From: M.AMOAH@lse.ac.uk
Date: Sun, 22 Jun 97 13:18:34 GMT
Message-Id: <9705238670.AA867087991@smtplink.lse.ac.uk>
To: socgrad@csf.colorado.edu
Subject: Re[2]: Areas of interest/prestige
          I think how prestigious a field or a dsicipline would be on 
          a particular campus also depends very much on whether the 
          academics handling the filed are considered as reknowned 
          experts relatively.
          
          Michael Amoah.


______________________________ Reply Separator _________________________________
Subject: Re: Areas of interest/prestige
Author:  socgrad@csf.colorado.edu at :external_mail
Date:    6/20/97 20:12


The question of prestige among the sociological sub-fields is a very 
interesting one to explore on this group.  I have a feeling that the 
rank-order of fields will vary widely from one department to the next. 
For instance, I was shocked to see Alan rank theory last on his prestige 
scale!  Also, while there are lots of job postings looking for 
criminologists, I'm not sure that this means it's more prestigious.  At 
Berkeley, I would place theory at the top and criminology at the bottom! 
Of course, Berkeley is not representative of the field.  Still, there 
should be some agreement as to what is most valued in our field (ignoring 
the ideal that no field of study should be more or less valued than 
another).  
          
Also, I am always disheartened when "methods" (quantitative or 
qualitative) is treated as a sub-field in and of itself.  Methods are 
tools we use to answer our sociological questions, which (for me) should 
be inspired by theory, empirical anomalies, previous academic work, social 
problems, etc.  We should choose an appropriate method based upon the 
question asked, not the intrinsic merits of the method.  Similarly, we 
should look for candidates (and be evaluated as candidates) on the basis 
of our work as a whole, not in part.  The same can be said for theory.  I 
would hope that our work as sociologists (and not just the "theorists" 
among us) is informed by and contributes to sociological theory.  
          
          
Robert Bulman