1. Allow for more ideological diversity. Don't scrutinize conservative research with a higher standard that you wouldn't apply to research that confirms your priors.
2. Require more baseline knowledge and practice in quant methods.
3. Train sociologists to become more attractive to industry.
4. Nip the crazies/mentally ill in the bud rather than admit them into PhD programs, allow them to graduate, then let them get eventually get tenure.
5. Reduce number of sociology PhD students by 25%.
Make Sociology Great Again!
-
-
1. Research shouldn't promote political ideology. If results point toward something right wingers appreciate, so be it. Please point to a project or paper that has been criticized for this. Regnerus? Don't make me laugh.
2. Mainstream sociology is quant. I'm qual and even I got far more quant training than I needed. Also, let's not pretend it takes some math guru to do quant work.
3. How? Easier said than done. What do you suggest, even more statistics and less emphasis on publishing? Perhaps a better suggestion here for you would be to take a few courses on the state of the economy. Machines coming for your job, bro.
4. I partially agree with this one. Programs should interview applicants before they admit them. That would also allow for a little diversity in most programs too. But, that said, none of the crazy ones finish their PhDs in my program and if they do, they certainly don't get tenure six years late.
5. Did you just make this number up? 25% of doctorates aren't unemployed and there is no easy way of "reducing" the number besides lowering admissions, which can hurt hiring in future years and doesn't take into consideration the amount of people that will drop out. A better solution here would be to better mentor our undergrads to let them know exactly what to expect upon the completion of a doctorate. -
4. "Crazy" faculty abound in VLRM regionals. Go to Bumblefvuck U and visit the _________ - Studies programs and you will see. Also, IMHO the healthier people left academia to spend time with family and only the most neurotic people thing the endeavor is worth it.
5. My program admitted 20 students in my cohort. Many were unfit for sociology and should have been advised into social work, JDs, MBAs or a policy/health PhD. The reality of many empty seats to fill is a serious issue for departments trying to maintain funding. Soc programs should seriously rethink this and try quality over quantity.
1. Research shouldn't promote political ideology. If results point toward something right wingers appreciate, so be it. Please point to a project or paper that has been criticized for this. Regnerus? Don't make me laugh.
2. Mainstream sociology is quant. I'm qual and even I got far more quant training than I needed. Also, let's not pretend it takes some math guru to do quant work.
3. How? Easier said than done. What do you suggest, even more statistics and less emphasis on publishing? Perhaps a better suggestion here for you would be to take a few courses on the state of the economy. Machines coming for your job, bro.
4. I partially agree with this one. Programs should interview applicants before they admit them. That would also allow for a little diversity in most programs too. But, that said, none of the crazy ones finish their PhDs in my program and if they do, they certainly don't get tenure six years late.
5. Did you just make this number up? 25% of doctorates aren't unemployed and there is no easy way of "reducing" the number besides lowering admissions, which can hurt hiring in future years and doesn't take into consideration the amount of people that will drop out. A better solution here would be to better mentor our undergrads to let them know exactly what to expect upon the completion of a doctorate.