132x Filetype PDF File size 0.35 MB Source: core.ac.uk
View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by Rhode Island College Rhode Island College Digital Commons @ RIC Faculty Publications Summer 7-2008 The Face of Society Roger D. Clark Rhode Island College, rclark@ric.edu Alex Nunes Rhode Island College Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.ric.edu/facultypublications Part of the Educational Assessment, Evaluation, and Research Commons,Gender and Sexuality Commons, and theRace and Ethnicity Commons Citation Clark, R., & Nunes, A. (2008). The face of society: gender and race in introductory Sociology books revisited. Teaching Sociology, 36(3), 227-239. https://doi.org/10.1177/0092055x0803600303 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by Digital Commons @ RIC. It has been accepted for inclusion in Faculty Publications by an authorized administrator of Digital Commons @ RIC. For more information, please contactdigitalcommons@ric.edu. Teaching Sociology http://tso.sagepub.com/ The Face of Society : Gender and Race in Introductory Sociology Books Revisited Roger Clark and Alex Nunes Teaching Sociology 2008 36: 227 DOI: 10.1177/0092055X0803600303 The online version of this article can be found at: http://tso.sagepub.com/content/36/3/227 Published by: http://www.sagepublications.com On behalf of: American Sociological Association Additional services and information for Teaching Sociology can be found at: Email Alerts: http://tso.sagepub.com/cgi/alerts Subscriptions: http://tso.sagepub.com/subscriptions Reprints: http://www.sagepub.com/journalsReprints.nav Permissions: http://www.sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav Citations: http://tso.sagepub.com/content/36/3/227.refs.html Downloaded from tso.sagepub.com at RHODE ISLAND COLLEGE on November 5, 2010 THE FACE THE FACE OF SOF SOOCIETY: GENDER AND RACE IN CIETY: GENDER AND RACE IN INTROINTRODUCDUCTTORORY SY SOOCIOCIOLOGLOGYY BO BOOKSOKS REVI REVISITESITEDD* * We have updated Ferree and Hall’s (1990) study of the way gender and race ROGER CLARK Rhode Island College are constructed through pictures in introductory sociology textbooks. Ferree Rhode Island College and Hall looked at 33 textbooks published between 1982 and 1988. We repli- cated their study by examining 3,085 illustrations in a sample of 27 text- ALEX NUNES books, most of which were published between 2002 and 2006. We found important areas of progress in the presentation of both gender and race as well as significant areas of stasis. The face of society we found depicted in contemporary textbooks was distinctly less likely to be that of a white man, very prominent in the 1980s texts, and much more likely to be that of a mi- nority woman. Thus, while only 34 percent of the pictures of identifiable indi- viduals in the textbooks examined by Ferree and Hall were of women, almost 50 percent of such pictures were of women in the recent texts. Moreover, while the percentage of white men portrayed dropped from about 45 percent to 30 percent, the percentage of portrayals of minority women rose from about 11 percent to 22 percent. Another sign of progress has been the de- creasing likelihood of textbooks to depict race and gender as being nonover- lapping categories: while women of color apparently “had” only race in the sample examined by Ferree and Hall, they “had” both gender and race in the sample we studied. Still, our examination of pictures as a whole as a unit of analysis found that blacks continue to be more likely than any other racial group to be depicted in the presence of other racial groups and, thus, to ideal- ize the degree of social integration in American society. We also still see non- white women enjoying very little (in fact, no) visibility in sections devoted to theory, despite developments in feminist theory, generally, and multicultural feminist, specifically. In general, though, our analysis suggests that the vari- ous criticisms of introductory texts that have appeared in this forum and oth- ers can have an impact on the content of those texts and, by extension, the sociology we teach. ROGER CLARK ALEX NUNES Rhode Island College Rhode Island College THE INTRODUCTORY SOCIOLOGY COURSE is concerns and interests of sociologists gener- probably students’ first exposure to the con- ally and, ideally, some realities of society cepts and concerns of the discipline, and for itself. That introductory textbooks often fail many students, it is also their last. It is most to achieve either of these goals is undoubt- likely taught with an introductory textbook, edly less a function of the efforts of intro- whose content is supposed to reflect the ductory textbook authors to achieve them than of the difficulty of keeping up with the *We would like to thank the Rhode Island many subdisciplines that constitute sociol- College Faculty Research Committee for a grant ogy (see, e.g., Hamilton and Form 2003, that enabled this research. Please address all Schweingruber and Wohlstein 2005) and of correspondence to Roger Clark at Rhode Island striking a balance among many valued ends. College, 600 Mount Pleasant Avenue, Provi- dence, RI 02908; e-mail: rclark@ric.edu. One of the functions, then, of forums such Editor’s note: The reviewers were, in alpha- as Teaching Sociology and other journals betical order, Diane Gillespie and David has become the provision of feedback to the Schweingruber. authors, or at least the faculty users, of our Teaching Sociology, Vol. 36, 2008 (July:227-239) 227 Downloaded from tso.sagepub.com at RHODE ISLAND COLLEGE on November 5, 2010 228 TEACHING SOCIOLOGY introductory textbooks, and such feedback claimed that many of the concepts intro- has been forthcoming. The purpose of this duced in texts are rarely used by practicing paper is to assess the degree to which one sociologists themselves. Nolan (2003) sug- kind of feedback about introductory sociol- gested that by using exaggeration, distor- ogy textbooks, that of Ferree and Hall tion, and simple untruths about social phe- (1990) about textbooks’ depiction of gender nomena, texts run the risk of engendering and race in society, is reflected in a new distrust and cynicism in students. Keith and generation of such textbooks. Ender (2004a, 2004b) and Schweingruber Ferree and Hall, of course, have not pro- (2004) debated whether sociology as a disci- vided the only feedback to authors and pub- pline has a “core” and whether this core, lishers of introductory sociology texts. The such as it is, is adequately reflected in our year before Ferree and Hall’s piece ap- introductory texts. Wagenaar (2004) argued peared in 1990, Mathisen (1989) opined that that certain topics covered by current texts introductory texts should stop treating are not seen as important by teaching soci- “common sense” negatively. Ferree and ologists, and Schweingruber and Wohlstein Hall’s piece seemed to inspire a wave of (2005) argue that textbook authors fail to articles focusing on groups that were omit- keep up with all the fields they cover, par- ted or whose presentation was in some other ticularly noting that introductory texts pro- way inappropriate: Najafizadeh and Men- mote crowd myths that experts in collective nerick (1992) observed that texts paid little behavior have debunked. The criticisms attention to Third World education; vary in the degree to which they may be Marquez (1994) noted that textbooks of- easily and happily dealt with by authors and fered a distorted image of “Hispanic” publishers of introductory sociology texts. It women; Stone (1996) observed that racial is, after all, one thing to commit to main- and ethnic minorities tend to be ghettoized streaming racial and ethnic minorities and marginalized in texts; and Taub and throughout a text (Stone 1996) and another Fanflik (2000) criticized textbooks for their to commit to demonstrating how sociology limited information about disability. There lacks the status of a science (Keith and were critiques that asserted that introductory Ender 2004a). textbooks provided inadequate approaches But do authors and publishers respond to to inequality or stratification: Lucal (1994) published criticisms as they rework older found that the majority of introductory texts introductory textbooks and prepare new offered distributional, rather than relational, ones, even when the problems addressed are approaches to social stratification and there- amenable to change? There is some evi- fore did not promote a consciousness of dence that authors read such criticisms (see oppression and privilege; Ferree and Hall Macionis’s [1989] response to Elaine Hall’s (1996) showed that texts segregated their [1988] insistence upon the inclusion and discussions of race, class, and gender, handling of gender.) We replicate Ferree rather than showing them as interactive in and Hall’s (1990) study based upon the ex- stratification processes; Hall (2000) argued amination of 33 introductory textbooks pub- that poverty information is too concentrated lished between 1982 and 1988, using 27 in discussions of class and not enough a part textbooks published between 2002 and 2006 of discussions of race and gender; and to ascertain the degree to which their cri- Hamilton and Form (2003) asserted that the tique of the visual presentation of gender categories of race, ethnicity, and religion and race has been addressed by a new gen- used by the texts oversimplify social reality. eration of textbooks. Even more recently there have been articles that seem even more radical in their cri- METHOD tiques of introductory texts. Best and Schweingruber (2003), for instance, We have replicated Ferree and Hall’s Downloaded from tso.sagepub.com at RHODE ISLAND COLLEGE on November 5, 2010
no reviews yet
Please Login to review.