Editorial Board:
Editor:
George H. Conklin,
 North Carolina
 Central University

Board:
Bob Davis
 North Carolina
 Agricultural and
 Technical State
 University

Richard Dixon,
 UNC-Wilmington

Ken Land,
 Duke University

Miles Simpson,
 North Carolina
 Central University

Ron Wimberley,
 N.C. State University

Robert Wortham,
 North Carolina
 Central University

® 
Volume 4, Number 1
Spring 2006
 
 

Eradicating Sociological Illiteracy:
Equipping a New Generation of Sociologists* 

by
Robert Wortham
North Carolina Central University

    A couple of years ago I encountered an article in The Chronicle of Higher Education by Judith Shapiro (2000) entitled “From Sociological Illiteracy to Sociological Imagination.”  This article caught my attention since Shapiro is a cultural anthropologist and a college president.  Being a sociologist who also teaches a cultural anthropology course, I was interested in what Shapiro had to say.

    As I read the article, I encountered many statements that reiterated concerns expressed by my colleagues.  Shapiro (2000) argued that:
 

1. Students often are not encouraged to see beyond their personal experiences and fail to appreciate how social and historical forces shape the world.
2. The general public is not aware of what sociologists do since sociologists generally interact with elite groups.
3. Sociology instructors have not equipped their students with the analytical tools needed to understand the impact of structural forces on daily life.
4. Many students are involved in service learning projects, but rarely are they encouraged to move beyond their personal experiences.  For example, students may work in an urban soup kitchen and never be encouraged to investigate the social, political and economic dynamics of urban poverty.

    As I reflected on Shapiro’s remarks and considered how I might address an audience that included sociology faculty, students and applied sociologists, I began to consider ways that sociologists might “equip a new generation of sociologists.”  C. Wright Mills’ reflections on the sociological imagination provided a beginning point.  Mills (1959) reminded me that individuals reside in societies within an interactive, historical context and that persons must distinguish “personal troubles” and “social issues.”  The sociological imagination emerges as individuals perceive how their lives are shaped by prevailing social structures.  Mills believed that this awareness would lead to social action.

    Given the concerns expressed by Shapiro and other colleagues and given Mills’ call to action, perhaps it is now time for sociologists to rethink how the teaching of sociology is approached.  Is the next generation of sociologists being provided with the tools needed?  Are structural (curriculum) changes needed?  Perhaps sociological illiteracy can be minimized if the following seven structural changes are implemented.

    First, it is time to revisit the introductory sociology course.  Since some departments offer several introductory level courses that satisfy the school’s social science requirement, the remarks about the introductory course may be extended to the introductory course cluster.  The introductory sociology course is one of our best marketing tools.  Often it is the only course that 90 – 95 percent of students take.  Here is where students are invited to embrace the sociological imagination and experience how social forces impact their lives.

    But how do we approach the introductory course?  Is this a course that seasoned faculty enjoy teaching, or is this course primarily relegated to junior faculty and graduate assistants.  The introductory course may function as a proving ground whereby beginning instructors may enhance their teaching skills, but do we want to stop here?  Perhaps the profession would be served better if the introductory course were perceived as a primary recruiting venue and innovative teaching faculty were encouraged to become more involved.  Could it be that we are not investing enough in the introductory course?

    Second, the introductory course must be more that a brief review of the literature on selected key concepts.  Are we providing the theoretical, analytical and methodological tools needed to foster the sociological imagination, or are we simply encouraging students to memorize facts?  Do we bother to develop and test concepts empirically?   Are we encouraging students to apply the sociological perspective to their analysis of everyday life events?  Classroom experiences will be more productive if students are encouraged to “do some sociology” rather than merely “learn about sociology” (Stark 2004).  Students retain more information if they are encouraged to apply what they have learned.

    Perhaps we need to revisit some of our classic analytical concepts like Wirth’s (1938) “Urbanism as a Way of Life.”  Once students begin to understand that the quality of urban life can be influenced by such factors as size, density and heterogeneity, they can appreciate how social forces and social structures shape human behavior.  Students need to gain an understanding of the nature of society and such core concepts as norms, deviance, social structure, socialization, stratification and social change, but have we adequately introduced our students to the sociological perspective if these concepts are presented without also introducing students to the major theoretical paradigms?  If students fail to learn how to test sociological claims empirically, has the sociological imagination been adequately stimulated and developed?  We can show students how the sociological perspective is relevant to understanding their everyday life experiences if we are willing to lay a firm theoretical and methodological foundation in the introductory course.

    Third, could sociology majors be served better if they were encouraged to take courses in sociological theory, statistics and research methods soon after completing the introductory course?  These courses help students perfect their understanding of the analytical tools of the trade.  When these courses are placed near the end of a student’s program of study, are students being led to believe that these tools are not important?

    It is time to de-mystify sociological theory and research methods.  Theories are perspectives, points of view.  With each theoretical paradigm, different questions are asked, different factors are addressed and different assumptions are made.  Theories are tools, which enable persons to discuss the nature of social phenomena.

    Likewise, sociologists are concerned with identifying patterns of behavior, describing social structures, noting associations among factors and specifying variations among these associations.  Statistics and research courses provide students with the analytical tools needed to understand these associations.  These courses introduce students to the different measures of association.  As students learn when to apply these measures, they are able to embrace the sociological perspective and engage the sociological imagination.

    Some may argue that this curriculum shift will drive majors away.  This is possible.  We may loose students who are not serious about sociology, but those who are committed will gain more from their upper division courses as classical and contemporary studies can now be evaluated critically.  If a student were to realize that he or she does not like sociology, would it not be better to discover this early so that other options may be explored?  This approach may be fairer to the student.

    Fourth, more can be demanded from our students.  In the movie Field of Dreams, Kevin Costner is told, “if you build it, they will come.”  Faculty could take a similar approach with their students.  If we require it and expect it, students will perform.  Perhaps we forget that students are “sizing us up.”  They want to know how much effort is going to be required with each course, and how this will impact their available time?  If our students know that we are serious about our expectations and if they know that we really care about their professional development, they will meet our expectations.

    Rational choice theory (Hechter 1987; Becker 1976) has helped me gain a clearer understanding of student and faculty expectation levels.  Goods and services can be either too costly or not costly enough.  To the extent that the future generation of sociologists does not possess the theoretical, analytical and methodological tools needed to embrace the sociological perspective, their preparation has not been costly enough.

    Fifth, do faculty understand how they are perceived by students?  Are we seen as approachable or as cold, aloof and uncaring.  Do students experience our love and passion for our craft, or do they see someone who is “tired and worn out.”  Teaching faculty work hard.  Some faculty members routinely teach four and five different preparations while others maintain heavy research agendas.  Some faculty members try to do both.  Committee assignments are endless.  These work conditions are less than perfect, but it is still our responsibility to let students know how exciting sociology can be even when it is not being offered in the best work environment?  As Stark (2004) asks in his introductory text, “if we had it to do all over, would we still become a sociologist?”  This question deserves an honest answer.

    The sixth structural change addresses the willingness of faculty to actively involve students in the learning process.  Does this mean that we must become entertainers?  This question has sparked much debate.  Perhaps a better question would be “how do we get and keep our students’ attention?”  Posing the question this way suggests that faculty must be willing to develop creative, innovative teaching strategies.  We may not need to become entertainers, but it is important that our classes be perceived as interesting and challenging.  If this is accomplished, we may be able to generate a passion for the sociological craft, and this will enable students to explore new horizons. 

    Students today juggle many obligations related to school and work.  By calling attention to this, I am not suggesting that less be demanded from our students.  However, I am suggesting that faculty provide instructional experiences that are relevant and that will enable students to acquire job-related skills that are required in an information society.   Students devote the time necessary to meet course expectations if course requests are relevant and stated clearly.  While faculty adjust teaching and research agendas to meet changing workload requirements, students adjust their class performance to meet perceived instructor expectations.  Just as faculty may not want to work with classes that lack motivated students, students do not want to be saddled with classes that are not perceived as relevant.

    If our task is to prepare the next generation of sociologists, are we willing to make curriculum changes that will enable students to appreciate the power of the sociological perspective and the sociological imagination?  We need to make it clear to our students that their sociology classes are providing them with opportunities to enhance marketable skills like critical thinking, data analysis, creative writing and public speaking.  Also, service learning experiences and internships deserve more attention.

    Students are constantly asking me about sociology internships.  They know that relevant job-related experiences are necessary if they are to be competitive in a job search.  Sociology programs could meet this need if more service learning internships were developed and if these internships invited students to understand how social forces inform the internship setting.  Internship experiences would enable students to develop and employ the sociological imagination.

    The seventh structural change concerns the profession’s willingness to offer its research findings in formats that are understandable and available to the general public.  Sociologists can offer valid social commentary on local issues.  For example, sociologists could be called upon to demonstrate how density and mixed land use development could impact a local community’s quality of life (Davison and Smith 2003; Regoeczi 2002).  How will the general public be able to appreciate our insights on an issue like this if our findings remain buried in journal articles, research monographs and technical books?  Traditional communication venues target a limited audience.    Professionals need to converse, but it is also important that social commentators interact with the general public.

    Through their sponsorship of an electronic journal, the North Carolina Sociological Association (NCSA) is taking an important first step in providing a communication venue that will result in a better sociologically informed public.  The journal is entitled Sociation Today, and it may be viewed at  www.sociationtoday.org.  Its mission is to serve as a refereed journal and clearinghouse of important sociological information that is available in an easily understandable, user-friendly format.  Sociation Today is devoted to short articles, journal article reviews, book reviews, applied studies, teaching aids, editorials and comments on important social issues that may prompt discussion among sociologists, government officials, planners and the general public.  This new communication venue should allow more people to gain a clearer understanding of the sociological imagination and represents one approach that can be taken to eradicate sociological illiteracy.

    In conclusion, how might sociologists begin to eradicate sociological illiteracy and equip the next generation of sociologists?  We can begin by encouraging students to embrace the sociological imagination in the introductory course.  Second, theory and methods courses could be introduced earlier in the curriculum, and we could enhance applied learning experiences by involving more students in internships and/or service learning experiences.  Third, our students may be able to develop a greater appreciation for the sociological imagination if we are more assessable, and the general public may take our work more seriously if we are willing to share our insights in easily understandable, user-friendly formats. 

    Finally, and most importantly, are we willing to embrace the sociological craft with renewed passion?  Do we love what we do?  Enthusiasm and passion promote excellence.  Years ago Mills challenged individuals to engage the sociological perspective and enhance the sociological imagination.  Will we accept this challenge, or will we let sociological illiteracy prevail?

*An earlier version was presented as the Presidential Address at the North Carolina Sociological Association at the 2001 annual meeting. 

Becker, Gary. 1976. The Economic Approach to Human Behavior. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Davison, Elizabeth and William Smith. “Exploring Accessibility Versus Opportunity Crime Factors.” Sociation Today, Volume 1, Number 1 (Fall 2003) http://www.ncsociology.org/sociationtoday/raleigh.htm

Hechter, Michael. 1987. Principles of Group Solidarity. Berkeley: University of California Press.

Mills, C. Wright. 1959. The Sociological Imagination. New York: Oxford University Press.

Regoeczi, Wendy. 2002. “The Impact of Density: The Importance of Nonlinearity and Selection on Flight and Fight Responses.” Social Forces 81:505 V530.

Shapiro, Judith. 2000. “From Sociological Illiteracy to Sociological Imagination.” The Chronicle of Higher Education March 31: A68.

Stark, Rodney. 2004. Sociology: Internet Edition. Ninth Edition. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth/Thomson Learning.

Wirth, Louis. 1938. “Urbanism as a Way of Life.” American Journal of Sociology  44:8 V20.

©2006 by the North Carolina Sociological Association