Studying ourselves: Sociology discipline-building in the United States

Abstract

self-studies, internal evaluations, and in the various histories of the discipline and of its professional organizations. In the early years of discipline-building, those who were, or wanted to be, sociologists studied themselves prodigiously and attempted to chart a course for posterity Prompted by the centennial anniversary of the American Sociological As sociation in 2005, it is timely to look back at how we defined and studied ourselves and at what was said as well as what was left unsaid. The "fathers" of American sociology and their network of associates engaged in dis cipline-building as they studied and directed the progress of the new science of sociol ogy. They collected data, analyzed it, reported their findings at professional meetings, and published them in the prominent journals of the day Of particular interest is who documented the history of early American sociology, how, and why? Peter Baehr di chotomized contributions to the development of sociology as either discursive or institu tional. Discursive contributions are those of ideas, and institutional those establishing "some artifact or institution demonstrably related to the sociological enterprise" (2002: 6). This work deals with the latter, specifically with sociology in institutions of higher education in the United States as it was introduced, defined, measured, and publicly presented. As is evident in the literature, the early history of academic sociology was written by white males and focused on selected male and coeducational institutions. In addition to looking at that history as a sociology of sociology, we will also seek out and examine the treatment of the "special mission" institutions for women and for blacks