I think the point should be to teach students how to theorize. Of course we probably won't have the next Foucault in our class, and it can be much harder to grade papers in which we tell students to do creative work. But, although of course it is just as important to develop students' appreciation of major ideas in sociological theory, it is necessary that they learn, not just how to critique those ideas, but how to produce their own ideas. A big part of learning to think critically is developing one's own voice, and this kind of creative endeavor, building theory, engages that facility in a way that other types of learning may not. I also think it is helpful when students are encouraged, early on, "You can do this, too." Otherwise, we may tend to produce students who know how to summarize and synthesize arguments, and how to recognize where authors agree or disagree, but not necessarily how to think for themselves, or how to do more than recognize obvious gaps in the literature.
Andrew - 13 years ago
Hard choice between "introducing students to major...", "history of sociological thought" and "greatest hits...", but ultimately the first ("introducing students to major models") is most important because it'll help students think rigorously and critically about social life, whether cultural, political, economic, religious, etc.
If we can do that well, we'll go a long way toward defeating the hold that "common sense" thinking by the Becks and Palins of the world have over society. This is not to attack only one side; a rigorous sociological theory course, done right, could do a lot to shoot down the shibboleths of the left as well
I think the point should be to teach students how to theorize. Of course we probably won't have the next Foucault in our class, and it can be much harder to grade papers in which we tell students to do creative work. But, although of course it is just as important to develop students' appreciation of major ideas in sociological theory, it is necessary that they learn, not just how to critique those ideas, but how to produce their own ideas. A big part of learning to think critically is developing one's own voice, and this kind of creative endeavor, building theory, engages that facility in a way that other types of learning may not. I also think it is helpful when students are encouraged, early on, "You can do this, too." Otherwise, we may tend to produce students who know how to summarize and synthesize arguments, and how to recognize where authors agree or disagree, but not necessarily how to think for themselves, or how to do more than recognize obvious gaps in the literature.
Hard choice between "introducing students to major...", "history of sociological thought" and "greatest hits...", but ultimately the first ("introducing students to major models") is most important because it'll help students think rigorously and critically about social life, whether cultural, political, economic, religious, etc.
If we can do that well, we'll go a long way toward defeating the hold that "common sense" thinking by the Becks and Palins of the world have over society. This is not to attack only one side; a rigorous sociological theory course, done right, could do a lot to shoot down the shibboleths of the left as well