Sociology of the Anarchists - Gozips.uakron.edu - The University of ...

when teaching about gender.) I love the idea of comparing/contrasting the speakers'
positions and forcing listeners to reconcile why we see some as more important than
others.
Moulder (1997) confirms many of my apprehensions about how many things are taught—
not just sociology—and how things are set-up beforehand for debilitating results for
students. Whenever I open intro sociology texts, I find just the LAST chapter deals with
“social movements and collective behavior”. While, I'm glad that the chapter exists and
that it does make sense in a way for it to be at the end (“now that you know this, here's
what people have and can do about it”).... I think that it still sets people up for depressing
failure. How can we expect students to sit through nearly 14 weeks of “downer”
sociology, and then be picked up by one measly chapter at the end?
I've been considering for the duration of this course to insert at the end of each lecture
suggestions, ideas, antidotes, or webpages about movements and social change related to
the topic discussed. I appreciate the focus upon exploring and learning the problems
within society, but without providing a form of counter-expression or hope (as Moulder
puts it) we guarantee depression, apathy, avoidance, or rejection.
Also, I know a social work professor at UA who commonly invites in local activists to
her community organizing classes to discuss what they do, why, how, etc. I've spoken in
her class about half a dozen times, and my impression is that the students WANT to know
how to do things locally that will have an impact about things they care about. (And that
such learning is just as valid as anything they learn from textbooks.) I've been invited to
present in “Intro to Sociology” classes on social movements, because teachers know I'm
active and might have some personal impressions to contribute. Afterward I've been told
that a teacher was very pleased and surprised that some students who had not spoken for
nearly four months spoke up in class for the first time and were interested in the subject.
It seemed to me that if we can find ways to make every lecture/class period more relevant
and useful to students, the more they'll want to learn and engage in class. From my own
experiences in activist organizations, things start to stagnate—or people who are
concerned about various issues move away from the group—when too much time is spent
on complaining and debating the problems of an issue/society, and less time is spent in
action. To counter this, I and others have tried focusing discussion on particular problems
(that are more “bite-sized”) and then direct the group toward discussion about how to
resist these problems actively (and to create alternative, counter-actions that behave in
ways more egalitarian, democratically, and liberating than the problems themselves). In
this respect, I liked Moulder’s suggestion for “action steps”.
In many ways, my experiences in activist groups (particularly those with a radical
focus/objective) have been the driving force toward sociology in my life. Activists often
have a very equivalent interpretation of society that is shared by sociology as a discipline.
And during the last 10 years of my life (much of which has been spent in or around
colleges), I've been surprised that there isn't a higher degree of participation in social
movements by sociologists. It seems a very logical avenue for expressing dissent for
those who have a very good understanding of what requires dissent. That said, I'm
planning on speaking in Jean Anne (and Michelle's) intro classes later this semester; and
[ Williams 100 ] [ this is a draft. do not cite. ]