Does the Center Hold? Reflections on a Sociological Core

Abstract

Is there a distinct disciplinary core (or foundation of agreed on knowledge) in sociology? Should we define a core in our broad field to build consensus? If so, what should it look like? We address these questions by presenting three viewpoints that lean for and against identifying a core for department curricula, students, and the public face of sociology. First, “There really is not much, if any, core.” Second, sociology is “a habit of the mind” (a sociological imagination). Third, key content of a sociological core can be identified using a long or short list. Centripetal forces pressure the discipline to define itself for assessment, transfer articulations, general education, the trend toward interdisciplinary courses, and the public face of sociology. We describe previous efforts for the introductory course and sociology curricula. We conclude with a discussion of everyday practices in sociology that are built on the conception of a core.

Discounting of Evolutionary Explanations in Sociology Textbooks and Curricula

“…Textbooks are good indicators of what is consensual in a discipline, what the commonly accepted grounds are, what is in the focus of interest and what is not. Their content is scanned, analyzed, interpreted, and linked to the core of the discipline by several studies (e.g., Keith and Ender, 2004;Lewis and Humphrey, 2005;Suarez and Balaji, 2007;Puentes and Gougherty, 2013;Dixon and Quirke, 2014;Ballantine et al, 2016).…”

The Center Does Hold

“…Moreover, sociologists, especially teachers of sociology, should be defining and promoting the core curriculum of sociology, not administrators, assessment experts, or government officials. Ballantine et al (2016) also correctly identify that there are multiple benefits for the discipline of sociology to have a defined "core." They argue three points: First, having an agreed upon core provides a foundation upon which to assess student learning in our courses as well as defends and justifies sociology's role as part of a general education curriculum.…”

“…Before I present my arguments for this point of view, I want to highlight some strengths of Ballantine et al's article. Ballantine et al (2016) accurately recognize some of the external pressures being put on the discipline that require sociology to have a coherent curriculum, and when a core is not readily identified, others are stepping in to define sociology for us. These forces include the sociology questions on the new social and behavioral section of the MCAT exams; increasing accountability pressures on higher education from a number of directions, including the White House College Scorecard initiative (Duncan 2015); and transfer agreements between two-year and four-year colleges.…”

“…I also think Ballantine et al (2016) could more assertively state that we need to move this discussion forward and take a more ardent stand on what needs to happen. After spending three years reviewing the primary and secondary literature on this topic and consulting with a variety of sociology faculty members, I claim that there is widespread consensus around a number of important concepts and skills that form the foundation of our discipline.…”

Strategic Design toward Foundational Learning Goals in Introduction to Sociology

“…Introductory coursework in sociology often has a sprawling, encyclopedic quality given the breadth of knowledge encompassed by the field (Calhoun 1992; Keith and Ender 2004). In addition, the diversity of the content of introductory syllabi and textbooks has raised questions about whether sociologists truly agree on the “core” knowledge and skills foundational courses in the discipline ought to teach (e.g., Ballantine et al 2016; Keith and Ender 2004; Wagenaar 2004). In the face of these challenges, scholars of teaching and learning in sociology have worked to dispense with the notion that introductory courses should provide an exhaustive review of the discipline and have instead sought to identify a common set of learning goals that instructors and disciplinary leaders can agree on as foundations of introductory coursework in sociology (e.g., Grauerholz and Gibson 2006; Persell 2010; Persell, Pfeiffer, and Syed 2007; Wagenaar 2004).…”