Choices must be made in the contents of any course. The introductory course offers a wide range of alternatives. When I first started to teach the course, the current fashion for introductory courses seemed to be clear. We were to teach an introduction to the discipline, we were to lay a "foundation" upon which other sociology courses would build. We assumed that every student in the class was prepared to become a full-fledged sociologist. We taught vocabularies, theories and a brief introduction to each of the major sub-fields. Slowly, we became aware that, in fact, few students who enrolled in the introductory rural sociology courses enrolled in additional rural sociology/sociology courses and even far fewer became majors in the program. The introduction to rural sociology was also the finish for most students. How much vocabulary, how much theory should a person learn, if this is going to be their only course in sociology? If is not a foundations course, what should the course be?
My own decision was that we should teach social understanding, e.g., people should be taught to understand the social behavior in which they participated and what was going on around them. This ranges from mate selection, families, behavior in the work place, where they live, etc. This type of course required a different vocabulary, different understanding of social behavior, etc., from the type needed to understand Talcott Parsons, Karl Marx and other classical sociological theoreticians.
When this sociology of every day life perspective is incorporated with my Dewey learning theories, which hold that the learning process is only complete when the new knowledge in incorporated into behavior, the result is a very applied or practical approach to the course. The result has been a course where papers and class discussions are often directed towards such topics as dating on the MU campus as compared to that in their home community. Indeed, I like a comparative approach in which students examine the social behavior in their home community and compare it to other communities.
Two criteria are used for the selection of topics for the course: the topics must be central to their lives and they must encourage the students to think about their own behavior. All of us, students and otherwise, are in constant social interaction. We are immersed in the social world. Most students have accepted without question their attitudes, values and behavior from their parents, peers and the media. To the students, their behavior is 'natural' and because of the relative homogeneity of midwestern culture most students have not had much opportunity to compare their behavior to anything very different. My goal is to get them to step back, recognize and critically think about who they are, what they are and how they got that way - from a sociological perspective. They need not necessarily change, but they should know better who they and why they have those characteristics.
Thus, an expanded title: the sociology of everyday life of young people, especially in small communities of the midwest.
Most of the leadership textbooks are aimed at business students or executives. Many of them seem to contain magic: it you will follow the author's simple principles you will become a leader, probably overnight. Another group of books profile the famous business leaders of the day: these are the characteristics which made the people famous and it may make you successful also. There is, of course, some truth in either approach.
I take a some what different approach by noting that the primary ingredient of leadership in most voluntary organizations is motivation. People may become motivated for many reasons. One of the most common is something is threatening or affecting them personally. The other part of leadership is communications skills. A good leader communicates well with his/her followers. So, I utilize a lot of class time in communications skill building. The idea is to empower the students so that they will feel more comfortable about becoming a leader should they so desire.
Both of these subjects are matters of considerable controversy in the U.S. today. People often feel very strongly on many of the topics to be discussed in such a course. Abortion is an example of a topics with very strong positions on each side. I do not want to "convert" people to my perspective (whatever it is) as much as I want them to be knowledgeable of the issues and facts on each side of each issue. I think it is very important that each person be able to understand the arguments on each side of the issues. And, indeed, to be able to take either side and discuss and debate the issue with good information from that perspective.
The period of several years of experimentation has produced the principles listed above. These have been utilized in a series of courses ranging from introductory to advanced undergraduate. While the principles remain the same for the various courses, the techniques do not. Freshman or entry level courses require greater specificity in assignments and instructions than do more mature and experienced upper-class students. The syllabi for 1996 included in the later section clearly illustrate this graduation. In the introductory course assignments are given on a daily basis, the papers are shorter and the students have fewer options. At the 100 level, the assignments are on a weekly basis and the students chose the specific topics of discussion. At the 200 level, the topics are given for much longer periods of time and the flexibility is even greater. Finally, in the honors classes, the approach is for a class problem on which the students decide and do the work, I serve as a resource person.
Career Goal:
My goal as an instructor is to become a "transformational professor." The characteristic of such an individual is as follows: "Provides vision and sense of mission...instills pride...gains respect and trust. Communicates high expectations...uses symbols to focus efforts...expresses important purposes in simple ways. Promotes intelligence...rationality...and careful problem solving. Gives personal attention... treats each {student} separately...coaches...advises." (McLean and Weitzel, Leadership: Magic, Myth, or Method. P. 55) I am currently doing all of these, at least in part, in my role as a professor, but there is room for improvement in some or all of the areas. Thus, I will continue to work to further improve. I will never finish, never fully succeed in attaining these characteristics, but progress can and will be made.
Specific Goals for Teaching Improvement:
copyright © 1996 by University of Missouri