|
|
Post by alwaysguest on Dec 13, 2012 23:00:24 GMT -5
I have seen various sociology departments here and abroad as both a student and an instructor. They are all WEIRD. Faculty members are disconnected, isolated from the rest of the university/college, less visible if not invisible, rude if not totally aggressive, not humble and presumptuous!! I can give a lot of more details. I know as all generalizations, this has problems but... Do you have such an observation? Do you agree with me? If that's the case, why do you think it is?  |
|
|
|
Post by top100program on Dec 14, 2012 11:13:41 GMT -5
Working at a SLAC, I have experienced disconnected, aggressive colleagues not just in my dept but also across the faculty. My first year was miserable because I found that every time I turned around I was stepping on a landmine (aka a faculty feud). Everybody hates somebody. Things that seem neutral or even nice can throw you out of the frying pan and into the fire, like volunteering to teach that theory course no one wants to teach, writing a newsletter, or inviting everyone to a holiday party. Seemingly mundane things too often have political consequences. It is tiring, frustrating, and a little disheartening.
An earlier thread on this board mentioned the growing importance of collegiality as a factor in finding a new job. I 100% agree on this. If I find I have the option of choosing between two departments, collegiality will be the deciding factor, no doubt. I realize it's hard to gauge a department and faculty's level of collegiality, but I will be trying my hardest to get a reading on this with each campus interview.
|
|
|
|
Post by 100percent on Dec 14, 2012 11:48:38 GMT -5
I agree -- 100 percent -- on the collegiality issue. Very, very important. And it is, unfortunately, an increasingly rare commodity. I have seen numerous departments and I have heard about these issues in countless more.
Sociology is a discipline in decline. We are increasingly irrelevant (I think determined to become irrelevant) both inside and outside of academe, and administrators are becoming less likely to provide adequate supporting funds for our departments as a result. The consequence is that more of us are fighting for fewer scraps left on the table -- leading to these ridiculous in-fights over scarce resources and egos -- which leads in turn to the phenomenon known as "weird sociology departments."
|
|
|
|
Post by tsk on Dec 14, 2012 12:50:19 GMT -5
I agree -- 100 percent -- on the collegiality issue. Very, very important. And it is, unfortunately, an increasingly rare commodity. I have seen numerous departments and I have heard about these issues in countless more. Sociology is a discipline in decline. We are increasingly irrelevant (I think determined to become irrelevant) both inside and outside of academe, and administrators are becoming less likely to provide adequate supporting funds for our departments as a result. The consequence is that more of us are fighting for fewer scraps left on the table -- leading to these ridiculous in-fights over scarce resources and egos -- which leads in turn to the phenomenon known as "weird sociology departments." While I agree with the broad point, I would just like to add something to the oft repeated "sociology is a discipline in decline" bit, that is something that was also said by Venkatesh: it is not just sociology that is on the "decline." Or do you think things are any better in anthropology, political science, public administration or urban planning? Nevermind the humanities. Hell, serving on a few university committees, I can tell you that whatever drama you've seen in sociology is nothing compared to what usually goes on in the foreign language departments. The bitterness and fighting that goes on over what should be required in terms of foreign languages and who should teach them is incredibly. |
|
|
|
Post by truebut on Dec 14, 2012 14:28:09 GMT -5
It may be true that humanities, and especially foreign language departments, are more dysfunctional, but it does not negate the fact that most sociology departments are quite ridiculous.
There is no question that the downward spiral in sociology is a function of the post-modernist, post-structuralist, and/or 'cultural turn'. We are now determined to become completely irrelevant, all while discussing quite 'important' matters. Let's all go read Foucault and have a class of wine while discussing just how important we are.
|
|
|
|
Post by rantrantrant on Dec 14, 2012 15:05:00 GMT -5
I think when people like Venkatesh and others talk about the growing irrelevance of sociology both inside and outside the academy it's about something different than the troubles that humanities departments are facing. It's a shame that SV's claim is mixed in with his scandal because he makes an important point.
It's disciplinary decline as we move further into research that doesn't even attempt to engage with issues outside the "field," and that the gate-keepers alone define as important. It's self-reinforcing as we continue to go deeper into obscure topics, myopia, and turgid prose that alienates potentially interested outsiders.
That's not to say there isn't great research being done in soc, but people increasingly either overlook sociologists or don't take us seriously, and that is because we are excluding ourselves from the conversation.
Ok, thread hijak over. I agree, sociology departments are weird.
|
|
|
|
Post by what on Dec 14, 2012 16:49:32 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by really on Dec 14, 2012 19:41:13 GMT -5
There is no question that the downward spiral in sociology is a function of the post-modernist, post-structuralist, and/or 'cultural turn'. I don't know what end of the discipline you're in, but in my corner the cultural turn is over. Over and done with. And has been for quite a while. A lot of work in my subfields is highly relevant--to policymakers, to other disciplines. And it gets read by them, too. It also seems like whenever I turn around there's a sociologist in the news, either being quoted or covered for their study, particularly in our bread and butter areas like education, labor, stratification... |
|
|
|
Post by like its hot on Dec 14, 2012 21:20:19 GMT -5
Criminology FTW!
|
|
|
|
Post by unreflexive on Jan 11, 2013 12:34:35 GMT -5
There is no question that the downward spiral in sociology is a function of the post-modernist, post-structuralist, and/or 'cultural turn'. I don't know what end of the discipline you're in, but in my corner the cultural turn is over. Over and done with. And has been for quite a while. A lot of work in my subfields is highly relevant--to policymakers, to other disciplines. And it gets read by them, too. It also seems like whenever I turn around there's a sociologist in the news, either being quoted or covered for their study, particularly in our bread and butter areas like education, labor, stratification... There are cultural aspects of education, labor, and stratification, and anything else that sociologists study. Cultural sociologists study boundary-making and exclusion practices in each of those areas, and they can recognize when other sociologists try to make themselves appear better by dismissing what they are not. If you think your subareas are better than others, or if you think that the cultural turn is dead, please note that the last ASR article to get widespread press coverage was written by a cultural sociologist, mysubfieldsishighlyrelevant. |
|
|
|
Post by earlier is right on Jan 11, 2013 12:46:06 GMT -5
The earlier post was absolutely right. Sociology is on the decline, intellectually, financially, in terms of influence, you name it...and it is because of a shift to all things 'cultural' (once largely the domain of anthropology). Have you been to ASA in the last 5-6 years? It is almost as if material relations and social structures no longer matter (or at least the cultural types must pretend they don't).
|
|
