SOCIOLOGY 4977 – SENIOR HONORS PROSEMINAR I

 

Fall 2000, Th 12:45-3:15 in Room TBA

 

Professor: Christopher Uggen          uggen@atlas.socsci.umn.edu  

1160 Social Sciences: 624-4016       www.socsci.umn.edu/~uggen/

Hours: Tu 12:45-3:15 or appt.           www.socsci.umn.edu/~uggen/4977.htm

 

Logic of the Course

The Senior Honors Proseminar I is the second course in a three-semester sequence designed for honors students majoring in sociology. Students in Sociology 4977 will finalize their research problems, develop appropriate methodologies and research instruments, secure human subjects approval, collect original data or identify secondary sources, and begin data analysis. The course will operate as a seminar, with students leading discussions and critiquing their peers.

 

Objectives of the Course

In the Junior Honors Seminar, you developed some core research competencies: using online indexes, summarizing and critiquing articles, writing cogent literature reviews and convincing proposals, and presenting your ideas orally. You also had the opportunity to think and talk about why and how sociological researchers do their work with nine guest speakers. This year, you will be using these competencies and experiences to produce your own research.

 

In the first (Fall) Senior Proseminar, we emphasize conceptualization and measurement. You will narrow your topic to a thesis-sized research question, secure the data and permissions necessary to proceed with your work, identify your three-person thesis committee, and take your first cut at the analysis. In the second (Spring) Senior Proseminar, you will focus on writing and rewriting your thesis. You will unify its component parts into a coherent whole, defend the thesis before your committee, and consider outlets for publication or dissemination of your work.

 

Organization of the Course

Attendance: Because the course is conducted as a seminar, it is especially important for all students to be active participants. Otherwise, it dilutes the experience for everybody. I therefore expect everyone to attend each of the weekly meetings. If you have an irreconcilable schedule conflict (something on the order of kidney dialysis), we will attempt to reschedule the class. If you must miss a single session due to illness, family or medical emergencies, or religious observances, inform me by email prior to the session.

 

Your grade will be determined by your revised project proposal (10% of course grade), the front-end: theory and literature section (25% of grade), human subjects forms (10% of grade), the middle: data, methods, and indicators section (25% of grade), and class participation (10%). The remaining 20% will be determined by short assignments, such as critiquing papers by fellow students, and in-class exercises.

 

A Note on Competition: Everyone in this class is a high achiever, but the only person you are competing with is yourself. Learn what you can from your peers – work habits, inspiring ideas, oral and written presentation techniques -- but do not get distracted making invidious comparisons between yourself and other students: That way madness lies. Trust yourself and your own abilities, work hard, stay organized, and you are sure to write a terrific thesis.

 

Required Texts

I will be distributing the first text at the first seminar meeting, so you need not buy it beforehand. The second text is Babbie’s methods book (I told you not to sell it!), which will be an invaluable reference throughout the year. 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 (even on days when writing assignments are due).

 

1.     American Sociological Association, 1997. ASA Style Guide. 2nd ed. Washington, D.C.: American Sociological Association.

2.     Babbie, Earl. 1998. The Practice of Social Research. 8th or 9th ed. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth. [NOTE: The 9th edition includes some new qualitative material. I’m assuming that everyone who participated in the seminar last year already has the 8th edition. Please let me know if you would like help obtaining a copy]

A Few Other Excellent Texts and Resources, by Subject

1.      QUALITATIVE METHODS: Lofland, John, and Lyn H. Lofland. 1995. Analyzing Social Settings: A Guide to Qualitative Observation and Analysis, 3d. ed. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.

2.      QUANTITATIVE METHODS: Hagan, John, A.R. Gillis, and David Brownfield. 1996. Criminological Controversies: A Methodological Primer.” Boulder, CO: Westview.

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

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

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

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

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

 

Course Policies, Expectations, and Friendly Reminders

1.      GRADING.

·         10% 3-5-page project proposal (due 9/19)

·         25% Front-end Theory and Literature (draft due 10/10, final due 10/17)

·         10% Human Subjects Forms (due 11/2)

·         25% Middle (Data, Methods, and Indicators) (draft due 11/7, final due 11/14)

·         10% Class Participation

·         20% Short assignments, Critiques, and In-class exercises

2. LATE ASSIGNMENTS:  Assignments are due on the dates noted in the syllabus. Late assignments are penalized 5% per day.  If family or medical emergencies prevent you from attending class, you may also fax the assignment to the department fax machine at (612) 624-7020.

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

 

INTRODUCTIONS AND ORIENTATION

 

Week 1

9/7    See the thesis, be the thesis…

·         Handout: ASA Style Guide

·         Big picture stuff: Where you want to be in December and in May

o        Identifying your committee

o        Identifying your models: (thinking beyond Hendrix v. Clapton)

o        Identifying your specialized methodological resources: people, courses, texts

·         Establishing individual timelines.

·         IN-CLASS WORKSHOP:  Write your research question in a single sentence, share it with the class, and we’ll all work it over.

 

THE FRONT END: LITERATURE, THEORY, AND CONCEPTUALIZATION

 

Week 2

9/14  Getting serious about the literature

o        Literature ≠ Theory

o        Expertise: You will know more about your thesis problem than me (you’d better!) or almost anyone else.

·         READ:  Becker, Howard S. 1986. Writing for Social Scientists. Chapter 8: “Terrorized by the Literature.” Pages 135-149. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

·         PREPARE:  Bring a draft of your research proposal. You might get started by revising the research question prepared in class. Be prepared to give a 5-minute informal presentation of your research proposal.

 

Week 3                       

9/19 3-Page Proposals Due 5:00 Tuesday to Uggen

 

3-Page Proposal Guidelines (from the UROP office)

Your narrative proposal must provide a thorough and specific discussion of each of the 5 topics listed below. Failure to address any one of these issues may disqualify your application. Proposal should be typed, double-spaced and approximately 3 pages long.  Your proposal must include:

1.a clear, complete description of your project, your method of inquiry, and expected outcome (Your project description must explain in specific detail what you are going to do. It is not enough to describe the issue you are investigating; you must explain the specific activities you will be engaged in.) This portion should include:

·         a statement of the problem (Students should include a clear statement of hypothesis clearly demarcated in the text of their proposal).

·         citations of relevant sources to demonstrate familiarity with the area of research that you are proposing.

·         a discussion of what your end product  (paper/article/work of art etc.) will be

2.a timetable showing time allotted to each major portion of your project

3.a fully itemized budget (form provided) explaining stipend and expenses in relation to your proposed project (NOTE: optional for thesis students (but not for UROP applicants))

4.discussion of the relationship of your project to the research or scholarly work of your faculty sponsor (NOTE: optional for thesis students (but not for UROP applicants))

5.discussion of your educational objectives in undertaking the project; describe past experiences which prepared you for this project and your future goals

 

9/21  No Class

·         READ:  Do a new/updated literature search and compile a list of five good new sources for our meeting. Who is doing the best work in and around your question?

·         LET’S BE CLEAR ABOUT EXPECTATIONS: Your completed thesis should be built on a foundation of at least 20 books or articles that provide context for and (more importantly) provide impetus to your project. However, I do not want a stand-alone “literature review” this semester. Instead, you will be integrating your literature review with the theory piece due 10/10.

 

Week 4                       

9/28 Theory and conceptualization

o        A necessary evil?

o        How good theorization this semester will bail you out next semester

·         READ: Becker, Howard S. Tricks of the Trade: How to Think about Your Research While You’re Doing It. Chapter 4: “Concepts.” Pages 109-145. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

·         READ: Alford, Robert R. 1998. “The Construction of Arguments.” Pp. 32-53 in The Craft of Inquiry: Theories, Methods, Evidence. New York: Oxford University Press.

·         REVIEW: Babbie, Chapter 5: Conceptualization and Measurement

·         PREPARE: Define 3 core concepts for your study and provide operational definitions for each of them. Use the core concepts to reformulate your research question around Alford’s multivariate, interpretive, or historical paradigm.

 

Week 5

10/5  Generating and Testing Propositions: Qualitative and Quantitative Approaches

o        Hypotheses and propositions

o        Boiling your thesis to its essences

·         READ: Hagan, John. “Testing Propositions about Gender and Crime.” Pp. 17-46 in Criminological Controversies: A Methodological Primer.” Boulder, CO: Westview.

·         READ: Lofland, John, and Lyn H. Lofland. 1995. “Developing Analysis” Pp. 181-203 in Analyzing Social Settings: A Guide to Qualitative Observation and Analysis, 3d. ed. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.

·         PREPARE: Write two or more propositions derived from theory that make explicit reference to your concepts.  

 

Week 6

10/10 Front-end draft due to Uggen & Critics by 5:00 Tuesday 10/10

·         Organization

o        1-paragraph introduction

o        5-page literature review, with substantive heading (e.g. “Findings and Limitations of Research on Sentencing Reform” or “Factors Associated with Outcome Attainment” but NOT “literature review”) and topical subheadings (see style guide p. 19).

o        5-page statement of theory, concepts, and propositions or hypotheses (e.g., “Two Views of Neighborhood Stability and Poverty” or “Conceptualizing Social Movement Outcomes” or “Two Ways of Thinking about Collective Memory”)

o        One paragraph “foreshadowing” of your proposed analytic strategy

 

10/12 Workshop on front-end assignments

o        Learning to rewrite

o        Trust, compromise, and constructive criticism

o        “I don't mind a repetitive chorus; I mind repetitive verse. I mean, it's the same amount of space. Why would you have only three diamonds if you can have six? Once you get that idea out of your head, then, if anything, the trouble is to not have forty of 'em. That's where editing comes in, and rewrites. That's the real secret of everything-rewriting. I always rewrite.” – Lou Reed

·         PREPARE:  Bring a neat list of at least 5 critical but constructive comments on your partner’s front-end paper.

 

THE MIDSECTION: DATA, MEASURES, AND METHODOLOGY

 

Week 7

10/17  Final Front-end due to Uggen Tuesday, 10/17

         

10/19  Human subjects and research ethics

o        Approval that Uggen can grant

o        Approval requiring a full committee review

o        Informed consent, anonymity, deception, and voluntary participation

o        Ethical considerations in writing and collaboration

·         REVIEW Babbie, Chapter 18: The Ethics and Politics of Research

·         PREPARE: Draft of Institutional Review Forms

 

Week 8           

10/26  Primary and Secondary Data Sources

o        Costs and benefits of collecting your own data

o        Norms for undergraduate and graduate research

·         READ:  Singleton, Royce A., and Bruce C. Straits. 1999. “Research Using Available Data.” Pp. 357-392 in Approaches to Social Research, 3d. Ed. New York: Oxford.

·         REVIEW: Babbie, Chapters 9-13.

·         PREPARE:  Identify the best available source of secondary data for your project. Search the archives at ICPSR (www.icpsr.umich.edu/archive1.html) or NACJD (www.icpsr.umich.edu/NACJD/index.html) or some other archive. Record the units of analysis, date of collection, sampling method, and specific questionnaire wording on the items closely related to the concepts of your study. Write up your rationale for choosing to analyze primary or secondary data in your thesis.

 

Week 9

11/2 Getting Your Data: Data Collection and Cleaning

o        Troubleshooting data problems

§         Collecting primary data

§         Cleaning secondary data

·         PREPARE:  Final copy of institutional review forms

 

Week 10         

11/7 MIDSECTION draft due to Uggen & Critics by 5:00 Tuesday 11/7

·         2-page data section: Discuss primary or secondary source, prior studies using data (for secondary), collection procedures (for primary), sample and population,  strengths and weaknesses of the data for your particular purposes.

·         3-page measures section: Discuss operational indicators of the concepts discussed in your theory section. How are the major concepts measured?

·         3-page methodology section: Discuss your research design and analytic strategy.

 

11/9 Workshop on Midsection

·         PREPARE:  Bring a neat list of at least 5 critical but constructive comments on your partner’s paper.

·         REVIEW: Babbie, Chapter 14

·         WORKSHOP  - troubleshooting session

 

Week 11         

11/14 Final Midsection Assignment Due Tuesday at 5:00

 

11/16 No class

 

Week 12         

11/23 Thanksgiving

 

THE (FRONT OF THE) BACK-END: ANALYSIS AND RESULTS

Week 13         

11/30  Univariate, Bivariate, and Multivariate Data Analysis      

o        Tables 1, 2, and 3

o        The elaboration model

·         REVIEW: Babbie, Chapters 15-16

·         PREPARE:  A one-page summary of your analytic strategy.

 

Week 14         

12/7 Taking Stock – Is it thesis yet?

·         PREPARE:  Present a 5-10 minute progress report to the class. Distribute a 1-page handout summarizing your research question, the current status of your data collection and analysis, and preliminary results.

 

                      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.