The Structure and Substance of Preparing Sociologists: The Nature of Qualifying Examinations in Graduate Education

Abstract

Professional socialization for sociologists continues to be contested, with contemporary debates about 1) the structure of graduate training and its rigor, and 2) the content of the body of knowledge that new professionals should master. This paper describes the institutional practices related to qualifying examinations in 178 U. S. sociology graduate departments (response rate 82%). It addresses two broad questions: First, what is the structure of qualifying exams in sociology? Specifically, what is the format, timing, and method of evaluation of this requirement? How often is this exam system revised? Are prestige rankings associated with the structure of qualifying exams? Second, what is the substance of these exams? Do practices across departments reveal a canon within the discipline of sociology? The findings indicate significant differences between Ph.D.-granting and M.A.-granting programs in exam structures, though there is considerable consistency in exam structures within each type of department. In most Ph.D. and M.A. programs, there have been recent changes in the format, content or evaluation of exams. Ph.D. departments with higher rankings offer students more freedom in taking exams and report higher rates of successful completion. The substance of exams is quite diverse, both in terms of topic areas and readings within those areas, indicating little in the way of a sociological canon passed down to future professionals in the discipline.