Soc'ing Out Loud

The Strange World of Academic Lingo

noreply@blogger.com (Bradley Koch) — Tue, 21 May 2013 20:13:00 +0000

We academics have a knack for using terms that normal human beings use in fairly mundane ways in odd and confusing ways. Take for example two common terms used in the journal manuscript submission process.

"Conditional Acceptance" does not mean that we are somehow less than giving with our love of other human beings.

"R&R" does not mean "rest and relaxation"; ironically, an R&R typically means that one will have to forgo a great deal of rest and relaxation.

Reframing the Church/State Debate

noreply@blogger.com (Bradley Koch) — Mon, 20 May 2013 14:46:00 +0000

SCotUS has agreed to hear a case involving the opening of public meetings (i.e. municipal legislatures) with prayer. I'm guessing that the decision will come down to some technical and arcane detail of law and will thus be a fairly narrow ruling, but it still gives a moment to consider an important social issue. I've written before on matters of church and state, but perhaps it's worth reminding ourselves about some basics. The initial historical impetus for a separation between religion and the state was decidedly self-interested. One of the first religious groups to tout a clear separation were ironically Baptists, who found themselves politically marginalized by their Anglican neighbors. It wasn't so much that early-American Baptists didn't want religion mixed up with politics; they just didn't want someone else's religion mixed up with politics, and so the bargain was, they decided, that the state had to be delivered from religion. Flash forward a few hundred years, and our collective amnesia about this part of our history and our short-sighted self-interest endangers the value in a social institution that many purport to champion. I am a person of faith, a Protestant Christian, and I value my religious freedom, and it is (in part) because of that--not despite it--that I am vociferous about my support of a very strict separation of church and state. (One certainly does not need to be religious, though, to be for religious freedom. Atheists, agnostics, as well as the growing ranks of the unaffiliated should be motivated for very similar reasons.) It may seem petty to squabble over seemingly insignificant things like the phrase "in God we trust" showing up on our currency and license plates or "under God" in our Pledge or a brief prayer to open a town council meeting, but the symbolic importance of those instances matters. Any intrusion of religion into government is dangerous, not so much to the government as it is to religion itself.

Incidentally, the "I feel left out" argument doesn't hold water for me. Unfortunately, this seems to be part of the case that SCotUS is taking up. It's easy to see (I hope) how Jews, Hindus, or Muslims who hear Jesus invoked in prayer or, short of that, hear an otherwise nonsectarian prayer constructed on the template of a Christian prayer would feel "othered." In the same way, however, that framing racially disparaging language as insensitive or offensive (i.e. it hurts feelings) is counterproductive, saying that one feels marginalized as a religious minority in a (culturally) Christian setting like an opening prayer detracts from the fact that such practices actually marginalize people in structural ways.

Empty Nests, Empty Trees, and Empty Forests

noreply@blogger.com (Bradley Koch) — Thu, 16 May 2013 23:27:00 +0000

Here is something that my wife and I were wondering: are people more geographically mobile today than they were in the past? Specifically, is occupational mobility increasing? Even more particular, assuming increased mobility, what effect does this have on extended family connections, childcare, and child socialization? Surely, researchers are looking at this, no?

The Wave as Community Construction

noreply@blogger.com (Bradley Koch) — Wed, 15 May 2013 20:00:00 +0000

It's easy to overlook the microsociological moments when community is created. For the most part, these moments do not involve a bureaucrat stamping a document or issuing a photo ID. I was reminded of that today while out for my daily bike ride. The weather is absolutely gorgeous this time of year in North Georgia, which means that there are a lot of cyclist out on the road. Typically, cyclists will wave to each other as they pass. There were a lot of other cyclists to wave at. I remember being elated the first time another cyclist waved at me when I first took up the sport. I had a real sense that I belonged to an exclusive fraternity. One can see similar behaviors among motorcyclists and Jeep owners. (See my friend Michael's upcoming book on The Jeep People.) It's a simple, informal rite with no costs: a wave. Yet, it binds strangers and generates identity. It matters.

Everyone's an Expert--except When They're Not

noreply@blogger.com (Bradley Koch) — Tue, 14 May 2013 15:19:00 +0000

Has this ever happened to you: you share something that you think is relatively settled academic fact* on Facebook only to find several people challenging you in the comments? Every sociological statement I make to friends and family is open, in their eyes, to debate. People feel entitled to question my expert pronouncements without having rigorously studied the field. Can you imagine a physicist being forced to defend the existence of gravity over Thanksgiving dinner? The difference is that the things that we sociologists study are the stuff of people's lived experiences. We interrogate marriage, family, religion, and government. We dissect race, class, gender, and sexuality. People may live in the physical world, but they don't experience quarks, bosons, or leptons; they experience tables, desks, and chairs. Because all people directly experience the social world, they feel an entitlement to make pronouncements about it. In no way, however, does this qualify them do to so. After all, all fish live in the water, but none is an expert on the chemistry of water. Expert status requires immersion in an existing body of knowledge (i.e. standing on the shoulders of giants) as well as, typically, a direct contribution of original knowledge to that field. Think of it this way: I've lived in my body for a few decades now and know it pretty well, but if something goes wrong with my heart, I'm going to trust what the cardiologist tells me. I'm not comfortable making the proverbial defiant comment on the Facebook status that is the physician's diagnosis. There is something different about the social, though. As human beings, we are so radically social that it becomes difficult for us to engage that nature critically.

--
* - Of course, there really is no such thing. Too often, debate within academia is interpreted among the laity as evidence for dissensus. (See here.) In reality, the debate in academia happens largely on the margins, and the margins are always being pushed out further as previous questions are generally settled, leaving a large and expanding body of accepted knowledge. By "fact," I mean the stuff that science sets aside as generally understood.

The PC'ing of Issues and Its Fallout

noreply@blogger.com (Bradley Koch) — Mon, 13 May 2013 16:30:00 +0000

The New York Times ran a story a couple days ago about how marketers are increasingly walking back advertisements that are received as "offensive." Emotional "pain" and "offense" are the wrong frames for these kinds of ads. It is more accurately about creating and reinforcing structural inequality and subtle and unconscious prejudice and discrimination. By thinking in terms of offensiveness, critics set their own argument up for dismissal. It ends up being interpreted as some people having thin skin instead of some people being systematically disadvantaged. Structural and subtle framing is more precise and leads to more robust dialogue and progress.

Friday Music: Does the Blues Make You Happy?

noreply@blogger.com (Bradley Koch) — Fri, 10 May 2013 19:00:00 +0000

This is not so much a musical post as a post about music. I've posted before about music and emotion. In the vlog below, Mike Rugnetta at the PBS Idea Channel ruminates about whether the connection between music and emotion is universal and objective or culturally-particular and specific.

Great stuff here.

Take Me to Your Followers

noreply@blogger.com (Bradley Koch) — Thu, 09 May 2013 19:48:00 +0000

Just a brief thought today. So, the computers are grading student essays now. How can we honestly tell our students that we are preparing them for a future working with other humans? On the other hand, it's good to know that there will be a labor force ready to serve our robot overlords.

Understanding in a Car Crash

noreply@blogger.com (Bradley Koch) — Wed, 08 May 2013 14:06:00 +0000

Chris and Nate at the SocilogySource Podcast shared an interesting allegory they use to teach race. They liken it to car accidents. (This is the episode, I think.) Car accidents are not intentional, and, yet, they still happen. Like car accidents, racist outcomes still happen even though the overwhelming (and increasing) majority of us are not intentionally racist. [Insert Brad Paisley "Accidental Racist" joke here.] I really like this analogy, and I think we can extend it further. One reason car accidents happen is that we have shared value, beliefs, and behaviors (i.e. culture) that make accidents more likely to happen. Think driving fast, aggressively, and distracted. Much in our culture predisposes us to racist outcomes. Think dialectical (i.e. language) prejudices, judgments about unique first names, and an insistence on "personal responsibility." Another reason car accidents happen is that we have designed an infrastructure (i.e. structure) that makes accidents more likely to happen. Think non-divided highways, crumbling roads/bridges, and elevated speed limits. Much of our social structure predisposes us to racist outcomes. Think concern over drug crime with apathy for white-collar crime, unequal schools, and disproportionate unemployment rates. Moreover, not all accidents have the same outcomes; some are more likely to be fatal than others. Think small car or motorcycle vs. SUV. Compare that to differences in social, economic, and human capitals. The dominant narrative that most students in the United States bring with them to the classroom is of intentionality: "I cannot be held personally responsible for things that I did not intentionally do." This narrative flies in the face of everything that we know sociologically, and I think the allegory above is one way to combat "common sense" assumptions.

"He's Shaving...His Legs."

noreply@blogger.com (Bradley Koch) — Tue, 07 May 2013 15:12:00 +0000

I've been meaning to post on this for a while. As I regularly remind you readers, I am a cyclist. I ride primarily for fitness, but I also enjoy it recreationally. I've never competed and, though I had aspirations as a younger man, I don't ever intend to compete. I'm quite content to do a solo hour-long aerobic ride six days a week. I generally prefer to ride outside, but when the weather is inclement, I'll ride indoors on a trainer. I have a good friend who occasionally attends spin classes. I regularly have given her crap about it. I've, however, been giving it a little more critical consideration. What are the social differences between spinning and actually riding a bike?

Physiologically, spinning and cycling offer different types of workouts. Road cycling is typically an aerobic exercise, focused on burning fat and increasing cardiovascular endurance. Spin classes, on the other hand, are typically interval training sessions, which are defined by alternating periods of high intensity and recovery. Ironically, spinning is better at preparing participants for competitive situations instead of increased cardiovascular fitness and weight-loss, the presumed goals of most spinners.

Economically, there are steep start-up costs to road cycling. Bikes and gear are not cheap. While I haven't done the maths, I suspect, however, that gym memberships and class fees make cycling less expensive than spinning in the long run. In terms of convenience, a road bike is always available. Spinning classes, on the other hand, are offered on a fixed schedule and, thus, could be a less easily sustainable practice.

Socially, both spinning and cycling can be group activities. Spinning classes do offer a built in social motivation in a barking instructor. While I haven't often taken advantage of them, group rides and local bike clubs can offer much more effective social pressure, though. Both are occasions for social interaction, but cycling feels much more organic.

Culturally, road cycling (and to a lesser extent mountain biking) carry a certain cachet, or cultural capital. Spinning has a middle-class tourist feel, while cycling has an elitist authenticity. This helps to explain a lot of the boundary work done by cyclist. Go into any local bike shop, and you'll get a feel for what I mean. There is a certain level of relatively arbitrary cultural knowledge demanded in such spaces. Those not in-the-know can experience a great deal of discomfort. (Hell, even those of us who are somewhat in-the-know experience discomfort!) This atmosphere is unwittingly cultivated by proprietors and aficionados to maintain exclusivity, thus generating high levels of in-group solidarity. (An ethnography of a bicycle shop would make a great dissertation project for a sociology or anthropology grad student!)

There are certainly some class differences between spinning and cycling. Given the myriad benefits of road cycling, it would be good to break down the social barriers and to grant access to all.

Extry Extry! Soc All about It!

noreply@blogger.com (Bradley Koch) — Mon, 06 May 2013 14:08:00 +0000

More often than not, when I encounter overt sociology in the media, it is in the op-ed section. While there really is no such thing as bad press, it seems insidious that sociology, when it does show up, is relegated to the subjective portion of the paper or website. Symbolically, this quite clearly segregates what our social science does from what is "really" going on in the world, as if we are speculating instead of rigorously gathering and analyzing data. Certainly, I would rather have the public encounter sociology in the op-ed section than not at all; ideally, these pieces would instead show up next to other pieces of hard news. Does this mean that sociologists should stop writing op-ed pieces? I'm not so sure I'd advocate that. I do think, however, that prominent sociologists who are invited to write such pieces are in a position to raise this concern with editors. More importantly, as educators, I think we sociologists have a real duty to foster a sociological imagination in future journalists when they do grace our classrooms.

For great examples of what sociologically informed journalism looks like, be sure to keep up with The Society Pages Media Award for Measured Social Science!

Watch That First Step; It's a Lulu!

noreply@blogger.com (Bradley Koch) — Fri, 03 May 2013 15:49:00 +0000

I learned from several of my students last night that I am on Lulu. It was a bit of an old-man moment because I had never heard of it. The company describes it as "the first ever app for private reviews of guys," where "[w]hen you meet a new dude, [you can] check his Lulu profile, and find out everything you want to know!" It integrates Facebook profile information, and the company goes to great lengths to keep men from surreptitiously infiltrating the service by changing their gender or creating a fake account on Facebook. My students tell me that many men are not so happy with the app, claiming that it is reverse sexism or libelous. Sociologically, men's negative reactions should not be surprising. Men have been engaging in the same kind of systematic objectification in locker rooms and bars for generations. To be subjected to the same practices challenges the status that men enjoy over women.

Does that mean that Lulu is good for women? I think there are two perspectives here. Within the current social system, Lulu does indeed open social space for women that was once the sole purview of men. While men have been able to control physical spaces, restricting women formally and informally from places like locker rooms and bars, virtual spaces like a web-based app are much more difficult to control; technology is an equalizer in this way. From a broader perspective, however, Lulu only expands the dehumanizing practice of objectification. It arguably and unwittingly buttresses men's claims to women's bodies. ("Women do it, too!" or "Women are just as bad as men.") Even if it does level the playing field, it does so by lowering the playing field. A more lofty goal would be to elevate both women and men's behavior, improving interpersonal relationships all around.

Oh, and all of this is incredibly heteronormative if I haven't mentioned that, yet.

Bicycles, Motorcycles, Proles, and the Powerful

noreply@blogger.com (Bradley Koch) — Thu, 02 May 2013 15:29:00 +0000

Last weekend, I got to attend an awesome crit bike race here where I live. (If you haven't already gathered from the blog, I'm a cycling fan.) I got there early and staked out a good spot to watch the races near the start/finish line. It happened to be right near a cordoned-off sponsor area for the motorcycles that cleared the way on every lap for the cyclists, Ducati. I was struck by the class diversity among the people associated with Ducati. Standing comfortably next to the working-class American rider/enthusiasts were elite European owner/managers. What otherwise we would think of as strange bedfellows seemed completely at ease in this setting. These kinds of situations, however, are quite rare. The only other examples that I can think of involve professional athletics or motorsports. Think Mitt Romney and his "friends who are NASCAR team owners" sans pandering inauthenticity. I wonder what it is about these social situations or realms that allow for otherwise avoidable inter-class contact. Is it their competitive nature? I also wonder if these moments for contact have appreciable effects, like elevated opinions of those in other classes, better treatment of employees by owners, increased levels of sympathy, or conversely, decreases in class consciousness. Surely, there is some research in the area. Point us to it in the comments below if you know of it.

A Girl and Her Atom?

noreply@blogger.com (Bradley Koch) — Wed, 01 May 2013 19:15:00 +0000

If you haven't seen it yet, IBM has just released the world's smallest movie--using atoms:

I find it truly amazing! No really, this is a big deal, and it's very cool.

Why is it a boy, though? Presumably, they could have just as easily titled it "A Girl and Her Atom." (And, no, that doesn't mean that they would have needed to include more atoms to make a dress. Read here.) As one can see in the making-of movie, several women, after all, were part of the very team that made the movie happen.

It's fairly well known now that the so-called STEM fields are having trouble recruiting girls and women.* This seems like it would have been a simple place to combat some of that.

--
* - For more on gender and STEM, check out these great posts from Sociological Images:
Gender Gap in Science and Tech Jobs
The Truth about Gender and Math
Transnational Data on Gender and Science Aptitude
Gender and Biased Perceptions: Scientists Rate Job Applicants

"Crowded Out"

noreply@blogger.com (Bradley Koch) — Wed, 01 May 2013 01:18:00 +0000

In the thick of finals week with no time to do a real post today, but you all should read this from Inside Higher Ed. (I guess I need to rethink this old post a little.)

--
h/t Josh Klugman

Can You Please Stop Using That Word Incorrectly? Thanks.

noreply@blogger.com (Bradley Koch) — Mon, 29 Apr 2013 18:19:00 +0000

A (fairly boring) story showed up in my Religion News Service RSS titled "Stopping radicals before they start." It caught my eye because of its misuse of the term "radicals." "Radical" is not a synonym for "extremist."[1] "Radical" traces back to the same etymological root as the word--well--"root," as in "getting to the root cause of an issue." "Extreme," on the other hand, means "the utmost" or "the furthest out." It's understandable why some have confused the two terms. After all, the solutions that address the root causes of problems almost invariably seem extreme from within the context of that system.[2] Take this story about a "radical Evangelical." The term "radical" in this case is used very differently. Shane Claiborne argues that the core (i.e. radical) message of the Christian Gospel(s) should inspire some pretty whacky behavior (that some might even describe as "extreme"), but that is not the same as arguing that the faithful should take up arms in a Cosmic War. Violent rhetoric is not core to any religion.[3] Words mean things, and we should take care to keep those meanings precise lest we perpetuate misunderstanding and conflict.

--

[1] I'm sure you can find several thesauruses that list them as synonyms. They are wrong.

[2] Take poverty, for example. Radical solutions proposed for poverty challenge the very basis of our economy and, thus, seem extreme from the perspective of those of us existing in that economy who may find it difficult to imagine any other kind of system.

[3] More accurately, violence is perhaps central to all religions. For more on this argument, see René Girard's Violence and the Sacred.

Southern Sociological Society Meetup in ATL! This Friday 3 PM!

noreply@blogger.com (Bradley Koch) — Wed, 24 Apr 2013 14:07:00 +0000

A bunch of us from SociologySource.org, SociologySounds.com, SociologyInFocus.com, and Soc'ing Out Loud are going to get together this Friday from 3:00 to 5:00 PM at Meehan's Public House.

It's just a bunch of friendly sociologists hanging out. Nothing major, everyone's welcome!

When: 3:00 - 5:00 PM Friday 26 April
Where: Meehan's Public House 200 Peachtree St NE Atlanta, GA 30303
Who: YOU! Open to all Sociologists, Criminologist, any other type of social scientist or teacher, and their friends.
How Will You Find Us? Nate from SociologySoucre.com will be wearing a red T-shirt that has the Marx Is My Homeboy logo on it.
Questions? Tweet Nate at @SociologySource or email him at Nathan- -at- -SociologySource.org.

Southerns 2013

noreply@blogger.com (Bradley Koch) — Tue, 23 Apr 2013 15:02:00 +0000

I'll be heading over to the Annual Meeting of the Southern Sociological Society so posting will be limited this week. I will be presenting with my coauthors at 4:00 PM on Thursday in the Fairlie room. Here is our abstract:

The "War on Christmas": Teaching about Christian Privilege

Scholars have begun to recognize a “Christian privilege” (CP) in the vein of “white privilege,” which McIntosh (1988) famously described as being “like an invisible weightless knapsack of special provisions, assurances, tools, maps, guides, codebooks, passports, visas, clothes, compass, emergency gear, and blank checks” (1-2). Blumenfeld (2006) defines CP as the:
…seemingly invisible, unearned, and largely unacknowledged array of benefits accorded to Christians. … This system of benefits confers dominance on Christians while subordinating members of other faith communities as well as non-believers. These systemic inequities are pervasive throughout the society. They are encoded into the individual’s consciousness and woven into the fabric of our social institutions, resulting in a stratified social order privileging dominant (“agent”) groups while restring and disempowering subordinate (“target”) groups… (195).
Several scholars (e.g. Schlosser 2003 and Goodman and Seifert 2010) have constructed lists of CP in line with McIntosh’s list of white privileges. Christians, irrespective to their specific religious practice or tradition, are indiscriminately privileged, just as even the most progressive of whites and men are advantaged by white and male privileges (Clark 2006). Christians can problematically ignore or deny their CP because they have never experienced the oppression that is levied against non-Christians (Schlosser 2003). Further entrenching CP is the supposed diversity of religion in the U.S., which tends to mask the hegemonic force exerted by Protestant Christianity; the assumption of pluralism in fact allows Protestant hegemony to marginalize religions that are not “normal” (Beaman 2003).

To teach this concept to students, we developed an in-class debate about the “War on Christmas” and holiday expressions (“happy holidays” vs. “Merry Christmas,” neutral winter displays vs. religious displays, etc.).

In the exercise, students are told they represent a community group meeting to decide if local businesses should be neutral on holiday greetings. They are divided up to represent different perspectives. The first group is instructed to argue the belief that “happy holidays” and neutral displays represent political correctness gone too far, and that these emphases focus too much on semantics. The second group is to argue that neutral greetings/displays represent inclusiveness of diverse religious backgrounds. Optionally, a third group can argue that the push for neutrality is “reverse discrimination” against Christians.

A debriefing discussion includes if a Christian offended by “happy holidays” is equivalent to a non-Christian offended by “Merry Christmas.” The instructor then addresses the concept of Christian privilege: the idea that “Merry Christmas” or other Christian displays may be intended as neutral is used to demonstrate the pervasiveness of Christianity and the privilege of being in a dominant group. Anonymous polls measure students’ own experiences with Christian privilege.

This exercise can be used in introductory classes or courses on religion, politics, or inequality, related to conversations about the separation of church and state, political correctness, pluralism, and privilege. As researchers in the South, we examine Christian privilege where Christianity is often the norm and taken for granted. Pending IRB-approval, we will implement this exercise in a range of introductory courses across our institutions.

Drop me a line if you'd like to meet up for a beer.

Cycling on the Brain, 2013 Tour de France Edition

noreply@blogger.com (Bradley Koch) — Mon, 22 Apr 2013 19:50:00 +0000

Is the men's Tour de France getting faster over time?

Yes. Yes, it is (p<0.001). The winners are adding 0.15 kph (0.09 mph) per year on average.

The data predict an average speed of 41.741 kph (25.936 mph) for the winner this summer.

--
data source: http://bikeraceinfo.com/tdf/tdfstats.html

Friday Music: "Karate" - Brad Paisley

noreply@blogger.com (Bradley Koch) — Fri, 19 Apr 2013 14:05:00 +0000

I give you Brad Paisley's "Karate":

The song is a revenge fantasy about a woman who is abused by her husband. I learned of in this review from Fresh Air. (I find the review completely misguided, BTW.) The music is oddly playful and upbeat given the grave nature of the lyrics, running the risk of trivializing the topic. This song, off the same album as the controversial "Accidental Racist," tackles yet another social problem. This song could help facilitate a discussion on domestic violence, retribution, and gender as well as a discussion about the larger public debate about the role of musicians in facilitating the amelioration of social problems.

Jesus, Jews, and the Classroom

noreply@blogger.com (Bradley Koch) — Thu, 18 Apr 2013 19:19:00 +0000

I have been fascinated by two recent episodes in which teaching exercises have come under heavy criticism. The first, assigned by a 10th-grade English teacher in New Albany, New York, required students to write a persuasive essay using historic Nazi propaganda arguing that Jews were evil and "the source of our problems." The second, assigned by a Communications Studies instructor at Florida Atlantic University, asked students to step on a piece of paper with the word "Jesus" written on it. While both exercises sound egregious and inflammatory, I don't find either necessarily inappropriate. (For contextualized defenses of both, see here and here respectively.) When we talk about academic freedom, we typically focus on research. [1] Academic freedom, however, is also essential in the classroom. It is our job as educators to challenge our students' common-sense conceptions of the world. If my students are not uncomfortable at some level in my class, I am not doing my job. [2]

That said, what so far hasn't been a part of the discussion about the "evil Jews" and "step on Jesus" exercises is the larger, stratified social context in which people of different religions/ethnicities exist. Jews and Christians experience different social advantages and disadvantages. While antisemitism has been waning for quite some time in the United States, Christians still enjoy immense privilege. (See previous posts on Christian Privilege here, here, and here.) It is quite a different thing to denigrate Jews--even if for benevolent effect--than it is to show symbolic disrespect to the name of the central figure of Christianity. Imagine similar teaching exercises about race instead of ethnicity/religion. Could you imagine asking a class to write an essay arguing that blacks are an inferior race? How about asking a class to step on pieces of paper with the word "Whites" written on them? The negative effect is asymmetric because the social location of these groups is asymmetric.

I suppose my point is that while we should grant teachers a lot of leeway in their classrooms, we teachers are responsible for understanding the social context that are larger than our classrooms.

--
[1] - I remember when I was on the job market several years ago, there was some controversy in Georgia over a professor of "blowjob studies" whom several state legislators wanted to oust. Luckily, the professor in this case was protected by tenure, and aside from the legislators scoring some political points with their anti-intellectual, backwards core constituents, nothing ever came of the media attention. Coincidentally, I was at that very time interviewing for two job in the University System of Georgia. While I found the witch-hunt extremely disconcerting and expressed concern in the interviews, I did end up accepting one of the job offers and today still work in Georgia. If all goes as planned, I'll be getting tenure in a year at which point I'll be able to reveal my actual, diabolical research agenda. Muah ha ha ha!

[2] - h/t Stephanie McClure

Throwing Aspirin at Social Problems

noreply@blogger.com (Bradley Koch) — Wed, 17 Apr 2013 20:28:00 +0000

I'm teaching a couple frosh-only sections of a critical thinking course again this term that is unique to our institution. The major final project for the class is a group problem-based learning (PBL) exercise. It works like this. I reveal pieces of a hypothetical scenario involving a local individual over several weeks. The students are charged with identifying the structural causes of the intersecting social problems befalling our imaginary friend. Finally, the students propose a solution(s) to the social problems.* One issue that I've run into in the past is that the "solutions" that students propose are not really solutions at all. In order to get them past this, I came up with this analogy that I used for the first time this morning:

Imagine that you are suffering from excruciating headaches that are recurring and that you just can't shake. Finally, you go to see your doctor about it. After describing your symptoms to her, she prescribes an aspirin a day. How would you feel about this?

The students generally agree that they would be angry because the doctor really didn't try to treat the cause of the headaches; the aspirin may alleviate the symptoms but doesn't really get at the root cause. I then tell the students not to throw an aspirin at their social problems. A paper that proposes increasing welfare benefits as a "solution" to poverty, for example, would be aspirin. The students all shook their heads and seemed to get it, but I guess we'll see.

--
* - I adopted the PBL model for this course after being selected for a workshop on campus that essentially required that we implement it. I'm not entirely sold on the pedagogy, but that's fodder for a different post.

Defining Civic Values after a Tragedy

noreply@blogger.com (Bradley Koch) — Tue, 16 Apr 2013 14:16:00 +0000

I always get nervous after acts of terrorism. Ironically, however, I am more worried about the irrational acts of hatred and "retaliation" that will likely follow than about secondary acts of terrorism (as if hate-filled and retaliatory acts are not terroristic). The Department of Homeland Security has the "If You See Something, Say Something" Campaign. Their website notes twice:

Factors such as race, ethnicity, national origin, or religious affiliation alone are not suspicious [emphasis added].

Why is the word "alone" necessary? Is that to say race, ethnicity, national origin, and religious affiliation could become significant when included with other information? It's not OK for me to be suspicious of a man because he is black alone, but what if he is black and is walking through an upscale gated community? It's not OK for me to be suspicious of a woman because she is Latina alone, but what if she is Latina and she is in the queue at a voting precinct? It's not OK for me to be suspicious of a woman because her parents emigrated from Egypt alone, but what if she is Egyptian-American and is applying for a job at the State Department? It's not OK for me to be suspicious of a man who prays to Allah alone, but what if he is Muslim and he is waiting to board my airplane?

Already, this seems to have been an issue. The New York Times reports:

It was unclear Monday evening who might be responsible for the blast. Although investigators said that they were speaking to a Saudi citizen who was injured in the blast, several law enforcement officials took pains to note that no one was in custody.
...
Officials stressed that they had no suspects in the attack. The Saudi man, who was interviewed at Brigham and Women’s Hospital, had been seen running from the scene of the first explosion, a person briefed on preliminary developments in the investigation said on Monday afternoon. A law enforcement official said later Monday that the man, was in the United States on a student visa and came under scrutiny because of his injuries, his proximity to the blasts and his nationality — but added that he was not known to federal authorities and that his role in the attack, if any, was unclear.

I heard early reports on television yesterday that the person in custody, presumably the Saudi man, had been chased down and tackled by a bystander as we was fleeing in the immediate aftermath of the initial explosion, a quite reasonable reaction shared by virtually everyone in the vicinity. The man, you see, was not suspicious because he looked Arab alone; he was suspicious for being Arab and running.

In these times of heightened tension, anger, and fear, we must exercise heightened vigilance not to those around us alone (i.e. the "other") but also to ourselves as well. If you see something, say something. Indeed. That includes acts of hate, prejudice, and racism.

Brut Aftershave and Lavoris

noreply@blogger.com (Bradley Koch) — Mon, 15 Apr 2013 14:21:00 +0000

The Little 500 happens this weekend. For those of you not lucky enough to have attended Indiana University, the Little 500 is an intramural relay race on fixed gear bicycles on a cinder track and was made famous by the 1979 film Breaking Away, which won the Academy Award for Best Screenplay (1980). In honor of the hallowed event, I've decided to run some analysis of the winning times. Have the times been getting better? I convert the winning times into the average minutes per lap as to be able to compare the men's times (200 laps) to the women's (100 laps).

Inspired by this, I suspected that the women's times might be converging with the men's, but that's not the the case. The women's times have been changing randomly over time. The men's times, however, have been decreasing significantly (p<0.001).

Based on this model, the predicted winning time for the 2013 men's race is 2:02:32.6 (36.763 seconds per lap), which would be the second fasted time ever. (The fastest finishing time belongs to the Cutters of 1986 at 2:01:26.4.) (By the year 2360, the race will be over before it starts!) Of course, the Little 500, much like a criterium, is more about strategy and tactics than it is about riding as fast as possible for the entire event. The pace varies considerably over the race. Still, this is what I do for fun.

--
data sources:
http://iusf.indiana.edu/little500/fans/results.aspx
http://www.bloomingpedia.org/wiki/The_Little_500

Friday Music: "W.M.A." - Pearl Jam

noreply@blogger.com (Bradley Koch) — Fri, 12 Apr 2013 13:14:00 +0000

I give you Pearl Jam's "W.M.A.":

This song is about white male privilege and racist policing.