SOCIOLOGY 3991- JUNIOR HONORS SEMINAR

Spring 2000, Tu Th 2-3:15 in 130 Blegen

Professor: Christopher Uggen

(Pronounced You-Gun)

1160 Social Sciences: 624-4016

Office: Tu, Th 3:30-5:00 or by appt.

uggen@atlas.socsci.umn.edu

http://www.soc.umn.edu/~uggen/

Logic of the Course

The Junior Honors Seminar is designed to help sociology honors students become integrated into the department of sociology. We will introduce you to the major areas of research in our department and you will meet with several members of our faculty. Readings, classroom discussions, and faculty presentations orient students to the department, its research, and to critical problems in the discipline. Students will prepare a précis of key readings and distribute it online, a 10-page paper, and a brief grant application. This course emphasizes tests of competing hypotheses about the social world. Throughout the semester we will examine: (1) definitive statements from important theoretical traditions; (2) critical empirical tests of theory; (3) critiques of theory or the research generated by it; and, where applicable, (4) attempts to translate scientific knowledge into policy or action. The specific content for the latter part of the course has been determined by student interest in (or outside of) options presented during the first week.

Course Objectives

Our first objective for this course is to help you develop some basic competencies that you will need to complete your senior project. Our second objective is to get you thinking and talking about some of the most important and difficult questions you will need to consider.

Competencies:

· Can you use Sociological Abstracts, JSTOR, and other online indexes?

· Can you read an article critically and summarize it clearly for others?

· Can you prepare a cogent literature review that clearly summarizes the state of knowledge in an area?

· Can you prepare a grant proposal that identifies an important research problem and shows that you have the means and imagination to solve it?

· Can you present your ideas coherently in a semi-formal oral presentation?

· Have you emerged from the seminar with a concrete research question for your senior honors thesis?

Questions to ask yourself and other sociologists (such as our guests):

· Why do you study what you study? Do you find personal meaning in your work? In some areas more than others?

· Do you attempt to maintain objectivity and value neutrality in your research? How?

· Do you adopt a particular theoretical orientation in your work? How or why have you taken this approach?

· How do you see the general relation between social science and social policy? What are the specific policy implications of your work?

· How do you do your work? What sort of methodology is most appropriate for answering the types of research questions you ask? What is the relation between theory and methodology?

· Do you try to separate your role as a scientific expert from your role as citizen, teacher, student, or advocate? How?

Course Organization

This course has been tailored to your individual and collective needs and interests. The first three weeks of the class are designed to help you find your place in the discipline and the department. On January 27, we voted to determine the areas of sociology we will investigate and the sociologists we will invite to participate. I then finalized the reading list for the latter portion of the course during the first week of February.

Your grade will be determined by your literature review (30% of course grade, due 3/23), grant proposal (20% of grade, due 4/20), oral presentation (10% of grade, due 4/25-5/2), and class participation (10%). The remaining 30% will be determined by a written précis (see attached description), short assignments (such as those due 1/25 and 2/1 below), and in-class quizzes. We will not have quizzes unless it becomes apparent that students are unprepared to discuss the readings.

Required Texts

There are no required texts for this class. The syllabus lists a few required readings that should be completed before each session. These materials will be made available during class. Everyone is expected to read the core articles closely. One student will summarize the précis articles, email their summary to seminar participants, and bring hard copies to class. The remaining students may then simply skim these pieces.

Other Excellent Texts and Resources

1. American Sociological Association, 1998. ASA Style Guide. Washington, D.C.: American Sociological Association. ISBN 0-912764-29-5. Order online (5$ members; $10 non-members) at: http://www.asanet.org/pubs/ref.html

2. Richlin-Klonsky, Judith, and Ellen Strenski, eds. (The Sociology Writing Group). 1998. A Guide to Writing Sociology Papers. 4^th ed. New York: St. Martin's Press.

3. Becker, Howard S. 1986. Writing for Social Scientists: How to Start and Finish Your Thesis, Book, or Article. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

4. Becker, Howard S. Tricks of the Trade: How to Think About Your Research While You're Doing It. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

5. Strunk Jr., William, and E.B. White. 2000. The Elements of Style.4^th Ed. Boston: Allyn and Bacon. Earlier ed. available online: http://www.bartleby.com/141/index.html

6. Uggen's Link Page: http://www.socsci.umn.edu/~uggen/links.htm

Course Policies, Expectations, and Friendly Reminders

1. GRADING.

· 30% literature review (due 3/23/2000)

· 20% grant application (due 4/20/2000)

· 10% in-class presentation (due 4/25-5/2)

· 10% class participation

· 30% précis, short assignments, and (maybe) quizzes (throughout semester)

2. LATE ASSIGNMENTS, MAKE-UP EXAMS, AND INCOMPLETES.

· ASSIGNMENTS: Assignments are due to me at the beginning of class on the date noted in the syllabus. Late assignments are penalized 5% per day. If family or medical emergencies prevent you from attending class, provide written documentation of the emergency. In such cases, you may also fax the assignment to the department fax machine at (612) 624-7020.

· INCOMPLETES: No incompletes will be given for this class.

· SNOW: If the University is open, I will hold class.

3. RESPONSIBILITY. You are responsible for everything discussed in class.

4. CHEATS. I trust my students not to cheat or plagiarize others’ work. When this trust is violated, I am personally offended and vigorously prosecute academic misconduct.

5. TEACHING PHILOSOPHY, COLLEGE, AND DEPARTMENT POLICIES: ATTACHED.

Tentative Class Outline

NOTE: The course schedule jumps around a bit to accommodate the busy schedules of our guests. You will also note a heavier emphasis on stratification and law/crime/deviance than on other areas of departmental specialization, since these were the areas of greatest student interest in our survey.

PART ONE: INTRODUCTIONS AND ORIENTATION

Week 1

1/20 2 Doing Sociology that Matters (to you and to others)

· Science and Policy

· Applied and Academic Sociology

Coleman, James S. 1992. “The Rational Reconstruction of Society.” American Sociological Review 58:1-15.

Rossi, Peter H. 1999. “Saving Academic Sociology.” Sociological Inquiry 69: 110-20.

Turner, Jonathon H. 1998. “Must Sociological Theory and Sociological Practice be So Far Apart? A Polemical Answer.” Sociological Perspectives 243-58.

Week 2

1/25 3 Mapping the Discipline

Assignment: Visit the website of another sociology research department (Yahoo! has a nice list). List the “areas” of specialization (these may be listed under faculty research, graduate or undergraduate programs, departmental history, research centers, or something else). Also record the number of full-time faculty and any “big names” you recognize. Be ready to discuss how the social organization of academic knowledge affects what counts for sociology.

Simon, Rita J. and Jennifer Scherer. 1999. “What Matters in Sociology.” Sociological Inquiry 69:296-302.

Huber, Joan. 1995 “Institutional Perspectives on Sociology.” American Journal of Sociology 101: 194-216.

1/27 4 Mapping the Department

· Class discussion and return of ballots

Satz, Lisa. 1999. Faculty Research Activities 1999-2000. University of Minnesota Department of Sociology.

PART TWO: MASTERING THE LITERATURE

Week 3

2/1 5 Taking Stock: What is the Current State of Knowledge?

· Compiling an annotated bibliography

· Developing “expert” knowledge in an area

· Appraising the quality of various sources

· Interdisciplinary issues

Welsh, Sandy. 1999. “Gender and Sexual Harassment.” Annual Review of Sociology 25:169-190.

Assignment: Identify, print, and read one review in “your” area using the search function at http://soc.AnnualReviews.org/ Bring this to class and be ready to discuss it.

2/3 6 Following through: The literature review in grants and articles

· What survives in the published article?

· Speaking to academic and non-academic audiences

Huiras, Jessica. 1999. “Employee Theft and Career Goals among Young Adults.” Undergraduate Research Opportunities Program Grant Proposal. University of Minnesota Department of Sociology.

Huiras, Jessica, Christopher Uggen, and Barbara McMorris. 2000. "Career Jobs, Survival Jobs, and Employee Deviance: A Social Investment Model of Workplace Misconduct" Forthcoming in The Sociological Quarterly (May). Plus reviews and correspondence.

Week 4

2/8 7 Literature Searches

· Quality and quantity – journal “impact” rankings

· Sociological Abstracts, Social Science Citation Index, Social Science Abstracts + Psychinfo, Econlit, et al.

2/10 8 Former Sociology Honors Students Tell All

Guests: Ryan King and Jessica Thurk

· panel discussion on the sociology honors sequence

· two exemplary theses

King, Ryan. “Crime Perceptions and National Context: A Comparison Of Minneapolis And Prague.” Undergraduate Honors Thesis, Department of Sociology, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN.

Thurk, Jessica. 1999. “Turning the Telescope: Looking into a Science Department.” Undergraduate Honors Thesis, Department of Sociology, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN.

Week 5

2/15 9 Topic Session

· group discussion of individual student topics

ASSIGNMENT: Prepare a brief “topic statement” introducing your topic, your interest in the topic, its sociological relevance, and any literature that you are using as a starting point. If you would like to push ahead, you might try to isolate one or more specific research questions, and the theoretical perspectives that you may adopt.

2/17 10 What Makes Research “Sociological?” Sociolegal Examples

Guest: Professor Elizabeth Heger Boyle

Everyone reads: Boyle, Elizabeth Heger, Barbara McMorris, Mayra Gomez, and Andrea Hoeschen, 2000. “International Norms and Cultural Change: The Case of Female Genital Cutting.” Paper to be presented at the 2000 annual meetings of the American Sociological Association, Washington, DC.

Everyone reads: Carr, Dara. 1997. Female Genital Cutting. Calverton, Maryland: Macro International. (Background policy piece).

Week 6

2/22 11 What Makes Research “Sociological?” Sociolegal Examples

Everyone reads: Savelsberg, Joachim. 1994. "Knowledge, Domination and Criminal Punishment." American Journal of Sociology 99(4): 911-943.

Precis (Brian Duginski): Grattet, Ryken, Valerie Jenness, and Theodore R. Curry. 1998. “The Homogenization and Differentiation of Hate Crime Law in the United States, 1978 to 1995: Innovation and Diffusion in the Criminalization of Bigotry.” American Sociological Review 63:286-307.

2/24 12 Departmental Specialization in Organizations and Occupations

Guest: Professor Joe Galaskiewicz

· Why are sociologists so hung up on the individual level of analysis?

Everyone reads: Galaskiewicz, Joseph. 1991. "Making Corporate Actors Accountable: Institution Building in Minneapolis-St. Paul," Chapter 14 in The New Institutionalism in Organizational Analysis, edited by W. Powell and P. DiMaggio, U. Of Chicago Press,

Everyone reads: Knoke, David and Arne L. Kalleberg. 1994. “Job Training in U.S. Organizations.” American Sociological Review 59: 537-46.

Precis (Kathy Nelson) Galaskiewicz, Joseph. 1997. “An Urban Grants Economy Revisited: Corporate Charitable Contributions in the Twin Cities, 1979-81, 1987-89.” Administrative Science Quarterly 42: 445-471.

Week 7

2/29 13 Departmental Specialization in Stratification: Class & Gender

Everyone reads: Marini, Margaret Mooney, and Pi-Ling Fan. 1997. “The Gender Gap in Earnings at Career Entry.” American Sociological Review 62:588-604.

Precis (Les Andrist): Gerteis, Joseph, and Mike Savage. 1998. “The Salience of Class in Britain and America: A Comparative Analysis.” The British Journal of Sociology 49: 252-274.

3/2 14 Departmental Specialization in Stratification: Class & Gender

Guest: Professor Yanjie Bian

Everyone reads: Bian, Yanjie, and John R. Logan. 1996. “Market Transition and the Persistence of Power: The Changing Stratification System in Urban China.” American Sociological Review 61:739-758.

NOTE: UROP deadline is 3/6/2000 for grants 6/2000-6/2001. Next deadline is October for grants 12/00-6/01. For more information, see

http://www.urop.umn.edu/index.html.

Week 8

3/7 15 From “Literature Review” to Theory

· pointing your paper in the right direction

3/9 16 Departmental Specialization in Crime, Law, and Deviance

Guest: Professor Ross MacMillan (Tentative Date)

· Precis by Megan and/or Marty

Everyone reads: Macmillan, Ross. “When She Brings Home the Bacon: Labour Force Participation and Risk of Spousal Violence against Women.” Forthcoming. Journal of Marriage and the Family.

Precis (Megan Carollo) Kruttschnitt, Candace. 1995. “Violence by and Against Women: A Comparative and Cross-National Analysis.” Pp. 89-108 in Interpersonal Violent Behaviors: Social and Cultural Aspects, edited by R. B. Ruback, and N. A. Weiner. New York: Springer.

NOTE: If you wish to submit a draft of your literature review by March 9, I will return it with suggested revisions in time for you to make changes by the March 23 due date.

Week 9

3/14 17 Stratification: Age, Health, and Inequality

Precis (Eric Hedberg) Pampel, Fred C. 1994. “Age, Class, and Inequality in Public Spending.” American Journal of Sociology 100:153-195.

Precis (Theodora Nemeth). Kawachi, Ichiro, Bruce P. Kennedy, Kimberly Lochner, and Deborah Prothrow-Stith. 1997. “Social Capital, Income Inequality, and Mortality.” American Journal of Public Health 87: 1491-98

3/16 18 Stratification: Race and Ethnicity

Guest: Professor Doug Hartmann (Tentative Date)

Everyone reads: Hartmann, Douglas. 1996. “The Politics of Race and Sport: Resistance and Domination in the 1968 African American Olympic Protest Movement.” Ethnic and Racial Studies 19:548-66.

Precis (Lauren Fuller). Massey, Douglas. 1993. “Latinos, Poverty, and the Underclass: A New Agenda for Research.” Hispanic Journal of Behavioral Sciences 15: 449-475.

Week 10

3/21 19 Departmental Specialization in Life Course & Family

Guest: Jeylan Mortimer

Everyone reads: National Research Council and Institute of Medicine, Committee on the Health and Safety Implications of Child Labor. 1998. “Work’s Effects on Children and Adolescents” Pages 110-140 in Protecting Youth at Work: Health, Safety, and Development of Working Children and Adolescents in the United States. National Academy Press.

Precis (Mary Lowe): Mortimer, Jeylan T., Michael D. Finch, Seongryeol Ryu, Michael J. Shanahan, and Kathleen T. Call. 1996. “The Effects of Work Intensity on Adolescent Mental Health, Achievement, and Behavioral Adjustment: New Evidence from a Prospective Study.” Child Development 67: 1243-1261.

3/23 20 LITERATURE REVIEWS DUE

NOTE: Spring Break March 27-31

PART III: SECURING FUNDING AND THINKING ABOUT YOUR THESIS

Week 11

4/4 21 Levels of Analysis

Guest: Professor Carl Malmquist (tentative date)

Individual Level: Everyone reads: Malmquist, Carl P. 1996. Homicide: A Psychiatric Perspective. Washington DC: American Psychiatric Press. Chapter 1: “Epidemiological Aspects” and Chapter 12: “Where Knowledge is Needed.”

Situational Level: PRECIS (Rachel Wurst). Luckenbill, David F. 1977. “Criminal Homicide as a Situated Transaction.” Social Problems 25: 176-186.

National Level: PRECIS (Marty Lloyd). Messner, Steven F. and Richard Rosenfeld. “Political Restraint of the Market and Levels of Criminal Homicide: A Cross-National Application of Institutional-Anomie Theory.” Social Forces 75: 1393-1416.

4/6 22 Group Discussion on Levels and Methods of Analysis

Week 12

4/11 23 Departmental Specialization: Political Sociology and Social Movements – Historical and Comparative Approaches

Aminzade, Ronald R. 1984. Capitalist Industrialization and Patterns of Industrial Protest: A Comparative Urban Study of Nineteenth-Century France American Sociological Review 49:437-453.

Brustein, William. 1997. “Who Joined the Nazis and Why” American Journal of Sociology 103:199-221.Review Symposium

4/13 24 Political Sociology & Social Movements (Readings/Guest TBA)

Week 13

4/18 25 Thinking about Data Sources

· Should you collect your own data? Primary and secondary sources

NOTE: Written Proposals Due 4/20

4/20 26 Introduction to the ICPSR/NCJRS data archive

Week 14

4/25 27 How Not To Present Sociological Research

4/27 28 Student Presentations

Week 15

5/2 29 Student Presentations

5/4 30 Final Meeting

Uggen's Teaching Goals and Philosophy

1. Respect for Students.

The other points are really a subset of this one. Education is a service industry, but you cannot simply purchase a unit of education the way you would buy other commodities. Instead, you must devote time and energy to learning. I respect those students who must make work, family, or other commitments their top priority. Nevertheless, to benefit from the class and to be rewarded with a high grade, you must find time to do the work.

2. Procedural Justice or Fairness.

In my non-statistics classes, I typically grade exams and papers anonymously (by identification numbers rather than names) to avoid favoritism or other biases. Universal standards and strict deadlines are the best way I know to provide equal opportunities for all students.

3. High Standards for Excellence.

I reserve grades of A for outstanding work that engages course materials with original thought and creativity or a mastery of technical skills. You can receive a B by doing all of the work well and a C by meeting all course requirements.

4. Opportunities for Independent Work.

All must meet the basic requirements. For those wishing to engage the material at the highest level, I allow flexibility for more ambitious projects.

5. Responsiveness and Accountability.

You will have the opportunity to evaluate me and to critique the course in time for me to make changes that will benefit you. If you think I have failed to live up to the principles or philosophies here listed, please let me know about it.

6. Accessibility.

I will be available to you during office hours and flexible in scheduling appointments outside these hours (including nights and weekends).

7. Openness to Diverse Perspectives.

Sharing your experiences and understandings (publicly or privately) enriches the course for your fellow students, especially when you disagree with me.

8. Enthusiasm for the Subjects I Teach and for Teaching as a Vocation.

I cannot expect you to really engage the course materials if I am bored with them. Therefore, I will make every effort to make the texts, lectures, and assignments current, relevant, and intellectually engaging.

9. Skills, Knowledge, and Attitudes.

I teach: (1) technical and life skills that will benefit you inside and outside of the classroom; (2) abstract and concrete knowledge about the social world; and, (3) attitudes promoting the free and good-humored exchange of ideas.

Sociology 3991 – Junior Honors Seminar Ballot

The University of Minnesota Department of Sociology is currently organized into the specialty areas listed below. After reviewing the Faculty Research Activities brochure, please rank your interest in each area from 1-5 (with 1 being highest and no tied ranks). Then nominate three faculty members to invite to our seminar to discuss their research.

I. Rank the areas by your own interest

AREA RANK (1-5)

Law, Crime, and Deviance: _____

Boyle, Kruttschnitt, Macmillan, Malmquist, Savelsberg, Uggen

Political Sociology and Social Movements: _____

Aminzade, Broadbent, Brustein, Gerteis

Organizations and Work: _____

Anderson, Galaskiewicz, Knoke, Mortimer, Nelson

Stratification: Race, Class, and Gender: _____

Bian, Hartmann, Laslett, Marini

Family and Life Course: _____

Leik, Mortimer

II. Nominate your first, second, and third choice to invite to the seminar. It would also be helpful to note any particular projects that look interesting to you:

Professor Projects

1^st

2^nd

3^rd

The Précis

A précis is a brief summary of a reading selection. In 3991, we will use them to expand our reading list by having students summarize core readings from their areas of interest. In general, a précis should be no more than three or four paragraphs (approximately 200‑300 words) in length, and it should be primarily descriptive in character. These are not intended to be complex creative endeavors. The main objective is simply to give readers some sense of what the selection is about, in a way that allows them to grasp its relationship to other materials in the syllabus. In constructing your précis, you may find it useful to employ the following template:

1. Citation: Indicate the full citation for the reading in ASA format.

2. Thesis: What is the reading's main point? Summarize the argument in your own words, perhaps situating it in the context of other course material. (If the reading contains an abstract, you may wish to use your own summary to clarify or elaborate upon the abstract, rather than simply restating it in different words).

3. Methods, Findings: If the reading is an empirical study, briefly describe the methodology and the central findings.

4. Comments: In a few sentences, provide your "thumb‑nail" evaluation of the reading. Did you find it useful? Clear? Convincing? What are its major strengths or weaknesses? How would you evaluate the quality of the theoretical argument and evidence presented? Your comments should be based on the scholarly caliber of the article, not on whether you agree with the author. Issues of substantive agreement or disagreement are better addressed in your classroom comments.

5. Distribution: Make your précis available to other seminarians by emailing it to them before class and bringing plenty of hard copies to class so that they may refer to it in our discussion.

NOTE: Adapted from Mark Suchman’s syllabus for Law and Sociolegal Studies, Spring, 1999, University of Wisconsin Department of Sociology.