|
Urban Studies 981 Perspectives Toward Change in Urban Social Institutions
Spring 2005 University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee Tuesdays, 4:30-7:10 Class meetings: Bolton 778B Amanda I. Seligman Stacey Oliker Holton Hall, room 331 Bolton Hall, room 756 229-2215 seligman@uwm.edu stacey@uwm.edu office hours: office hours: Thurs. 3-4 M 1:45-2:45, W 11:30-12:30 or by appointment or by appointment The purpose of this course is to examine how social scientists—especially but not exclusively sociologists and historians—explain changes in urban social institutions. Each week, students will read and discuss essays or books chosen to illustrate substantive or methodological themes important to urban scholars. The central task of this course is learning how to assess the thesis, conceptualization, and evidence of a work of scholarship. In pursuit of this goal, students will write summaries of and essays about the assigned readings throughout the semester. Readings:
Three books have been ordered through the UWM Union Bookstore and placed on paper reserve in the Golda Meir library. They are: Wayne C. Booth, Gregory G. Colomb, Joseph M. Williams, The Craft of Research (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1995) Eric Klinenberg, Heat Wave: A Social Autopsy of Disaster in Chicago (Chicago : University of Chicago Press, 2002) Karen Sawislak, Smoldering City: Chicagoans and the Great Fire, 1871-1874 (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1995) Robert D. Putnam, Bowling Alone : The Collapse and Revival of American Community (New York : Simon & Schuster, 2000) We will also read excerpts from two books. The excerpts are on library reserve. Only a few copies of these books will be available in the bookstores: · Theda Skocpol, Protecting Soldiers and Mothers (Harvard University Press, 1992) George Chauncey, Gay New York (Basic Books, 1994) In addition, articles and essays assigned for the course have been placed on paper and electronic reserve. Paper reserve readings are marked with a (p) on the class meeting schedule section of this syllabus; E-reserve readings are marked with an (e). Please note that there are a few readings that are available to you ONLY through paper reserve, not through e-reserve or for purchase at the bookstore. Instructions for accessing electronic reserve readings will be distributed during the first class meeting. We recommend that you print out the electronic reserve readings early in the semester in order to avoid any last minute computer glitches. You will need hard copies of the essays for reference during class discussions; please do not read the essays only on-line. Please note: the processes of scanning and placing materials online often results in typos and other printing errors in the documents. Reading scholarly arguments and writing about them is not an easy task. Instructors are happy to talk with students about their progress towards mastering these skills (see office hours). In addition, students who wish to read more about the craft of writing and scholarly research are invited to look over the following books: · Bronwyn T. Williams and Mary Brydon-Miller, Concept to Completion: Writing Well in the Social Sciences (Harcourt Brace College Publishers, 1997) Anne Lamott, Bird by Bird: Some Instructions on Writing and Life (Anchor Books, 1994) Requirements: In addition to completing all of the readings in advance of weekly class sessions, students are required (1) to participate actively in seminar discussions, (2) present (orally) analyses of the weekly reading assignments, at least once during the semester (3) write four papers critically assessing course readings, and (4) during weeks when papers are not due, write one-page analyses of the reading assignments. Each assignment is discussed in more detail below. Students must participate in class discussion. Quality participation includes listening respectfully to one’s colleagues, asking honest questions, and sharing one’s opinions, reasoning, and evidence. At least once during the term, each student will be responsible for opening the class session with a presentation on the readings assigned for that week. In some weeks, depending on course enrollment, the class session will open with two presentations. The presentations should very briefly present the authors’ main arguments and primarily, compare and assess them. Each week of the semester, except when papers are due, students are required to bring with them to class three copies of the short, summary assignments. This assignment should not be more than one page long, and may be single-spaced. At the start of class, one copy should be given to each instructor, and one copy retained for reference during discussion. The short assignments must include the following elements: For each reading, provide a one-sentence summary of the work’s main argument and a few sentences assessing the logic of conceptualization and the use of evidence. A discussable question, preferably one that elicits comparison between the assigned readings or criticism of them. Note: you might want to introduce your question into the general seminar discussion at an appropriate point. The weekly summary assignments will not be graded, although they will be read and critiqued. In order to pass the course, students are required to turn in all of the weekly assignments. No short summary assignment is due the week in which the student makes his or her first class presentation. Four other papers are due during the course. Students must submit two copies of each paper, one for each instructor, at the beginning of the class meeting during which they are due. A copy of the final paper should be placed in each of the professors’ department mailboxes. Please double-space all of these papers Each paper will address a question distributed at least a week before the paper is due, based on a set of course readings. Papers should not describe the readings. Instead, they should compare, analyze, and assess authors’ theoretical frameworks and arguments. Course grades will be calculated on the following basis: · Seminar participation, including presentations: 30% · Paper 1: 10% Papers 2, 3, 4: 20% each Notes: If you need special accommodations in order to meet any of the requirements of this course, please contact one of the instructors as soon as possible. All students are expected to observe University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee standards of academic honesty. A statement about UWM’s policies regarding academic integrity is available at http://www.uwm.edu/SAHP//administrationinfo/acadmisc.html. You can find the academic integrity statements of many other universities and colleges through http://www.nwu.edu/uacc/cai/resources.html.
January 25: Introduction February 1: Making a Claim Wayne C. Booth, Gregory G. Colomb, Joseph M. Williams, The Craft of Research (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1995), pp. 106-108 and ch. 7-10. Eric Klinenberg, Heat Wave: A Social Autopsy of Disaster in Chicago (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2002), Introduction. Karen Sawislack, Smoldering City: Chicagoans and the Great Fire, 1871-1874 (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1995), Introduction. (e) Peter Uhlenberg and David Eggebeen, “The Declining Well-being of American Adolescents,” The Public Interest 82 (1986): 25-38. Assignment due: After capturing, in one sentence, the main claims in Klinenberg, Sawislack, and Uhlenberg and Eggebeen, briefly assess how Uhlenberg and Eggebeen use reasons, evidence, and acknowledgements. Bring three copies. February 8: A Sociological Debate on Causes (e) Arthur L. Stinchcombe, “The Structure of Causal Theories,” in Constructing Social Theories (N.Y.: Harcourt, Brace and World), pp. 28-56. Uhlenberg and Eggebeen, “Declining Wellbeing” (e) Frank F. Furstenberg Jr. and Gretchen Condran, “Family Change and Adolescent Well-being: A Reexamination of U.S. Trends,” in The Changing American Family and Public Policy, ed. Andrew J. Cherlin (Washington, D.C.: The Urban Institute Press, 1988). Booth, et al., Craft of Research, ch. 11. Assignment, due: Write a 3-page paper on the Uhlenberg-Furstenberg debate that identifies the subject of debate and each article’s main claim. Assess how each uses reasons, evidence, and warrants (explicit or implicit) to support claims. Apply an argument from Stinchcombe about causal direction. Introduce the paper with a claim that summarizes your main argument about this debate. Bring 2 copies. February 15: Historical narratives (e) William Cronon, “A Place for Stories: Nature, History, and Narrative,” Journal of American History 78(4) (1992): 1347-1376. (e) Rogers M. Smith, “Beyond Tocqueville, Myrdal, and Hartz: The Multiple Traditions in America,” American Political Science Review 87(3) (1993): 549-566. Feb. 22: no class. Paper preparation. March 1: Work and Identity (e) Rosabeth Moss Kanter, “The Impact of Hierarchical Structures on the Work Behavior of Women and Men,” Social Problems 23(4) (1976): 415-430. (e) Eva Baron, “On Looking at Men: Masculinity and the Making of a Gendered Working-Class History.” In Feminists Revision History, ed. A.L. Shapiro, 146-171 (New Brunswick: Rutgers University Press, 1994). (e) Cecelia Ridgeway, “Interaction and the Conservation of Gender Inequality,” American Sociological Review 62 (1997): 218-235. Paper due March 8: The Emergence of the U.S. Welfare State (p) Theda Skocpol, Protecting Soldiers and Mothers: the Political Origins of Social Policy in the United States (Cambridge, Mass.: The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, 1992): Introduction (pp. 1-62), pp. 65-66, chapter 2 (pp. 102-151), pp. 154-159, pp. 312-320, chapter 8 (pp. 424-479), and Conclusion (pp. 525-539). March 15: Networks, Social Capital, and Civic Life (e) Claude Fischer et al. Networks and Places: Social Relations in the Urban Setting (1977), chapters 1, 2, and 10. (e) Robert D. Putnam, “The Strange Decline of Civic America,” The American Prospect 24 (Winter 1996): 34-78. Replies to Putnam, The American Prospect 25 (March-April 1996): 17-28: Michael Schudson, “What if Civic Life Didn’t Die?;” Theda Skocpol, “Unraveling from Above;” Richard M. Vallely, “Couch-Potato Democracy;” “Robert Putnam Responds.” (e) Alejandro Portes and Patricia Landholt, “The Downside of Social Capital,” The American Prospect 25 (May-June 1996) 18-21, 94. March 22: no class: spring break March 29: paper due. Robert D. Putnam, Bowling Alone : The Collapse and Revival of American Community (New York : Simon & Schuster, 2000). Pages: 15-28, 31-35, 40-53, 58-64, 69-74, 79, 85-92, 109-115, 116-118, 122-133, 135-137, 140-141, 148-154, 183-284, 294-295, 350-363, 402-414 April 5 Klinenberg, Heat Wave (Introduction through chapter 3) April 12: Sawislak, Smoldering City (Introduction through chapter 3) April 19: Klinenberg, Heat Wave (second half) April 26: Sawislak, Smoldering City (second half) May 3: (p) George Chauncey, Gay New York (New York: Basic Books, 1994): Introduction, chapters 5, 7, and 9. May 10: no class meeting; paper due |