Sociology

UNDERGRADUATE SOCIOLOGY: RESEARCH METHODS IN THE PUBLIC SECTOR
CURRICULUM
Author(s): G. Payne, E.S. Lyon and R. Anderson
Source: Sociology, Vol. 23, No. 2 (May 1989), pp. 261-273
Published by: Sage Publications, Ltd.
Stable URL: https://www.jstor.org/stable/42853924
Accessed: 01-04-2019 11:35 UTC
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide
range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and
facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at
https://about.jstor.org/terms
Sage Publications, Ltd. is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to
Sociology
This content downloaded from 14.139.60.17 on Mon, 01 Apr 2019 11:35:45 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
SOCIOLOGY Vol. 23 No. 2 May 1989
261-273
UNDERGRADUATE SOCIOLOGY: RESEARCH METHODS

IN THE PUBLIC SECTOR CURRICULUM
G. Payne, E.S. Lyon, R. Anderson
Abstract This paper presents an investigation of the research methods curriculum in

public sector sociology courses. It is based on an analysis of CNAA course documents for
degrees in sociology and the social sciences, and undertaken with the aim of contributing to
the current debate on the content of the undergraduate curriculum in sociology. The survey
results suggest several trends in curricular policy: in particular an increasing emphasis on
practical competence and familiarity with procedures and techniques, and a greater
recognition of 'methodological pluralism', although qualitative methods are still given only
a marginal place in many courses. There was little evidence of progress in the teaching of
quantitative skills, nor was computing yet seen to be a core element of the curriculum. The
documents also revealed a continuing problem over the place of methods teaching as a
whole in relation to other parts of the curriculum as reflected both in time allocation and in
assessment weighting. It is argued that if the claims of sociology to practical and vocational
relevance are to become genuine for students wishing to pursue research in a variety of
careers, then research methods teaching needs to be brought out of the ghetto. It is the
contention of the authors that this is not just a pragmatic consideration: such a change
would also benefit sociology as a discipline.
In his Presidential address, the immediate past-President of the BSA called for
more debate about the content of the undergraduate curriculum (Albrow 1986). To
large extent, a subject is what it teaches, and during a period of restructuring,
questions of development and direction become all the more important. We need to
know what to teach and why we teach it, if we are to have a clear view of what
sociology is and should be about.
Central to the curriculum question is the teaching of 'research methods', not least
because it is the topic that has received most attention in an under-researched field
(e.g. Wakeford 1979; Burgess 1979; Sociology 1981; SRA 1982 and 1985). The
inspiration for this attention has come from both inside and outside the profession;
from the demands of employers for graduates with the necessary skills to carry out
social research, and from the graduates themselves, from the promptings of ESRC,
and from the debate arising from the identification of the 'epistemological crisis'
(see Bell and Newby 1977; Payne et al. 1981).
The reviews of methodology in Sociology (1981) raised several central themes: the
relationship between practical competence and critical awareness, the role of
familiarity with research procedures and techniques, the position of quantitative
skills in the sociology curriculum, the problematic links between Theory and
Methods, and most important the implications of a growing awareness of the need
for 'methodological pluralism'. As noted then, such questions are importantly
related both to the nature and objectives of sociology as a discipline, and in a wider
sense to the kinds of things sociologists do in a variety of researcher positions in the
labour market. It is in the methodology curriculum that the training needs of
students converge with the knowledge needs of the discipline.
262 G. PAYNE, E. S. LYON, R. ANDERSON
This last point is an important one. For the professional sociologist, 're
not a separate, specialist domain, but rather part of the practice of socio
contrast, the teaching of Methods has for a long time continued to treat r
if it were quite independent of other aspects of the discipline:
the similarities between the teaching of practice in 1979 and 1967/8 are strikin
is still a ghetto. (Wakeford 1981:509)
A decade later, research remains at the heart of the sociological enterpri

teaching, as this paper shows, remains in the ghetto.
The earlier studies of Methods teaching understandably had more to sa
courses in the Universities than in the Public Sector of Higher Education
The Polytechnics and large Institutions of Higher Education have grown to
that they currently educate about half of the students in higher educatio
Council for National Academic Awards (CNAA, their joint validating body)
recognises over thirty degrees in which sociology can be read as the major subject.
This paper attempts to fill the gap left by earlier studies which tended to over-look
the Polytechnics. It also updates these studies: we might expect that a decade of calls
for vocationalism, relevance, and applied skills would produce modifications in the
PSHE sociology curriculum more quickly than in the university sector, because of
the Polytechnics' dominant ideology. There may also be something in the results of
this analysis of CNAA practice from which University departments can learn.
Methods
Following a suggestion by one of the present authors in 1986, the former CNAA
Sociological Studies Board set up a working party, chaired by John Westergaard, to
investigate several features of the teaching of sociology in PSHE. Part of this
exercise provides the basis for the present paper. A brief summary of the findings of
the working party is now available (CNAA 1988), but the present analysis of
research methods goes much further. The data base consisted of nine single honours
sociology degrees (one of which gave no syllabus), and twenty-one combined social
sciences degrees (five with no syllabus) in which sociology could be studied as a
major pathway.1 Four of the nine single honours degrees offered a four-year variant,
all including social research as one of the specialisations.
CNAA requires that each course is described in detail in a formal document (often
running to several hundred pages) containing details of teaching programmes,
reading lists, course structure, assessment procedures, cv's of staff, physical and
revenue resources, and philosophy of the course. A regular updating and critical
appraisal of the course is carried out, and reported upon, through peer review by
academics from universities and other polytechnics. Thus CNAA holds a library of
'definitive course documents' that can be fairly easily, if laboriously, consulted.
Data were collected by making rapid searches of the Definitive Course Documents
lodged with CNAA, identifying relevant pages which were then xeroxed, and finally
studying them in more detail.2 After the first two days of work, the authors
necessarily worked on the papers separately, having agreed a procedure for selecting
relevant items, and checking that this method was feasible. Thereafter the analysis
UNDERGRADUATE SOCIOLOGY 263
was completed both in parallel and with replication,

occasional phone calls and exchange of working notes.
We took the pragmatic view that what a department li
'Research Methods' or 'Empirical Sociological Research
means by 'Methods'. No course spelled out explicit points
Methods and other taught components. In as far as we
fairly brief review, Methods only occurs as a topic in the
explicitly reserved for it.
Inevitably, although it covers a very high proportion o
this report gives an incomplete picture: first, not all docu
there was a considerable variation in the style of presen
second, not all the documents were of the same vintage,
from reviews between 1984 and 1987. We also recognise
departmental practice and what gets written into a CNA
be a large one.
The Definitive Course Documents enable the authors to discuss six main issues.
The starting point is the stated purpose of both a degree in sociology and the
contribution of research methods teaching within it. This leads to a discussion of
three main areas of content, and in turn to teaching and assessment.
The Purpose of Sociology Degrees and Research Methods Teaching

Aims and Objectives for degree courses are typically expressed in a very general
and high-minded way. Courses are said to be designed to provide a 'foundation',
'analytical insights' (which could mean research skills) 'opportunities for student
choice', or 'an academically rigorous education'. Most documents make no direct
reference to Methods skills, with nine talking about vocational or training elements
in a general way, and only five specifically mentioning research. Most of these are
single honours degree schemes. Typical phrases include 'mastering the techniques of
sociological inquiry', or providing 'a competence in social research'. Only one of the
Aims statements mentions computing or information technology, and only one
referred to quantitative methods by name.
The Aims statements were a poor reflection of the actual emphasis given in the
courses. Four of the degrees with streams in Social Research did not, in their Aims,
seem to pay substantially greater attention to research per se, or vocational
orientations, than did the other degrees. Two of the most explicit statements were
that one course provided 'a sound education and training in those subjects and skills
required for competence in social research', and that another provided 'an
understanding of research procedures, ability to apply them in the appropriate
context ... a foundation for future development in research or other postgraduate
training'. However, one of these statements refers to a course having one of the
smallest research components, whereas the other statement is taken from a course
with over three times as much Methods teaching time and assessment, as well as a
year's placement in a research setting!
The absence of Aims statements dealing with research skills is interesting in two
respects. First, it does not fit with the tendency of many sociologists to claim that
sociology is valuable because it meets the needs of professionals and managers to
handle research activities. Human service agencies in both the private and public
sector increasingly need to evaluate their programmes and to test client response to
policies. Research activity in these areas is combined with a need to

interpret and apply the findings of other people's research. As many
graduates go into careers of these kinds, it is not unreasonable to expect t
degrees in sociology to include learning the skills which graduates will act
and use.
Second, and despite the lack of explicit Aims statements, Methods are a
compulsory element in all but one degree course. Seven of the single honours and
thirteen of the combined degrees have this core subject in both Year One and Year
Two, and two also include some compulsory work in Year Three, in addition to
options or project. On the other hand, about one quarter have compulsory Methods
only in Year Two. The teaching time varies considerably between institutions: on a
'teaching year' of twenty-five weeks, the lowest would be fifty hours and the highest
around 170 hours. More typical courses devote 100-125 hours tuition to research
methods over two years.
The treatment of Methods after the first two years is interesting and warrants
some discussion. There is generally no taught Methods option in Year Three. This
seems remarkable, given the identification across the board of Methods as a core
discipline. A taught Methods option is available only in four combined degrees, and
all the four-year programmes offer social research as one possible specialisation. The
amount of time devoted to research methodology has also to be seen in the context
of the overall weight of the teaching. There is never more than one Methods course
running at the same time, except in the case of the specialist courses, or for ancillary
studies. The ratio of Sociological Theory to Methods teaching is normally between
2:1 and 3:2. Indeed, in many combined degrees, the Methods core is seen as
'common' to several social sciences, or as an 'integrating study' so that its content
may be skewed away from sociology.
Course Content
Burgess and Bulmer (1981) noted that scepticism during the 1970s about
conventional approaches to methodology led to a reassessment of methods teaching
and the undermining of any common agreement on its nature. We identified this
supposed shift towards 'methodological pluralism' in the courses examined, albeit to
a modest extent. It seemed to the present authors that approximately one-third of
the courses could be said to be predominantly skills - (and in practice)
quantitatively-oriented, one-third were mainly concerned with the philosophy rather
than the practice of research, and one-third a combination of both approaches.
Given the terms of debate about modern British sociology, one might have expected
a larger proportion of courses in the second 'epistemological' category. Five cases in
this group consisted of documents dated 1983 or before. However, the more mixed
group of courses is more weighted to recent validation, and also includes more of the
single honours sociology degrees. We also noted that combined multi-disciplinary
courses have a stronger quantitative emphasis, probably due to the association with
psychology and economics.
Contents : (i) Course orientation as indicated by Reading List

One general indicator of content is what students are asked to read, and therefore
an examination was made of the booklists for First and Second Year courses. To
keep the task simple, case studies or 'classics' (e.g. Durkheim's Suicide ), sources
FIGURE 1
The Top Ten Methods Books
Sociology Degrees (8)* Combined Degrees (16)* Totals (24)*

^ ,, , IT VT , ,, s 1. C. Moser and G. Kalton (12 votes) 1 . C. Moser and G. Kalton (16 votes)
1.C. ^ Bell ,, and , H. IT VT Newby , (5 ,, votes) s . .
_ . , Survey Methods and Social . Survey Methods and Social .
Doing _ . Sociological Research , , ,
Investigation , Investigation ,
2. C. Moser and G. Kalton (4)

,, , , , „ . , 2. A. Cicourel (9) 2. J. Hughes (12)
Survey Methods ,, , , and , Social „ . , , . , # .
Method and Measurement in Sociology Sociological ,
Investigation
3 M Bulmer (3) ^ug^es ^ Be^ anc* Newby

, , Sociological Analysis Doing Sociological Research
Sociological Research Methods , ,
C. Marsh (9) J. Irvine et al. (11)

M. Fuller and D. Lune (3) _ _ . , „ _ 0 . .
, , , The _ Social _ . , Survey „ Demystifying _ Social Statistics 0 . .
Statistics Workbook , , ,
5. J. Irvine et al. (8) 5. M. Bulmer (10)

. ammers ey an Demystifying Social Statistics Sociological R
P. Atkinson (3)
Ethnography M_ Bulmer (7) A. Cicourel (10)

_ „ . _ , „ , Sociological 6 Research Methods Method and Measurement in
G. _ „ Hoinville, . R. _ Jowell , „ et al. , (3 6 p . .
, „ Sociology p . .
Survey Research , Practice „ XT ,
l.C. Bell and H. XT Newby , (6)
T TT , Doing Sociological Research C. Marsh (10)
8 , es ' The Survey Method
The Philosophy of Soctal Sa enee ^ an(| R Strjb|e
Social Research: Principles and 8.M. Fuller and D. Lurie (8)
ug es ( ) Practice Statistics Workbook
Sociological Analysis
,,, VT. , A. Oppenheim (6) G. Hoinville et al. (8)

,,, W VT. Nie et al , (3)
Questionnaire Design and Attitude Survey Research Practice
SPSS Manual
Measurement
W. Nie et al. (8)

W vv. Whvte wnyie (3) ^ C. Seilitz et al. (6) SPSS Manual
W vv. Whvte wnyie (3) ^
Street Corner Society , ^ ■ c ■ i n , <■

Research , Methods ^ in ■ Social c ■ i Relation n , <■
*(Number of degrees giving full book lists)
obviously aimed at psychology or economics on joint courses, and courses

specifically on the Philosophy of Social Science were not included. Even so, we were
surprised at the range of books listed. Among the sociology degrees with syllabuses,
there was a total of 170 recommendations which, because of multiple entries,
consisted of 125 different titles. Among the sixteen combined degrees with
syllabuses, there were 315 entries for 154 titles. Together, this gave 485
recommendations to 206 separate titles in twenty four courses.
This diversity seems to stem from the several broad topic areas involved: basic
statistics; survey methods; qualitative research; philosophy of social science;
computing; historical development and 'sociology of sociology' etc. Basic statistics
have generated many alternative introductory texts, so none dominates the market.
As a result, there is no coherent set of texts which sociology graduates might be
expected to know, particularly when they have studied with psychology and
economics students.
To give some idea of the content coverage, it is interesting to consider which
books are most frequently recommended as key texts. This does give a slight
impression of a methodological 'Top Ten' and needs to be treated with care3 but is
nonetheless illuminating. Details are given in Figure 1.
While there is little surprise in the continued popularity of Moser and

to a lesser extent in the showing of more recent contributions like Hoinvi
and Marsh) how many readers (except those with good memories of Mar
survey a decade ago) would have predicted the appearance of Street Corn
the survivals of Oppenheim and Seilitz, or the prominence given to Bell an
and Cicourel? It is also interesting to note how few frequently recomme
deal with quantitatively oriented material beyond basic statistics, and th
absence of sources in the list on feminist research and interpersonal skil
interviewing.
Content : (ii) Computing and Student Numeracy
The introduction of computing skills to sociological education is probably the

most significant current and future change in Methods teaching. As the documents
show, we are in a transitional phase. Five of the course documents say nothing about
computing, while the rest are evenly split between those who are introducing an
optional, ancilliary or short unit, and those who are attempting to treat computing
as an integral part of Methods. This latter group tends to be concentrated in the
more recent reviews, and we are dealing with intentions , not reports on practice.
Almost no degree offers advanced options in data handling and analysis, and the
level to be achieved is relatively low. Basic familiarity with SPSS is the most common
goal, but the more advanced techniques of analysis, such as the more sophisticated
tricks of data manipulation and file handling do not appear to be taught.
Many courses refer to problems of resource provision, including staffing
constraints. The stated intentions for course development appear severely out of line
with present evidence of hardware and software availability. Indeed, in seventeen
schemes there is nothing said about availability of terminals or micros. Of those
schemes where we are told about the resources, these are typically outside of the
department, shared with other courses and inadequate. Only one scheme raises the
very real problem of the intensive use of staff time which computing makes. With
sociology in the public sector funded and staffed as a humanities discipline, it is
doubtful whether computing can be rapidly or properly introduced.
Where there was evidence of the introduction of computing, it was likely to
supplant statistics, because on the whole, there seemed little sign of increase in the
time given to develop numeracy. Several courses did seem to be tackling the
traditional problems of statistics teaching (see below) but in conventional ways.
There was, for example, virtually no discussion of setting higher entry standards -
such as O-level mathematics - or offering remedial classes. We could find no
evidence of school qualifications held, but twenty-five of the schemes accepted
students who had not obtained O-level mathematics.
This we feel, is an area in need of discussion. While it is true that some innumerate
students become very good at sociological theory, is this the purpose of our schemes,
or should we aim to educate well-rounded sociologists who can cope with all aspects
of the subject? In his article on competence in post-graduate sociology, Abrams
(Sociology 1981) makes the important point that within the framework of
methodological pluralism, large elements of a course could be matters for
negotiation between teachers and students. The non-negotiable elements of the
curriculum should consist of general familiarity wit

methodological options. Similarly for undergraduates,
teaching which allowed for more options could incorpora
specific skills such as quantitative data analysis and comp
appropriate abilities and interests. This would probably pro
discipline. It is difficult to see how students are othe
anything more than a basic level of statistics, such as the
now commonly used in other nations' sociology. Could
required O-level mathematics for entry, and if not, should
the lead of one which provides numeracy and keyboard sk
in students' pre-qualifications?
Content: (iii) Qualitative Methods
If there is a shortage of coverage for quantitative method

dearth of qualitative methods. Combined Social Scienc
qualitative methods than do the single honours degrees, de
the way in which psychology approaches cross-cultural w
are typically encountered only in the second and third
compulsory, and their treatment seems to marginalise the
an emphasis on their problems (representativeness, subjec
critique of quantification within a framework of the inves
a heavy concentration on participant observation. Thi
difficulties about teaching qualitative analysis, but it doe
methods as seen by their advocates.
The terms which recurred most often in descriptions of
methods being taught were participant and non-participant observation,
ethnography, and less often the use of life histories and documents. What is
interesting about this is the presumption that there is no need to specify what
precisely these entail whereas elsewhere most courses make it clear which statistical
techniques were to be mastered, which packages were being used and which classic
texts were reviewed. To judge from the readings (i.e. the references to Spradley,
Humphreys, Whyte and in particular Hammersley and Atkinson) what qualitative
method refers to is epitomised in the Chicago tradition and, exemplified for Britain, in
the studies of schools, deviant sub-cultures and occupations. The above feature is
particularly interesting because it indicates how high and insulating the ghetto walls are.
Most of the single honours courses emphasised the centrality of comparative
analysis especially with regard to the process of industrialisation. One would have
thought, then, that methods courses would have featured analysis of what might be
called classic modern anthropology e.g. Oscar Lewis and Clifford Geertz as well as
the numerous contributions being made in 'Development Studies'. The use of this
material would demand examination of whether these are or are not distinct from
the Chicagoan tradition. But this did not seem to be the case. Similarly, joint courses
often stress an interdisciplinarity which is belied by the section on qualitative
method. There was, for instance, not one mention of cognitive anthropology's
approach to the topic of researching cross-cultural psychology. Neither were there
many indications that courses with strong historical and political connections would
be likely to feature the use of historical documentary evidence in sociolog

such as those over Barrington Moore, Stone, Macfarlane or even Web
In common with the rest of Methods, there is a distinct drift towards a
by coursework and teaching by workshop/group discussion. Whether this
a 'damage limitation' exercise to reduce student anxiety and to try t
interest, rather than out of belief in the inherent superiority of the pedag
clear. In the statistical field, user-friendly packages have now taken muc
drudgery out of data analysis. There has been no comparable technological
revolution in qualitative method. Tape recorders and video cameras merely provide
yet more unorganised material for analysis. In terms of achieving comparability with
perceived professional standards, undergraduate exercises in quantitative analysis
are likely to be far superior to those in qualitative analysis.
Most courses, even those which concentrate on epistemology, tend to present a
view of an external world waiting to be investigated. This conception of data and
investigation is not entirely appropriate to all qualitative methods. Can cultural
experience only be made available by adopting an investigative strategy such as
participant observation? With the almost universal acclaim which Goffman's work
is given elsewhere, why does his work get so little prominence or even mention? Is
there no way to bring the social world into the tutorial room?
Teaching Methods in Teaching Methods
Over half the degrees combined conventional lecture/seminar courses with some
form of practical experience. Where there are two years of teaching, the Year One
course is more typically conventional, with the Year Two containing workshops,
group projects, or practicals. In such cases, most Year One courses include statistical
techniques. The documents say little about how 'workshops' are arranged, what
kinds of material students are provided with, or what kinds of exercises students are
given to work on. Few courses treat such workshops as bearing a direct relationship
to project or dissertation writing. This may reflect the constraints of documentation
format, but without some elaboration it is almost impossible to tell which skills are
learned and practised, and which are merely instructed as part of a small group, in
reference to an activity or goal. As against this, there is a clear trend towards
workshop methods with over half of all the courses and three quarters of the single
honours degrees now using this method. Courses approved up to 1983 had only one-
third which involved students in a methods project, whereas two thirds of courses
revalidated from 1984 on contain a project.
Where the degree includes a dissertation great play was made in the
documentation of the opportunity to carry out empirical work. However, the
authors' experience as members of CNAA visiting parties is that in fact many
students treat the dissertation as an exercise in library research. The difficulties of
doing fieldwork are seldom tackled. Where documentary information on this was
available, which was rare, it supported the authors' prior judgment. This is clearly
an area for debate and review. Apart from one or two specialist degrees, the
dissertation is not treated as the culmination of the methods teaching, nor is the
second year work explicitly geared to be an integral base for the Final Year work.
Assessment
The documents also include recent External Examiners' reports, indicating items
of performance and course content which have been debated with the staff teaching
the course, and details of assessment mechanisms. In view of the fact that twenty-
five courses reported changes to their Research Methods, it was surprising to
discover that only six out of the thirty had any External Examiner comments on
methods. In only one case did the External Examiner enter into detailed written
dialogue over Methods, while in another case a high failure rate in Quantitative
Methods was mentioned. No External Examiner's formal reports raise questions
about student performance in Research Methods in the context of the course aims or
overall priorities within undergraduate education.
The information on mode, relative weighting and outcome of assessment is less
complete than the other features discussed above. On the basis of about two-thirds
of the degree schemes available to us, it appears that Research Methods are often
given a lower weighting than other subjects, in particular in Year Two. This may
result from the actual mode of assessment: coursework is the norm for single
honours and mixed mode for the remainder. The trend noted by Wakeford in 1979
away from assessment by examination to that by various practical exercises and
projects appears to continue and most courses reviewed examined Research Methods
in a variety of modes.
Course Changes and Critical Reviews
The CNAA system requires a written review of a course's operation in previous

years, the 'critical review and appraisal'. This may identify problems, or new
developments which now need to be incorporated. Lower level problems may be
tackled by minor, unreported modifications, but substantial problems are normally
associated with a recorded change in content, teaching and/or structure of the
degree.
The single most mentioned item for change was the teaching of Research
Methods: only four of the thirty degree schemes did not propose at least one
modification , with a total of forty-four substantial changes being nominated. No
course proposed a reduction in content or teaching time. The main area of change
relates to numeracy, with the teaching of statistics identified as the main problem,
and the introduction of computing as the major innovation in response to new
developments. There are five major issues addressed in the Critical Reviews:
(a) student difficulties with mastering statistics and computing, in particular when
they are taught as servicing from a specialist, non-social science, department;
(b) the lack of integration of quantitative methods into mainly theoretical courses
and the students' perception of Methods as marginal to the degree;
(c) the need for introducing IT (computing) skills in an already crowded syllabus:
intentions presently outrun resources and delivery;
(d) the recognition that Methods teaching which depends on a traditional lecture/
seminar format is unlikely to develop skills, particularly those of vocational
relevance, and may as a teaching method be producing some of the problems
presented as problems of Methods content per se;
(e) a wish to present students with a more coherent conceptual, methodo

theoretical approach to sociology through research, without falling into
the difficulties associated with degrees that place a primary emphasis
philosophy of social science.
The first of these problems is a familiar one, but significantly it seem

declining one. More sociology departments now seem to be teaching q
skills from within their own ranks, so escaping from inappropriate statis
Departments have slowly expanded over nearly two decades, and have often
succeeded in recruiting one or two 'methodologists' who could tackle the Methods
teaching. The evolution of combined programmes, with shared Methods courses,
also seems to be producing a modus vivendi , at least as far as the staff are
concerned. Faced with cuts to student intakes imposed by the National Advisory
Body and the applied ethos of the Polytechnic, PSHE sociologists have possibly
been more ready to accept for defensive reasons the need for vocational relevance,
graduate employment and the acquisition of useful skills.
This does not mean that there has been a uniform pattern of change, not least
because there is more than one dimension of revision: new content and teaching style
are independent changes. However, as the summary in Figure 2 shows, there is a
dominant emphasis.
While again stressing the element of individual judgement involved in this grouping,
it does seem that a majority of courses are becoming more concerned with numeracy
and practical skills. This is all the more so when one notes that there is no course
proposing a reduction in Research Methods, or adopting a less skills-based teaching
style. Furthermore most of the courses in the 'south-east' box of Figure 2 are concerned
to improve quantitative methods learning, even those proposing to cut some of the
previously less successful sections. The main axis of change is the 'north- west/south-
east ' diagonal of quantitative methods, and the main direction of the changes is
'northerly', towards greater practical skills and numeracy. While the issues of
quantitative methods have by no means all been resolved, the new problems seem to be
integration and skills development. The growth of information technology has raised
possibilities for research of new kinds, and offered more painless ways of data analysis.
The new changes indicated in Figure 2 may also be interpreted as evidence of a
more general change in British sociology. The last decade has seen not only a shift of
concern towards the application of sociological analysis to 'the real world', but also
an increased emphasis on research production, and more sociologists with research
skills and experience. Methods, then, has not just evolved along with other topics,
but seems to reflect a more basic change within the discipline.
Conclusions
It is a formal requirement of CNAA that its degree courses are of a standard

comparable to those in the universities. To that end, its committees have typically
had at least half their membership drawn from the university sector, and university
based personnel have predominated as External Examiners. It is therefore tempting
to extrapolate the results in this paper into comments applying directly to PSHE
courses and indirectly to those on the other side of the binary line. However, a mor
FIGURE 2
Proposed Major Changes to Research Methods

(to scale: number of courses in brackets, each course can appear more than once)
TEACHING STYLE
More emphasis on
QUANTITATIVE practical and/or
METHODS expanded overall
Expanded content content
on Computing and (8)
Numeracy
(13) i
PHILOSOPHY OF
SOCIAL SCIENCE
Reported problems
and/or reduced
content (6)
PHILOSOPHY OF QUANTITATIVE
SOCIAL SCIENCE N. METHODS
/ N. Reported problems
Expanded content and/ or reduced
(4) N. content
impor
contention that because methodology represents the essential practice of the
discipline, its development lies at the core of the subject. The health of Methods is an
indicator of the health of sociology.
Our survey of thirty degree schemes suggests several trends, not all of which are
either welcome or expected. On the one hand, most of what was suggested by the
surveys at the end of the last decade seems born out. In particular there has been a
shift towards practical competence and familiarity with procedures and techniques.
Two-thirds of research methods courses revalidated since 1984 have included project
work, the more formally-taught and epistemologically-focussed degrees tend to date
from 1983 and before. Assessment by course work suggests a more realistic
approach to skills acquisition, and no degree proposed any reduction in the time
devoted to Methods. These trends, together with clear evidence of a methodological
pluralism (even if this does not fully extend to qualitative methods) seem
greater coherence and sense of progress than some of the more pess
observations of Bulmer and Burgess (1981).
On the other hand, we are left with doubt about some of the detail an
of Methods as a whole. It is striking, for instance, that quantitative meth
receive wider coverage in joint social science degrees and that none of th
courses we examined treated multi-variate statistical methods adequately
the final year options in Research, and how are the good intentions to add
computing to be carried out, faced with a lack of physical resources, shortages of
staff time and an already crowded syllabus? Why, despite Methods' universal status
as a core subject is it given a lower assessment weighting, and why is it still
considered normal that the undergraduate dissertation - the single piece of
individual 'research' - should be nothing more than a long essay based on reading
in the library? Is there no room here for the qualitative methods, if the demands of
fresh survey research are too great to be practicable?
These issues are problematic because the
basic, underlying question that has to be addressed concerns the kind of sociology
graduates we are trying to produce. Once sociologists have some conception of what
sociology graduates should be and what skills they should possess, we can begin to address
other questions about teaching and the content of courses in all areas of the sociology
curriculum. (Bulmer and Burgess 1981, 588)
The absence of clear statements of Aims and Objectives reflects the absence of
coherence in sociology as a whole. Until there is more agreement about the purpose
of a degree in sociology, we can hardly expect the questions of competence to be
answered. The call for relevance, vocationalism and applicability is not the only
solution for sociology, but without the appropriate opportunities for learning, we
deprive our students of their choice to respond in their own way.
Perhaps the most disquieting findings of our survey is the continued isolation of
methodology in its narrow slot of a Research Methods course. While we recognise
that teaching on other elements of a degree needs to address substantive results, and
that there are many studies to be covered if students are to acquire an adequate
knowledge base, the means and processes by which those results were generated
should receive more attention. Methodology is not a specialist topic: it is simply the
practice of sociology itself. So long as Methods are confined to the Ghetto - which
still is overwhelmingly the case - it cannot be properly understood by our students.
In this respect, we find ourselves echoing the conclusions of Bulmer and Burgess:
The future of methodology teaching will be determined within the discipline as a whole. It
does not lie with methodology teachers. As Bechhofer emphasizes, the tail cannot wag the
dog. Much depends too, however, on the health and state of mind of the dog. (1981: 589)
Notes
1 . No bibliographic references are given for quotations, and no institutions are mentioned by
name. This is not simply to protect anonymity in the conventional sense: the process of
course review and appraisal can only succeed if teaching team

risk that their self-criticisms will not be used for purposes oth
were originally written.
2. The authors are grateful to the staff of CNAA, and in p
and Heather Eggins, for facilitating access to the course do
nor CNAA as an organisation, are in any way responsible for
We would also like to thank the other members of the CNA
who attended the conference at North Staffordshire Polyte
comments.
3. For a note on the need for caution in interpretation, see Marsh (1979), and Bur
Bulmer (1981:481-3).
References
Abrams, P. 1981. 'Visionaries and Virtuosi', in Sociology 1981, q.v.

Albrow, M. 1986. 'The Undergraduate Curriculum in Sociology'. Sociology 20.
Bell, C. and Newby, H. 1979. Doing Sociological Research. London: Allen and Unwin.
Bulmer, M. and Burgess, R. 1981. 'Which Way Forward for Methodology Teaching?' in
Sociology q. v.
Burgess, R. 1979. Teaching Research Methodology to Postgraduates , Dept. of Sociology,
University of Warwick, Coventry (mimeo).
Burgess, R. and Bulmer, M. 1981. 'Research Methodology Training: Trends and
Developments', in Sociology 1981, q.v.
CNAA 1988. Review of Sociology Courses and Teaching. London: CNAA.
Marsh, C. 1979. Social Sciences Methods Bibliography: British Universities 1978. Social and
Political Sciences Committee, University of Cambridge, Cambridge (mimeo).
Payne, G. et al. 1981. Sociology and Social Research. London: RKP.
Sociology 15:No.4. 1981. Special Issue: The Teaching of Research Methodology.
SRA 1982. Training Courses in Social Research. London: Social Research Association.
SRA 1985. The State of Training in Social Research. London: Social Research Association.
Wakeford, J. 1979. Research Methods Syllabus in Sociology Departments in the United
Kingdom. Dept. of Sociology, University of Lancester, Lancester (mimeo).
Wakeford, J. 1981. 'From Methods to Practice , in Sociology 1981, q.v.
Biographical note : Geoff Payne is Dean of Social Science at Polytechnic South West
(formerly Plymouth Polytechnic).
Stina Lyon is a senior lecturer in Sociology at South Bank Polytechnic.
Bob Anderson formerly taught Sociology at Manchester Polytechnic, and is now Social
Science Advisor for Rank Xerox in Cambridge.
Address : Faculty of Social Science, Polytechnic South West, Drake Circus, Plymouth PL4
8AA.

Sociology

Hochgeladen von

Dokumentinformationen

Copyright

Verfügbare Formate

Dieses Dokument teilen

Dokument teilen oder einbetten

Freigabeoptionen

Stufen Sie dieses Dokument als nützlich ein?

Sind diese Inhalte unangemessen?

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

Sociology

Hochgeladen von

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

UNDERGRADUATE SOCIOLOGY: RESEARCH METHODS IN THE PUBLIC SECTOR

UNDERGRADUATE SOCIOLOGY: RESEARCH METHODS

G. Payne, E.S. Lyon, R. Anderson

Abstract This paper presents an investigation of the research methods curriculum in

A decade later, research remains at the heart of the sociological enterpri

was completed both in parallel and with replication,

The Purpose of Sociology Degrees and Research Methods Teaching

policies. Research activity in these areas is combined with a need to

Contents : (i) Course orientation as indicated by Reading List

Sociology Degrees (8)* Combined Degrees (16)* Totals (24)*

2. C. Moser and G. Kalton (4)

3 M Bulmer (3) ^ug^es ^ Be^ anc* Newby

C. Marsh (9) J. Irvine et al. (11)

5. J. Irvine et al. (8) 5. M. Bulmer (10)

Ethnography M_ Bulmer (7) A. Cicourel (10)

,,, VT. , A. Oppenheim (6) G. Hoinville et al. (8)

W. Nie et al. (8)

Street Corner Society , ^ ■ c ■ i n , <■

*(Number of degrees giving full book lists)

obviously aimed at psychology or economics on joint courses, and courses

While there is little surprise in the continued popularity of Moser and

Content : (ii) Computing and Student Numeracy

The introduction of computing skills to sociological education is probably the

curriculum should consist of general familiarity wit

Content: (iii) Qualitative Methods

If there is a shortage of coverage for quantitative method

be likely to feature the use of historical documentary evidence in sociolog

Teaching Methods in Teaching Methods

Course Changes and Critical Reviews

The CNAA system requires a written review of a course's operation in previous

(e) a wish to present students with a more coherent conceptual, methodo

The first of these problems is a familiar one, but significantly it seem

It is a formal requirement of CNAA that its degree courses are of a standard

Proposed Major Changes to Research Methods

course review and appraisal can only succeed if teaching team

Abrams, P. 1981. 'Visionaries and Virtuosi', in Sociology 1981, q.v.

Das könnte Ihnen auch gefallen