Approaching the Second In-Class Exam
Getting each book in focus
You have seven books which we have read since the first in-class exam:
Level of aggregation of concepts and processes:
|
Level of aggregation of concepts and processes: |
|
| Laub & Sampson
Venkatesh St. Jean Taylor Martinez Garland Messner & Rosenfeld |
Individual Groups (gangs, roles-in-community)-in-context Streetblocks (and individual perceptions thereof Neighborhoods over time, and individuals Communities International differences International differences |
Strongly suggest you try and draw or write for yourself the conceptual model for each book, outlining how it looks. Be sure you can understand all key concepts, and all key hypotheses. Use the weekly questions to be sure you are picking up key terms. Use the index. Feel free to compare models with one another.
I will not ask you to commit these to memory, but you want to be sure you understand for each model:
what is the outcome of interest? (what is inside the scope of the theory? what is outside?
how is the outcome operationalized? what are the indicators from what data sources and what are the scientific properties of those different indicators?
what is the level of aggregation for that theory?
what assumptions does the theory make about human nature?
what in the model is truly exogenous? (predictors not caused by anything prior)
what are the processes whereby the exogenous predictors connect to the outcome(s)? be able to describe. Be sure you know if you are talking about direct effects, indirect (mediating) effects, or moderating effects.
what is the evidence presented as supporting the theory?
what is the quality of the evidence presented, using standard social scientific benchmarks of quality?
how strongly is the theory supported by the evidence?
how closely do the data indicators match the associated concepts?
how parsimonious is the theory?
in your view is it falsifiable?
what is the theory's main take-away lesson for policy? for practice?
does the theory build solidly on and incorporate insights from pre-existing research?
OVERALL: how strong is the argument? why?
OVERALL: how strong is the evidence? why?
For more thoughts on these matters refer to the start-of-semester orienting memo. CLICK HERE
Thinking about connections between books
Think about ways you can compare and contrast pairs or triads of books to get at broader questions. Some examples follow. I may use all or some or none of these in the exam. I encourage you to think up some of your questions which link together different books.
1. You have read one book describing recent changes in crime and responses to crime in two countries (Garland), and one examining international differences in crime and responses to crime (Messner & Rosenfeld). If someone asked you to describe which of these two presented a more convincing argument about macro-level features of crime and responses to crime, what would be your answer? In your answer, outline just the main points of the argument you have selected, just the main points of the argument you think is inferior (no more than 1/2 - 3/4 page for each outline), then clearly state the reasons for your choice.
2. Use some of the dynamics described by Messner & Rosenfeld to provide an alternative or complementary explanation, different from the one proposed by Martinez, for why Latino urban communities have lower homicide rates than African-American urban communities.
3. Andrew Abbott recently argued (1997, Social Forces) that too much sociological theorizing is a-contextual. Explain how three volumes you read (Venkatesh, Martinez, St. Jean) each provided great examples of theories that were NOT a-contextual. Do do by clearly describing how each theory provided clear descriptions of how the outcome and dynamics in each case were linked to features of context. Be sure you define what you mean by context.
4. St. Jean and Taylor end up coming to different conclusions about the implications of incivilities for crime? Why? Be sure you explain what each volume says about the connections, then explain why the different conclusions?
5. Are there some individuals described in Venkatesh's book that exemplify some of Laub & Sampson's points about the criminal life course? Which individuals and which points do they illustrate?
6. Of these seven books, which one provides the most guidance for preventing crime? Be sure to say at what level the prevention program would operate at, what it would do as specifically as you can, and how these program elements link to the theory.
7. Argue for or against, using three books, drawing equally on each: High violent crime rates will continue in the US, especially in core portions of urban areas, and in urban communities of color, and are unlikely to drop significantly anytime soon. Define "drop" "significantly" and "soon."
Probable structure
My guess at this point is that there will be a "big" multibook question spanning 2 or 3 (maybe) 4 books, then one or two much smaller questions.