Bachelor 2024/2025

General Sociology

Type: Elective course (Sociology and Social Informatics)

Area of studies: Sociology

Delivered by: Department of Sociology

Where: Saint-Petersburg School of Social Sciences

When: 1 year, 1-4 module

Mode of studies: offline

Open to: students of one campus

Instructors: Бемлер Екатерина Сергеевна, Daniil A. Alexandrov, Maria Safonova

Language: English

ECTS credits: 13

Course Syllabus

Abstract

Genaral sociology is introductory course. It is organized as discussion of important social issues (inequality, poverty, migration, urban space, religion etc.) with theoretical lenses provided by social theory. The course is divided into four big blocks: (1) social inequality, (2) social institutions, (3) social processes and (4) theoretical perspectives. The logic of the course and its structure are defined by the variety of answers for the questions about the conditions of formation, maintaining and reconfiguration/ destruction of the samples of social organization, and about the possible ways to analyze these processes suggested by sociology. We start from the very basic elements of explanation of social action and then proceed to understanding the nature of causal explanations in social science.

Learning Objectives

• understand the complexity of social systems and gain ability of critical thinking on social issues in light of the key concepts underlying major sociological theories

Expected Learning Outcomes

• - to use sociological theory for development of sociological research design
• - be able to differentiate social actions and social behavior, explain social actions through social mechanisms
• - understand the link between micro-actions and macro-outcomes
• - generate simple middle-range theories
• - develop academic skills in reading, writing, and presentation.

Course Contents

• Introduction. Social Facts.
• Poverty.
• City and Inequality.
• Urban Institutions and Inequality
• Migration, ethnicity, inequality.
• Education and Inequality.
• Social stratification. Class and status.
• Social stratification. Forms of capital.
• Social stratification. Reputational approach.
• Inequality and Social Mobility.
• Elites.
• Inequality and gender.
• Inequality and consumption.
• Family and marriage.
• State and political institutions.
• Total and disciplinary institutions.
• Medical institutions and health.
• School systems.
• Religion.
• Universities and higher education.
• Art and cultural production.
• Cultural industries and fashion.
• Mass Media.
• Socialization.
• Civilization.

Assessment Elements

• Classroom discussion
  Students need to formulate critical questions for the projects presented by their classmates. These questions should demonstrate a student’s ability to apply the theory from the mandatory readings to the empirical cases discussed by the presenting group. A student needs to ask one question during 75% of all seminars in the given semester to receive a grade of “10.” If a student participates in less than 75% of the classroom discussions, they receive a grade proportional to the number of participations. For example, if a student participates in 15 out of 20 discussions, they receive a grade of “10.” If a student participates in 7 out of 20 discussions, they receive a grade of “5.”
• Collective presentation grade
  To successfully participate in seminars, students are expected to present a collective project paper during class (10 minutes for the presentation). The grade is calculated based on the average quality of the presentations given by the team throughout the semester. Each presentation is prepared by a working team (4 teams per seminar group). The grade for each presentation is relative. The strongest presentation given during a particular seminar receives 4 points, while the weakest receives 1 point. The presentations in between receive 3 and 2 points, respectively. Generally, the teacher distributes 10 points among the 4 working groups. If the presentations for a particular seminar are of equal quality, they are graded with the same points (e.g., 2.5 points to all 4 groups). At the end of the semester, the average number of points is calculated for each team, and a team ranking is produced. The relative scale is then converted to the standard HSE 10-point scale based on this ranking. Students from the team occupying the 1st position in their group ranking receive a grade of “10” for the project papers, while students from the team occupying the 2nd position receive a “9,” and so on. If a student misses some seminars without a sick leave, their grade is proportional to the number of seminars they participated in. For example, if a student’s team grade is “10,” but they missed 50% of the seminars in the given semester, their individual grade would be “5.”
• Intermediary written exam
  Students are expected to sit up an intermediary written exam with open questions on the topics covered during the 1st semester.
• Collective project paper
  The project paper is prepared by a working team (with 4 teams per seminar group) for each seminar in the form of a written essay covering the main tasks from the seminar assignment. Papers must be submitted to the teaching assistant before the seminar begins. The grade for each project paper is relative. The strongest paper submitted for a particular seminar receives 4 points, while the weakest receives 1 point. The papers in between receive 3 and 2 points, respectively. Generally, the teaching assistant distributes 10 points among the 4 teams. If the papers for a particular seminar are of equal quality, they are graded with the same points (e.g., 2.5 points to all 4 teams). At the end of the semester, the average number of points is calculated for each team, and a team ranking is produced. The relative scale is then converted to the standard HSE 10-point scale based on this ranking. Students from the team occupying the 1st position in their group ranking receive a grade of “10” for the project papers, those from the 2nd position receive a “9,” and so on. If a student misses some seminars without a sick leave, their grade is proportional to the number of seminars they participated in. For example, if a student’s team grade is “10” but they missed 50% of the seminars in the given semester, their individual grade would be “5.”
• Collective presentation grade
  To successfully participate in seminars, students are expected to present a collective project paper during class (10 minutes for the presentation). The grade is calculated based on the average quality of the presentations given by the team throughout the semester. Each presentation is prepared by a working team (4 teams per seminar group). The grade for each presentation is relative. The strongest presentation given during a particular seminar receives 4 points, while the weakest receives 1 point. The presentations in between receive 3 and 2 points, respectively. Generally, the teacher distributes 10 points among the 4 working groups. If the presentations for a particular seminar are of equal quality, they are graded with the same points (e.g., 2.5 points to all 4 groups). At the end of the semester, the average number of points is calculated for each team, and a team ranking is produced. The relative scale is then converted to the standard HSE 10-point scale based on this ranking. Students from the team occupying the 1st position in their group ranking receive a grade of “10” for the project papers, while students from the team occupying the 2nd position receive a “9,” and so on. If a student misses some seminars without a sick leave, their grade is proportional to the number of seminars they participated in. For example, if a student’s team grade is “10,” but they missed 50% of the seminars in the given semester, their individual grade would be “5.”
• Test grade
  Final test grade is the average of the scores from tests taken during the semester.
• Final exam 1st year
  Students are expected to sit up an final written exam with open questions on the topics covered by the course.
• Test grade
  Final test grade is the average of the scores from tests taken during the semester.
• Classroom discussion
  Students need to formulate critical questions for the projects presented by their classmates. These questions should demonstrate a student’s ability to apply the theory from the mandatory readings to the empirical cases discussed by the presenting group. A student needs to ask one question during 75% of all seminars in the given semester to receive a grade of “10.” If a student participates in less than 75% of the classroom discussions, they receive a grade proportional to the number of participations. For example, if a student participates in 15 out of 20 discussions, they receive a grade of “10.” If a student participates in 7 out of 20 discussions, they receive a grade of “5.”
• Collective project paper
  The project paper is prepared by a working team (with 4 teams per seminar group) for each seminar in the form of a written essay covering the main tasks from the seminar assignment. Papers must be submitted to the teaching assistant before the seminar begins. The grade for each project paper is relative. The strongest paper submitted for a particular seminar receives 4 points, while the weakest receives 1 point. The papers in between receive 3 and 2 points, respectively. Generally, the teaching assistant distributes 10 points among the 4 teams. If the papers for a particular seminar are of equal quality, they are graded with the same points (e.g., 2.5 points to all 4 teams). At the end of the semester, the average number of points is calculated for each team, and a team ranking is produced. The relative scale is then converted to the standard HSE 10-point scale based on this ranking. Students from the team occupying the 1st position in their group ranking receive a grade of “10” for the project papers, those from the 2nd position receive a “9,” and so on. If a student misses some seminars without a sick leave, their grade is proportional to the number of seminars they participated in. For example, if a student’s team grade is “10” but they missed 50% of the seminars in the given semester, their individual grade would be “5.”

Interim Assessment

• 2024/2025 2nd module
  1 semester grade=Collective project paper* 0.12 + Collective presentation* 0.2 + Classroom discussion* 0.08 + Test* 0.4 + Intermediary written exam* 0.2
• 2024/2025 4th module
  2 semester grade=Collective project paper* 0.12 + Collective presentation* 0.2 + Classroom discussion* 0.08 + Test* 0.4 + Final written exam* 0.2

Bibliography

Recommended Core Bibliography

• Abrutyn, S. (2016). Handbook of Contemporary Sociological Theory. Switzerland: Springer. Retrieved from http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&site=eds-live&db=edsebk&AN=1251393
• Rousseau, N. (2014). Society Explained : An Introduction to Sociology. Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers. Retrieved from http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&site=eds-live&db=edsebk&AN=752270

Recommended Additional Bibliography

• Bearman, P., & Hedström, P. (2009). The Oxford Handbook of Analytical Sociology. Oxford: OUP Oxford. Retrieved from http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&site=eds-live&db=edsebk&AN=381029
• Dillon, M. (2014). Introduction to Sociological Theory : Theorists, Concepts, and Their Applicability to the Twenty-First Century (Vol. Second edition). Chichester, West Sussex: Wiley-Blackwell. Retrieved from http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&site=eds-live&db=edsebk&AN=667235
• Manzo, G. (2014). Analytical Sociology : Actions and Networks. Hoboken: Wiley. Retrieved from http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&site=eds-live&db=edsebk&AN=714658
• Segre, S. (2014). Contemporary Sociological Thinkers and Theories. Farnham, Surrey: Routledge. Retrieved from http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&site=eds-live&db=edsebk&AN=797017
• Sloman, S. A. (2005). Causal Models : How People Think About the World and Its Alternatives. Oxford: Oxford University Press, USA. Retrieved from http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&site=eds-live&db=edsebk&AN=552942
• Wright, J. D. (2015). International Encyclopedia of the Social & Behavioral Sciences (Vol. Second edition). Amsterdam: Elsevier. Retrieved from http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&site=eds-live&db=edsebk&AN=957369

Authors

• Ильина Мария Ивановна