Unveiling the cloak of competence: Cultivating authenticity in graduate sociology

Abstract

In the summer 2005 issue of The American Sociologist, there were a series of essays that applied the sociological eye to the issue of graduate school experience, providing insightful and, at times, uncomfortable examinations of the "underside" of this competi tive endeavor.1 In this issue, Fenrales and Fine (2005) presented an incisive analysis of the realities of labeling processes that inevitably emerge in graduate school, and the repercussions this carries with it.2 The authors argue that the quest for supervisors is com petitive, and that the professoriate must make typifications about students rather quickly, in order to choose whom to work with and whom to avoid. Beyond simply passing the minimum requirements of the program in terms of courses, comprehensive exams, and the dissertation, they argue that the cultivation of a positive reputation (conveying the image of a hardworking, intelligent student) is an essential part of success. Thus, if the student is ignorant of a relevant theorist or issue in classroom discussion, this should be effectively hidden. There is such a thing, Ferrales and Fine warn, as a "stupid question"; as such, displaying this sort of ineptitude should be avoided. Further, students who are planning to vacation over the summer, or invest time in leisure pursuits, ought not to advertise this, as it is a sign that they are not fully committed to the demands of the discipline. Under the constant monitoring and surveillance of the professorial gatekeep ers, students must be active in censoring that which could serve to harm their academic reputational identities. It is this piece of advice we take issue with, as we argue that it has negative normative ramifications for our profession in the long term. Further, we believe that the degree of bureaucratic impression management enacted by graduate students (and others) varies