Search

Based on new data and new analytical frameworks, this book assesses the forces of change at play in the development of American universities and their prospects for the future. The book begins with a lengthy introduction by Clark Kerr that not only provides an overview of change since the time he coined the phrase "the city of intellect" but also discusses the major changes that will affect American universities over the next thirty years. Part One examines demographic and economic changes, such as the rise of nearly universal higher education, private gift and corporate sponsorship of research, new labor market opportunities, and increasing inequality among institutions and disciplines. Part Two assesses the profound influence of the Internet and other technologies on teaching and learning. Part Three describes how the various forces of change affect the nature of academic research and the organization of disciplines and the curriculum. Part Four analyzes the consequences of change for university governance and the means by which universities in the future can maintain high levels of achievement while maintaining high levels of autonomy. The contributors include many of today's leading scholars of higher education. They are Andrew Abbott, Steven Brint, Richard Chait, Burton R. Clark, Randall Collins, David J. Collis, Roger L. Geiger, Patricia J. Gumport, Clark Kerr, Richard A. Lanham, Jason Owen-Smith, Walter W. Powell, Sheila Slaughter, and Carol Tomlinson-Keasey.

Using the tools of organizational analysis, this article presents a framework for understanding the volume and content of socialization messages expressed in 64 primary school classrooms. This framework specifies five levels of classroom and school organization in which socialization messages are embedded. It links the behavioral ideals expressed at two of these levels—teacher-initiated interactions in the classroom and schoolwide programs—to the schools’ organizational interests in maintaining order and work effort and encouraging students to identify with the school. It links the values expressed at two other levels—the formal curriculum and the routine practices of everyday classroom life—to a blending of old and new cultural influences. The framework specifies two ways in which new values can enter the schools—through the influence of social movements institutionalized with governmental support or the adoption of pedagogical philosophies consistent with changes in adult middle-class life experiences.

This 1996 essay reviews three books: Anthony T. Kronman, 'The Lost Lawyer: Failing Ideals of the Legal Profession' (Belknap 1993); Steven Brint, 'In an Age of Experts: The Changing Role of Professionals in Politics and Public Life' (Princeton 1994); and Christopher Lasch, 'The Revolt of the Elites and the Betrayal of Democracy' (WW Norton 1995). The review essay argues that lawyers in the United States should be seen as part of the professional New Class who use the law as a monopoly in the management by elites of the rest of society. The review examines the history of New Class theory - especially as criticized by Steven Brint - and locates lawyers within it as a group characterized by claims to expertise. The essay suggests that, contrary to Kronman, the dissatisfactions of American lawyers has to do less with the loss of calling of a profession than with the simultaneous demand of New Class lawyers to be simultaneously therapeutic-legal managers of society while commanding market rate compensation for apparent legal expertise that consists in large part of rent-seeking for access to the public-private divide that the law polices. The requirements of the older form of the lawyer as respected authority within a particular community restricts the mobility essential to securing market compensation for expertise and access. The unhappiness that Kronman identifies within the legal profession is, according to the conclusion of the article, best explained that it is not a glorious profession because it is not a glorious class, and lawyers are right to be unhappy. This article predates the increasing focus of social theory on the globalized professional - lawyers, managers, NGO workers - but it points toward a form of critical analysis in social theory of the horizontal integration of a globalized bourgeois class that seeks to manage global masses at the expense of vertical leadership and integration with particular national and local communities.

Las profesiones y los profesionales están diferenciados en sus posiciones en el mercado y en sus posiciones de poder. Este artículo discutirá las razones que hacen que algunas profesiones y algunos profesionales estén mejor situados en el mercado y mejor pagados que otros. Argumento que las fuentes principales de valor y poder en el mercado son la capacidad de las profesiones para organizarse en el ejercicio privado, la contribución a los intereses de producción y eficacia de las organizaciones, el sector en el cual los profesionales están mayoritariamente empleados, y la composición por género de la ocupación. A pesar de la importancia de los mecanismos tradicionales de protección, estas cuatro fuentes de poder tienen una mayor capacidad para explicar la posición especial de las profesiones en la sociedad contemporánea así como las diferencias entre profesiones y entre sectores profesionales.

This paper is about structural sociology as practiced by one of the more important sociologists and social thinkers of our day-Harrison White, lately of Columbia University. I have chosen this topic because structuralist thinking is an important, perhaps the most important, feature of contemporary social thought; because Professor White's approach to the study of social structure is particularly influential; and because, frankly, I have misgivings about certain features of the structuralist program. It seems to me, in general, a good principle that critical questions ought to be raised about views that are on the verge of becoming accepted orthodoxy. In this paper I intend mainly to probe a line of thinking to see what sorts of dubious notions might actually be involved, but I will also suggest a few alternatives and improvements as I go along. There can be little doubt that the analysis of social structures as networks of relations among persons and positions is of decisive importance in contemporary sociology, and that Professor White plays an important role in current thinking about these matters. In the index of Collins's (1988) Theoretical Sociology-perhaps the best guide to the current state of scientifically oriented thinking in sociological theory-the word structure and words related to it take up an entire column, whereas words such as culture, social control, stratification, institutions, and social change take up half as many lines or fewer. White's name occupies 10 lines in the index. Of living sociologists, he is mentioned less often than Peter Blau (another structuralist), Jonathan Turner, and Harold Garfinkel, but he is cited more often than Robert K. Merton, Anthony Giddens, Pierre Bourdieu, Mary Douglas, Arthur Stinchcombe, or Immanuel Wallerstein, among others. Apart from an uncharacteristic book (written with Cynthia White) on institutional and stylistic change in the French art world (White and White 1965), White has attempted for the last 30 years to work in a rigorously "structuralist" frame, which is to say that he has focused on the form of fundamental patterns of interaction that link individuals and larger social units to one another or provide the essential, underlying channels within which behavior occurs (Mullins 1973, pp. 256-57). In this sense, White has been unusually faithful to perhaps the single most distinguishing project of our discipline since the classical period: the effort to demonstrate how social structure constrains and in some instances even determines human behavior. This emphasis on underlying structures is evident in White's early mathematical studies of kinship organization (White 1963) and in his mature conceptualizations of "vacancy chains" as the channels of social mobility in organizations (White 1970), of "blocks" as positions in social networks (Boorman and White 1976; White, Boorman, and Breiger 1976), and of