Sociology 319
Social Stratification
Spring 2004
Dr Scott Schaffer

Midterm Examination Prep Sheet

Rules of the Game: The midterm examination will take place on Th Feb 26/2004 from 11am to 1215pm. Note the date change. 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 Feb 25/2004 at 11am to make arrangements for an alternate assignment.

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 in the event you run out of time.

On the notes for the exam: You are allowed to have one letter-size sheet of notes, on which you can write on both sides. You are encouraged to develop outlines for each of the essays, including page citations of materials you’re using to support your argument and short notes on why it is you see those materials supporting your argument. You are not, however, permitted to write out the essays and use them on your notes (though you may want to do this in your preparation for the exam). The notes will be submitted at the end of the exam; any exam that has more than an outline for each of the question and the page citations/short notes on the relevance of the readings will receive an F for the exam.

The Details: The midterm exam will ask you to write two argument-based essays dealing with issues raised so far in the course. Below you will find six essay questions; four of these will appear on the midterm, and you will be asked to respond to two of them. Your responses should be an argument that clearly addresses the “big question” posed to you, one that clearly demonstrates the entire thought process that went into the development of that argument and ways in which you are utilizing the course materials to support the claims you are making.

You need to have adequate textual support for your responses, so think of these as short “Schaffer papers.” (You should refer to the “How to Write a Schaffer Paper” handout in preparing for this examination; it is available on the course web site.) Each question will ask you utilize a certain number of texts in developing your response; essays that are short texts will lose one-third letter grade per text it is short. You need to utilize this format when citing the texts: (Author Year: Page).

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 30-35min for each essay during the exam period. I will announce the time remaining at 30min, 15min, and 5min left in the exam.

Good luck, and happy preparing…

 

The Exam Questions: Four of these will appear on the examination; you will choose two for your response. The crucial question your response must clearly and directly address (the “big question”) is listed in boldface. Please make sure to utilize citations of relevant readings in the development of your responses and to show how it is that the cited material supports your argument. Also, note that the minimum number of required sources appears in italics after the question; this same information will not appear on the exam.

Please note that the numbers of the questions listed here will not match the question numbers on the examination.

 

1. Compare the spaces for the subversion of the stratification system provided by theories of stratification and empirical studies of inequality. To what extent do you see theorists and the subjects they study as being aware of the possibilities for changing the stratification system in the US, and why? (Two theories of stratification; two empirical studies of inequality)

2. Compare the ways in which class, race/ethnicity, and gender operate at the meso level of analysis. To what extent are interactions based on these three classifications as responsible for maintaining people’s perceptions of inequalities as inherent to groups? (At least one essay at the meso level of analysis on class, race/ethnicity, gender)

3. Discuss the ways in which theories of stratification attribute responsibility for the continuing existence of inequality in our society, as well as how empirical studies reflect or refute those attributions of responsibility. To what extent do you think that the theoretical attribution of responsibility reproduces our perception of how inequality is reproduced, and why? (Two theories of stratification; two empirical studies of inequality)

4. Using theories of stratification and the insights of empirical studies of inequality, analyze your reasons for and experiences in attending MU on at least two of the three main classification criteria. To what extent can you say that your reasons for attending MU are predicated on either a concern for your social mobility or for preserving your own position in the social structure? (Two theories of stratification; two empirical studies of inequality; one essay from Meritocracy and Economic Inequality)

5. Discuss the ways in which class, race/ethnicity, and gender intersect with one another at the macro level of analysis. To what extent do you think the solution of social inequality in the US is aided or hindered by an intersectional analysis of inequality, and why? (At least one essay at the macro level of analysis on class, race/ethnicity, gender)

6. Using theories of stratification and the insights of empirical studies of inequality, analyze the extent to which you were aware of your structural position at the start of this course based on class, race/ethnicity, and gender. To what extent do you think that your awareness of your structural position (or lack thereof) is due to the ideology of meritocracy? (Two theories of stratification; two empirical studies of inequality; one essay from Meritocracy and Economic Inequality)


On preparing for this examination:

As has been already mentioned, you are allowed to have a sheet of notes with outlines and appropriate textual citations with you on the exam. This should not be the only preparation you pursue, however. Each essay, while clearly written, requires that you think your way through the question in a critical manner. There are elements of each question that require definition, elaboration, conceptual operationalization, and other thought processes that you must attend to, as the clear and successful response to the question is based on these elements.

The best advice I can give you is this: Do not wait until the last second to prepare for this exam. If you do, your essays will read simply like “two-paragraph responses,” able to deal only with the barest of elements needed to address the question. You will want to spend some time thinking through the question: there are overlaps between issues we’ve discussed in class, and between the readings within and across the books we’ve used so far; and each of the questions involves some kind of critical evaluation on your part, not just in the “big question,” but in the bases for your evaluation of the materials presented.

As always, I am more than happy to look at drafts of your essays and outlines for the essays, as well as to discuss the issues behind the questions in office hours, via email, or in class on the midterm prep day (T Feb 24/2004). Should you wish me to look at drafts or outlines, you need to get them to me no later than M Feb 22/2004 at 5pm.

Good luck…and happy thinking.

 

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.

A – Clearly formulated and demonstrated response to the “big question”; 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,” 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”; 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”; 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.