SC 102-Introduction to Sociology
Spring 2013
Instructor: Emily Barko
Email: barkoe@bc.edu
Office: McGuinn 410A
Office Hours: Wed & Fri: 4-5 p.m. and by appointment
Cell Phone: 508.736.9468
Campus Mail: Box #20/Barko, 410 McGuinn
Class Email: SC00102S@bc.edu
Classroom and Time: O’Neill Library 253; Monday, Wednesday and Friday, 3:00-3:50 p.m.
“None are more hopelessly enslaved than those who falsely believe they are free.” –Johann Wolfgang von Goethe
"All good education does two things at the same time: it conserves the best of what we know and it questions the best of what
we know in case we were wrong." –Richard Hersh
“The sociological imagination enables us to grasp history and biography and the relations between the two within society.
That is its task and its promise.” –C. Wright Mills
Course Concentration
This course offers an introduction to a number of origins, perspectives, basic principles and tool concepts of
sociology with application to studies of societies and cultures deemed “American”—while simultaneously keeping a
broader global network in the periphery of our “American” lens of attention. Through critical and creative thinking
and sociologically sophisticated analyses, we will explore how (seeming) dichotomies of: structure and agency;
freedom and constraint; self and society; and individuals and institutions are far from separate and static, but
rather in constant temporal and contextual communication and negotiation.
Some key topics explored in focusing a variety of sociological perspectives will include: the self and interaction;
cultural capital and consumption; myths of meritocracy; social de/constructions of identity; dis/ability; health and
illness; social stratification; violence; social institutions as sites of everyday life; crime, deviance and social control;
activism; and social change.
The two themes that are emphasized throughout the course include: 1) understanding and applying a Sociological
Imagination at the level of individuals, interactions, and institutions; and 2) the importance of grasping an
introduction to sociology while utilizing a Critical Race Feminist lens in exploring how conceptions of self and
society always intersect one’s positionality, (i.e. social position/location), e.g. as influenced by race, class, gender,
sexuality, nation—and one’s personal biography within history at large.
I. Perennial Questions:
In echoing the work of C. Wright Mills’ “promise” and noting how “[n]o social study that does not come back to the
problems of biography, of history and of their intersections within a society has completed its intellectual journey[,]”
we will continually explore the following Millsian inquiries: 1. What is the structure of this particular society as a
whole? 2. Where does this society stand in human history? 3. What varieties of men and women now prevail in this
society and in this period?
Indeed, this course will likewise emphasize some of the subsequent guiding questions: Is society and/or culture
shaped by nature, nurture, or both? How/are all wo/men created equal as self-evident truth? Is social in/equality
inevitable? Are we all equally free and/or constrained? What is meritocracy? What is “The American Dream?”
How is the personal also political? What do race, class, gender, and sexuality tell us about power relationships in
society? How do we perform or “do” “American” culture at individual, interactional and institutional levels?
2
How/is change possible? How do “life choices” and “life chances” alongside conceptions of “troubles” verses
“issues” matter? Who does/not benefit from change and/or greater social in/equality?
A Critical Race Feminist Lens:
To help interrogate these topics and questions, this course will additionally be shaped by four central themes from
critical race feminism (CRF), which assert the following:
1) Social Identities are historically and culturally specific and change over time.
2) Race, class, gender and sexuality are not separate identities that are easily distinguishable from one
another. These social identities intersect and reinforce each other. For example, once cannot talk about
race without examining its implications for gender and vice versa.
3) CRF acknowledges the importance of laws, policies and institutions in the perpetuation of inequality.
4) Finally, CRF is skeptical of concepts such as objectivity, neutrality and meritocracy. Therefore, ideas of
equality must be critically examined.
II. Historical Perspective:
In the first assigned reading, sociologist C. Wright Mills outlines the “sociological imagination,” which highlights
the connections between history, social structure and personal biography. This course nurtures the sociological
imagination through its socio-historical foundation, its emphasis on multiple perspectives, and an examination on
how history and social structures converge to impinge on the life chances (and influence life choices) of different
categorizations/constructed factions of people.
Further, given the broad topical scope of a course introducing the discipline and practice of sociology, we will
always situate our topical themes and discussions in historical context. Likewise, this course underscores how our
understandings of ourselves and our individual identities, shared relationships, societies, structures and institutions
are inescapably political, situational, socio-cultural and temporal—thus always inseparable (in construction and
connotation) from other social identity categories, (e.g. race, class, gender, sexuality, nationality, dis/ability, age,
and so forth).
Notably, we will grapple with the extent to which biological and socio-cultural re/definitions of self and society
de/stabilize taken-for-granted assumptions about ostensibly innate and fixed categories, particularly as bolstered and
re/inscribed by social “facts” that we take to be Real.
III. Methodology:
Methodologies are the theories that are used to guide research. The course materials are purposely eclectic and draw
from a wide range of sources and methods. We will utilize the work of both “positivist” scholars who often obtain
quantitative data from social surveys and controlled experiments as well as more “interpretive” researchers who
frequently derive qualitative data from fieldwork and interviewing.
Moreover, we will discuss the strengths and weaknesses of particular methodologies, alongside the socio-cultural
politics at work that influence how “we” determine such demarcations (between “strong” and “weak” scientific and
social scientific methodologies), and why. We will explore how and why “we” determine particular forms of
research and corresponding metrics to confer strong or weak measures of validity and/or reliability—and
simultaneously, entertain how we might take for granted the “Truth” of research science more broadly.
Subsequently, alongside our more mainstream academic sources, as often prescriptive and more privileged within
the academy, we will simultaneously consider less-traditional social science informed research and related topics of
inquiry, as based in creative arts, literary, and popular cultural venues—as unexpected origins for social justice
movement, and as channels to potentially more subversive and expansive styles and compositions of both authorship
and audience.
IV. Cultural Diversity:
In echoing the sentiments of Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. (1963): “Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice
everywhere,” attention to cultural diversity will be a salient feature of this course. We will discuss a range of
3
geographical, racial and ethnic groups and their relationships to self, society and power—with heightened attention
to how categories both stabilize and destabilize other categories. For instance, we will consider how historically
social categories (e.g. identities and institutions) are always mutable. (E.g. if all “men” are created equally—who
does/not constitute man/men? How do race, class, gender and sexuality matter in these identity re/constructions
and/or justifications for in/equality?)
Likewise, we will constantly be mindful of how all “Americans,” and/or individuals at large, have not and do not
experience in/equality in the same ways, neither historically nor contemporarily. We will always be looking at
similarities and distinctions within and across groups, while always interrogating seemingly monolithic groups of
Americans and conceptions of American society as ubiquitous, unchanging and Real.
V. Writing Component:
There is a strong writing requirement in this course. Throughout the semester you will be compelled to use your
“sociological imagination” through the completion of three exams, (including a take-home midterm essay exam)—
in tandem with in-class writing reflections, assignments and unannounced quizzes, and through the optional written
participation “Connections Portfolio,” where you will include weekly critical and analytical, sociologically strong
and “imaginative” written responses to the readings of the week. Self-designed writing components presented to
and approved by me, as part of your participation grade, will also be considered.
VI. Creating a Personal Philosophy:
Introduction to Sociology, (SC102), will encourage you to utilize your sociological imagination in developing a
personal philosophy that urges you to see connections between individuals and structures through a quality of mind
where it becomes essential to grasp the interplay of individuals and society, of biography and history, and of self and
the world (Mills 1959).
Moreover, this course will challenge you to critically examine yourself within social order/s, as well as entertain the
following inquiries: how you benefit from and/or are oppressed by your social location; your ideas of self, freedom
and social justice; your vision for yourself and society in the future; and the best ways to realize that vision
considering the very Real/ “real” social constraints that bind us all, (albeit unevenly).
Hopefully this will encourage working for the betterment of humankind in both theory and practice, and within and
across academic and activist arenas. Subsequently, from a more culturally competent standpoint, informed by a
sociological imagination, and as nuanced by gender, race class, sexuality and so forth, many of us might discover we
have been forced (or further forced) out of a social somnambulism of sorts, as we better awaken to the
reverberations of social inequality in micro, meso and macro arenas in our everyday lives—with fastidious focus on
myths of meritocracy and corollary perpetuations of inequality as dependent upon hegemonic scripts of “‘The’
American Dream.”
VII. Course Expectations and Evaluation:
1) Class participation comprises 25% of your overall grade.
This is a reading and participation intensive course. If you miss a class, you are responsible for getting notes from
a classmate. Readings are due on the date they are listed. Come to class ready to discuss them.
A strong participation grade includes the following: regular and engaged class participation in lectures, “current
events,” small and large group discussions, in-class writing assignments, short written reflections assigned alongside
course readings TBA, and unannounced quizzes.
The Connections Portfolio option may also be completed to bolster your participation grade. A
“Connections Portfolio,” as another venue to show that you are actively engaged with the course readings
and classes, will be an ongoing assignment that you work on, as you incorporate critical analyses of and
reflections on the readings, both separately and taken together. Furthermore, alongside more traditional
writing responses, (e.g. essay format, article response)—less traditional forms (that highlight personal
4
creativity and application), used to illuminate your engagement with the course, are also greatly
encouraged. (E.g. you might incorporate connections to: current events, popular culture, everyday
activities and/or events at Boston College, art, advertisements, music lyrics, newspaper clippings, Facebook
exchanges and so forth.) The strongest Connections Portfolios will include a moderate balance between
more and less traditional response formats. More specific components, suggestions and expectations
for the “Connections Portfolio” are further detailed in an addendum at the end of the syllabus.
*In addition, alternate proposals for class participation credit, as well as exam credit, particularly via evaluative
paradigms that you estimate to be more valid measures of your knowledge and engagement with the course
material, will be considered at your request. (However, do come see me to propose/discuss available options early
in the semester.)
Finally, please be aware that within class discussions there can be a tendency to over-generalize one’s own personal
experiences to the overall population. This tendency is especially striking in courses that address gender, race, and
identity politics in general. These topics seem to elicit statements such as: “Well, where I’m from it’s not like that”
or “That’s not my experience, so that’s not true.” However, keep in mind that one’s own experience alone does not
create and/or debunk socio-cultural trends at large. Consequently, and once more, this course is positioned firmly in
C. Wright Mills’ “sociological imagination,” which highlights the connections between history, social structure, and
personal biography—and relationships between (personal) ‘troubles’ and (public) ‘issues.’ Class participation
should do so as well.
2) Three writing intensive, essay and/or short-answer based exams will comprise 75% of your grade.
Exam One is worth 25% of your grade.
Exam Two, (or your Midterm Exam), is worth 25% of your grade.
Exam Three, (or your Final Exam), is worth 25% of your grade.
o Note: you will have the choice to complete two comprehensive take-home essay exams and one
short- answer based in-class exam OR two short-answer based in-class exams and one
comprehensive take-home essay exam.
*********************************************************************************************
Grading Overview and Due Dates:
I. Class Participation (and writing) = 25%: including attendance and participation; quizzes; short writing assignments (in-class and
outside of class); group activities; and the written participation/reflection option via the “Connections Portfolio” assignment, due on Apr, 26th
(Fri.); (see the end of syllabus for further details).
II. Exam One (in class) = 25% : Date: Feb. 22nd (Fri.)
III. Exam Two/Midterm Exam = 25%: Take-home Essay; Distributed on Mar. 20th (Fri) and due on Apr. 8th (Mon)
IV. Exam Three/Final Exam (in class) = 25%: May 9th (Thurs.) 12:30p.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------Total Score: 25% + 25% + 25% + 25% = 100%
*********************************************************************************************
IIX. Academic Integrity:
Academic integrity is a standard of utmost importance in this course. Guidelines for academic integrity in written
work are posted on the Boston College website at: http://www.bc.edu/schools/cas/polisci/integrity.html
If you have any questions pertaining to the academic integrity guidelines, please come and talk with me for
clarification. If you are caught violating Boston College’s policies on academic integrity, you will receive a failing
grade for the assignment and the appropriate Dean will be notified in accordance to the rules set forth by Boston
College.
5
IX. Disability Statement:
Boston College is committed to providing reasonable accommodations and integrated access for students with
disabilities to all available academic, social, and recreational programs and activities. Appropriate support and
referral services are provided by the Disability Services Office, which serves students with hearing, visual, mobility,
medical, and psychiatric disabilities.
If you have a disability, please let me know at the beginning of the semester so I can work with the Disability
Services Office to determine the appropriate accommodations that we can make for you. Further information about
the Disability Services Office can be obtained from the Boston College website at:
http://www.bc.edu/offices/odsd/disabilityservices.html.
If you are unsure whether or not Disability Services are appropriate for your needs, please come and talk with me
and/or make an appointment with Disability Services for a consultation.
X. Required Readings:
*Ferris, Kerry and Jill Stein. 2012. The Real World: An Introduction to Sociology, 3rd Edition. New York: W. W.
Norton & Company.
*Karp, David. 1996. Speaking of Sadness: Depression, Disconnection, and the Meanings of Illness. New York:
Oxford University Press.
*Sternheimer, Karen. 2010. Everyday Sociology Reader: New York: W.W. Norton & Company.
In addition, please note the following:
1) Required Readings (books): these readings are denoted with an asterisk * in the syllabus.
•
These books (listed above) will be available for purchase through the Boston College bookstore, as well as
available through library loan.
2) Course Reserves (articles): these readings can be obtained from Ereserve/Course Reserve or through general
Online Access as specified below:
•
•
To access e-reserve readings: 1) go to the libraries home page, 2) click on “more catalog search options,” 3)
click on “Course/On-line Reserves,” and 3) Search by my last name, Barko. (Note that a recent Fall ’12
change in library search services may ask you to search by the course number, SC001.02 in the search
engine.)
These readings will be denoted by the phrase “Course Reserve” in the syllabus.
3) Online Access (general worldwide web): There are several sources that you are asked to obtain from the
worldwide web; for these articles the syllabus will note that these can be “Accessed Online,” and will include the
hyperlink to the article.
4) PDF Articles Email: To expedite access to course materials, you will see a number of articles that I will send to
you as a PDF via email. These articles will be denoted with the symbol “@PDF” in the syllabus.
5) Finally, please note that the instructor reserves the right to incorporate and/or modify reading assignments
throughout the course.
XI. Reading Schedule:
1. ***Week 1: Introduction to the Course; The Sociological Imagination ***
Jan. 14 (Mon.): First Day of Class; Introduction to the course and to the syllabus.
Jan. 16 (Wed): C. Wright Mills, “The Promise” pp.1-11 @PDF
AND
Horace Miner. 1956. “Body Ritual Among the Nacirema.” American Anthropologist. Pp.503-507. @PDF
6
Jan. 18 (Fri): Erving Goffman. 1959. “Presentation of Self in Everyday Life” (approx. 11 page selection) @PDF
AND
Sternheimer, Chapter 1: Thinking Sociologically and Doing Sociology. Pp.1-15. *
2. ***Week 2: Self and Interaction***
Jan. 21 (Mon.): NO CLASS (MLK Day).
Jan. 23 (Wed.): Charles Horton Cooley. 1902. “The Looking Glass Self.” Human Nature and the Social Order.
New York: Scribner's, pp. 179-185. @PDF
AND
Simon Davis. 2011. “Men as Success Objects and Women as Sex Objects: A Study of Personal
Advertisements.” Pp.28-34. (The Research Craft, Chapter 4), The Practical Skeptic: Readings in Sociology,
5th Edition. Pp. 35-49. Course Reserve.
Jan. 25 (Fri.): In Sternheimer, Chapter 3: Self and Interaction, Pp. 47-77. *
AND
Erik Eckholm. 2012. “Gay ‘Conversion Therapy’ Faces Tests in Court. The New York Times. Accessed
Online: http://www.nytimes.com/2012/11/28/us/gay-conversion-therapy-faces-tests-in-courts.html
3. ***Week 3: Cultural Capital: Conspicuous (and Inconspicuous) Consumption***
Jan. 28 (Mon): In Sternheimer, Chapter 2: Culture, Consumption, and Media, Pp. 25-43. *
AND
Jessica Valenti. 2012. “The Upside of Ugly.” The Nation. Accessed Online:
http://www.thenation.com/blog/169208/upside-ugly#
Jan. 30 (Wed.): Abigail Sullivan Moore. 2012.“Prepping Students for Sorority Rush.” New York Times. Accessed
Online: http://www.nytimes.com/2012/07/22/education/edlife/prepping-students-for-sorority-rush.html
AND
John Larew. 1991. “Why are Droves of Unqualified, Unprepared Students Getting into our Top Colleges?
Because their Dads are Alumni.” The Washington Monthly. Pp.10-15. @PDF
Feb. 1 (Fri): Peggy McIntosh. 1998. “White Privilege: Unpacking the Invisible Knapsack” Pp. 1-4. @PDF
AND
Linda Bacon. 2009. “Reflections on Fat Acceptance: Lessons Learned from Privilege”
(An essay based on a keynote speech delivered at the conference of the National Association to Advance
Fat Acceptance August 1, 2009.) Pp.1-12. @PDF
4. ***Week 4: Further Unpacking Privilege and Myths of Meritocracy: Class, Gender and Sexuality***
Feb 4 (Mon): In Ferris and Stein, Chapter 7, “Social Class: The Structure of Inequality” Pp. 185-216. *
AND
Stephanie Coontz, 2012. “The Myth of the Male Decline.” The New York Times. Accessed Online:
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/09/30/opinion/sunday/the-myth-of-male-decline.html
AND
Suzanne Venker. 2012. “The War on Men.” Fox News. Accessed Online:
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/09/30/opinion/sunday/the-myth-of-male-decline.html.
Feb 6 (Wed): In Ferris and Stein, Chapter 8, “Constructing Gender and Sexuality” Pp. 247-277. *
AND
Ruth Padawer. 2012. “What’s So Bad About a Boy Who Wants to Wear a Dress.” The New York Times.
Accessed Online: http://www.nytimes.com/2012/08/12/magazine/whats-so-bad-about-a-boy-who-wants-towear-a-dress.html
Feb 8 (Fri): In Sternheimer, Chapter 7, “Gender and Sexuality.” Pp. 173-202.*
7
AND
Sarah Schweitzer. 2012. “Massachusetts Women at Forefront of Pay Gap: Disparity with Men Among
Highest in the U.S.” The Boston Globe. Accessed Online:
http://www.boston.com/news/local/massachusetts/2012/12/10/massachusetts-women-forefront-paygap/GgRg7bLVbAWMKqCpae3trK/story.html
5. ***Week 5: Social De/constructions of Race and Ethnicity***
Feb. 11 (Mon): Prudence Carter. 2003. “‘Black Cultural Capital, Status Positioning, and Schooling Conflicts for
Low-Income African American Youth.” Social Problems. Pp. 136-152. @PDF
AND
Motoko Rich. 2012. “For Young Latino Readers, an Image Is Missing.” The New York Times. Accessed
Online: http://www.nytimes.com/2012/12/05/education/young-latino-students-dont-see-themselves-inbooks.html
Feb. 13 (Wed): in Sternheimer, Chapter 8. “Race and Ethnicity” Pp. 209-236.*
AND
Carolyn Chen. 2012. “Asians: Too Smart for Their Own Good?” The New York Times. Accessed
Online: http://www.nytimes.com/2012/12/20/opinion/asians-too-smart-for-their-own-good.html
Feb. 15- (Fri): in Ferris, Chapter 8, “Race and Ethnicity as Lived Experience” Pp. 222-244.*
AND
Charles A. Gallagher. 2011. “Miscounting Race: Explaining Whites’ Misperception of Racial Group
Size.” (The Research Craft, Chapter 5), The Practical Skeptic: Readings in Sociology, 5th Edition. Pp. 3549. Course Reserve.
6. ***Week 6: Dis/ability; General Review; and Exam One***
Feb. 18 (Mon): Joseph P. Shapiro “The New Civil Rights: The Americans With Disabilities Act has unlocked the
door; now it's time to open it.” Accessed Online: http://www.disabilityculture.org/course/article3.htm
AND
General Course Review for Friday (2/22) exam; bring your questions to class.
Feb. 20 (Wed): Exam One Review continued.
AND
In-class survey/course feedback.
Feb. 22 (Fri): Exam One (in class).
7. ***Week 7: Health and Illness: Mind, Body, Culture and Environment***
Feb. 25 (Mon): - In Ferris, Chapter 14, “Health and Illness,” Pp. 411-435.*
Feb. 27 (Wed): Carrie Arnold. 2012. “Is Anorexia Caused by Runway Culture? New Science Says No.” Slate.
Accessed Online:
http://www.slate.com/articles/health_and_science/medical_examiner/2012/09/what_causes_anorexia_and_
bulimia_new_eating_disorder_research_says_it_s_not_a_cultural_disease_.html
AND
Tetyana. 2012. Science of Eating Disorders. “Gender Nonconformity, Transsexuality and Eating
Disorders.” Accessed Online: http://www.scienceofeds.org/2012/05/15/gender-nonconformitytranssexuality-and-eating-disorders/
AND
Tetyana. 2012. Science of Eating Disorders. “EDs Don’t Discriminate: Psychiatric Comorbidity in Men
with Eating Disorders.” Accessed Online: http://www.scienceofeds.org/2012/04/28/what-about-menpsychiatric-comorbidity-in-men-with-eating-disorders/
8
Mar. 1 (Fri):
Steve Kroll-Smith, Phil Brown, and Valerie J. Gunter. 2000. “Introduction: Environments and Diseases in a
Postnatural World” Pp.1-6 and Chapter 1, “Knowledge, Citizens and Organizations: An Overview of
Environments, Diseases, and Social Conflict.” Pp.9-25. Illness and the Environment: A Reader in
Contested Medicine. Course Reserve.
SPRING VACATION MARCH 4th-8th: NO CLASSES
***Week 8: Speaking of Sadness: Individual, Interactional, and Institutional Intersections***
Mar. 11 (Mon): In Karp, Chapters 1 & 2, “Living With Depression” and “The Dialectics of Depression,” Pp.3-49. *
AND
Martha Rosenburg. 2012. “Former FDA Reviewer Speaks Out About Intimidation, Retaliation and
Marginalizing of Safety.” Truthout. Access Online: http://truth-out.org/news/item/10524-former-fdareviewer-speaks-out-about-intimidation-retaliation-and-marginalizing-of-safety
Mar. 13 (Wed): In Karp, Chapters 3 & 4, “Illness and Identity” Pp. 50-77. *
Mar. 15 (Fri): In Karp, Chapter 4, “The Meanings of Medication,” Pp. 78-103. *
AND
Richard A. Friedman. 2012. “Good News for Mental Illness in Health Law.” The New York Times:
Accessed Online: http://www.nytimes.com/2012/07/10/health/policy/health-care-law-offers-widerbenefits-for-treating-mental-illness.html
***Week 9: Speaking of Sadness (Continued.)***
Mar. 18 (Mon.): In Karp, Chapters 5 & 6, “Coping and Adapting” and “Family and Friends” Pp. 104-164. *
Mar. 20 (Wed): In Karp, Chapter 7, “Sickness, Self, and Society”; Postscript; Appendix Pp. 165-197. *
Mar. 22 (Fri): D.L. Rosenhan. 1973. “On Being in Insane Places.” The Practical Skeptic: Readings in Sociology, 5th
Edition. (2011). Pp. 276-283. Course Reserve.
AND
Distribution of Exam #2: Take-home Sociological Autobiographical Essay; Due Apr. 8th (Mon.)
***Week 10: De/constructing and Re/constructing Violence***
Mar. 25 (Mon.): Melinda Henneberger. 2012. “Why I won’t be cheering for old Notre Dame.” The Washington
Post. Accessed Online: http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/she-the-people/wp/2012/12/04/why-i-wontbe-cheering-for-old-notre-dame/
AND
Elizabeth A. Armstrong, Laura Hamilton, and Brian Sweeny. 2006. “Sexual Assault on Campus:
A Multilevel, Integrative Approach to Party Rape.” The Practical Skeptic: Readings in Sociology, 5th
Edition (2011). Pp.284-301. Course Reserve.
Mar. 27 (Wed): Richard Friedman. 2012. “In Gun Debate, a Misguided Focus on Mental Illness.” The New York
Times. Accessed Online: http://www.nytimes.com/2012/12/18/health/a-misguided-focus-on-mental
illness-in-gun-control-debate.html
AND
Frank Bruni. 2012. “Pro Football’s Violent Toll.” The New York Times. Accessed Online:
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/12/04/opinion/bruni-pro-footballs-violent-toll.html
Mar. 30 (Fri): NO CLASS: (Easter Break)
9
***Week 11: Stratification and Class Intersections***
Apr. 1 (Mon.): NO CLASS: Easter Break
Apr. 3 (Wed.): In Sternheimer, “Social Institutions,” Pp. 243-261 (only). *
AND
Jodi Kantor. 2012. “Elite Women Put a New Spin on an Old Debate.” The New York Times. Access
Online: http://www.nytimes.com/2012/06/22/us/elite-women-put-a-new-spin-on-work-life-debate.html
Apr. 5 (Fri): Michael Moore. 2009. “Capitalism: A Love Story” (Documentary Film: 127 min).
***Week 12: Examining Social Institutions as Sites of Everyday Life***
Apr. 8 (Mon): Michael Moore Discussion, continued;
AND
Exam #2: Due In-Class
Apr. 10 (Wed): In Ferris and Stein. Chapter 10, “The Macro-Micro Link in Social Institutions: Politics, Education
and Religion. Pp. 286-319. *
AND
Jason DeParle. 2012. “For Poor, Leap to College Often Ends in a Hard Fall.” The New York Times.
Accessed Online: http://www.nytimes.com/2012/12/23/education/poor-students-struggle-as-class-plays-agreater-role-in-success.html
Apr. 12: (Fri): In Sternheimer, “Stratification,” Pp. 133-168. *
AND
James Loewen. 2011. “The Land of Opportunity.” The Practical Skeptic: Readings in Sociology, 5th
Edition. Pp. 317-326. Course Reserve.
***Week 13: Crime, Deviance and Social Control***
Apr. 15 (Mon.): NO CLASS: (Patriot’s Day)
Apr. 17 (Wed): In Sternheimer, Chapter 5, “Crime and Deviance.” Pp. 105-132. *
AND
Bridget O’Donnell. 2012. “Shanghai Metro tells sexily-dressed female passengers to expect harassment.”
Shanghiist. Access Online:
http://shanghaiist.com/2012/06/26/shanghai_metro_to_scantily_clad_wom.php
Apr. 19 (Fri): Emile Durkheim. (1895, 1938 trans.) “The Normality of Crime.” The Practical Skeptic: Readings
in Sociology, 5th Edition (2011). Pp. 262-263. Course Reserve.
AND
Graham Bowley. 2012. “Afghan Prosecutor Faces Criticism for Her Pursuit of ‘Moral Crimes.’” The New
York Times. Accessed Online: http://www.nytimes.com/2012/12/29/world/asia/afghan-prosecutor-facesattacks-over-her-pursuit-of-moral-crimes.html
***Week 14: Social Change***
Apr. 22 (Mon.): In Ferris and Stein, Chapter 16, “Social Change: Looking Toward Tomorrow.” Pp.484-505. *
AND
Alexia LaFata. 2012. “An Attempt to Humanize Feminists.” The Heights. Accessed Online:
http://www.bcheights.com/an-attempt-to-humanize-feminists-1.2956390
(Note: this article was written by one of your peers, enrolled in this Intro Sociology course last semester, Fall 2012.)
Apr. 24 (Wed): Randall Collins. 1998. “The Sociological Eye and Its Blinders.” The Practical Skeptic: Readings in
Sociology, 5th Edition (2011). Pp. 397-403. Course Reserve.
AND
10
Gloria Steinem. 1986. “If Men Could Menstruate” Steinem, Gloria. "If Men Could Menstruate." Everyday
Acts of Rebellion. Accessed Online:
http://www.haverford.edu/psych/ddavis/p109g/steinem.menstruate.html
Apr. 26 (Fri): Allan G. Johnson. 1997. “What Can We Do? Becoming Part of the Solution: Social Strategies to
Deal with Privilege and Oppression.” Mapping the Social Landscape: Readings in Sociology, 6th Edition
(2012). Ed. Susan J. Ferguson. Pp. 649-660. Course Reserve.
AND
 “Connections Portfolios”/Participation Portfolios are Due Today.
***Week 15: Class Conclusions***
Apr. 28 (Mon): Course Review/Course Catch-up Continued.
Apr. 30 (Wed): Last Day of Class; Class Wrap-Up and Final Exam Review.
May 9 (Thurs): FINAL EXAMINATION, 12:30p: Cumulative In-Class Final Exam.
*********************************************************************************************
The Connections Portfolio, Further Addendum
*********************************************************************************************
From the Syllabus:
A “Connections Portfolio,” as another venue to show that you are actively engaged with the course readings and classes, will be
an ongoing assignment that you work on, as you incorporate critical analyses of and reflections on the readings, both separately
and taken together. Moreover, alongside more traditional writing responses, (e.g. essay format, article response)—less traditional
forms (that highlight personal creativity and application), used to illuminate your engagement with the course, are also greatly
encouraged. (E.g. you might incorporate connections to current events, popular culture, everyday activities and/or events at
Boston College, art, advertisements, music lyrics, newspaper clippings, Facebook exchanges and so forth.) A strong
Connections Portfolio will include a moderate balance between more and less traditional response formats.
Number of Entries:
Aim to write one to three entries per week, with one serving as an ideal minimum if you are using the Portfolio as a large portion
of your participation grade. However, both quality and quantity will be considered, with greater emphasis on the former.
•
•
Note that an entry should be in response to the readings assigned for the day.
Notwithstanding, you are welcome (and encouraged) to include and connect previous readings to a present class day
response; however, the central attention for the current entry should surround at least one of the readings assigned for
that day.
I. Responses: Traditional Type:
Traditional Responses likely echo reflection responses you have submitted in your other classes.
•
For example, you might use the following criteria: (a) an introduction that distinctly states your topic and why it is
important; (b) responses should have a logical flow with supporting evidence from the readings and lecture; (c) a
succinct critique of the pertinent issues; (d) and all papers should be typed (12pt), double spaced, numbered and
stapled.
Note: Your overarching aim should be on providing some kind of critical analysis, NOT simply a summary of what the author
states.
Further note: the above is just ONE example of a traditional response format. The above criteria are used as an example for a
two-page response paper (from a different course). You might, instead, prefer to write a shorter—or—longer response. The style
of your paper can also vary as to best suit your own writing strengths.
***The only requisite criteria to traditional responses include: 1) a thesis (what is your argument?) and 2) integration with the
course material assigned for the day you are writing.
11
Some Qs/topics you might address:
Highlighting limitations of the work: e.g. contradictions, reductionistic thinking and/or overgeneralizations, weak
evidence or lack of evidence. How could the author strengthen his/her work?
Highlighting strengths: does a current author bolster and/or nuance and/or challenge a previous author we’ve
encountered? How/where/why?
What might be larger implications of a work or series of works—e.g. in activist, academic, political and/or professional
arenas?
Why might a particular thesis or idea resonate so strongly for you in this course and/or alongside your other
academic/personal pursuits; why/how—and to what, if any, ends?
How effectively does the author employ a sociological perspective and/or sociological imagination? Are the author’s
politics in line with and/or at odds with the core tenants of critical race feminism (in the syllabus)?
II. Less Traditional Response Examples:
•
•
•
•
•
Here you might want to link the readings assigned to Introduction to Sociology with examples/artifacts/evidence you
encounter in your everyday life, (which is everywhere!)
For example, you might cut out a magazine ad, newspaper article; print a Facebook conversation, Twitter thread,
clothing label—any artifact where in which you can express some kind of pronounced commentary and connection
between the readings and your everyday examples.
You might also take your own photographs and/or write your own ethnographic descriptions, e.g. encountering a
girl/boy gender binary in a children’s toy section that reinscribes “doing gender” scripts. (Or, perhaps you encounter
subversive counter-examples to challenge “normative” socialization?)
Conversations amongst friends/strangers (overheard)—with subsequent analysis might be another venue for you to
make connections. Here you would want to type up an informal transcript to the best of your recollection, and then
provide commentary (again, as linked to the course readings).
Personal poetry, artwork, short stories, etc. are also submission types you might entertain.
***The only requisite criteria to non-traditional responses mirror those for a traditional submission: 1) a thesis (what is your
argument?) and 2) integration with the course material assigned for the day you are writing.
•
•
However here, your thesis/statement/main point can be less (formally) explicit. (For example, a “thesis” in a poem will
likely be much different than a thesis in an essay response.)
In addition, you want to integrate course material with non-course specific works, (i.e. your everyday
examples/artifacts/evidence). (You can also connect Introductory Sociology course readings with those from another
course and/or alternate academic sources of your choosing as yet another example of a non-traditional submission, but
do give priority attention to the current course material you are responding to for that day.
Moderate Balance of More and Less Traditional Responses:
This means that you do NOT have to submit the exact same number of traditional and non-traditional entries, but you should aim
for an approximate ratio no larger than 3:1 (in favor of the style of submission you prefer) for the most credit available from the
Portfoli; i.e. for every 3 traditional responses you submit, include1 non-traditional response, or vice versa.
Feel free to also balance time/effort. For instance, if for a Monday class you write a lengthy essay (or time-consuming succinct
critical retort); for Wednesday you might write a shorter (less taxing) reflection, connecting a magazine advertisement to “white
privilege” or “hegemonic masculinity” and so forth.
The following are some questions from former students:
Q: Quick question about the Connections Portfolio. As far as the more formally structured entries are concerned, is it alright to
bring in personal experience/opinions/pronouns into the reflection? In past courses I've taken, I've been able to do this, but
every course is structured differently, so I just figured I would ask!
•
A: Yes, this is definitely fine to do--and encouraged. However, just be careful to do so in a sociologically informed
way. E.g. I might use my own experience growing up to relate it to what we discuss in regard to "doing gender,"
perhaps as an example that elucidates or conversely challenges the reading. With this, I would want to be careful to 1)
link my experience/argument to topics of our course/readings, and 2) remember that my (perhaps contradictory)
experience doesn't disprove a sociological phenomenon at large, but might raise new questions. For instance, I might
talk about playing on all boys soccer teams growing up and thus not feeling gender discrimination. This would not
prove that gender discrimination doesn't exist; instead, I might ask what variables/factors seemed to create an alternate
12
experience for me. Or, perhaps further reflection might allow me to realize that while overt discrimination wasn't
evident, covert instances were abound.....etc.....
Q: I just had a question about the connections portfolios. Do you want us to write an entry for each of the assigned readings?
A: I would aim to create 2-3 portfolio submissions per week. This might mean that you respond to readings for M or M
&W/W&F, etc; or MWF. For a submission, I would focus your attention on the readings assigned for that day.
(However you do not have to include all the readings for that day, and you are not limited to only those readings
assigned for that day--but all/both/at least one reading (say assigned for September 10th) should be part of a
connections response for September 10th.
Feedback:
Please come to my office hours, make appointments, and/or email me with questions/sample submissions, etc.
While I do not want to micro-manage your work production and force you to check-in with me a certain number of times
throughout the semester, I encourage you to devise a feedback/extra help schedule with me that suits your own needs as/if
needed.
•
My mailbox is #20/Barko in 410 McGuinn Hall. This is the sociology graduate lounge, right outside my office in
410A. Handing me hardcopies of your work (in class or in my mailbox) will likely be the most efficient method to
receiving my feedback on portfolio work—second of course to meeting with me live. You are also welcome to send
me your submissions over email, but the response rate might be slightly slower (depending upon the volume of new
inbox messages).
•
I will aim to provide feedback within a week of receiving your work. Depending upon overall volume mass of requests
(or lack there of), it is possible I will be able to offer same day feedback—or need a bit more additional time beyond
the week maximum response aim. If your feedback request is time-sensitive and/or a week has passed (or is nearing)
without my feedback, please feel free to relay and/or remind me of these details.