A CENTER ON THE PERIPHERY

The two promotions and expansion of the curricula in the Sociology Department, announced today, serve to emphasize the importance of this new division. Sociology is a relatively new social science, but it may, with accuracy, be regarded as the center of them all. Its close affiliations with government, economics, education, philosophy and history, its ramifications in the fields of psychology and biology--to mention but a few--only need to be recalled to recognize the importance of sociology. And in its own right it shows astonishing vitality; even at Harvard, under many handicaps, it has expanded and developed greatly. It is, nevertheless, the weakest department in the University, with only one possible competitor for the also-ran position.

In lusher days, some six years ago, the Sociology Department was conceived by Social Ethics, with a small heritage from the Economics Department. Since then Sociology has been left to fend for itself more than most new-born babes. To inquire whether the present plight of the department is due more to neglect by the University or to internal weakness is perhaps needlessly academic, for the interactions are extensive and varied.

Certain facts, however, stand out in bold relief. Last year's Carnegie survey reported the Sociology Department as one of two sub-standard groups in the college. It is the department most likely to receive the sweepings--the undecided, the cast-off from another department, and the seeker of the "snap" field. Since its origin there has been a great increase in the number of concentrators, but there has been hardly more than a gesture made at increasing its allotment of funds. The double action of expansion within and budget rigidity imposed from without has show up grievous flaws. The need for internal reorganization and outside assistance is as obvious as it is urgent.

The first place to apply remedial measures is in Sociology A. If there is a desire to make this course more popular than ever and more valuable to embyro concentrators, it would be well if it climbed down from its lofty theoretical plane. As an introductory course it should survey the many fields of sociology, and the material should be illustrated by contemporary applications and be related, as far as possible, to the individual. Then the prospective concentrator would find his taste whetted, without having philosophical vagaries float over his head so early in his career. Secondly, the theoretical aspects largely eliminated from Sociology A might be incorporated in a course on theory alone.

Besides turning their attention to Sociology A the college and departmental authorities must consider the division as a whole. The Sociology Department must review its own rapid, uncertain, and undernourished growth and attend to the task of tying up loose ends. Beyond cavail, the college must recognize the growing importance of Sociology. It must discover some way of giving it a more adequate "cut" in departmental allowances, and, if necessary, shear the allotments of departments which have been sliding down the chute of popularity.