Sociology 130: Contemporary Social Problems (3 cr.)

Spring 2003

UW – Marathon

 

Instructor:  Dr. Ann Herda-Rapp                                                  

Office:  325 North Hall                                                                             

Office phone:  715/261-6269

E-mail:  aherdara@uwc.edu

Meeting time:  W 5:00-7:30

 

Office hours:     T 10:00-11:00

                            W 4:00-4:45

    R  10:00-11:00

                            or by appointment

Office hours are set up for you, so please take advantage of them.  Sometimes it is hard for me to determine if students are having difficulties;  thus I hope you will visit during office hours if you have problems or simply want to visit.  My door is always open (though perhaps not literally).

 

Course Overview, Objectives and Proficiencies:

This course explores how society defines social problems and how sociologists study social problems.  We will examine the social construction of social problems, inquiring as to why some problems are defined as social problems while others are not and how an issue becomes defined as a social problem.  

 

Students will learn the following:

·         To understand and critically analyze the social construction of social problems.

·         To understand and critically analyze how claims-makers (social movement organizations, politicians, the media, etc.) help to construct images of social problems and our understanding of those problems.

·         To develop critical thinking skills through active participation with the text, assignments and class discussion.

 

Over the course of the semester, students will develop the following proficiencies: 

·         mastery of a breadth of knowledge.

·         the ability to analyze, synthesize, evaluate and interpret data.

·         the ability to distinguish knowledge, values, beliefs and opinions.

·        the ability to read and listen with comprehension and critical perception.

 

 

Required Texts

The following materials are required reading for this course.  You can purchase both at the bookstore. 

 

(L)                   Loseke, Donileen.  1999.  Thinking About Social Problems:  An Introduction to        Constructionist Perspectives.  NY: Walter de Gruyter.

 

(CP)                 Course packet of journal articles

 

 

Course Requirements – The dates and assignments listed below are subject to change.  All due dates are listed on pg. 4.

 

Total Course Points = 430

 

·         Exams (2) --- Each exam = 100 points

   Total grade = 200 points

Two exams, consisting of objective (such as multiple choice questions) and short essay components, will be administered.  One exam will be administered at the halfway point in the semester, while the other will be a final, comprehensive exam (see Course Outline for dates).

Make-up exams will be given only in cases of medical or other emergencies, and will require written documentation from a physician or counselor (the latter in the case of deaths or other personal tragedies).  There will be no exceptions.  If possible, please notify me before the exam.

 

·         Social Problem Research Project --- Total grade = 170 points

This assignment consists of three components:  1) the Analysis of Sources assignment (2-3 pgs.; 20 pts.);  2) a group presentation (50 pts.);  3) a 7-9 pg. final paper (100 pts.).   See the description of the project found later in this syllabus.

 

·         Micro-Essays (5) --- Total grade = 60 points

To assess your understanding of the course concepts and strengthen your writing skills, I will give the class a short essay question --- sometimes at the start of class, sometimes at the end --- to be completed individually in class.  I will administer five such essays over the course of the semester.  These micro-essays will be unannounced. You will be permitted to use your notes and course materials to answer the question.  These micro-essays are intended to be micro;  you will not write and I will not read answers longer than ½ page.  If you miss a class, you will not be permitted to make up the missed essay. 

            Each essay will be graded with the following grading system:  12 = shows full understanding of day’s readings and concepts/ideas;  6 = does not explicitly use concepts or readings assigned, but shows general understanding;  0 = unacceptable: need to work on reading and using concepts.  Should you receive a 6 or a 0, you may elect to re-write your micro-essay to earn back up to half of the points lost on that essay.  So, if you originally earned a 6, you might improve your grade to a 9.  And if you start with a 0, you can improve your grade to a 6.  All of this, of course, depends on whether you write a top quality answer.  If you choose to re-write, you must hand in your re-written essay during the next class after the graded micro-essays are returned.  I also require that you turn in your first try at the question and, in the revised micro-essay, highlight (with a highlighter marker) the points that differ from the first attempt.

 

 

Grade Scale

The grade scale followed for this course is that established by the university.   The breakdown of points follows:

A = 90%-100% =  387-430 pts.

B = 80%-89%   =  344-386 pts

C = 70%-79%   =  301-343 pts.

D = 60%-69%   =  258-300 pts.

F = under 60%  =  257 or less

 

[+ and – grades will be assigned for the highest & lowest point values in each grade category]

 

Miscellaneous Notes

Paper format:  Your final paper and Analysis of Sources should use a standard format:  typed, double-spaced, 12 pt. font, 1 inch margins on all sides.  Consult the last page of this syllabus (“Citing Sources”) for citation format.  Please do not use plastic report covers --- they are awkward, produce waste in the manufacturing process, and are not recyclable.  Simply staple the paper in the top left corner. 

 

Academic integrity:  Plagiarism in/of papers will not be tolerated.  Students who plagiarize either by copying a paper or using sources improperly (i.e., using the author’s words without citation) may receive a 0 for the assignment.   Severe infractions may result in an F for the course. 

 

Language:  As a sociologist, I believe language is tremendously powerful in defining a situation or group of people.  With that in mind, I ask that students refrain from referring to adult women (over 18 years of age) as “girls”;  rather, they are “women”.  And likewise, adult men are “men”, not “boys”. 

Absences:  While micro-essays are, in part, a measure of attendance, attendance does not figure into the grade explicitly.  This is not to suggest that attendance and participation in class are not crucial.  Participation will make the ideas accessible and will foster a positive learning environment.  And, without attending regularly and keeping up with the readings, you will simply be lost.  We cover too much material—material often not introduced in the readings—to miss class.  Knowing this, students who miss class are taking a risk.  Students should know that it is their responsibility to access the missed material (though not from the instructor) on their own.  Such responsibility for one’s own learning is the cornerstone of a university education. 

 

Course readings:  This course is reading intensive, not necessarily in the amount of reading but in the importance of the course readings:  our discussions, your essays, your paper, and course exams will all require an in-depth understanding of the readings.  If you do not do the readings, all of the above will suffer.  You should know from the beginning, then, that I have this expectation of you.  If you cannot meet that expectation, you should consider a different course.

 

Students with special needs:  Students for whom English is a second language and students with documented learning disabilities should see the instructor at the start of the semester to discuss accommodations.

 

Cell phones:  please turn them off when entering class.  Should it go off during class, please have the courtesy to shut it off immediately;  do not answer it in the classroom!

 

 

Course Outline and Schedule

The assigned readings will be discussed on the day they are posted unless otherwise stated in class.  Note that there are days when no readings are assigned;  this should NOT lead one to conclude that we do not have class that day!  You should come to class having read the assigned readings and fully prepared to discuss them.  I suggest you outline each reading --- detailing the reading’s thesis and its main points --- as you read.

 

This schedule of readings and assignments is subject to change at the instructor’s discretion. 

 

Date

Topic

Assignment

1/22

Intro. to course and the study of social problems

 

1/29

Theoretical Perspectives on Social Problems

Ch. 1 (L)

2/5

(cont’d)

 

Discuss Social Problems Research Project

It is VERY important that you attend this class.

2/12

Constructing Social Problems

Ch. 2 (L)

“Deviance in the welfare state” by Gusfield (CP) – focus on first half

2/19

The Arenas of Discourse

 

 

 

 

The Life Cycle of a Social Problem

1.      “The Rise and Fall of Social Problems” by Hilgartner and Bosk (CP)

2.      “The Emergence of Premenstrual Syndrome as a Social Problem” by Rittenhouse (CP)

 

“Up and Down with Ecology” by Downs (CP)

2/26

Claims-Making Strategies

 

 

Constructing Solutions and Everyday Life

Chapters 3 & 4 (L)

“Down on the Farm” by Kunkel (CP)

 

Chapters 5 & 6 (L)

 

Analysis of Sources due at start of class

3/5

Exam 1

 

3/12

Primary Claims-Makers:

1.      The Social Problems Industry/Experts

2.      Social Movement Organizations

 

“The Discovery of Hyperkinesis” by Conrad (CP)

 

 

“From Sex as Sin to Sex as Work” by Jenness (CP)

 

 

3/19

No class – Spring break

 

3/26

Secondary Claims-Makers:

1.      The Mass Media

“Network News as Secondary Claims” by Best (CP)

 

“Media Images” by Gamson et al. (CP) – focus on first half

4/2

             (cont’d)

1.      “From Incidents to Instances” by Best (CP)

2.      “My Problem and How I Solved It” by Berns (CP)

4/9

    2.   Politicians

“The Crack Attack” by Reinarman and Levine (CP)

4/16

Researching Objective Conditions and Subjective Worries

Begin group presentations of Social Problems Research Project, continued through last class.

4/23

(cont’d)

 

4/30

(cont’d)

 

5/7

(cont’d)

 

Course Wrap-Up

 

Distribute review sheet for comprehensive final exam

Ch. 8 (L)

5/14

Final Exam, 6:00-8:00 p.m.

 

 

 


Social Problem Research Project                         

 

Overview:

Keeping in mind that there are different sides to every social problem—stemming from different moralities and views of a problem’s prevalence, causes and solutions—you will research a current social problem and will analyze 1) who the claims-makers are, 2) what they are claiming and with what validity, 3) how they are claiming it, and 4) the solutions they offer (and how those solutions are tied to how the claims-makers frame the problem).  Your task is to pivot around the problem, showing all sides, by analyzing the claims-makers, their claims, and solutions to the problem.  As individuals, you will research your chosen social problem (or at least one of your top choices), present part of your analysis as a member of a group of individuals researching the same topic, and write a final paper that focuses on the four parts listed above.

 

Each of the components of this project is described below.

 

The Analysis of Sources assignment (20 pts.):

After you have been assigned a social problem to research (from your top choices), you should begin your research immediately by going to the library and searching for magazine AND newspaper articles on your social problem.  Look for a range of sources from the general market—such as news magazines like Time and Newsweek—to the special market—such as women’s magazines, sporting magazines, car magazines, religious magazines, etc.

 

This assignment gives you a running start on the final paper because it requires you to get an early start on the research and to start thinking about and analyzing your sources.  For the assignment, you will pick two articles and compare and contrast the articles, explaining similarities and differences.  Do NOT talk about one article, then go to the other one.  Instead, you should be discussing both at once.  Think about the following questions when reading the articles and writing up your analysis:

·         What claims are being made?  By what claims-makers?  Are they primary or secondary claims-makers?  Why? Again, use specific examples to illustrate claims and claims-makers.

·         Assess the quality of evidence in the articles.  Are real-life examples (perhaps atrocity tales) used?  Are statistics used?  Do the articles say where the statistics came from?  Is there enough information provided to assess the credibility of the claims?  Are the statistics specific or do they seem vague (or have gaps)? For example, they may use only percentages without showing raw numbers.  This can make a problem appear bigger than it is.

·         Finally, consider the effect of this claims-making by the author and the claims-makers cited in each article.  How does all of this affect the reader?  That is, how does each claim and the way it is presented affect how the audience views the problem, its causes, its magnitude, its solutions, how we should dedicate our resources (our time, our money), and who the victims and villains are? 

Your analysis will be 2 and ½ to 3 and ½ pages long and will include a separate Works Cited page (list the articles and any other sources).  You must also be sure to quote and cite correctly within your analysis (see the “Citing Sources” page at the end of this syllabus).  You will also need to turn in a copy of each article with your analysis.  Failure to meet any of these requirements will result in a grade of 0 pts. 

 

Group Presentation:

Each of you will be part of a group researching a shared problem.  This does not mean, however, that you must do the research together, nor that your grade is dependent on your group members’ performance.  Rather, you will be individual researchers whose only obligation to the group is to come together on one day and coordinate a group presentation.  Each group member will be responsible for a class presentation on one area of the problem.  I will assign one person to analyze and present on the claims-makers.  I will assign another person to present the claims and critically assess them.  Another group member will analyze the claims-making strategies.  And a fourth person will present claims-makers’ solutions to the problem.  The “group” part of this group presentation, really comes in coordinating the flow of the presentation, sharing sources (where you feel comfortable doing so), and (sometimes) creating handouts for the class. 

 

You are encouraged to explore how your particular social problem has been constructed over time by researching articles and claims-making over the past 5, 10 or even 20 years.  For instance, date rape has moved through different constructions over the past 15.  First it was framed as an epidemic, particularly on college campuses.  A few years later, however, the media turned to a hype frame, calling the epidemic they had publicized simply a matter of hype and false accusations.

 

Two groups will present during each class period, though we all need to remain open to the possibility that some sessions (because we are all SO involved) will go long.  Consequently, some groups’ presentations may be pushed back or may start one day and continue into the next.  No one will have to present earlier than expected. 

 

Each member of the group will prepare a 5-10 minute presentation; your presentation may not go longer than 10  minutes.  After each person presents, it is entirely likely (even probable) that the other group members will have additional information (through their own research of the problem) to offer.  In fact, I expect that the other group members will have additional info. to offer, building on their group member’s presentation.  So, we will take a few minutes of class time after each presenter to bring in additional information and to ask questions. 

 

So that your audience has something tangible to wrap their brains around, each presenter is responsible for constructing a one-page handout using the following guidelines:  the person presenting on claims-makers will provide a list of claims-makers; the person presenting claims and assessing them will list a range of claims on their handout.  This might include statistics, statements, images, etc.  The person responsible for analyzing the claims will provide examples of claims-making strategies (for instance, an atrocity tale) on their handout.  Finally, the person responsible for presenting solutions should list them.  All handouts should identify the source (the magazine article, website, etc.) of the information provided in the handout.  If you give me a copy of the handout in the class period preceding your presentation, I will make enough copies for the class.  If you cannot get the copy to me by that time, you are responsible for making copies for the 35 class members. 

 

Here are some questions to be considered by presenters, depending on the component they are assigned.  These same questions, however, will be addressed by each person in their individual final papers:

 

1.      Claims-makers:

·         Who are the claims-makers?  Give examples.

·         Are they primary or secondary claims-makers?

·         Do they draw on a particular social position, a personal closeness to the problem (for example, a victim of sexual abuse who speaks from the authority of that position)?

·         Are they affiliated with organizations?  Which organizations?  What are the organizations about?

·         Are they members of the troubled persons industry?  Does this industry benefit in any way?  If so, how? 

 

2.      Claims and Assessment of Claims:

·         What are the claims-makers claiming about the objective conditions (prevalence, victims, causes, villains, etc.) of the problem? Give examples of claims. What is the quality of evidence offered by the claims-makers? Is there enough information provided to assess credibility? Is the information biased or vague?  Explain.

·         How do the claims-makers explain the problem, that is, why it exists?

·         Do they tend to use the objective theories (functionalist theory or conflict theory) for social problems to describe or explain the problem?

·         What kind of problem do they suggest this SP is?  That is, at its root, what is this problem about?  How is it a problem of morals?  Is it a medical problem?  A criminal problem?  A resource inequality (that is, some have resources and power and other do not) problem?

3.      Analysis of Claims-Making Strategies:

·         Were the claims/frames expanded at any time by the claims-makers?  If so, in what way and why?

·         How do they attempt to convince the reader of the problem’s magnitude or urgency?  Through statistics?  Through atrocity tales? Why are those strategies employed by the claims-makers?  Give examples.

·         What images do claims-makers present to illustrate or give a face to the problem (for example, the image of a welfare mother or a crack baby or an alcoholic)?  Give examples.  As a consumer of that image, how does the image construct the problem for the audience?  That is, discuss the consequences of that image (of that construction).

4.      Solutions:

·         What solutions do specific claims-makers suggest?

·         How do those solutions relate to or extend from the way the claims-maker framed the problem?  Keep in mind, the solution must fit with the framing or explanation of the problem.  For example, if a problem is defined as a medical problem (with medical causes), the solution should also be medical in nature.

·         Are the solutions directed at only part of the problem?  Why that part? 

·         Does anyone benefit from the plan laid out to solve or address the problem?

 

One overarching question that all group members should consider:  how are the claims-maker’s claims geared toward the audience?  That is, how does the claims-maker make this problem relevant to the particular magazine audience?  Keep in mind that magazine editors know the demographics (age, sex, income, religion, race, etc.) of their audience.

 

The Final Paper:

Your final paper will be an individual effort in which you bring together the four parts.  It is due one week after your group’s presentation.  It should answer the above questions and consist of the following four section headings, in addition to an introduction that provides a road map of the paper and a conclusion that wraps up the paper: 1) claims-makers, 2) claims and assessment of claims, 3) analysis of claims-making strategies, 4) solutions. 

 

Your paper should be 7-9 pages in length and should follow the paper formatting requirements laid out in the syllabus.  Your paper should also include a Works Cited page (see the “Citing Sources” page at the end of this syllabus for the format required) in which you list all of the sources cited in your paper.  There are some expectations and restrictions on sources, however:

·         The minimum number of sources expected (as citations in the text AND in your Works Cited page) is 8.

·         I expect to see at least 6 magazine or newspaper articles cited in your paper.

·         You may use no more than 3 internet sites.  While internet sites should not be trusted as valid sources for peer-reviewed, valid research, they are a forum in which the public discusses and learns about social problems.  So, such sites are important examples of that public discourse.

·         You may use no more than 3 books.

·         You may not use journal articles, primarily because they are not read by the general public   (these are research-oriented journals published by academic institutions;  they are not read by the general public).  Scholarly journals are published four times a year by academic institutions, have no advertising, and begin with an abstract.  If you need help in determining if something is a popular periodical (a magazine) or a scholarly periodical (a journal) ask me or the reference librarian, Todd Roll.

·         You may borrow from me and use no more than one Social Problems textbook.  Like your other sources, it must be cited within your paper and your Works Cited page. 

 

While you may share sources among your group and you may also build on the ideas/concepts introduced by a group member during their presentation, you may not rely on their analysis or their writing.  I will watch closely to be sure there are significant differences between the individual group members’ papers. 

 

Turn in two copies of this paper.  I will keep one for my records.

 

Grade Components:

·         Analysis of Sources—20 pts.

3 pgs. + Works Cited pg., due on 10/15;  Papers are due at the start of the class period.  Anything after that will be considered late and will NOT be accepted (you receive 0 pts. for the assignment).

·         Group Presentation—50 pts.

Individual grades (there are no group grades) will be based on the following questions:

1.      Did the presenter meet the pre-presentation requirements (i.e., readings and handouts to class)?

2.      Did the presenter clearly present the material in a way accessible to the class?

3.      Did the presenter analyze the Social Problem using the tools of constructionist theory?  Here I mean did you use the terms, concepts, and questions of analysis that constructionists use?

Those who do not present will earn 0 pts. for this assignment.

·         Final Paper—100 pts.

7-9 pgs. + Works Cited pg., due one week (7 days) after the group presentation.  The quick due date takes as its assumption that you have done the bulk of your research and written the majority of the paper by the date of your group presentation. 

Papers are due at the start of the class period.  Anything after that will be considered late and will lose 5 points for every business day late.

 

 


Criteria for Final Paper:

So that you know, up front, what I expect to see in your final paper, I provide the following checklist. 

 

An “A” paper …

… uses the complex language of constructionism and applies concepts of the course, showing a fluency with constructionist theory.

… illustrates the depth and range of claims-making and, through discussing them, shows how     the claims of various claims-makers relate to each other. 

=> creates a dialogue between claims-makers/claims.

… analyzes the claims-making strategies by applying concepts and critiquing (and dissecting)             the claims.

… appropriately cites a wide variety and more than the required number of sources in the text      and in the Works Cited page.

A “B” paper …

            … presents the concepts of the course and uses the course language.

            … shows the depth and range of claims-makers and their claims.

            … assesses the claims and analyzes the claims-making strategies by citing course concepts, but             perhaps lacking depth of analysis.

            … appropriately cites a wide variety and more than the minimum number of sources in the             text and in the Works Cited page.

A “C” paper …

            … only minimally or superficially uses the language or concepts of the course.

            … presents a portion of the claims-makers and claims but does not show the range and not             with the necessary depth.

            … introduces the claims but does not assess them critically; does not analyze the claims-            making strategies with depth.

            … appropriately cites but not broadly, or

            … uses a range and the minimum number of sources but does not cite appropriately in the   text and/or Works Cited page.

A “D” paper …

            … does not consistently use the language or concepts of the course.

            … offers a glimpse at the claims-making (the claims-makers and what they do or say) but             without the depth and range required.