As Sorokin has pointed out (1956), sociological theories, like other theories, may be nothing more than attempts to explain some contemporary event in terms that &dquo;seem right&dquo; to the theorist and his audience. In fact, Gouldner (1970) has suggested that the mark of a good theory is the gut-level feeling that it fits the historical moment; it makes sense of events otherwise too depressing to contemplate, or too disjointed and random to understand. The recent growth of publications in ethnomethodology, phenomenology, and symbolic interaction may illustrate this phenomenon.(Symbolic interactionism, of course, is not a new theoretical perspective, but must be treated in conjunction with the two former theoretical perspectives because of similarities in structure, purpose, and intellectual origin.) We would like to examine the implications of these theoretical models for contemporary sociology. It is important to note that these theories have implications at two levels: the methodological and the political.These theories implicitly deny the generalizability of any theory of social change, and at the same time give a superficial sense of universal understanding of society. We are not arguing that case studies cannot lead to under-
This essay explores the question of why sociology departments, compared to other university departments, are often viewed negatively by higher-level administrators (deans, provosts, chancellors and presidents). We are asked to consider, as sociologists, how departments are ranked and evaluated by administrators. The characteristics of any good university department are identified (e.g., grants, support from alumni, publications, quality of teaching, national rankings, student enrollments); and, the characteristics of dynamic and healthy departments are outlined (e.g., student learning is primary; there is a commitment to the goals of the larger organization; leadership is provided by the unit to solve all-university problems; there is a focus on learning; faculty are productive; there are strong communication links across the organization). The question is posed and then systemically answered as to how sociology departments compare in terms of these standards. It is suggested that a major factor in terms of how and why sociology departments are negatively evaluated is the fact that sociology uses narratives of power and explanations of organizational behavior that are inherently oppositional, i.e., there is an "us" and "them" mentally that sometimes develops. Other reasons for organizational marginalization are identified such as the "canon wars" and their lingering effects, and the fact that the sociological enterprise has been diluted by the teaching of "sociology" in many other campus units, such as composition programs. Finally, questions are raised about how sociology, as an intellectual enterprise, differs from other disciplines in terms of pedagogy, the sequencing of courses, "grand" theory, and forms of apprenticeship. It is recommended that sociologists act positively to help the organizations within which they work to identify common Am Soc (
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.