| The announcement of ASA's award for a Distinguished Career in
the Practice of Sociology to Peter Rossi (see page 1) led me to
reflect on an article, "Furthering the Applied Side of Sociology,"
which Howard Freeman and Rossi published 15 years ago in the
American Sociological Review. In that piece, at a timeÑ1984Ñwhen the
academic job market was particularly tight, they argued that
"applied work could mitigate the consequences of the shrinking
opportunities for sociologists in the academic labor market." As
importantly, they argued that it was intellectually unwise for the
discipline to turn "inward"; instead, they maintained that sociology
should address a rich array of problems and issues. Yet, before new
PhDs and their advisors could simply hop on that bandwagon, they
threw in this challenge: ". . . there are qualitative differences
between applied and conventional academic work that need to be
confronted, including the educational preparation required, the
criteria for student selection, the ways faculty are evaluated, and
the kinds of work that are valued " (p.571).
Fast forwarding to 1999, the ASA Research Program on the
Discipline and Profession is in the midst of analyzing the data from
the PhD-tracking survey, a sample of graduates from July 1996-August
1997. First, the data show that in better employment times,
sociology PhDs have fairly low rates of entry into applied work,
even when the academic positions they hold are non-tenure track.
While the PhDs in academic and non-academic positions did not differ
on many personal characteristics, their graduate education showed
differences. Those employed in academia were more likely to have had
teaching assistantships and had more opportunities to present
research outside of their universities. Eighty-five percent of all
respondents indicated that faculty had not encouraged them to pursue
non-academic jobs, and 63 percent reported that they had not had
opportunities to interact with non-academic professionals.
Yet, as Freeman and Rossi invoked, "it is not possible to train
students in applied sociology without on-going faculty involvement
in the work we are training them for" (p.575). To encourage such
training, they lay out a list of specific illustrative changes
needed in sociology departments to accommodate applied sociology,
such as a openness to publications in non-sociology journals as well
as technical and proprietary reports; flexibility to allow a
colleague to take an applied, public service assignment; and
adequate support staff to help to ensure the quick and quality
turnaround applied clients require. Their and other ideas for shifts
in graduate education will be taken up by an exceptional panel of
sociologists at the ASA's Directors of Graduate Study conference in
August on "Preparing for Applied Careers."
From where I sit, some progress has been made to prepare
intentionally and rigorously a new generation of applied
sociologists. A 1998 ASA report on "Applied Programs" profiles a
number of MA-only programs that have been particularly creative in
addressing actual or simulated client-driven research agendas. Many
of these programs include a sociological research center at the hub,
where faculty and students engage in collaborative research. Freeman
and Rossi made the point, and I concur, that not all sociologists or
sociology departments should turn to applied activity, but, as in
economics, the strength of our discipline can derive from high
quality "training" for and "doing" of both academic and non-academic
work.
While many departments may not have transformed themselves as
much as they can, or should, or will, professional socialization in
and support for applied work can be found in many sociological
associations beyond ASA. In certain subfields like rural sociology,
public opinion research, or demography, there has been a
longstanding and valued presence of professionals doing substantive
and methodological work of rigor and significance on applied issues
or in applied settings. The legitimacy of these roles can be seen in
a "blended" leadership in the Rural Sociological Society (RSS), the
American Association for Public Opinion Research (AAPOR), or the
Population Association of America (PAA), which prominently include
those in practice (that is, non-academic careers).
This blending and support for applied work can also be seen in
the leadership of those sociological associations essentially
dedicated to applied work such as the Society for Applied Sociology
(SAS), the Sociological Practice Association (SPA), and the ASA's
Section on Sociological Practice. Not only do applied sociologists
find a network of interested colleagues in a wide range of applied
settings, but academics with applied interests are active as well.
In summer 2000, SAS and SPA will hold a joint meeting, overlapping
with the ASA Annual Meeting in Washington, DC. Within ASA, we have
reflected on how to ensure professional visibility and growth for
sociologists engaged in applied work, whether in our "Policy and
Practice" column in Footnotes, in didactic workshops at the Annual
Meeting, or as reviewers of books for Contemporary Sociology.
As someone who has affirmatively chosen professional
opportunities outside of the academic workplace, I can attest to the
immense challenges and pleasure of using sociological training and
insights in venues where our work can make a difference. When I was
at the National Science Foundation, my core purpose was advancing
basic research in the social sciences, but the mode of the activity
was an application. At ASA too, our work is applied even when we are
aiming to promote the most fundamental objectives of the discipline.
Over the years, other false dichotomies, such as that between
teaching and research, have slowly fallen, by virtue of exemplary
instances of colleagues doing their best work across sectors. Rossi
and others certainly typify this tradition and, through their words
and actions, address some of the stereotypes and distortions between
applied and academic sociology. My enthusiasm about the
possibilities for our field to be strengthened and to be useful
extends not just to students at all degree levels, but to department
leaders as well. The structural changes are yet to be fully
implemented, but there are enough breakthroughs in the barriers to
encourage sociologists to take a walk on the applied side. --
Felice J. Levine
|