Received: from pantheon-po03.its.yale.edu (pantheon-po03.its.yale.edu [130.132.143.34]) by csf.Colorado.EDU (8.8.4/8.8.4/CNS-4.1p-nh) with ESMTP id KAA03888 for ; Wed, 10 Dec 1997 10:53:41 -0700 (MST) Received: from hud03.som.yale.edu (hud03.som.yale.edu [130.132.152.116]) by pantheon-po03.its.yale.edu (8.8.6/8.8.6) with SMTP id MAA26654 for ; Wed, 10 Dec 1997 12:53:38 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <348ED6CF.37D4@yale.edu> Date: Wed, 10 Dec 1997 12:52:15 -0500 From: Dan Ryan Reply-To: daniel.ryan@yale.edu MIME-Version: 1.0 To: socgrad@csf.colorado.edu Subject: Re: Time limits References: <199712092137.OAA04224@csf.Colorado.EDU> <199712100223.VAA16923@jhunix.hcf.jhu.edu> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Thomas F Brown wrote: ...other stuff deleted... > 1) How long "should" a sociology degree take to completion, given > that budget contraints do exist? If we insist on premising the question on the "given..." phrase, then I think we should rephrase the question along the lines of "Given how many sociologists the world needs, the critical mass the community of the department requires, upcoming teaching requirements, and the importance of appearing to the rest of the world to be using resources wisely lest we get slammed and have our funding taken away...how long..." Otherwise, it would seem to me that the appropriate policy analysis approach would be to separately analyze the questions of how long it takes to make good sociologists (and the shape of the distribution) and then how many sociologists we need to produce and then whether we can do so given budget constraints. What's the point of being a profession or discipline if the answer derives solely from budget constraints with a little humanitarian flexibility added? [And note that the calculus that sees TAships and RAships simply in terms of "support," as if there is only one side to the transaction, smuggles in approval for running an organization on the assumption that there are "plenty of people who'd like to be in your place." Fine if you subscribe to that approach, but let's make it explicit.] > 2) How much leeway should be built into the funding system to give extra > support to students who run into bad luck, or who bring serious personal > challenges along with them? But let's do note that if we were to open the question of what constitutes "personal challenges" we will be a long time before consensus. If you add the fact that folks often deprecate problems by calling them "personal," you get yet more contrariness still. There once was this passage in Mills about unsociologically characterizing things as "personal problems" I think. * * * Note: I actually think "timely completion" is a great thing. I also think that most grad programs are a long way from having a structurally conducive environment in which to make it happen. I don't mean that the "blame" only goes on the department, only that done well, structural adjustments may be a much more efficient way to achieve the goal. Unfortunately, most people are rather inept about setting such things up. It's a genuine organizational/institutional challenge. A more or less Darwinist approach may "work," but it is terribly inelegant from a sociological point of view, IMHO. Sort of like opening walnuts with a sledge hammer. dan