The Institution of Sociological Theory in Canada

Abstract

Using theory syllabi and departmental data collected for three academic years, this paper investigates the institutional practice of theory in sociology departments across Canada. In particular, it examines the position of theory within the sociological curriculum, and how this varies among universities. Taken together, our analyses indicate that theory remains deeply institutionalized at the core of sociological education and Canadian sociologists' self-understanding; that theorists as a whole show some coherence in how they define themselves, but differ in various ways, especially along lines of region, intellectual background, and gender; that despite these differences, the classical versus contemporary heuristic largely cuts across these divides, as does the strongly ingrained position of a small group of European authors as classics of the discipline as a whole. Nevertheless, who is a classic remains an unsettled question, alternatives to the "classical versus contemporary" heuristic do exist, and theorists' syllabi reveal diverse "others" as potential candidates. Our findings show that the field of sociology is neither marked by universal agreement nor by absolute division when it comes to its theoretical underpinnings. To the extent that they reveal a unified field, the findings suggest that unity lies more in a distinctive form than in a distinctive content, which defines the space and structure of the field of sociology.

Academic Hiring Networks and Institutional Prestige: A Case Study of Canadian Sociology

“…Next, the magenta cluster is less central and encompasses connections between various Québec institutions and others that have a focus on the French language and culture (e.g., Ottawa and New Brunswick). This community might characterize a particular Francophone “style” of sociology likely derived from departmental or theoretical focus, working language, and geographic propinquity (Guzman and Silver ; Warren ). It is also very insulated, as 48 percent of sociologists employed in Québec are self‐hires or those who graduated from another institution in the province.…”

“…York and Carleton are hegemons of this segment, possibly explaining their status as prominent sources in the network despite having lower institutional prestige. Other critical institutions are likely located in the Francophone cluster, which has historically valued engagement with public policy and scholarship embedded in intellectual traditions (Guzman and Silver ). At the same time, these specific institutions also recognize French language skills as markers of competence, reflecting a unique need for their job candidates to adequately engage with the Francophone student body and participate in the local culture (Warren ).…”

“…Moreover, Canadian academia is also segmented on the basis of Anglophone and Francophone traditions, reflecting the absence of a homogenous nationalized sociology with few ties bridging these groups (Warren , ). French Québec exemplifies a unique academic milieu encompassing a different working language and alternative theoretical approaches and styles, which have insulated Francophone sociology from the rest of Canadian sociology (Guzman and Silver ; Warren ). Therefore, Anglophone scholarship and knowledge exchange through the English language represent the dominant paradigm in Canadian sociology, which is becoming more structurally cohesive since the mid‐2000s (Stokes and McLevey ).…”

Abandon canon in American sociology

“…In sociology's boundary-making exercises, there exists a set of thinkers whose work is recognized by a large proportion of the discipline as formative to its identitya "canon" of knowledge deemed indispensable to sociology's disciplinary identity, its researchers' self-understanding and educational curriculum (Baehr, 2017). A large-scale study of sociological theory education in Canada, for instance, has recently laid bare how a core set of works/authors are commonly anointed classical canon and specifically orbit around the Holy Trinity of Marx, Weber and Durkheim, demonstrated by the fact that they are taught, heard, scrutinized and labeled as canon almost universally in syllabi for the classical sociological theory courses (Guzman and Silver, 2018).…”

Theory Is for Everybody*

“…There are multiple visions. As Guzman and Silver (2018) note, sociological canons are spaces of contention and sites where social inequalities are reproduced, as is evident in their summary of most frequently listed authors in Canadian sociological theory syllabi. Of the ten authors listed there is one woman, Dorothy Smith, and not a single person of colour.…”