. I guess we can all hope that the instructors that remain will try their best to meet the needs of their students in the best ways possible. I thinh that this will occur at the grad level, but I worry about the lower division classes. -TODD-G|:o3 Date: Sat, 28 May 94 20:41:14 EDT From: Marni Hancock Organization: Emory University - Atlanta, Georgia, USA Subject: ATTENDANCE AND GRADES To: SOCGRAD@UCSD.EDU To add my small bit--IF one is going to grade on attendance/participation MY BELIEF is that one should make clear what one expects the student to gain by his/her attendance. I seldom care about attendance in "lecture" courses--but the courses I've taught (in nursing to undergrads) had such heavy reading assignments that the lectures were vital to students' ability to "sort out" the important to know from the important to know how to find material. In clinical courses attendance was required because there is no alternative way for the student to DEMONSTRATE the requisite patient care skills. I would imagine the same to be true of lab sections in science courses and student teaching in education courses, etc. If one is conducting a true seminar, then attendance is necessary for each to contribute to the learning of all. Again, this should be "rational" and "explainable" to the students. If I can't document some lack in the education of the student who fails to attend the class, then I don't know how I would support required attendance. What do the rest of you think? Marni Hancock SOCAW059@EMUVM1.CC.EMORY.EDU From socgrad-relay@UCSD.EDU Sat May 28 18:26:08 1994 sendmail 8.6.9/UCSD-2.2-sun Sat, 28 May 1994 18:25:00 -0700 for socgrad-list Sat, 28 May 1994 18:24:58 -0700 for Date: Sat, 28 May 1994 21:29:33 -0500 To: socgrad@UCSD.EDU From: danryan@minerva.cis.yale.edu (Dan Ryan) Subject: Designing for mediocrity content-length: 1001 I find myself just a tad troubled by the number of "solutions" that we come up with that are based on or built around the worst students or the worst case scenarios. Don't let the turkeys set the agenda. All the time and energy we spend trying to outsmart gradegrubbers, lazy or disinterested students, and intellectual cads of all descriptions is time and energy stolen from "good" students (see below for my definition). Reasoning from horror stories or worst cases is for talk show journalism, not serious discussions about pedagogy. I supsect that part of it is just how we talk about what we do, but I find it helpful to remind myself from time to time to 1) teach to the students who really want to learn 2) make decisions by asking whether an action benefits the students who really want to learn It's real easy to get confused and disoriented when stuff is happening all around me, but these help get me back to where I need to be. I'm a teacher not a cop. DJR From socgrad-relay@UCSD.EDU Sun May 29 04:20:38 1994 sendmail 8.6.9/UCSD-2.2-sun Sun, 29 May 1994 04:18:34 -0700 for socgrad-list Sun, 29 May 1994 04:18:33 -0700 for From: JWL3697@utarlg.uta.edu Date: Sun, 29 May 1994 06:18:31 -0600 (CST) Subject: Re: Designing for mediocrity To: danryan@minerva.cis.yale.edu I agree with DJR. When I first started teaching, I was constantly reminded to teach the good student ( meaning those who come to class, turn in their assignments on time, do their reading and score well in their exam). And I find this to be the only incentive for me to perform well as an instructor. My philosophy is "Help those who want to help themselves." emselves." If a student realized that their instructors care enough to walk an extra mile with them when necessary, they would be more willing to work harder. Julia From socgrad-relay@UCSD.EDU Sun May 29 16:51:51 1994 sendmail 8.6.9/UCSD-2.2-sun Sun, 29 May 1994 16:49:54 -0700 for socgrad-list Sun, 29 May 1994 16:49:45 -0700 for (5.65c+/IDA-1.4.4 for ); Mon, 30 May 1994 09:49:21 +1000 Date: Mon, 30 May 1994 09:49:21 +1000 To: socgrad@UCSD.EDU From: Paul.Reser@jcu.edu.au Subject: Re: Attendance on grades wrote on 28 May >If a student is going to constantly be absent from class, then they >will probably miss some important information (as was pointed out by >someone earlier) and their grade will reflect that lack of knowledge. >Punishing them once more for missing class doesn't seem fair. Fair for whom? This is too much of an individualistic view. I teach in a full year methods subject at second year where tutorials have required attendance, though lectures do not. That is to say, we take roll at the beginning of the tutorial and if the student misses more than three tuts in a semester, they fail the subject. Draconian? Perhaps, but before this policy was in place, students would stop attending once they had done enough exams and assignments to pass the subject. The following year they would take experimental design and a more advanced methodology course, and sections of the methods course would in effect have to be repeated for them to grasp the material in the more advanced subjects. Is this fair for their fellow students who had done the work in the first place? As well, this subject serves to introduce the student to the use of computers which is essential for their future performance both while at university and beyond. (By the way, for those unfamiliar with the antipodean system, or at least how it works here in a tropical backwater, lectures are en masse with some 100 people enrolled in the subject. We then tutor in small groups for two hours per week in the computer lab where the class is divided into 8 tutorials of about 16 people each.) Paul A. Reser Department of Psychology and Sociology James Cook University Townsville, QLD 4811 AUSTRALIA From socgrad-relay@UCSD.EDU Sun May 29 20:01:26 1994 sendmail 8.6.9/UCSD-2.2-sun Sun, 29 May 1994 19:59:17 -0700 for socgrad-list Sun, 29 May 1994 19:59:16 -0700 for From: XCHUFF@ccvax.fullerton.edu Date: 29 May 1994 19:57:48 -0800 (PST) Subject: Re: attendance on grades To: socgrad@UCSD.EDU In response to my comment of the unfairness of punishing a student a second time for missing a class (after they have already been "punished" from a lack of knowledge at exam time), Paul Reser wrote... >Fair for whom? This is too much of an individualistic view... If the tutorials at a university have a required attendance, then those students who choose not to attend should feel that a lower grade based on lack of attendance is "fair". If the lecture classes do not require attendance, then attendance should not figure into the equation when it comes time for a decision on the student's grade for that class. I think that a student's grade has to be viewed as individualistic. It is, after all, the grade that that individual earned for the class. If an instructor feels that attendance, participation and discussion are vital to each student's final grade (as I feel they should be) then the instructor should make that a part of their grading scale. Perhapes each could be worth 10% so that a student would have to attend and participate in order to get an "above average" grade. I think that most college students (especially grad students) would agree that if they show up to class, participate regularly and do well on all their assignments, that they should receive a higher grade than a fellow student that does the opposite. I don't think that most classes lose too much when a student does not show up every once and a while. Most classes have enough participation from a variety of students that more than fills the void of an absent student or two. Instructors need to remember that most students have lives outside of the classroom (at least undergrad students do) and hopefully they are there to learn and participate. As long as attendance problems are not chronic, it seems wrong to punish students based on absence. If an instructor is going to do so, then they should make the students aware of this on day one. I'm starting to feel like the only person out there that feels this way...does anyone agree??? -TODD- From socgrad-relay@UCSD.EDU Mon May 30 04:21:02 1994 sendmail 8.6.9/UCSD-2.2-sun Mon, 30 May 1994 04:18:43 -0700 for socgrad-list Mon, 30 May 1994 04:18:42 -0700 for From: JWL3697@utarlg.uta.edu Date: Mon, 30 May 1994 06:18:38 -0600 (CST) Subject: Re: attendance on grades To: XCHUFF@ccvax.fullerton.edu Responding to Todd of Fullerton, this is what I do. On the first day of class, and througout the semester, I also say to the students that class participation would affect border-line students. For example, if one's average at the end of the semester is 89.5, and he/she only comes to class periodically, he/she can be a assured that he/she would get a 'B' while if he/she is there all the time. turn in assignment on time, and participate in discussion, I would have no problem in giving out an 'A'. So far, I have not had any problems with students' grade, yet. I also tell them that I want them to exhibit a continous semester-long effort in striving for what ever grade they want. I do not want a spur-of-the-moment or sporadic passion. Subsequently, for those who care, they would know where they stand; while for those who do not care, i don't even have to worry about them. Julia From socgrad-relay@UCSD.EDU Mon May 30 05:45:15 1994 sendmail 8.6.9/UCSD-2.2-sun Mon, 30 May 1994 05:43:02 -0700 for socgrad-list Mon, 30 May 1994 05:43:00 -0700 for Date: Mon, 30 May 1994 08:47:37 -0500 To: socgrad@UCSD.EDU From: danryan@minerva.cis.yale.edu (Dan Ryan) Subject: What can ASA do for SOCGRAD? content-length: 1661 Fellow SocGrad'ers: I sent the following note to Carla at ASA in response to her recent query about what ASA can do for SOCGRAD. Please feel free to amplify, correct, rebuke or refute as you see fit. Since I neglected to tell her how properly to subscribe, perhaps someone will jump in and do that. Happy bbq day, Dan ========================================================================= Hi Carla -- I presume you are Carla H.? Greetings. Not that you'd remember, but we met at ASA last year at some workshop or party. I chatted with a woman at ASA last year about setting up a SOCGRAD table for the DAN party at ASA (I'm trying unsuccessfully to remember her name -- staff person who had something to do with parties and receptions and registration). We sort of had it arranged, but then whoever was doing the setup left our banner in a box somewhere. We were all looking forward to meeting, but alas, only a few of us hooked up, and that by accident. So....one thing you could do would be to arrange from your end for that to happen. Last year they wanted to bill us $100 even though I kept pointing out that there was no "us" in that sense. I also suggested that ASA might well do it gratis as a "profesional development" gesture or to support grad students coming to ASA. Let me know what you think. I'm not the list organizer, but I was the head ra-rah person for ASA last year. As far as publicity goes, Laura Miller of UCSD, who set up the list, put a little item in Footnotes about a year and a half ago. Perhaps a little tiny regular notice could be placed? Let me know what you think. Dan Ryan Yale University From socgrad-relay@UCSD.EDU Mon May 30 14:46:39 1994 sendmail 8.6.9/UCSD-2.2-sun Mon, 30 May 1994 14:44:35 -0700 for socgrad-list Mon, 30 May 1994 14:44:33 -0700 for id AA08011; Mon, 30 May 1994 15:44:30 -0600 for socgrad@ucsd.edu Date: Mon, 30 May 1994 15:44:29 -0600 (CST) From: "Gregory S. Yelland" Subject: sub To: socgrad@UCSD.EDU sub "gsy136@herald.usask.ca" socgrad From socgrad-relay@UCSD.EDU Mon May 30 15:31:48 1994 sendmail 8.6.9/UCSD-2.2-sun Mon, 30 May 1994 15:29:57 -0700 for socgrad-list Mon, 30 May 1994 15:29:56 -0700 for Date: Mon, 30 May 1994 18:29:49 -0400 From: "Michael R. Fraser" Subject: subscribe To: socgrad@UCSD.EDU Please subscribe me to the SOCGRAD list: fraser@soc.umass.edu From socgrad-relay@UCSD.EDU Mon May 30 16:40:42 1994 sendmail 8.6.9/UCSD-2.2-sun Mon, 30 May 1994 16:38:58 -0700 for socgrad-list Mon, 30 May 1994 16:38:53 -0700 for (5.65c+/IDA-1.4.4 for ); Tue, 31 May 1994 09:38:39 +1000 Date: Tue, 31 May 1994 09:38:39 +1000 To: socgrad@UCSD.EDU From: Paul.Reser@jcu.edu.au Subject: Students who don't work As noted in my earlier post, we require attendance in a methods subject in which I teach. I wish to bring up another matter - what do you do if students don't do the work necessary to participate in the discussion/learning? I teach mainly in small group situations, and in the case of the methods course this occurs in the computer lab. The course is well organised by the coordinator, with all requirements clearly stated in writing. A workbook containing this information along with set problems for each of the tutorials and outlines of the lecture notes is provided. As well additional self-paced computer modules on specific topics are available for students. The work for the tutorial is to be done before coming to the tut and discussed as a group. Students are not graded on this, all we ask is that they make some attempt at doing the tutorial problems. They already have received a lecture on how to handle the material, have the lecture note outlines, and a textbook which is tied to the subject. Last week was very frustrating. I had three tutorials and only 1 or two people in each of the groups had even tried the problems. The other two tutors teaching in this subject experienced much the same thing. The problem is that it is the end of the semester here, and people are getting a bit slack. Oh yes, there are other assignments due and all that, but to not even to have read the chapter?! My response was to walk in the room, ask who had done the work or the reading, and when I received an overwhelming "no" response, I cancelled the tutorial telling the students I would keep cancelling until someone started showing some effort. Not wishing to disadvantage the feww who did work I reviewed their effortes individually. Here is the point. One may argue that students have the right to do work or not to do work, or skip class, whatever, as their final grades are their own business. While true, there is a hidden dimension. Our performance as teachers is affected by how much students work. My advancement in employment in part is based on student assessment of my teaching. Is it fair to be assessed by those who are not working or attending? Will they have any real view of my ability? And what of the effect on my on attitude and productivity? After last week I am tempted to seek another career path! I'd like to know what the rest of you do in this situation. Paul A. Reser Department of Psychology and Sociology James Cook University Townsville, QLD 4811 AUSTRALIA From socgrad-relay@UCSD.EDU Tue May 31 09:29:25 1994 sendmail 8.6.9/UCSD-2.2-sun Tue, 31 May 1994 09:20:37 -0700 for socgrad-list Tue, 31 May 1994 09:20:30 -0700 for From: blovitts@nsf.gov To: socgrad@UCSD.EDU Subject: The Ghost in the Modem (Loka Alert 1:6--from the Washington Date: 31 May 94 10:41 EST ---------------------------- Forwarded with Changes --------------------------- From: dchubin at NOTE Date: 5/31/94 7:01AM To: blovitts at nsf6 *To: redstaff at NOTE Subject: The Ghost in the Modem (Loka Alert 1:6--from the Washington ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Socgraders -- thought you might find this article interesting. Barbara ______________________________ Forward Header __________________________________ Subject: The Ghost in the Modem (Loka Alert 1:6--from the Washington Author: dchubin at NOTE Date: 5/31/94 7:01 AM ---------------------------------- Forwarded ---------------------------------- From: RESCLOVE@amherst.edu at NOTE Date: 5/29/94 10:40PM To: dchubin at nsf6 *To: loka-l@amherst.edu at NOTE Subject: The Ghost in the Modem (Loka Alert 1:6--from the Washington ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---------------------- Original Header Lines (From NOTE) ----------------------- rholland@nsf.gov, rmorrison@nsf.gov ------------------------------- Message Contents ------------------------------- Loka Alert 1:6 (May 29, 1994) >From the Sunday _Washington Post_: IF INFORMATION HIGHWAYS ARE ANYTHING LIKE INTERSTATE HIGHWAYS--WATCH OUT! Friends and Colleagues: This is one in an occasional series of e-mail postings on democratic politics of science and technology, issued by The Loka Institute. You are welcome to post it anywhere you feel is appropriate. The following essay, written by Loka Institute members, is reprinted from the Outlook Section of _The Washington Post_, Sunday, May 29, 1994. --Dick Sclove Executive Director, The Loka Institute, P.O. Box 355, Amherst, MA 01004-0355, USA Tel. 413 253-2828; Fax 413 253-4942 E-mail: resclove@amherst.edu ***************************************************************** THE GHOST IN THE MODEM For Architects of the Info-Highway, Some Lessons From the Concrete Interstate By Richard Sclove and Jeffrey Scheuer Vice President Gore envisions the information superhighway as the second coming of the interstate highway system championed by his father, former U.S. Senator Al Gore, a generation ago. Let us hope that the junior Gore is proven wrong. Rush-hour traffic jams, gridlock, garish plastic-and-neon strips, high fatality rates, air pollution, global warming, depletion of world oil reserves--have we forgotten all of the interstate highway system's most familiar consequences? It's not that Gore's analogy is wrong, only that his enthusiasm is misplaced. Comparing the electronic and asphalt highways is useful--but mostly as a cautionary tale. Building the new information infrastructure will not entail the degree of immediate, physical disruption caused by the interstate highway system. But sweeping geographic relocations, and accompanying social transformations, seem probable. And the risk of inequity in contriving and distributing electronic services--or, conversely, imposing them where they are not wanted--is clear. Indeed, disparities in access to new information systems have already begun to surface. A study released this past week by a group of public interest organizations, including the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People and the Center for Media Education, notes that low-income and minority communities are underrepresented in U.S. telephone companies's initial plans for installing advanced communications networks. Unequal access is only the most obvious among many social repercussions that may lie in store for us. The real history of the interstate highway system suggests how we can think about and control the vast implications of new technologies and a new national public infrastructure. It is widely assumed that Americans' infatuation with cars led to the construction of America's superhighways. But actually when Congress passed the Interstate Highway Act in 1956, car sales were slack, and there was no popular clamor for building a new road system. At the time only about half of American families owned an automobile; everyone else depended on public transportation. Congress was responding to aggressive lobbying by auto makers and road builders, plus realtors who saw profits in developing suburban subdivisions. The act's key provisions included support for bringing freeways directly into city centers and earmarking gasoline tax revenues for highway construction. As the interstate highways were built, city and suburban development adapted to the quickening proliferation of autos. Soon more Americans found themselves forced to buy a car in order to be able to shop or hold a job. The Highway Trust Fund, by assuring the rapid atrophy of competing public transit systems, bolstered this trend. Thus the asphalt highways--and the society around them--are a reflection of successful lobbying by powerful business interests and external compulsion, not simply the free choices of consumers. There is no guarantee that the process of wiring consumers and employees into the electronic highway system will be different. The effects of the interstate highway system on American communities were profound, especially in the cities. As historian James Flink notes, "Ambitious programs for building urban freeways resulted in the massive destruction of once viable poor and minority neighborhoods." In other cases, new highways encircled poor neighborhoods, physically segregating minorities into marginalized ghettoes. Gradually, a black and Hispanic middle-class did emerge. Its members too fled along the interstate to the suburbs, further draining economic and cultural resources from the inner city. This contributed to the emergence of a new social phenomenon: today's desperately deprived, urban underclass. Elsewhere the effects were subtler but still significant. The noise and danger from growing numbers of autos drove children's games out of the street, and neighbors and families off their front porches. Before long, suburbs without sidewalks came to signal an unprecedented paucity of local destinations worth walking to. Suburban housewives found themselves leading increasingly isolated daytime lives at home. Highways made shopping malls possible, enabling franchise and chain store sales to boom. But this sapped downtown centers. For some teenagers and senior citizens, today's anonymous, consumption-mad expanses provide a semblance of community space-- having swallowed up the general store, the soda fountain, the Main Street sidewalk, and the town square. There is ample danger of the new electronic technology extending these losses. Remember too that it is easy to romanticize new technology. The popular arts glorified life on the highway. People read Jack Kerouac's "On the Road," watched "Route 66" on television, and recall the Merry Pranksters' psychedelic bus-capades during the '60s. In fusing alienation and rebellion with youthful exuberance, each of these foreshadows contemporary cyberpunk culture. Yet real-life experience on the interstate is mostly banal and uneventful. McDonald's, Pizza Hut, and Wal-Mart look about the same wherever you exit. There are also political ramifications of a vast new public infrastructure. Interstate highways contributed to national and even international economic integration. But while GNP soared, mom-and-pop production and retailing declined. That meant greater local dependence on national and global market forces and on distant corporate headquarters--powers that communities simply couldn't control. The locus of effective political intervention thus shifted toward more distant power centers. But because those are realms in which everyday citizens cannot be as effectual as in smaller political settings, democracy was impaired. If the growth of the highways is revealing, so too is the opposition to freeway construction that emerged. As citizens became more politically mobilized during the 1960's and early '70s, opposition to relentless highway expansion arose from environmentalists and from local communities, both rich and poor. Transportation engineers reeled at the specter of upright citizens rejecting their good works. Many current telecommunications engineers and true-believing entrepreneurs are no less convinced of the unalloyed beneficence of their art. The importance of the analogy between the information and asphalt highways lies in the political procedures that create them. What if a wider range of people, including non-car owners, had been involved in transportation planning all along? Considering the alternatives envisioned by critics such as Lewis Mumford, it seems likely we would have a smaller and different road system today. As in Europe and Japan, there probably would have been greater investment in public transit. Modern America might exhibit less sprawl, less dependence on foreign oil, and more cohesive urban neighborhoods. Three lessons for the construction of the information superhighway suggest themselves: o _No Innovation Without Evaluation_: To help reduce adverse social impact, the federal government should mandate evaluated social trials of alternative electronic services. Analogous to environmental impact statements, these trials should precede full-scale deployment of any major components of new information infrastructures. o _No Innovation Without Regulation_: We should conserve cultural space for face-to-face social engagement, traditional forms of community life, off-screen leisure activities and time spent in nature. How about a modest tax on electronic home shopping and consumer services, rebating the revenue to support compensatory, local community-building initiatives? o _No Innovation Without Participation_: A number of European nations are out-competing America in including lay people in technology decision-making. For instance, the Danish government appoints panels of everyday citizens to cross-examine a range of experts, deliberate among themselves and then publish their own social assessments of technological alternatives. Sweden, Norway and Germany have pioneered processes for involving workers directly in designing new production systems. The coming revolution in information systems is going to change life for everyone--including the multitude who, by circumstance or choice, never use computers. It is imperative to develop mechanisms for involving all segments of our society in designing, evaluating and governing these new systems. Data highway enthusiasts may see such measures as wasteful obstructions of market forces. But what entrepreneurs call red tape is really democracy in action. __________________ Richard Sclove is executive director of the Loka Institute in Amherst, Mass., a public interest research organization concerned with science, technology and democracy. He also directs the Public Interest Technology Policy Project at the Institute for Policy Studies. Jeffrey Scheuer, a New York writer, is a fellow of the Loka Institute. ***************************************************************** If you would like to be added to, or removed from, the Loka Institute e-mail list, please send an e-mail message to that effect to: resclove@amherst.edu The Loka Institute is currently raising funds to produce Technology Watch, a national newsletter on opportunities for developing more environmentally sound and socially responsive post-Cold War science and technology policies. Technology Watch will be used, in turn, to help organize a nationwide network of public interest and grassroots activists: FASTnet (Federation of Activists on Science and Technology). These activities represent a collaborative undertaking of the Loka Institute and the Institute for Policy Studies (IPS) in Washington, DC. To support the Loka Institute's work, please write a check to "IPS--Technology Project," and send it to: IPS, 1601 Connecticut Ave., NW, Washington, DC 20009. Contributions are tax deductible. Thank you! Please note: Loka Institute members will be travelling during much of June 1994. Please forgive us if we are consequently slow in replying to your comments, queries or requests. From socgrad-relay@UCSD.EDU Tue May 31 18:19:16 1994 sendmail 8.6.9/UCSD-2.2-sun Tue, 31 May 1994 18:17:24 -0700 for socgrad-list Tue, 31 May 1994 18:17:20 -0700 for Date: Tue, 31 May 1994 18:14:00 -0700 (PDT) From: Jiannbin Lee Shiao Subject: Re: The Original Grade Post To: "John J. Maurer" On Sat, 28 May 1994, John J. Maurer wrote: > You've got to be kidding me? A college student skipped class? > Unfriggin'believable! It's a good thing you showed him! HelllOoooo? > I'm sorry but, what the hell are you thinking? If a student misses class Excuse me, John, is this your normal style of emailing or are you intentionally flaming me here? We don't know each other, and I see no reason for your seemingly insulting tone. If you disagree with my posts then say so, but you have absolutely no call to denigrate my person. Is that clear? The only reason I am not outright blowing my stack at you is that we're on email which means I can't be sure what your tone actually is. > important discussions. If he was able to still show recallable knowledge > from the class then so be it. This New info you just gave me shed's your > specific argument in a whole new light for me . I believe you were wrong > for what you did and although I may not have gone as far is > student did show such understanding of the course then, it wasn't the > material that was causing him to skip class. Perhaps it was the way it I've been away for the weekend to see my younger sister graduate from college, which is probably be a good thing, because I got to hear other socgradders respond to this post before formulating my own. Grades and learning are obviously not the same thing as much as they are often linked. Grading is individual but learning is not. So how do we resolve this tension, esp when we have a diversity of student attempts to grapple with the learning but a single scale of grading? I don't think my method of grading for attendence is perfect. What I'm trying to encourage is participation, group learning which is -in my mind- at least as important than any "straight" content or methods absorption. I once had a student who came but rarely said anything, a rare occurrence because of the way I structure my sections for cooperative work; nevertheless she made the effort to come and listen and occasionally to correct other students' use of the materials, however briefly. To set the record right, I was grading for attendence in discussion section, not in lecture. New material there was not, and I agree with John and Marni that skipping lecture shows up in paper and exam performance and thus does not need to be "double" penalized. However, I agree with Steve and Morton's comments that John's approach is too individualistic. If smart students skip discussion section, I also consider that to be academic snobbery. If ability and effort must be put on a single scale, then I think it is condescending to give some students "consolation" points for effort and not penalize others for lack of effort. Obviously I'm not happy with my solution to this problem; any suggestions? > was being taught. I don't believe you sound like a "bad" instructor, you > are probably either following administration rules and regs. or you may > just feel frustrated at wanting to teach to a repeatingly absent audience. > It's a common mistake. I want to stress this is not a personal shot at > you, I just have conflicting views on this common approach of instructors As stated above, I think there are better reasons than "regs, rules, or an absent audience" to grade for attendance. John, the next time you want to work out "conflicting views" or debates you are having with yourself, then *please* state that upfront and clearly. I'm sure many mailing list discussants use each other privately as "strawmen" representing particular positions with which we are trying to grapple. But let's give each other more benefit of the doubt in public dialogue, okay? If we reduce each other to stereotyped positions then why would we want to communicate with each other in the first place? :-) And I do realize you may not have intended to do that. tha j'ster