Sociology 448
Seminar: Social Change
Fall 2003
Dr Scott Schaffer

Final Examination Prep Sheet – Fri Dec 12/2003, 1015am to 1215pm

Rules of the Game: The final examination will take place on F Dec 12/2003 from 1015am to 1215pm. There will be no makeup exams given, as per the course syllabus; anyone who cannot attend the midterm examination needs to contact me no later than W Dec 10/2003 at 3pm to make arrangements for an alternate assignment. Due to the final exam schedule, you should not count on any time beyond 1215pm to finish your essays, so make sure you manage your time accordingly and appropriately.

For this exam, you will need the following:

At the end of the exam, you will submit the blue books, the exam sheet, and your sheet of notes. No credit will be given for anything not written in the blue books, but at least I’ll be able to see where you were heading if you run out of time.

On the notes for the exam: As mentioned above, you may write whatever you like on the sheet of notes, going so far as to write the entire set of essays below in 2pt font and using a magnifying glass during the exam. The one thing that you must have on the notes is page citations for the material you use to support your responses to the questions below. Any exam that does not include adequate textual support for the argument will automatically lose one full letter grade from each of the essays in which this problem appears.

The Details: The final exam will ask you to write three essay responses. Below you will find five essay questions, from which three will be chosen for the final; everyone must answer these questions clearly and directly. Each essay will constitute one-third of your midterm grade.

You need to have adequate textual support for your responses, so think of these as short “Schaffer papers.” In cases where there is a required number of materials mentioned, you must use at least that number in the development of your response. If there is no “minimum source” listed, it is up to you to utilize adequate textual support for your argument. In both cases, part of my evaluation of the essay will include the extent to which you’ve supported your claims. You need to utilize this format when citing the texts: (Author Year: Page). Be sure that you put the year of the text; for some questions, it will be the only thing distinguishing between different texts.

As mentioned above, these questions are designed to elicit shorter “Schaffer papers” from you. Do not give short shrift to your responses. Your job in this is to fully and completely respond to the questions presented to you. These are not two-paragraph essays you’re being asked to write.

You should allow yourself about 30-40min for each essay during the exam period. I will announce the time remaining at 1hr, 30min, 15min, and 5min left in the exam.

Good luck, and happy preparing…


The Topics:

Three (3) of the five questions below will appear on the exam for your response. You must respond to all three of the questions that appear there. The required numbers of materials (if any) are listed after the question; for those that have no “minimum sources” listed, it is up to you to provide adequate textual support for your claims.

1. In what ways do three of the theoretical positions presented in The Social Movements Reader derive their insights from the more classical theories of social change discussed in the first part of the course? (Three theoretical essays from SMR*; as many theoretical essays from the first part of the course as you need)

2. In what ways do two of the “top-down” theories of social change presented in the first segment of the course highlight issues surrounding the downfall of two communist regimes in Central and Eastern Europe? To what extent can you say that one (or both) of these theories adequately explain the changes that occurred in these situations, as well as the issues these countries have faced since “the transition”? (Two theories from first half of course; two case studies of communist regimes in Central and Eastern Europe)

3. In what ways do two of the “bottom-up” theories of social change highlight issues surrounding the impact of social movements working to change policies of two multilateral economic institutions? To what extent can you say that one (or both) of these theories adequately explain the changes that have occurred (or have been prevented)? (Two theories, either from the first half of the course or SMR; two case studies of MEIs)

4. To what extent does a “top-down” analysis of processes of social change highlight the difficulties of attempting to bring about social change from outside “the system”? How does the interplay between social institutions and social movements provide us with the tools needed to engage in extra-systemic forms of change?

5. To what extent does a “bottom-up” analysis of processes of social change highlight the ways in which social institutions can resist attempts at changing them? How can the responses of institutions that have been changed “from below” provide us with ways to counteract institutional resistance to social change?


* The theoretical essays in The Social Movements Reader include the following:

Inglehart, “Changing Values in Post-Industrial Societies” (pp. 55-63)
Klandermans, “Disengaging from Movements” (pp. 116-128)
Jasper, “The Emotions of Protest” (pp. 153-162)
McCarthy and Zald, “Social Movement Organizations” (pp. 169-186)
Clemens, “Organizational Repertoires” (pp. 187-201)
Alinsky, “Protest Tactics” (pp. 225-228)
Ganz, “Another Look at Farmworker Mobilization” (pp. 283-300)
Gitlin, “The Media in the Unmaking of the New Left” (pp. 301-312)
Gamson, “Defining Movement ‘Success’” (pp. 350-352)

See also the list of concepts on p. ix; any of the articles mentioned in the concept boxes are also fair game (and most can be found on J-STOR, should you feel so inclined; if so, please include full bibliographic citations on your notes for the essays)


Basic Grading Rubric:

These general principles are what will guide the application of letter grades to the essays submitted. Other deductions as specified in this assignment or in the course syllabus will affect these grades, and +/- modifiers will be applied.

As always, the key element of my evaluation will focus on the strength and clarity of your response to the assigned questions, as well as the sophistication you show in identifying elements of your argument to be addressed. Other issues, such as those included in the syllabus under “paper evaluation guidelines,” will pertain as well.

A – Clearly formulated and demonstrated response to the “big question(s)”; addressing all specified parts of the question, and demonstration of logic behind those responses; presentation of evidence from required texts and demonstration of how that evidence supports the statement made.

B – Well formulated response to the “big question(s),” though without full demonstration of the logic; addressing all/most of the specified parts of the question and/or not fully demonstrating the logic behind those responses; presentation of evidence from required texts, but no demonstration of how that evidence supports the statement made.

C – No clear thesis in response to the “big question(s)”; addressing some/most of the specified parts of the question, but without development of the logic behind those responses; intimation of evidence from the required texts, but no discussion of that evidence or how it supports the statement made.

D – Cursory attempt at answering the “big question(s)”; addressing some of the specified parts of the question, but no discussion of logic behind those responses; no presentation of evidence from required texts.

F – No attempt to answer the question assigned; cursory discussion of specified parts of the question; no use of evidence from the required texts.