Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Top Stories

Sociology saves us all

People holding protest signs

University of Houston students protest a Texas bill which would ban diversity programs at public colleges and universities in 2023.

Raquel Natalicchio/Houston Chronicle via Getty Images

Thiele Strong is a sociology professor at San José State University and a public voices fellow at the The OpEd Project.

Across the nation, campaigns to cancel, eliminate and marginalize the basic social science education that underpins diversity, equity and inclusion efforts have gained steam. Educational gag orders andDEI bans impact students from K-12 classrooms to college campuses.

Most central to the ire of those attacking are foundational sociological concepts. Sociology is the field which studies society. Sociologists analyze life chances and how we get them; how structures pattern our experiences and beliefs. Too often confused for its more celebrated sister science, psychology, sociology is the psychology of the people.


Sociologists explore how various aspects of our identity – gender, race, economic status, sexuality – show up and affect us in the world.

We discuss the “social construction zone” and how what has happened in the past affects people today. We examine power, who has which types of it — and, just as importantly, who doesn’t. As educators, we want students to learn about our social order, to reconsider and reimagine both it and their place in it.

Despite its centrality to understanding the collective human experience, sociology is marginalized in our schooling system. Sociology is not part of the core curriculum in K-12 education, and students can earn an undergraduate degree without taking a sociology class.

Sign up for The Fulcrum newsletter

Becoming sociologically minded is not always easy. Quoting astrophysicist Neil DeGrasse Tyson, “In science, when human behavior enters the equation, things go nonlinear. That's why physics is easy and sociology is hard.”

As a normative sociologist, I encourage students to get curious and to use data to understand how we can learn from ourselves, what works and what doesn’t work, to build a better society for all people.

In recent years, I have felt incredulity for the ways in which the alt-right weaponizes the notion of freedom of speech. Conservative political pundits claim to be unable to speak freely, yet they have a platform to denounce social science fundamentals – and do so. Debating the theories of sociology is certainly acceptable but it is quite different from advocating the banning of sociological concepts from our schools.

As a tenured professor, I haven’t felt like I have full freedom of speech in my classroom; speaking without reservation about sociological content can feel risky. There are colleagues outside my department who dismiss sociologically driven insights. I worry a student in the class might record me, skewing content or taking what I say out of context to create a viral bit. I fear a public that does not value and will attack educated women talking honestly about our craft, which asks difficult, thorny questions with uncomfortable answers.

This negotiation to work within our current polemic political environment limits my ability to express freely. The notion of freedom of speech, and more specifically, the freedom of speech for whom, is at stake.

This hierarchy of “whose rights” is playing out across the nation and it plays out at the classroom level as well. Perversely, the ideal of freedom of speech has been commandeered by the alt-right as freedom to denounce legitimate and necessary social science knowledge. This shift has negative consequences for our youth, sociology educators, the public — all of us.

Nearly a dozen states have introduced bills directing what students can and cannot be taught about the role of enslavement in American history and ongoing racism. Florida lawmakers have proposed legislation that would prohibit classroom discussions about sexual orientation and gender identity. Labor history has long been absent from school curriculum.

At the root of the free speech debate is the fine line between speech that offends one’s sensibilities and speech that crosses the line into intolerance. Learning the reality of anti-Black racism, for example, may threaten some; however, antiracist curriculum is education, not hate speech.

In a highly polarized society, how do we keep ourselves and our school systems in contact with ideas that are enriching — and safe from ideas that are not so?

Sociology, because of the way it parses through, discerns and analyzes our collective ways, can help.

Education is meant to broaden horizons and encourage critical thinking through exposure to knowledge, new ideas and different ways of thinking.

Sociology faculty, educators and students deserve to live out freedom of speech, both on- and off-campus. We need people and institutions to invest in sociology. We need parents to write letters to school boards and administrators asking for more sociology in schools. And we need a political system that will take seriously the work of those of us who study society. The ability to open our minds, perhaps to uncomfortable ideas, which could help us to envision a socially sustainable future, may indeed be vital for our collective well-being.

Read More

Is This What Education in a Democracy Looks Like?

Students raising their hands on a class at school.

Getty Images, Skynesher

Is This What Education in a Democracy Looks Like?

On February 14, the Trump Administration sent a Valentine’s Day shocker to American higher education and schools nationwide. The Department of Education sent them a mandate for a new educational orthodoxy, prescribing institutional policies at a level of detail seldom seen in this country.

The Department of Education’s “Dear Colleague” letter, the vehicle through which its Office of Civil Rights communicates policy guidance, delivered a radical redefinition of what it calls “the nondiscrimination obligations of schools and other entities that receive federal financial assistance from the United States Department of Education.” And, while claiming to take inspiration from the Supreme Court’s 2023 decision in Students for Fair Admissions v. Harvard, which curtailed affirmative action in college admissions, the Dear Colleague letter goes well beyond that decision while also ignoring or pushing aside key elements of Chief Justice Roberts’ majority opinion in that case.

Keep ReadingShow less
No Going Backwards: Cannot Take Down DOE

A young student studying at school.

Getty Images, Westend61

No Going Backwards: Cannot Take Down DOE

Growing up in New Castle, Pennsylvania, where every public school received extra federal support due to the city’s high poverty levels, I saw the importance of governmental assistance.

New Castle Area School District, one of the poorest in Pennsylvania, relied on Title I to fund essential services like tutoring, after-school programs, smaller class sizes, and specialized instruction. It was also vital in making sure that everyone had a chance to succeed in this country, despite economic disadvantages. The goal was for no child to be left behind.

Keep ReadingShow less
DEI programs are essential to tackle systemic barriers

Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI).

CT Mirror

DEI programs are essential to tackle systemic barriers

By executive order, the Trump administration has called for an end to “dangerous, demeaning, and immoral” diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) schemes.

Growing up, my cultural identity was nurtured by my family but when I stepped beyond the safeguards of home, my experiences as an undergrad and grad student were revealing. My journey was marked by the absence of Latina representation in required texts and academic spaces. Revolutionary figures like U.S. Supreme Court Justice Sonia Sotomayor, U.S. Surgeon General Antonia Coello Novello, writer Sor Juana Inés de la Cruz, and others were glaringly omitted.

Keep ReadingShow less
Raised hands with diverse skin tones
2021 Diversity Report shows progress … and a long way to go
https://thefulcrum.us/voting/military-voting

Even Without The Acronym, Diverse Workforces Thrive

The good of diversity must not be jettisoned from the workplace or eliminated from core American values in one sweeping move.

The recent Executive Order eliminates initiatives “including illegal DEI and ‘diversity, equity, inclusion, and accessibility’ (DEIA) mandates, policies, programs, preferences, and activities in the Federal Government, under whatever name they appear.”

Keep ReadingShow less