See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/234676789

Sociology as Pedagogy: How Ideas from the Discipline

Can Inform Teaching and Learning

Article  in  Teaching Sociology · October 2008

DOI: 10.1177/0092055X0803600401

CITATIONS READS

26 3,386

2 authors:

Judith Halasz Peter Kaufman

State University of New York at New Paltz State University of New York at New Paltz
20 PUBLICATIONS   95 CITATIONS    21 PUBLICATIONS   711 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Transformation of Brooklyn View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Peter Kaufman on 22 April 2014.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 ARTICLES
SOCIOLOGY AS PEDAGOGY: HOW IDEAS FROM THE
DISCIPLINE CAN INFORM TEACHING AND LEARNING*
As a discipline, sociology has produced a rich understanding of social proc-
esses, and yet the pedagogical implications of this scholarship remain largely
untapped. In this paper, we employ a framework of sociology as pedagogy to
show how sociology can enhance and inform teaching and learning. We select
examples from a range of classical and contemporary social thought to high-
light the connection between sociological theory and the practices of teaching
and learning. We use these theories to demonstrate a broad application of our
notion of sociology as pedagogy; however, we believe that all sociological
knowledge can be mined for its pedagogical significance. Furthermore, recog-
nizing how sociological phenomena shape the classroom experience is condu-
cive to a more reflexive pedagogy in line with the tenets of the sociological
imagination.

JUDITH R. HALASZ PETER KAUFMAN

SUNY New Paltz SUNY New Paltz

IN RECENT YEARS, there has been a bur- Hanson 2005a; Lucal et al. 2003) and an
geoning interest in the Scholarship of ASA-sponsored SoTL conference in 2000.
Teaching and Learning (SoTL) (see In addition to the SoTL literature, there is a
Hutchings, Babb, and Bjork 2002 for anby Ingenta
Delivered wealth toof :materials on strategies for effec-
annotated bibliography).State University
Whether the of
re-Newtive
York at Newteaching
college Paltz and learning. Most of
Wed, 08 Oct 2008 18:43:49
search focuses on student or faculty atti- this work stems from such disciplines as
tudes, assessment procedures, institutional education, English, and psychology. Sociol-
impediments, or teaching strategies and ogy is notably underrepresented in this lit-
techniques that can be implemented in the erature, despite the attention to teaching and
classroom, the goal is always to enhance learning among sociologists. We find this
teaching and learning. Since Baker (1985) omission puzzling given that the foundation
noted the link between sociology and teach- of sociology is the examination of social life
ing, our discipline has begun to develop a and education is part of the social world. By
sociology-specific SoTL with a growing viewing the classroom as a social space, our
body of literature (Albers 2003; Chin 2002; discipline can explore a range of sociologi-
*We would like to thank Liz Grauerholz and cal themes such as interactional dynamics,
the editorial staff of Teaching Sociology as well identity formation, institutional effects,
as the anonymous reviewers, whose recommen- structural inequalities, and knowledge pro-
dations helped us improve this article. We duction, among others. If sociologists al-
would also like to acknowledge the members of ready study these levels of social analysis,
the faculty writing group at SUNY New Paltz why not capitalize on this for the betterment
for their support and encouragement. Please of teaching and learning?
address all correspondence to the authors at
In this article, we make a case for sociol-
SUNY New Paltz, Department of Sociology,
600 Hawk Drive, New Paltz, NY 12561; e- ogy as pedagogy by exploring the implica-
mail: halaszj@newpaltz.edu or kaufmanp@new tions of various social theories for the proc-
paltz.edu. ess of teaching and learning. Sociology as
Editor’s note: The reviewers were, in alpha- pedagogy is a model that encourages us to
betical order, Jan E. Thomas, Chris Wilkes, use our sociological knowledge to reflect on
and Mary Wright. and address the social dynamics of educa-

Teaching Sociology, Vol. 36, 2008 (October:301-317) 301

302 TEACHING SOCIOLOGY
tion. With such sociological insight we are instructors have suggested innovative, crea-
better equipped to develop effective strate- tive, and engaging ways to convey both
gies that answer the challenges and tap into classical and contemporary social theory to
the potentialities of educational processes. students. Some of these teaching strategies
Analyzing teaching and learning sociologi- have used active learning (Holtzman 2005),
cally should be as fruitful as any other so- actual conversations with theorists (Sturgis
ciological analysis. By examining the class- 1983), television programs (Donaghy
room from a sociological perspective, we 2000), participant observation (Silver and
could understand interactions, institutional Perez 1998), literature (Gotsch-Thomson
context and dynamics, structure, identity, 1990), video (Fails 1988), music (Ahlkvist
and culture as they emerge in the class- 2001), and even puzzles (Lowney 1998).
room—and ideally we could use such in- Although these strategies have informed
sights to improve the teaching and learning how we teach social theory, we still know
experience of our students and ourselves. very little about how social theory may in-
By discussing how major works of socio- form our teaching.
logical theory can inform teaching and In the following, we focus on five well
learning, we attempt to bridge what Hanson established sociological theories and demon-
(2005b) describes as the intellectual gap strate how these ideas can guide us in our
between what we do in the classroom and pedagogy. The five theories are: rationaliza-
what we do as scholars. Whereas Hanson tion and McDonaldization (Weber and
calls for a more theoretically grounded Ritzer), solidarity and anomie (Durkheim
SoTL that incorporates the sociological and Merton), symbolic interaction (Blumer
imagination, we take the integration of the and Goffman), feminist standpoint theory
disciplinary perspective and studies of edu-by Ingenta
Delivered (Smith),to and
: cultural capital and symbolic
cational processes a step State
farther.
University notNewviolence
We do of York at New(Bourdieu).
Paltz We selected these
Wed, 08 Oct
intend to position sociology as pedagogy as 2008 18:43:49
theories for two main reasons. First, they
a partisan interjection into the debate that represent a broad range of sociological per-
ensued from Hanson’s article (Hanson spectives. In addition to including classical
2005b; Kain 2005; McKinney 2005); rather and contemporary as well as micro and
we envision sociology as pedagogy as a macro theories, our selections reflect an
broader approach to pedagogy that links the array of political and epistemological orien-
insights of SoTL, the sociology of educa- tations. Second, most sociologists are famil-
tion, and the discipline as a whole. Our iar with these theories since they are com-
work builds on Pescosolido and Aminzade’s monly found in the curriculum. These theo-
(1999) effort to collect examples of the inte- ries demonstrate the suitability of sociologi-
gration of teaching and research in the so- cal ideas for enhancing pedagogical proc-
cial sciences and analyze the social aspects esses; however, as we will discuss later, we
of college. We take their project a step fur- believe that most, if not all, sociological
ther by demonstrating that the sociological theories can help us become better teachers
outlook not only helps us analyze and un- and learners.1
derstand higher education, but it can also be We recognize that there are diverse ways
put into practice in the classroom. In effect,
1
sociology as pedagogy brings the connec- In selecting theories for this paper, we were
tion between the scholarship of teaching and primarily concerned with demonstrating how
learning, the sociology of education, and one could locate pedagogical insights in social
theories. To that end, we chose wide-ranging,
sociology as a discipline full circle—from
yet familiar theorists instead of the most recent
the classroom to the larger social realm theorists. Nevertheless, we reiterate our con-
back to the classroom. viction that the model of sociology as pedagogy
Much attention has been given to how can be applied to the most current social theo-
sociologists teach theory. Over the years, ries and we encourage our readers to do so.
SOCIOLOGY AS PEDAGOGY 303
in which sociologists approach teaching. are lost. McDonaldized education is, like
Some lecture, some discuss; some sociolo- other McDonaldized experiences, dehuman-
gists draw on feminist and/or postmodern ized and deindividuated. In a McDonaldized
epistemologies and pedagogies, while others world, students cannot ask to be graded
subscribe to a positivist paradigm. We do based on unique circumstances, faculty can-
not presume to know the full range of peda- not use nonstandard forms of evaluation,
gogies practiced; however, many sociolo- just as you cannot ask that your burger be
gists do share the goals of encouraging criti- cooked medium-rare. Looking at teaching
cal thinking, sociological awareness, and and learning sociology through the lens of
social justice (Grauerholz and Gibson 2006; McDonaldization underscores the rationali-
McKinney et al. 2004). It is from this per- zation, standardization, and commodifica-
spective that we will discuss how drawing tion of higher education.
on sociological insights may promote a The impact of McDonaldization on higher
more reflexive pedagogy that makes evident education is undeniable. Ritzer (2004) of-
the implicit interrelationship between socio- fers several examples: computer-graded
logical practice and teaching. testing, the use of textbooks and publisher’s
lecture notes, the quantification of the
RATIONALIZATION AND evaluation of students (e.g., GPA) and fac-
MCDONALDIZATION ulty (e.g., ranking of publications, number
of publications, weight of tenure dossier,
In one of the central texts of classical socio- number of citations), and technology medi-
logical theory, Weber (1930) identified ra- ated and delivered instruction (e.g., distance
tionalization as a key characteristic of mod- learning, computer-based training). The
ern life. Rationalization remains extent toof : rationalization is so great that
such aby Ingenta
Delivered
commanding force that it is not difficult to some
State University of New Yorkhave
at Newdescribed
Paltz contemporary institu-
Wed, 08 Oct 2008 18:43:49
tions of higher education as knowledge fac-
recognize its impact on teaching and learn-
ing. While the modern condition is such that tories (Aronowitz 2000) and McUniversities
we cannot naively hope to create a class- (Hayes and Wynyard 2002). While colleges
room free of rationalism, nor do we neces- and universities may be aptly described as
sarily want to, developing a critical aware- such, faculty also participate directly in the
ness of its impact will likely make us better rationalization of higher education. Increas-
sociologists and teachers. Today, the para- ing pressures to rationalize teaching and
digmatic example of rationalization is learning often constrain the choices faculty
Ritzer’s concept of McDonaldization. As make, despite the sanctity of academic free-
Ritzer (2004) explains, “Weber described dom and autonomy. At the institutional
how the modern Western world managed to level, the movement towards greater ac-
become increasingly rational—that is, domi- countability and assessment compels faculty
nated by efficiency, predictability, calcula- and students to rationalize teaching and
bility, and nonhuman technologies that con- learning. Similarly, the multitude of de-
trol people. … McDonaldization is an am- mands postsecondary institutions place on
plification and extension of Weber’s theory faculty results in an academic time bind that
of rationalization” (p. 25). By examining pushes faculty to adopt efficient, and often
the McDonaldization of education, we can standardized, pedagogical strategies (Wright
discern the pedagogical implications of so- et al. 2004).
ciological ideas like rationalization. Though in some ways rationalization can
For all that may be gained in a McDon- be viewed as beneficial to the educational
aldized institution, there are some funda- process (for example it may be useful in
mental elements of experience—elements negotiating the time bind and increasing
quite important to teaching, learning, criti- productivity), social theory and research
cal thinking, and social consciousness—that have long pointed to the direct correlation
304 TEACHING SOCIOLOGY
between rationalization and alienation standardized testing in elementary school.
(Alexander 1987; Weber 1930). Typically, This assignment mirrored the process of
alienation limits students’ motivation, which sociological analysis we as researchers use,
in turn stifles engagement with course mate- and it gave students a way to develop in-
rials and curtails the development of their sight into a subject that interests them. Fur-
sociological imaginations. If teaching prac- thermore, it gave them an opportunity to
tices contribute to alienation among students exercise their sociological imaginations,
(and faculty), then the students may become resulting in papers that were far more spir-
disengaged, making teaching more a chore ited and enjoyable for both the reader and
than a calling (c.f., Davis 1993, chapter writers. Unlike homogeneous, predictable
23). Under such circumstances faculty are papers that merely regurgitate course mate-
prone to compartmentalize research and rial, these papers required thinking “outside
teaching, resulting in the estrangement of the box” in terms of how to evaluate them.
our professional lives and the rationalization While the extra effort needed for evaluation
of our pedagogies. By contributing to alien- may seem irrational given the time con-
ation, McDonaldized teaching methods pro- straints faculty face, grading these papers
mote the further rationalization of our aca- turned out to be far less onerous than the
demic practices. In effect, a vicious cycle of seemingly rational compare and contrast
rationalized higher education ensues. assignment.
The rationalization of teaching and learn- Hudd (2003) presents another example of
ing also tends to produce uniformity rather the rationality of a seemingly irrational
than independent, critical thinking. So often pedagogical technique. She asks her stu-
we complain about students producing dents to collaborate with her on constructing
“cookie-cutter” responses to essay ques-by Ingenta
Delivered the syllabus
to : and designing the assignments
tions. This complaint canState
be heard
University of Newfor
through- their
York course.
at New PaltzIn the process, students
out academia, from communityWed, 08 Oct
colleges to 2008
take18:43:49
greater ownership of the course and
doctoral programs (Bean 2001). But before assignments. Here, relinquishing control
we place the blame solely on students, we over the course turns out to be a rational
should ask what role rationalized, “cookie- and effective pedagogical strategy to foster
cutter” pedagogical strategies play in this student engagement. In addition to the ap-
phenomenon. In what ways do we plications described above, Bean’s (2001)
(unintentionally) limit the development of Engaging Ideas offers a wide range of crea-
critical thinking? Being aware of the tive assignments and activities designed to
McDonaldization of education may illumi- foster critical thinking and student engage-
nate the irrationality of rationalization as ment. Research indicates that non-
well as the rationality of seemingly irra- McDonaldized pedagogy, including active,
tional pedagogical strategies. In one of our collaborative, and service learning tech-
courses, for example, following a conven- niques, enhances student engagement and
tional compare and contrast assignment that learning (Umbach and Wawrzynski 2005).
produced lackluster, “cookie-cutter” pa- Moreover, recognizing the manifestations of
pers, students were given a less standard- rationalization and McDonaldization in the
ized and less predictable assignment. Stu- classroom and experimenting with ways to
dents were asked to select a current event, counter them helps us maintain what Freire
piece of literature, film, or television epi- (1998) describes as epistemological curios-
sode and analyze it according to a contem- ity, a trait critical to scholarly and peda-
porary social theory of their choice. Stu- gogical effectiveness.
dents wrote about a wide range of topics
including the Black Panthers, the Tama- SOLIDARITY AND ANOMIE
gachi popular culture fad, female suicide
bombers, and the increasing emphasis on Of all the sociologists we explore in this
SOCIOLOGY AS PEDAGOGY 305
paper, Durkheim is one of the few who has strongly encouraged because rules, proce-
actually addressed pedagogy. In Education dures, and policies are being established.
and Sociology (1956) and Moral Education Although this type of mechanical learning
(1961), Durkheim presents his ideas about environment has its benefits, we believe that
the role of education in maintaining stabil- a classroom reflecting Durkheim’s ideal
ity, discipline, and a harmonious social or- typical organic solidarity offers distinct ad-
der. Much like the argument we put forth in vantages. Here, interdependence would be
this paper, Durkheim believed sociology strong, cooperation would be expected, and
informed the pedagogical process more than positive individualism in the form of inven-
any other discipline. Although Durkheim’s tiveness, innovation, and imagination would
thoughts about education are still invoked be welcome. A classroom modeled after
today (c.f., Walford and Pickering 1998) Durkheim’s organic solidarity would dem-
and his ideas about moral education have onstrate cohesiveness, reciprocity, and re-
been foundational for many theorists work- spect among teachers and learners.
ing in this area (Piaget 1999; Power, Hig- When individuals in an organic society do
gins, and Kohlberg 1989), most sociological not feel wholly integrated the threat of ano-
discussions of Durkheim concentrate on his mie is always present. Anomie encompasses
views on societal integration. We focus on social disintegration ranging from complete
some of Durkheim’s most well known con- chaos to the breakdown of norms such that
cepts, specifically solidarity and anomie, in individuals no longer share the same goals
order to demonstrate how we may locate and/or the same means to achieve goals.
pedagogical value in the sociological canon. Although higher education does not often
In one of his most famous passages, suffer from the stark breakdown of societal
Durkheim (1984) makes a distinctionDelivered norms,toanomie
be-by Ingenta : could still manifest in subtle
tween mechanical and organic solidarityoftoNewways.
State University York For instance,
at New Paltz listening to many of our
Wed, 08
capture the essence of the changing Oct 2008
nature 18:43:49we notice there is a growing
colleagues
of society. For Durkheim, mechanical so- sense of feeling bogged down, overworked,
cieties are characterized by small, relatively and progressively more powerless due to
homogeneous social units bound by tradi- the corporatization and commercialization
tion, whereas organic societies are more of the university (Aronowitz 2000; Bok
individualistic. In the face of modernization 2004). Universities are getting more
and the move toward organic societies, “greedy,” expecting faculty to demonstrate
Durkheim’s great concern was how social enthusiastic citizenship by serving on cen-
cohesion would be maintained. Although tral committees, attending campus-wide
Durkheim developed this dichotomy to sup- meetings, and participating in fund-raising
port his vision of history, the distinction activities, among other things (Wright et al.
may be relevant to pedagogy. If we view 2004). Being aware of these organizational
the classroom as a type of society, we may strains helps us address such anomic ten-
say that as the semester begins our classes dencies. For example, building what Baker
reflect quasi-mechanical solidarity. In our (1999) calls a “learning community” may
experience, students appear to enter the remedy feeling overextended, robotic, or
classroom with weak social bonds—both dispirited. By focusing on communication,
among themselves and with the teacher. The mutuality, and mindful engagement, learn-
glue that holds the class together is the ing communities go a long way in promot-
strong collective consciousness of educa- ing connectedness, cultivating integration,
tional customs; through years of socializa- and stemming the tide of anomie.
tion, students and professors know their Students too may feel a greater sense of
roles and act them out dutifully. In the early disconnectedness from the educational proc-
stages of this mechanical classroom, origi- ess. With a rise in adjunct instructors and
nality, creativity, and change may not be online classes, and with an increase in class
306 TEACHING SOCIOLOGY
sizes, it is increasingly unlikely that strong the exception of Rafalovich’s (2006)
collective ties with other students and fac- breaching experiments and the application
ulty will be formed. By studying Durk- of strain theory to studies of academic mis-
heim’s ideas and contemplating how his conduct (Brezina 2000; Vowell and Chen
theoretical framework informs the peda- 2004), the pedagogical insights of Merton’s
gogical process, we will be in a better posi- idea have been largely ignored. We believe
tion to adopt teaching strategies that may that strain theory can be used to better com-
counter these macro-structural forces. For prehend some key processes of teaching and
example, in our experience learning all of learning. Higher education is a goal-driven
our students’ names and working to ensure endeavor. Instructors are aspiring toward
that the students know each other’s names tenure, promotion, publication, and merit
help foster a more organic classroom char- pay raises. Students are driven by GPAs,
acterized by cohesion, reciprocity, and re- degrees, graduate school admissions, and
spect. One exercise we use at the beginning career credentials. With all of this goal-
of the semester is to place students into oriented behavior “a strain toward anomie
groups of two with the task of identifying and deviant behavior” is likely, especially if
eight things they have in common. After the “the social structure rigorously restricts or
groups introduce each other to the class and completely closes access to approved modes
report on their commonalities they then join of reaching these goals” (Merton
together into groups of four with the same 1968:200). This last point is an important
task. The groups of four introduce each component of Merton’s analysis and it may
other, identify their commonalities, and help us better comprehend and address the
then join together into groups of eight. This various modes of adaptation among teachers
snowballing exercise (see anotherDelivered and learners.
variationby Ingenta to :
in Brookfield and Preskill 1999)
State continues
University Paulsen
of New York andPaltz
at New Feldman (1995) point out
until the class is back together Wed, 08 Oct 2008
as a whole. that18:43:49
“to understand how the teaching of
Although such an exercise may take up a individual faculty members can be im-
whole class period, it goes a long way in proved, a good place to start is an examina-
establishing a more cohesive and intercon- tion of organizational forces within the uni-
nected community of learners. versity” (p. 121). For example, when com-
Building on Durkheim’s notion of ano- petency in the classroom is an institutional
mie, Merton’s “Social Structure and Ano- goal and we are provided with the means to
mie” has long been an integral part of the achieve this goal, the classroom has the
sociological canon. In this classic article potential to be a dynamic site of learning.
Merton develops strain theory to explain When teaching is deemed secondary and the
how individuals adapt to various social con- institutional means necessary to be an effec-
ditions. By focusing on the acceptance of tive teacher are limited, some sort of inno-
cultural goals and the institutionalized vation (or retreatism) on the part of the in-
means to achieve such goals, Merton de- structor will be necessary. Merton reminds
vised a typology of five modes of individual us of the need to be cognizant of how teach-
adaptation: conformity, innovation, ritual- ing is impacted by the stated goals of the
ism, retreatism, and rebellion. Merton academic institution and the extent to which
(1968) explains that the social structure the school grants access to the legitimate
“produces a strain toward anomie and devi- means to achieve these goals. A critical
ant behavior” because “[t]he pressure of insight we can gain from strain theory then
such a social order is upon outdoing one’s is an understanding of the way in which
competitors” (p. 211). Merton’s strain the- institutional conditions shape pedagogical
ory has been used and modified by count- adaptations.
less researchers to explain a wide range of Using Merton’s framework may offer
behaviors and social processes. Yet, with even more pedagogical value by examining
SOCIOLOGY AS PEDAGOGY 307
how students’ behaviors are affected by the sume-enhancing internships and fieldwork,
cultural goals and the institutional means. and educating them about the importance of
Because college serves as a building block doing quality undergraduate work given the
for students’ future orientations, the typical increasing competitiveness of graduate
goal is to graduate with a strong academic school admissions may all help students
record. However, the students’ goal may be better adapt to the rigors of college life
different from the goal of their professors, without as much strain or anomie.
who may be aiming to instill an appreciation
and comprehension of the subject matter. SYMBOLIC INTERACTION
The students’ goal may also be different
than the stated goals of the college adminis- As the theoretical perspective that considers
trators, who may be more interested in re- how society is produced and reproduced
tention rates and years students take to com- through social interaction, symbolic interac-
plete their degrees. Even if there is some tion has much to offer us pedagogically. By
consensus on the stated goals, the students positing the classroom as a site of social
may not have the means to achieve such interaction, we can critically analyze the
goals. The need to undertake paid work processes of teaching and learning from a
because of cuts to financial aid, the desire micro-sociological orientation. From this
to build one’s resume through extracurricu- perspective, the foundation of the educa-
lar activities and volunteer service posi- tional process can be accurately character-
tions, and the emphasis on social life are all ized as the exchange of “significant ges-
factors that may inhibit students’ ability to tures” (Mead 1934). Much like all social
embrace the institutional means to their de- encounters, teaching and learning are com-
sired ends. municative
Delivered by Ingenta to : practices. Because the literature
When professors contemplate
State University of NewofYork
students’ symbolic
at Newinteraction
Paltz is replete with ob-
Wed, 08why
conduct in the classroom, for example, Oct 2008 18:43:49about how individuals traverse
servations
some seek shortcuts whereas others are this interactive landscape, it is particularly
highly motivated or why some may doze off well suited to developing our awareness of
whereas others are attentive and focused, it the classroom environment.
may be useful to return to Merton’s typol- A logical starting point for revealing
ogy of individual adaptation to comprehend some of the pedagogical insights of sym-
these different behaviors. The insights we bolic interaction is with Blumer’s classic
gain from strain theory can help us recog- statement. Blumer outlined three premises
nize the influence of institutional constraints of symbolic interaction each of which pro-
on our pedagogical choices and the corre- vides a glimpse into some of the practices
sponding adaptations among our students. of teaching and learning. First, Blumer
For example, a straightforward strategy we (1969) suggests that “human beings act to-
utilize to understand student behavior is to ward things on the basis of the meanings
go right to the source. If we want to know that things have for them” (p. 2). Blumer’s
why students conform, innovate, ritualize, initial premise is especially salient when
retreat, or rebel, we simply ask them. Once instructors and/or learners attempt to under-
we have this information we can provide stand, much less change, the dynamics of
students with legitimate means to accom- the classroom. By recognizing that we all
plish their goals without compromising the approach the classroom based on our pre-
goals of the faculty or institution. Teaching conceived notions and identities, we are
students about what constitutes plagiarism, better situated to engage in mutually sup-
showing them how to skim for content and portive social interactions. If we accept
comprehension, incorporating a variety of Blumer’s suggestion that “the meanings that
assignments designed to tap into students’ things have for human beings are central in
different strengths, offering credit for re- their own right” (p. 3), then we are more
308 TEACHING SOCIOLOGY
likely to validate the behaviors and experi- an interpretive process. This final premise
ences of others instead of disrespect and is the defining characteristic of symbolic
neglect them. This is a crucial point for a interaction and it has great resonance for the
successful educational experience because classroom. Beyond the many innovative
good teaching and learning is unlikely to teaching techniques that reflect this interpre-
occur if students and/or teachers feel dis- tive construction of reality (Obach 1999;
counted or ignored (Hirschy and Wilson Roberts 2001; Rodgers 2003), Blumer’s
2002; Karp and Yoels 1976; Major and theory reminds us that teachers and learners
Palmer 2002). It is difficult to give voice to enter the educational setting with a set of
the experiences of individuals if we resist preconceived connotations of the situation,
understanding from where such individuals but these meanings are not rigid. Through
are coming. This point is particularly rele- the interactions that transpire in the class-
vant when it comes to students’ learning room our understanding of education can
styles. As Powers (1999) suggests, if we and does change. We can challenge students
fail to comprehend how students learn (i.e., to entertain alternative meanings of learning
how they act toward learning), then we are just as we can challenge ourselves to con-
unlikely to employ pedagogical strategies sider alternative meanings of being a
that maximize learning. Incorporating as- teacher. For example, in smaller classes we
signments and activities that are geared to- can rearrange the seating, have students
wards a wide range of learning styles, such lead discussion, and invite students to de-
as group work, individual writing assign- velop assignments. In larger classes, we can
ments, peer teaching, and experiential invite students to generate critical questions
learning, enables us to reach more students about the course material, a select few of
than teaching in only one or two Delivered which to
modalitiesby Ingenta may: be used to begin (or end) each
(Hirschy and Wilson 2002). State University of Newclass.
York Some
at Newinstructors
Paltz even transform the
Blumer’s second premise builds Wed,on08 Oct
the 2008 18:43:49meanings of teacher and student
normative
first one, stating that the meaning of things by having students construct the syllabus,
is drawn from our social interactions. This select the course content, and rewrite the
point underscores the idea that meaning is a grading system (Bickel 2006; Eby 2001;
social product. The meaning of things— Hudd 2003). All of these examples are at-
including the classroom, the role of teacher tempts at de-centering the authority of the
or student, the course material—are not teacher by altering the roles and statuses
intrinsic or inherent; rather, we learn that students and teachers conventionally
through our social interactions what these occupy. As Blumer suggests, this renegoti-
things are and how we are expected to re- ated environment can only arise from the
spond to them. Blumer’s second premise reinterpretations of classroom interactions.
reminds us there is nothing innate about Blumer’s framework is one of many ideas
how we respond as teachers or learners, from symbolic interaction that may be use-
much less how the classroom is constructed. ful pedagogically. As another example we
Blumer argues that our behavior in social can examine some of Goffman’s insights.
settings is built on a process of interaction. Goffman may not have considered himself a
As individuals we have the potential to symbolic interactionist but his dramaturgical
change what it means to be students and analysis is often discussed within this
teachers just as we can change the meaning framework. Goffman’s (1959) discussion of
of teaching and learning. how people engage in impression manage-
The potential to transform the educational ment and face-saving techniques is well
process through our social interactions is known by most sociologists and is often
the key pedagogical benefit from Blumer’s taught in introductory sociology classes. As
paradigm, and it brings us to his third point: teachers, it is helpful to consider how self
that meanings are used and changed through presentations play out in the classroom.
SOCIOLOGY AS PEDAGOGY 309
Being aware of how we manage our impres- ing the “reciprocal influence of individuals
sions to students as well as how they man- upon another’s action” (p. 15). To address
age their impressions to us and to each this situation it may be helpful for us to
other may allow us to better appreciate the consider many of the aspects that Goffman
differences we experience. For example, identified in his theory of self presentations:
discussion-oriented classes often have a our initial projections; our practices, both
dynamic whereby some students are loqua- defensive and protective; our overall per-
cious whereas others are quiet and reserved. formance; and even our appearance and
Some might explain this behavior by relying manner. Fobes’s (2006) account of physical
on psychological explanations of innate per- and emotional risk-taking in front of her
sonality traits such as extroversion and in- students offers one example of how the
troversion. Research confirms the feedback learning environment can benefit if we are
we hear from students: their reticence ema- more mindful of our self presentations. By
nates in part from a fear of appearing stu- not managing her impressions to the extent
pid, while talkativeness stems from a desire that we typically try to do in the classroom,
to sound knowledgeable (Auster and Fobes demonstrated her vulnerability which
MacRone 1994). In other words, students allowed her students to trust her and see her
are engaging in impression management. as a full human being, not just as a teacher.
Along with other sociologists, we have used Reflecting on our own impression manage-
this feedback to develop strategies to ment strategies may shed light on the ways
counter these impression-management ten- in which we encourage or obstruct social
dencies, such as engaging the class in a si- interactions with students, and by extension,
lent discussion (Kaufman 2008) or online how our self presentation may affect the
discussion (Wolfe 2000), assigning discus-by Ingenta
Delivered learningtoprocess.
:
sion roles to students State
(e.g.,University
summarizer,
of New York at New Paltz
Wed, 08time
questioner, facilitator, exemplifier, Oct 2008FEMINIST
18:43:49 STANDPOINT THEORY
keeper), and setting classroom rules of en-
gagement such as having everyone speak at Feminism has made notably strong and ex-
least once before anyone speaks twice (for plicit connections between theory and peda-
more strategies see Brookfield and Preskill gogy (Macdonald and Sanchez-Casal 2002;
[1999], pp. 171-93). By recognizing these Maher and Tetreault 1994; Mayberry and
underlying dramaturgical processes, we are Rose 1999). Unfortunately, for many soci-
better equipped to help one group find their ologists these potential insights remain un-
voice while helping another group temper derutilized. In light of the richness of femi-
theirs. nist pedagogy and the constraints of space,
The ideas of self presentation are also we limit our discussion to standpoint theory
valuable for our own understanding of how as articulated by Dorothy Smith. For Smith,
we navigate the social landscape of acade- the distinct experiences women have and the
mia. Students are by no means the only roles they play shape the perspectives with
ones who engage in impression manage- which they approach a situation. She argues
ment. Teachers also utilize interactive that the male-centered sociological world
strategies to get students to react to them in has failed to fully incorporate women’s
a particular way. As such, it might be use- lives, experiences, and perspectives. To
ful for us consider how we are presenting remedy this, she calls for an acknowledge-
ourselves and what impressions we are giv- ment of the distinct experiences that shape
ing off to students. At times we may feel women’s lives and perspectives as com-
frustrated that what we are trying to achieve pared to men’s. For Smith (1974), “an al-
is not being accomplished. In Goffman’s ternative sociology must preserve in it the
(1959) terms we are not controlling the im- presence, concerns, and experience of the
pressions of our students nor are we achiev- sociologist as knower and discoverer” (p.
310 TEACHING SOCIOLOGY
389). This results in the need to make “our can be easily employed in both small and
direct embodied experience of the everyday large classes. Students are asked to answer
world the primary ground of our knowl- the question “Who am I?” with 20 single-
edge” (Smith 1974:389). In other words, word responses. By contemplating this
experience as prior knowledge becomes the question, students have an opportunity to
foundation for learning. identify what attributes are salient to their
Smith’s approach keys teachers into gen- own standpoints. More importantly, it illu-
der dynamics in the classroom, such as the minates the invisibility of privilege that
silencing of women. Despite the number of dominant groups often take for granted. The
studies that address this issue, it remains a point in these suggestions is to demonstrate
problem in many classes (e.g., Hall and to students that knowledge does not emanate
Sandler 1982; Jones and Dindia 2004; Sad- from a single perspective or common set of
ker and Sadker 1994). To the extent that experiences. Standpoint pedagogy fosters
Smith’s characterization of sociology as the idea that all students have the capacity
male-centric is accurate, the silencing of to contribute based on the distinct experi-
women in the classroom may be explained ences they bring to the classroom.
in part by the disconnection between their While Smith concentrated on women and
experiences and the perspective implicit in gender, we can extend her approach to en-
the course materials. When students are compass the myriad standpoints we develop
presented with material that fails to resonate through embodied experience. Social theo-
with their lives, it is difficult for them to rists writing before and after Smith have
develop as both knower and discoverer. elucidated standpoint theories addressing
Furthermore, without a curriculum that re- various dimensions of diversity, such as
lates to their lived experiences, Delivered race, ethnicity,
studentsby Ingenta to : sexuality, nationality, relig-
may lack the confidenceState
or desire
University of Newion,
to enter class,
York andPaltz
at New ability (e.g., Appiah 1993;
the dialogue. Thomas and Kukulan Wed, (2004)
08 Oct 2008 18:43:49
Davis 1981; DuBois 1903; Fanon 1967;
argue that the dearth of women in the socio- Hill Collins 1990; hooks 1981). Encourag-
logical cannon, especially in social theory, ing students and faculty to recognize their
reflects the limited attention graduate multiple positionalities pulls us away from
courses pay to women theorists, since our the traditional monofocal perspective
doctoral training often shapes who and what (white, male, heterosexual, etc.) and better
we teach. Thus, breaking the cycle of ex- reflects the diversity of contemporary soci-
clusion often requires a conscious effort to ety. Like feminist standpoint theory, this
diversify the curriculum. heterogeneous perspective has important
Bringing in readings by women is perhaps implications for the classroom. Just as
the most obvious strategy to address this women may feel silenced in a male-centered
issue. Beyond this, instructors can take curriculum, diverse students may be alien-
other measures such as drawing on research ated and frustrated by the disconnect they
and examples that specifically address feel from their educational experience
women’s experiences and remaining cogni- (Hirschy and Wilson 2002; McCarthy and
zant and equitable in how one responds to Crichlow 1993; Weis and Fine 1993). In-
and encourages student involvement. A spe- structors wanting to address privilege and
cific example we use involves a critical ad- inequality in the classroom have countless
aptation and analysis of the classic “Twenty strategies from which to choose. For exam-
Statements Test” developed by the Iowa ple, Schuster and Van Dyne (1999) outline
School of Social Psychology (Kuhn and six stages of curriculum development to
McPartland 1954; Wellman 1971). This transform courses characterized by exclu-
exercise, similar to Brookfield and Pre- sion and invisibility of certain groups into
skill’s standpoint statements (1999), high- courses that reflect balance and inclusion of
lights the insights of standpoint theory and all groups. Similarly, Chesler, Lewis, and
SOCIOLOGY AS PEDAGOGY 311
Crowfoot (2005) offer a comprehensive such as the educational system, as symbolic
template to move one’s course from mono- violence. Schools tend to value the domi-
culturalism to multiculturalism. By focusing nant class culture resulting in the legitima-
their recommendations on the interaction tion and perpetuation of stratification.
among subject matter, instructors, students, Those students socialized with the habitus,
classroom techniques, and larger institu- cultural capital and practices of the domi-
tional contexts, these authors offer decid- nant class are more likely to succeed in the
edly sociology as pedagogy applications of educational field than those who find the
standpoint theory. cultural codes foreign and more difficult to
acquire (Carson 1993; Roscigno and Ains-
CULTURAL CAPITAL worth-Darnell 1999). According to
AND SYMBOLIC VIOLENCE Bourdieu and Passeron (1970), testing is the
archetypical manifestation of cultural capital
We end our discussion by considering the in schools and thereby serves as the main
sociology of Bourdieu who, through his mechanism of symbolic violence: “In im-
concepts of habitus, cultural capital, and posing as worthy of university sanction a
symbolic violence, offers instructors ana- social definition of knowledge and the way
lytical tools to help further cultivate a re- to show it, it provides one of the most effi-
flexive approach to the classroom. In keep- cacious tools for the enterprise of inculcat-
ing with the French sociological tradition, ing the dominant culture and the value of
Bourdieu (1989) bases his theory on the that culture” (p. 142). Not only do exams
premise that individual behavior and per- disguise the relationship between the school
ception are constrained and guided by the and the larger social structure, but more
hierarchical world of structures we inhabit,by Ingenta
Delivered generally
to :all forms of assessment are inher-
“structures independent State
of the
University of Newently
conscious- Yorkbiased.
at New For
Paltzexample, essays tend to
ness and will of agents” (p. Wed, 14). 08 Oct 2008
Social 18:43:49
favor eloquent writers regardless of their
structure takes shape in fields, or competi- comprehension of substantive material.
tive marketplaces where we accumulate and Similarly, students skilled in memorizing
marshal economic, social, symbolic and material generally have an advantage in
cultural capital to gain relatively favorable short-answer questions. Charismatic, confi-
positions. Of particular importance in edu- dent students may present themselves ex-
cation is cultural capital, the legitimate and ceptionally well in public speaking assign-
legitimated knowledge that shores up or ments. We believe that these attributes
increases one’s position in a field. Cultural largely derive from one’s habitus and cul-
capital may be objectified (in material tural capital. This point is reflected in
goods), institutionalized (e.g., diplomas), or Anyon’s (1981) and Lareau’s (2000) re-
embodied (in language, habits, and taste). search, which both tie school knowledge
Bourdieu argues that economic and cultural with social class location, demonstrating
capital are powerful “principles of differen- how academia is not a level playing field.
tiation” in that these forms of capital direct Teachers and students may be unaware of
us into the objective social position which how cultural capital favors those who pos-
conditions our disposition, the “generative, sess it and disadvantages those who do not.
unifying principle of conduct and opinions” Given that educational credentials are
he calls habitus (Bourdieu and Passeron largely based on test performance and are
1970:161; see also Bourdieu 1987); in turn, presumed to reflect individual achievement,
habitus reinforces position. it is important to recognize the extent to
Bourdieu and Passeron (1970) describe which cultural capital is mistaken for merit.
the seemingly consensual assertion, legiti- Undoubtedly, some will disagree with the
mation, and naturalization of the hegemonic foregoing analysis and reject the argument
culture carried out by powerful institutions, that their exams are biased and unfair—
312 TEACHING SOCIOLOGY
12
much less that they contribute to the repro- exchanges between students and professors
duction of social inequality. But Bourdieu’s exemplify such asymmetry. By being mind-
sociology encourages us to suspend such ful of how classroom interactions may re-
impulsive reactions and instead implores us flect such imbalances, we can deconstruct
to be reflexive about our social practices. and de-center this locus of power. For ex-
By understanding the propensity of school- ample, a professor we spoke with at a di-
ing to be a site of symbolic violence, and by verse, urban community college with a high
acknowledging our potential role in this proportion of first-generation college enrol-
process, we will be better positioned to con- lees discusses the issue of linguistic capital
struct an educational environment that is with her students each semester. She ex-
welcoming and receptive to all students. To plains to students that standard written Eng-
this end, we may challenge ourselves with lish is the language of the academy and in
the following pedagogical questions: How large part the workplace; thus language is
are our classroom strategies and assessment not simply a matter of pride, style, or even
techniques shaped by our habitus or the value, but also a matter of successfully op-
level or types of cultural capital we possess? erating in powerful gate-keeping institu-
Are some students inadvertently excluded or tions. Moreover, language signals status,
disqualified because they do not share the which is equally important for students and
institutionalized signals that we rely on to faculty to be aware of. She is careful not to
transmit information and knowledge? Can demean forms of expression less valued in
we use alternative measures of evaluation academia and discusses code-switching to
including participation, oral presentations, navigate between the fields in which stu-
peer evaluations, group work, field re- dents are positioned. Her point is not to
search, self reflections, and of course
Delivered advocate
writ-by Ingenta to the
: continuing legitimation of stan-
ten work such as papers,State
journals,
University of Newdard
and reac- Yorkwritten
at New English
Paltz at the cost of other
tions instead of relying solely on Wed,
the 08 Oct 2008
tradi- 18:43:49
forms of expression, but rather to provide
tional methods of exams and quizzes? students with the knowledge necessary to
Would these alternative measures help us understand the consequences of their
accommodate a wider range of learning choices, specifically in terms of how they
styles and mitigate the differences in cul- use language. Engaging in dialogues about
tural capital accumulation? In short, the role of linguistic and cultural capital in
Bourdieu’s reflexive sociology reminds us academic and professional success is one
to think about the ways in which we may be strategy to make the subtle mechanisms of
unwitting accomplices to symbolic violence. inequality more transparent to students (for
In educational institutions, language other exercises that help students understand
emerges as a key component in reproducing the role of cultural capital in social life and
the social hierarchy (Carson 1993). Schools their education in particular, see Dundes
enforce institutionally and often state- and Spence [2007], Isserles and Dalmage
sanctioned forms of language and systems [2000], or Wright and Ransom [2005]).
of meaning while de-legitimizing popular Bourdieu’s framework reminds us that
and subcultural vernaculars. In this way, the language, especially as it plays out in the
legitimation of class-encoded linguistic capi- classroom, is a complex matter. Linguistic
tal constitutes another example of symbolic capital that is valued in one field may not be
violence (Bourdieu 1999 [1991]). Bourdieu recognized in another (Bourdieu 1984).
and Wacquant (1992) note that “[e]very This insight becomes particularly salient as
linguistic exchange contains the potentiality students navigate between their peers and
of an act of power, and all the more so their teachers. Though a command of slang
when it involves agents who occupy asym- may gain students respect within youth sub-
metric positions in the distribution of the cultures, it becomes a liability when stu-
relevant capital” (p. 145). Written and oral dents cannot master the dominant language
SOCIOLOGY AS PEDAGOGY 313
12
of academia. College students must learn prominence by studying institutional struc-
how to “talk smart” if they hope to succeed tures and explicating the processes of indi-
in the dominant culture (Kaufman 2003). As viduals navigating the social landscape.
instructors we can play a crucial role in What goes on in the educational arena—at
either assisting or obstructing students from both the institutional and the individual
acquiring linguistic competency and, subse- level—reflects the underlying analytical
quently, gaining important cultural capital. orientation of sociological inquiry. As such,
For example, by purposefully using aca- we believe that because of our disciplinary
demic jargon and obfuscating language, we expertise, sociologists are uniquely posi-
reify dominant cultural codes and extend tioned to understand didactic processes and
our institutional power over students. In formulate ways to improve them.
doing so we may make our students feel Although we focus on select theories, we
inferior or disinclined to participate in class argue that all sociological knowledge has
(Karp and Yoels 1976). Our point here is potential pedagogical applications. To fully
not to promote a “dumbing down” of the appreciate our argument, one should look
academy; rather, we hope to encourage beyond the specific theories and theorists
intellectual interactions between students we discuss. For example, although we did
and professors that will enable students to not discuss Marx, in part because his ideas
gain legitimate cultural capital. Through are foundational to many of the theories we
attentive pedagogical means such as defin- analyzed, we believe there is as much peda-
ing terms contextually, inviting students to gogical value to be gained from his ideas as
ask questions, creating a list of key words, there is from others we did not examine
and promoting epistemological inquiries, we such as Anthony Giddens, Michel Foucault,
can help students penetrate theDelivered or Arlie
dominantby Ingenta to Russell
: Hochschild. Furthermore,
linguistic codes. In short,
Stateby recognizing
University of Newpedagogical
York at Newvalue
Paltzis not limited to paradig-
Wed,as08well
the potential for symbolic violence Oct 2008 18:43:49
matic theories and findings. Indeed, we
as the advantages of accumulating legiti- encourage our colleagues to explore the
mated linguistic and cultural capital, we can ways in which the full range of sociological
help students negotiate the educational field theory—and even research—may be mined
more effectively and enhance our own abil- for pedagogical insights. As Durkheim ar-
ity to interpret classroom dynamics. gued, if sociology studies social life and the
school is a microcosm of society, then there
SOCIOLOGY AS PEDAGOGY: is much to discover about teaching and
A NEW PARADIGM OF learning from our disciplinary knowledge.
TEACHING AND LEARNING? By drawing on the literature of sociology
as pedagogy, we can further integrate peda-
In this paper, we employ a framework of gogy and scholarship. When people want to
sociology as pedagogy to highlight the ways connect their teaching and research, they
in which sociology can enhance and inform usually incorporate their scholarship into
teaching and learning. The theories we dis- the curriculum. Certainly, this helps stu-
cussed exemplify the insights we can gain dents gain an appreciation of the methods
from using what we teach to learn how to and findings of the professional sociologist.
teach more effectively. By examining the But what we are advocating here is some-
pedagogical implications of these social thing quite different. We suggest that using
theories, we draw out the connection be- sociological ideas to inform our pedagogy is
tween the theoretical insights and practices an effective and underutilized way to ex-
of teaching and learning, and between our pand the modes of integrating teaching and
work as scholars and our work as educa- research. Not only does sociology as peda-
tors. Our analysis is based on the premise gogy offer potential benefits for faculty but
that the discipline of sociology has gained it also enhances the learning experience of
314 TEACHING SOCIOLOGY
students. Ultimately, we hope that by recog- Auster, Carol J. and Mindy MacRone. 1994.
nizing sociology as pedagogy instructors “The Classroom as a Negotiated Social Set-
will feel compelled to be more reflexive ting: An Empirical Study of the Effects of
Faculty Members’ Behavior on Students’ Par-
about their teaching practices and position-
ticipation.” Teaching Sociology 22(4):289-
ality. 300.
Reflexivity involves a continual process Baker, Paul. 1985. “Does the Sociology of
of simultaneously looking inward and out- Teaching Inform Teaching Sociology?” Teach-
ward. We should reflect upon our actions, ing Sociology 12(3):361-375.
the reactions we elicit, and the interactions Baker, Paul. 1999. “Creating Learning Commu-
constituted by this negotiation between our nities: The Unfinished Agenda.” Pp. 95-109 in
selves as actors, as processors, and others. The Social World of Higher Education: Hand-
Comprehending how our own experiences book for Teaching in a New Century, edited by
Bernice A. Pescosolido and Ronald Aminzade.
and positionality shape the way in which we
Thousand Oaks, CA: Pine Forge Press.
interact with the social world begins to capi- Bean, John C. 2001. Engaging Ideas: The Pro-
talize on the benefits of reflexivity. Along fessor’s Guide to Integrating Writing, Critical
these lines, sociology as pedagogy suggests Thinking, and Active Learning in the Class-
that we need to be cognizant of how what room. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
we study informs how we teach as well as Bickel, Christopher. 2006. “Cultivating Orchids:
the forms of learning we facilitate. As Promoting Democracy in the Classroom.” Pp.
teachers and learners, we should strive to 93-107 in Critical Pedagogy in the Classroom,
become aware of the manifestations of ra- 2nd Edition, edited by Peter Kaufman. Wash-
ington, D.C.: American Sociological Associa-
cial, ethnic, gender, class, and other struc-
tion.
tural dynamics in classroom interactions. Blumer, Herbert. 1969. Symbolic Interactionism:
Sociology informs us of these Delivered
structuralby Ingenta to : and Method. Berkeley, CA: Uni-
Perspective
dynamics and the classroomStateisUniversity
by no meansof New York atofNew
versity Paltz Press.
California
immune to them. In our questWed, 08 Oct 2008
to become Bok,18:43:49
Derrick. 2004. Universities in the Market-
better teachers and learners, much can be place: The Commercialization of Higher Edu-
gained from using sociology as pedagogy. cation. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University
Press.
REFERENCES Bourdieu, Pierre. 1984. Distinction. Cambridge,
MA: Harvard University Press.
_____. 1987. “What Makes a Social Class? On
Ahlkvist, Jarl A. 2001. “Sound and Vision: Us-
The Theoretical and Practical Existence of
ing Progressive Rock to Teach Social The-
Groups.” Berkeley Journal of Sociology
ory.” Teaching Sociology 29(4):471-82.
32(1):1‑17.
Albers, Cheryl. 2003. “Using the Syllabus to
_____. 1989. “Social Space and Symbolic
Document the Scholarship of Teaching.”
Power.” Sociological Theory 7(1):14-25.
Teaching Sociology 31(1):60-72.
_____. 1999(1991). Language and Symbolic
Alexander, Jeffrey. 1987. “The Dialectic of
Power, edited by John Thompson, translated
Individuation and Domination: Weber’s Ra-
by Gino Raymond and Matthew Adamson.
tionalization Theory and Beyond.” Pp. 185-
Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
206 in Max Weber, Rationality and Modernity,
Bourdieu, Pierre and Jean-Claude Passeron.
edited by Scott Lash and Sam Whimster. Lon-
1970. Reproduction in Education, Society and
don, UK: Allen and Unwin.
Culture. London, UK: Sage.
Appiah, Kwame Anthony. 1993. In My Father’s
Bourdieu, Pierre and Loic Wacquant. 1992. An
House: Africa in the Philosophy of Culture.
Invitation to Reflexive Sociology. Chicago, IL:
New York: Oxford University Press.
Chicago University Press.
Anyon, Jean. 1981. “Social Class and School
Brezina, Timothy. 2000. “Are Deviants Differ-
Knowledge.” Curriculum Inquiry 11(1):3-42.
ent from the Rest of Us? Using Student Ac-
Aronowitz, Stanley. 2000. The Knowledge Fac-
counts of Academic Cheating to Explore a
tory: Dismantling the Corporate University
Popular Myth.” Teaching Sociology 28(1):71-
and Creating True Higher Learning. Boston,
8.
MA: Beacon Press.
SOCIOLOGY AS PEDAGOGY
Brookfield, Stephen D. and Stephen Preskill.
1999. Discussion as a Way of Teaching: Tools
and Techniques for a Democratic Classrooms.
San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Carson, David. 1993. Language, Minority Edu-
cation and Gender: Linking Social Justice and
Power. Clevedon, UK: Multilingual Matters.
Chesler, Mark, Amanda Lewis, and James
Crowfoot. 2005. Challenging Racism in
Higher Education: Promoting Justice.
Lanham, MD: Rowman and Littlefield.
Chin, Jeffrey. 2002. “Is There a Scholarship of
Teaching and Learning in Teaching Sociology?
A Look at Papers from 1984 to 1999.” Teach-
ing Sociology 30(1):53-62.
Davis, Angela. 1981. Women, Race and Class.
New York: Random House.
Davis, Barbara Gross. 1993. Tools for Teaching.
San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Donaghy, Mary L. 2000. “Simulating Television
Programs as a Tool to Teach Social Theory.”
Teaching Sociology 28(1):67-70.
DuBois, W.E.B. 1903. The Souls of Black Folk.
Chicago, IL: A.C. McClurg.
Dundes, Lauren and Bill Spence. 2007. “If Ida
Known: The Speaker Versus the Speech in
Judging Black Dialect.” TeachingDelivered
Sociologyby Ingenta
35(1):85-93. State University of New
Durkheim, Emile. 1956. EducationWed,and 08 Oct 2008Politics
Sociol-
ogy. New York: The Free Press.
_____. 1961. Moral Education. New York: The
Free Press.
_____. 1984. The Division of Labor in Society.
New York: The Free Press.
Eby, John W. 2001. “Proposed Grading Sys-
tem.” Pp. 169-70 in Sociology through Active
Learning, edited by Kathleen McKinney,
Frank D. Beck, and Barbara S. Heyl. Thou-
sand Oaks, CA: Pine Forge Press.
Fails, Eleanor V. 1988. “Teaching Sociological
Theory through Video: The Development of
an Experimental Strategy.” Teaching Sociol-
ogy 16(3):256-62.
Fanon, Franz. 1967. Black Skin, White Masks,
translated by Charles Lam Markmann. New
York: Grove Press.
Fobes, Catherine. 2006. “Practicing Critical
Pedagogy in Travel Study Abroad: Teacher-
As-Learner in Cusco, Peru.” Pp. 7-13 in
Critical Pedagogy in the Classroom, 2nd Edi-
tion, edited by Peter Kaufman. Washington,
DC: American Sociological Association.
Freire, Paulo. 1998. Pedagogy of Freedom:
Ethics, Democracy, and Civic Courage.
Lanham, MD: Rowman and Littlefield.
Goffman, Erving. 1959. The Presentation of Self
315
in Everyday Life. Garden City, NY: Double-
day Anchor Books.
Gotsch-Thomson, Susan. 1990. “The Integration
of Gender into the Teaching of Classical So-
cial Theory: Help from The Handmaid's
Tale.” Teaching Sociology 18(1):69-73.
Grauerholz, Liz and Greg Gibson. 2006.
“Articulation of Goals and Means in Sociology
Courses: What We Can Learn From Syllabi.”
Teaching Sociology 34(1):5-22.
Hall, Roberta M. and Bernice Resnick Sandler.
1982. The Campus Climate: A Chilly One for
Women? Washington, DC: Association of
American Colleges.
Hanson, Chad. 2005a. “The Scholarship of
Teaching and Learning—Done by Sociolo-
gists: Let’s Make That the Sociology of
Higher Education.” Teaching Sociology
33(4):411-24.
_____. 2005b. “Reply to McKinney and Kain.”
Teaching Sociology 33(4):421-4.
Hayes, Dennis and Robin Wynyard. 2002.
“Whimpering into the Goodnight: Resisting
McUniversity.” Pp. 116-25 in McDonaldiza-
tion: The Reader, edited by George Ritzer.
Thousand Oaks, CA: Pine Forge Press.
to : Patricia. 1990. Black Feminist
Hill Collins,
York at New
Thought: Paltz Consciousness and the
Knowledge,
18:43:49
of Empowerment. Boston, MA: Unwin
Hyman.
Hirschy, Amy S. and Maureen E. Wilson. 2002.
“The Sociology of the Classroom and Its In-
fluence on Student Learning.” Peabody Jour-
nal of Education 77(3):85-100.
Holtzman, Mellisa. 2005. “Teaching Sociologi-
cal Theory through Active Learning: The Irri-
gation Exercise.” Teaching Sociology
33(2):206-12.
hooks, bell. 1981. Ain’t I A Woman: Black
Women and Feminism. Boston, MA: South
End Press.
Hudd, Suzanne S. 2003. “Syllabus Under Con-
struction: Involving Students In The Creation
Of Class Assignments.” Teaching Sociology
31(2):195-202.
Hutchings, Pat, Marcia Babb, and Chris Bjork.
2002. The Scholarship of Teaching and Learn-
ing in Higher Education: An Annotated Bibli-
ography. Menlo Park, CA: The Carnegie
Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching.
Isserles, Robin and Heather Dalmage. 2000.
“Cultural Capital as Rules and Resistance:
Bringing It Home in the Introductory Class-
room.” Teaching Sociology 28(2):160-5.
Jones, Susanne M. and Kathryn Dindia. 2004.
“A Meta-Analytic Perspective on Sex Equity
316
in the Classroom.” Review of Educational
Research 74(4):443-71.
Kain, Edward L. 2005. “SoTL, SHE, and the
Evidence of an Incomplete Paradigm Shift. A
Response to ‘The Scholarship of Teaching and
Learning—Done by Sociologists: Let’s Make
That the Sociology of Higher Education.’”
Teaching Sociology 33(4):419-21.
Karp, David A. and William C. Yoels. 1976.
“The College Classroom: Some Observations
on the Meanings of Student Participation.”
Sociology and Social Research 60(4):421-39.
Kaufman, Peter. 2003. “Learning to Not Labor:
How Working-Class Individuals Construct
Middle-Class Identities.” The Sociological
Quarterly 44(3):481-504.
_____. 2008. “The Silent Discussion.” Feminist
Teacher 18(2):175-77.
Kuhn, Manford H. and Thomas S. McPartland.
1954. “An Empirical Investigation of Self-
Attitudes.” American Sociological Review
19(1):68-76.
Lareau, Annette. 2000. Home Advantage: Social
Class and Parental Intervention in Elementary
Education. Lanham, MD: Rowman and Little-
field.
Lowney, Kathleen S. 1998. “Reducing Delivered
‘Theoryby Ingenta
State University of
Anxiety’ through Puzzles.” Teaching Sociol- New York
ogy 26(1):69-73. Wed, 08 Oct 20081999.
Lucal, Betsy and Cheryl Albers, with Jeanne
Ballantine, Jodi Burmeister-May, Jeffrey
Chin, Sharon Dettmer, and Sharon Larson.
2003. “Faculty Assessment and the Scholar-
ship of Teaching and Learning: Knowledge
Available, Knowledge Needed.” Teaching
Sociology 31(2):146-61.
Macdonald, Amie A. and Susan Sanchez-Casal.
2002. Twenty-First-Century Feminist Class-
rooms: Pedagogies of Identity and Difference.
New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
Maher, Frances A. and Mary Kay Thompson
Tetreault. 1994. The Feminist Classroom.
New York: Basic Books.
Major, Claire and Betsy Palmer. 2002. “Faculty
Knowledge of Influences on Student Learn-
ing.” Peabody Journal of Education
77(3):138-62.
Mayberry, Maralee and Ellen Cronan Rose.
1999. Meeting the Challenge: Innovative
Feminist Pedagogies in Action. New York:
Routledge.
McCarthy, Cameron and Warren Crichlow, eds.
1993. Race, Identity, and Representation in
Education. London, UK: Routledge.
McKinney, Kathleen. 2005. “The Value of SoTL
in Sociology. A Response to ‘The Scholarship
TEACHING SOCIOLOGY
of Teaching and Learning—Done by Sociolo-
gists: Let’s Make That the Sociology of
Higher Education.’” Teaching Sociology
33(4):417-9.
McKinney, Kathleen, Carla B. Howery, Kerry J.
Strand, Edward L. Kain, and Catherine White
Berheide. 2004. Liberal Learning and the
Sociology Major Updated: Meeting the Chal-
lenge of Teaching Sociology in the Twenty-
First Century. Washington, DC: American
Sociological Association.
Mead, George Herbert. 1934. Mind, Self and
Society From the Standpoint of a Social Be-
haviorist. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago
Press.
Merton, Robert K. 1968. Social Theory and
Social Structure. New York: The Free Press.
Obach, Brian K. 1999. “Demonstrating the So-
cial Construction of Race.” Teaching Sociol-
ogy 27(3):252-7.
Paulsen, Michael B. and Kenneth A. Feldman.
1995. Taking Teaching Seriously: Meeting the
Challenge of Instructional Improvement.
ASHE-ERIC Higher Education Report No. 2.
Washington, DC: The George Washington
University, Graduate School of Education and
Human to Development.
:
at New Paltz A. and Ronald Aminzade.
Pescosolido, Bernice
18:43:49
The Social World of Higher Education:
Handbook for Teaching in a New Century.
Thousand Oaks, CA: Pine Forge Press.
Piaget, Jean. 1999. The Moral Judgment of the
Child. London, UK: Routledge.
Power, F. Clark, Ann Higgins, and Lawrence
Kohlberg. 1989. Lawrence Kohlberg's Ap-
proach to Moral Education. New York: Co-
lumbia University Press.
Powers, Gerald T. 1999. “Teaching and Learn-
ing: A Matter of Style.” Pp. 435-46 in The
Social World of Higher Education: Handbook
for Teaching in a New Century, edited by
Bernice A. Pescosolido and Ronald Aminzade.
Thousand Oaks, CA: Pine Forge Press.
Rafalovich, Adam. 2006. “Making Sociology
Relevant: The Assignment and Application of
Breaching Experiments.” Teaching Sociology
34(2):156-63.
Ritzer, George. 2004. The McDonaldization of
Society: Revised New Century Edition. Thou-
sand Oaks, CA: Pine Forge Press.
Roberts, Keith A. 2001. “The Seed Jar: Social
Construction of Reality.” Pp. 73-4 in Sociol-
ogy through Active Learning, edited by Kath-
leen McKinney, Frank D. Beck, and Barbara
S. Heyl. Thousand Oaks, CA: Pine Forge
Press.
 SOCIOLOGY AS PEDAGOGY
Rodgers, Diane M. 2003. “‘The Stigmatizers
and the Stigmatized’: Enacting the Social Con-
struction of Difference and Discrimination.”
Teaching Sociology 31(3):319-24.
Roscigno, Vincent J. and James W. Ainsworth-
Darnell. 1999. “Race, Cultural Capital, and
Educational Resources: Persistent Inequalities
and Achievement Returns.” Sociology of Edu-
cation 72(3):158-78.
Sadker, Myra and Sadker David. 1994. Failing
at Fairness: How America’s Schools Cheat
Girls. New York: Touchstone.
Schuster, Marilyn R. and Susan R. Dyne. 1999.
“Stages of Curriculum Transformation.” Pp.
462-70 in The Social World of Higher Educa-
tion: Handbook for Teaching in a New Cen-
tury, edited by Bernice A. Pescosolido and
Ronald Aminzade. Thousand Oaks, CA: Pine
Forge Press.
Silver, Ira and Gina Perez. 1998. “Teaching
Social Theory through Students' Participant-
Observation.” Teaching Sociology 26(4):347-
53.
Smith, Dorothy. 1974. “Knowing a Society from
Within: A Woman’s Standpoint.” Pp. 388-90
in Social Theory: The Multicultural and Clas-
sical Readings, third edition, Delivered
edited byby Ingenta
State University
Charles Lemert. Boulder, CO: Westview of New York
Press, 2004. Wed, 08 Oct 2008
Sturgis, Richard B. 1983. “Conversations with
Theorists: An Innovative Approach to Teach-
ing Social Theory.” Teaching Sociology
10(2):275-80.
Thomas, Jan E. and Annis Kukulan. 2004.
“‘Why Don’t I Know about These Women?:
The Integration of Early Women Sociologists
in Classical Theory Courses.” Teaching Soci-
ology 32(3):252-63.
Umbach, Paul D. and Matthew R. Wawrzynski.
2005. “Faculty Do Matter: The Role of Col-
lege Faculty in Student Learning and Engage-
ment.” Research in Higher Education
46(2):153-84.
View publication stats
317
Vowell, Paul R. and Jieming Chen. 2004.
“Predicting Academic Misconduct: A Com-
parative Test of Four Sociological Explana-
tions.” Sociological Inquiry 74(2):226-49.
Walford, Geoffrey and W. S. F. Pickering.
1998. Durkheim and Modern Education. Lon-
don, UK: Routledge.
Weber, Max. 1930. The Protestant Ethic and the
Spirit of Capitalism. Talcott Parsons, trans.
London, UK: Routledge.
Weis, Lois and Michelle Fine, eds. 1993. Be-
yond Silenced Voices: Race, Class and Gender
in United States Schools. Albany, NY: State
University of New York Press.
Wellman, Barry. 1971. “I Am a Student.” Soci-
ology of Education 44(4):422-37.
Wolfe, Joanna. 2000. “Gender, Ethnicity, and
Classroom Discourse: Communication Pat-
terns of Hispanic and White Students in Net-
worked Classrooms.” Written Communication
17(4):491-519.
Wright, Mary C., Nandini Assar, Edward L.
Kain, Laura Kramar, Carla B. Howery, Kath-
leen McKinney, Becky Glass, and Maxine
Atkinson. 2004. “Greedy Institutions: The
Importance of Institutional Context for Teach-
ing intoHigher
: Education.” Teaching Sociology
32(2):144-59.Paltz
at New
18:43:49
Wright, Wynn and Elizabeth Ransom. 2005.
“Stratification on the Menu: Using Restaurant
Menus to Examine Social Class.” Teaching
Sociology 33(3):310-6.
Judith Halasz is an assistant professor of sociology
at the State University of New York at New Paltz. She
teaches and researches sociological theory, culture,
film, labor, and urban life.
Peter Kaufman is an associate professor of sociol-
ogy at the State University of New York at New Paltz.
His teaching and research revolve around critical peda-
gogy, sociology of education, and sociology of sport.