A Quarterly Publication of The American Sociological Association Guidelines for Papers Submitted to Teaching Sociology Teaching Sociology publishes several types of papers. The basic distinction is between articles and notes. Generally, articles are longer than notes, more analytical, contain an extensive literature review, and present data. Notes are shorter (usually 15 pages or less), contain a shorter literature review, and present and assess a teaching technique. The distinction reflects the dual purposes of the journal: 1) to provide a forum for analyzing the teaching of sociology, and 2) as a forum for the exchange of specific teaching ideas. Articles are evaluated using some combination of the following criteria: How useful and original are the ideas presented? How thoroughly does the author consider implications for the teaching of sociology? How well developed is the basic analytical point? Is there sociological theory and/or analysis? How thoroughly and accurately does the author ground the paper in the literature? Are there articles in Teaching Sociology that the author should cite? Does the paper tie into the larger literature on pedagogy? How extensively does the author extend previous ideas and bring some intellectual closure to the topic? In an empirical study, how sound is the methodology and how accurately do the presented results reflect the data? If applicable, how is student success measured and is there evidence that demonstrates that learning outcomes were achieved? How well written is the paper? How well integrated is the paper? How well organized is the paper? Notes are evaluated using some combination of the following criteria: How useful, original, and transferable is the technique, strategy, or idea? Does the paper discuss the types of classes and institutions where the technique can be used? How cogently are the ideas and implications presented? Is the description sufficiently detailed so a reader could easily employ it? Does the paper say more than "I tried this and I liked it"? Is there a brief literature review? Does the author address potential difficulties with the technique and suggest possible solutions? Is qualitative or quantitative outcome data reported? How well written is the paper? How well integrated is the paper? How well organized is the paper? Guidelines for Papers Submitted to Teaching Sociology for the Conversation Section Teaching Sociology publishes brief comments, arguments, conversations, interviews, and responses related to a wide variety of issues in teaching sociology. The purpose of the Conversation section is to stimulate lively, thoughtful, topical, and controversial discussion. The Conversation section serves as a forum for an on-going exchange of ideas, arguments, responses, and commentary on issues that present the teacher of sociology with formidable challenges, dilemmas, and problems. Submissions to the Conversation section are refereed. Conversations are evaluated using some combination of the following criteria: How useful and original are the author's ideas, arguments, and/or commentary? How relevant are the author's ideas, arguments, and/or commentary to issues in teaching sociology? How well do the author's ideas and arguments contribute to an on-going dialogue on issues and dilemmas related to teaching sociology? How thoroughly does the author consider implications for the teaching of sociology? How cogently are the ideas and implications presented? How well developed is the author's basic point/argument? How well written is the paper? How well integrated is the paper? How well organized is the paper? Guidelines for Papers Submitted to Teaching Sociology for the Application Section Teaching Sociology occasionally publishes applications of current research. The purpose of application papers is to make sociological research more accessible to undergraduate students by providing instructors with pedagogical tools for incorporating current research in their undergraduate courses. Application papers present learning activities, discussion questions, and other student-centered learning techniques that can be used in a variety of undergraduate courses. Applications are solicited by the editor. Revised: August 22, 2007 Preparing your Book Review* A good review should inform the reader of merits or problems with the book. The review should be engaging and interesting to read and not simply a listing of the book's contents. It should include a brief description of the contents, as well as the value of the book and your views about the success of the book in meeting its aims. Finally, since this is a teaching journal, the review should focus on the uses of the book from a teaching perspective. This may include issues such as for what courses the book would be useful, the level at which the book is pitched, and other ways the book can be integrated into the course. It could also include any tie to specific teaching suggestions or class activities. In writing your review, you may find the following points and questions to be useful. Is the book well written and clearly organized? Does it have a clear thesis and approach to dealing with the thesis? To what level is the book pitched? Is the book appropriate for lower level undergraduates? Graduate students? What can a student gain from reading this book? Is the appeal of the book narrow or broad? What are the major contributions? If it is a second edition, how has it changed from the first? If you are reviewing a book which includes papers from numerous authors, feel free to focus on a small number of papers . What are the strong points of the book? Are there any serious problems? (Do not focus on minor defects of the book.) The focus here should be on what you liked or disliked about it. What courses might this book be appropriate for? Is it good for an introductory sociology course? A course on gender, family etc.? How might a professor use the book in his/her teaching? Specific ideas and suggestions are welcome. General instructions. The first few lines of the review should resemble the following: The Structure of Social Stratification in the United States. 3d ed. Leonard Beeghley. Boston, MA: Allyn and Bacon. 2000. 306 pages. $45.00. If you refer to yourself in the review, please use the first person (i.e., I think that...) Reviews should be between three and six pages in length and should be double spaced. If you are reviewing several books, feel free to go beyond that length. Please send us two copies of your review. To make it easier to read, edit and typeset your review, double-space your reviews on non-erasable paper with 1" margins. Please also include a 3.5" disk, formatted for the PC, (Word Perfect or Word) with the review or e-mail the review in addition to the hard copy. Once you have sent the review to Teaching Sociology, please do not send it any place else. After the review has been accepted or rejected, you may send the review, with appropriate citation, to others. If you cannot submit the review on time, please let us know so that we can plan accordingly. If you find that the book you agreed to review is not appropriate for Teaching Sociology or you do not think you are an appropriate reviewer, please let us know as soon as possible. The ASA Code of Ethics says that the "invitation to review a book assumes [the reviewer] has not reviewed the book for another journal." Also, the Code of Ethics prohibits review of work when an "overriding sense of personal obligation, competition, or enmity" is present. Please do not use long quotations in your review. If you use a quotation, please be sure it is exactly as printed. It is acceptable to use references and footnotes as long as they are not extensive and that you use ASA citation style. Teaching Sociology reserves the right to edit reviews for style, punctuation, and length. Include your name and your school affiliation. We also encourage you to indicate a status as a graduate student, faculty rank, or other sociological position(s) outside the academy which might help the readers understand your particular standpoint for the review. Criteria Revised: February 2000 *Examples of book reviews may be viewed by clicking here. Preparing your Film/Video Review* A good review should inform the reader of merits or problems with the video. The review should be engaging and interesting to read and not simply a description of the events in the video. It should include a brief description of the content, as well as the value of the video and your views about the success of the video in meeting its aims. Finally, since this is a teaching journal, the review should focus on the uses of the video from a teaching perspective. This may include issues such as for what courses the video would be useful, the level at which the video is pitched, and other ways the video can be integrated into the course. It could also include any tie to specific teaching suggestions or class activities. In writing your review, you may find the following points and questions to be useful. Is the video well done and clearly constructed? Does it have a clear thesis and approach to dealing with the thesis? To what level is the video pitched? Is the video appropriate for lower level undergraduates? Graduate students? What can a student gain from viewing this video? Is the appeal of the video narrow or broad? What are the major contributions? What are the strong points of the video? Are there any serious problems? (Do not focus on minor defects of the video.) The focus here should be on what you liked or disliked about it. What courses might this video be appropriate for? Is it appropriate for an introductory sociology course? A course on gender, family etc? Discuss the concepts/theories/points that the video illustrates. How might a professor use the video in his/her teaching? (This may involve including a list of questions to stimulate class discussion. Specific ideas and suggestions are welcome. General instructions. The first few lines of the review should resemble the following: W.E.B. DuBois: A Biography in Four Voices. 116 minutes. 1995. California Newsreel, 149 9th Street, San Francisco, CA 94103. 415.621.6196. Rental: $95.00; purchase $195.00. If you refer to yourself in the review, please use the first person (i.e., I think that...) Reviews should be between three and six pages in length and should be double spaced. If you are reviewing several videos, feel free to go beyond that length. Please send us two copies of your review. To make it easier to read, edit and typeset your review, double-space your reviews on non-erasable paper with 1" margins. Please include a 3.5" disk, formatted for the PC, (Word Perfect or Word) with the review or e-mail your review in addition to the hard copy. Once you have sent the review to Teaching Sociology, please do not send it any place else. After the review has been accepted or rejected, you may send the review, with appropriate citation, to others. If you cannot submit the review on time, please let us know so that we can plan accordingly. If you find that the book you agreed to review is not appropriate for Teaching Sociology or you don't think you are an appropriate reviewer, please let us know as soon as possible. The ASA Code of Ethics says that the "invitation to review a book assumes [the reviewer] has not reviewed the book for another journal." Also, the Code of Ethics prohibits review of work when an "overriding sense of personal obligation, competition, or enmity" is present. Please do not use long quotations in your review. If you use a quotation, please be sure it is exactly as printed. It is acceptable to use references and footnotes as long as they are not extensive and that you use ASA citation style. Teaching Sociology reserves the right to edit reviews for style, punctuation, and length. Include your name and your school affiliation. We also encourage you to indicate a status as graduate student, faculty rank, or other sociological position(s) outside the academy which might help the readers understand your particular standpoint for the review. *An example of film review may be viewed by clicking here. The Editor of Teaching Sociology is Liz Grauerholz. For articles, notes, and conversations, send manuscripts to: Liz Grauerholz, Department of Sociology and Anthropology, University of Central Florida, Howard Phillips Hall 403, Orlando, FL 32816-1360. Phone: 407-823-2227, Fax: 407-823-3026. For book, video, and software reviews, send manuscripts to: Jay Howard, Department of Sociology, Indiana University Columbus, 4601 Central Avenue, Columbus, IN 47203-1769. For questions about manuscript processing, contact Monica Mendez, Department of Sociology and Anthropology, University of Central Florida, Howard Phillips Hall 403, Orlando, FL 32816-1360. Phone: 407-823-2227, Fax: 407-823-3026. The Webmaster is Pauline H. Pavlakos. Observations on form and egregious spelling may be directed to Ms. Pavlakos. The Teaching Sociology Web Page is located at the Department of Sociology and Anthropology at Le Moyne College, the Jesuit College of Central New York. Page last updated: September 21, 2007