|
Thanks to everyone who responded to my
questions. I want to make a few points of clarification.
I probably should've mentioned that the readers I put together for my courses include both journal articles and book chapters. So it's not that I don't use articles from sociological journals--it's that I'm finding it more and more difficult to justify making students plod through them, as I said in my original post. Second, I fully realize, as Kathleen pointed out, that not all articles are empirical and that not all empirical articles are quantitative. My intention wasn't to debate the merits of quantitative versus qualitative approaches. Regardless of whether an article is empirical, or primarily quantitative or qualitative, my question was only whether there were really that many articles out there that folks thought important enough to expose our students to. Frankly, I'm not at all convinced by many of the responses that people offered, namely: that reading journal articles helps students understand the "systematic application of sociological concepts, theories, issues, and concerns"; that scholarly journal articles are the major way--or even one major way--of making our research public; that we should hold up our journal articles as a model for how students' own papers should be written and organized; that we should use articles to help students learn to deal with the frustration of understanding only pieces of what they read; or that the struggle to understand journal articles can be a useful experience. I think what I'm least convinced by,
though, is the argument that making students read journal articles will
help socialize them into the discipline. Should this even be our goal at the
undergraduate level--to socialize students into sociology as a discipline? Or
should it be to help them understand what the sociological perspective offers? I
think there's a huge difference between the two approaches. "Forcing" students
to read and think about the issues raised in a journal article, in my opinion,
is very different from socializing them into the discipline. Are we
teaching/training undergraduates or graduate students? I think our content and
objectives depend upon our answers to that question. Most of my students, for
instance, can't tell me what sociology is or how it differs from the other
social sciences. And these are junior and senior sociology majors. Are journal
articles really going to help them clarify things? I don't believe they will.
From my perspective, all of the issues
that I and others have raised are empirical issues--empirical issues that
haven't really been addressed, let alone resolved, by sociologists who study
teaching. Michael mentioned, for instance, that his students "learned quite a
bit" and "learned tremendously." I'm not doubting that they did; I'm just
wondering how we're measuring learning and whether we can be so sure of
ourselves. Shouldn't we start to empirically examine some of the positions that
we've taken for granted for so long--like that struggling through a scholarly
article is a meaningful learning experience, for example?
All of this notwithstanding, thanks
again, folks. As always, your comments have been helpful as I continue to
rethink and clarify my own positions on the teaching of our
discipline.
Best,
Mike *********************** Michael DeCesare California State University, Northridge Department of Sociology 336 Santa Susana Hall 18111 Nordhoff Street Northridge, CA 91330-8318 818.677.7198 818.677.2059 (Fax) [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.csun.edu/~mdecesare
|
- TEACHSOC: Re: List of Sociology Journals Michael DeCesare
- TEACHSOC: Re: List of Sociology Journals Kathleen McKinney
- TEACHSOC: Re: List of Sociology Journals Michael DeCesare
- TEACHSOC: Re: List of Sociology Journals Mikaila . Arthur
- TEACHSOC: Re: List of Sociology Journals Michael Johnston
- TEACHSOC: MLK Andi Stepnick
- TEACHSOC: Re: MLK Michael Johnston
- TEACHSOC: Re: MLK Winfield, Idee C.
