E-Newsletter Number 4

December 2005

Section on the History of Sociology

young scholar said he was trying to tie up the materials in a new conceptual framework for which he had created a special terminology. After I heard the neologism intended as a conceptual key to unlock or tie up the rich empirical materials, something in my mind clicked and in the Q & A period that followed, I got up and asked, “This is very excit-ing but isn’t what you call “X” just what Max Weber termed ‘ideal type’?” There was an embarrassing momentary silence.

Number Two. I was very recently told of a visiting Rus-sian sociologist passing by Cambridge, who went to the Department of Sociology at Harvard hoping to get them to organize and/or cosponsor a conference in honor of Pitirim Sorokin (founder of the de-partment in 1930 and chair for

(Continued on page 4)

NEW VISTAS FOR THE HISTORY OF SOCIOLOGY: FROM PERIPHERY TO CENTER? Edward Tiryakian

Anthony J. Blasi, ed., Diverse Histories of American Sociology (Leiden and Boston: Brill, 2005). Reviewed by Joe R. Feagin, Texas A & M University

Three days after Christmas, one hundred years ago, a group of men and women gathered together at the Johns Hopkins University and voted a Constitution for a new professional organization, the American Sociological Soci-ety. It held its first meeting a year later, and the rest, as they say, is history. This year, 2005, marking a Centennial celebration most evident at the ASA meetings in Philadel-phia, “history” was at center stage in the program, with centennial celebration ses-sions and special publications, official and non-official, on the anniversary of ASA. This fo-cus gave a boost to our His-tory of Sociology section, and in the limited space at my disposal I want to argue that far from the centennial being the one-time booster, it should if anything be seen as the catalyst that our section should utilize in moving from

benign somnolence to a core activism at the center of the discipline. This is predicated on my viewing sociology as not a natural science (which is ahistorical in self-conception and terrain of research) nor as a humanities (which do not strive for conceptual closure and replication of research), but rather as a social science (having one leg in each but its torso up higher).

First, two vignettes that will illustrate something missing in our dominant sociological culture. Number One: This summer I attended a profes-sional meeting of sociologists, and made a point of going to hear the presentation of a person highly recommended as a “rising young star”. The materials were historical data which the person had com-pleted research on. Substan-tively, it was very interesting. After presenting the data, the

was not just to research the social world, but to change it in the direction of democracy and social justice.

The editor of this volume, Anthony J. Blasi, has put to-gether a very interesting col-lection of articles that probe well the long development of U.S. sociology. He has di-vided this volume into four sections: sociology and social reform, perspectives of those sociologists excluded from “mainstream” sociology, or-ganizational histories, and neglected issues and trajecto-

(Continued on page 6)

Too often academic celebra-tions of the past do not tell it like it really was. In the case of the centennial of U.S. soci-ology, mainstream celebra-tions frequently reinforce myths of white men inventing bold new sociological re-search and teaching, yet ig-nore the foundational role of the many women scholar-practitioners and male scholar-practitioners of color who were the first research pioneers in empirical sociol-ogy. Indeed, they invented U.S. sociology--and gave their sociological research and thought a distinctively libera-

tory cast.

In the mid-nineteenth cen-tury, a founder of the libera-tory social science tradition, Karl Marx, penned the famous line that "philosophers have only interpreted the world, in various ways; the point, how-ever, is to change it." Subse-quent social scientists con-cerned with human emancipa-tion and liberation from op-pression have extended this insight to the diverse worlds that they live in. The point of sociology, as seen by most of the early liberation sociolo-gists discussed in this book,

Inside this issue:

Call for 2006 Nomina-tions

2

HOS 2005 Award Re-cipients

3

Call for 2006 Award Nominations

5

Member Publications 5

Call for AJES Papers 7

Call for Syllabi 7

HOS Officers and Com-mittees

8

ASA Council 2005-2006 8

Postcards from Philadel-phia

2

Call for Nominations It is already time to begin to think about Spring 2006 elections for the Section on the History of Sociology. According to Section V-1 of our Section Bylaws (see our website) the Section Chair appoints a nominations committee of three Section members with the Past-Chair as chair of the committee. The Nominations Committee is responsible for nominating two candidates for each vacant position of officers and Council seats, according to ASA rules. The Nominations Com-mittee is providing this opportunity for members of the section to suggest persons for the positions that will become vacant at the end of the 2006 meetings. Your suggestions to the Committee are due no later than December 15, 2005. The following HOS positions require nominations for the Spring 2006 elections:

Chair-Elect (2006; will be Chair 2007-2008) Council Seat (2006-2009) Secretary-Treasurer (2006-2009) Council Seat (2006-2009) We look forward to your suggestions. Please email them to any of the committee members. Best regards, The Nominations Committee Susan Hoecker-Drysdale, Chair susan_hoecker@yahoo.com Alan Sica alansica@psu.edu Stephen Turner turner@chuma.cas.usf.edu Jan Thomas thomasj@kenyon.edu

Page 2 December 2005

Postcards from Philadelphia (Photos courtesy of John Drysdale.)

Page 3 December 2005

Congratulations to the 2005 HOS Section Award Recipients

Distinguished Graduate Student Paper Award Ryan Light, Ohio State University "Balkanized or Boundless: The Dynamic Idea Boundaries of American Sociology"

Ryan Light , Yolanda Johnson, and Kay Broschart

Photo courtesy of John Drysdale.

Distinguished Scholarly Book Award

Michael R. Hill and Mary Jo Deegan (Editors)

Social Ethics: Sociology and the Future of Society by Charlotte Perkins Gilman, Green-wood Publishing Group, 2004.

Mary Jo Deegan and Michael Hill

Photo courtesy of John Drysdale.

Distinguished Scholarly Achieve-ment Award

Susan Hoecker-Drysdale, Professor Emerita, Concordia Univ. and Retired Visit-ing Professor, Univ. of Iowa

'for her outstanding career of scholarship and leadership in the History of Sociology'

Kay Broschart and Susan Hoecker-Drysdale

Photo courtesy of John Drysdale.

NEW VISTAS FOR THE HISTORY OF SOCIOLOGY—cont’d historical puzzle in the history of sociol-ogy can become a broader intriguing problem about a fault in the structure of the scientific enterprise.

A second puzzle that I have wondered about is what accounts for the drift of a figure into sociological recognition when that person was not identified as a soci-ologist in his lifetime, and conversely, the drift out of sociological recognition into peripheral oblivion. And perhaps drifts are not definitive in or out. As a case in point, when I was a student in a prehis-toric stage of sociology (incidentally, I did not do my dissertation under Durkheim’s supervision, as some younger sociologist innocently inquired at the Philadelphia meetings!), Karl Marx was not on our required reading list because he was not considered a sociologist but rather a social philosopher or an economist man-qué: he “became” a sociologist in the 1960s. And thanks to the work of Pat Lengermann and Jill Niebrugge, we are seeing Marianne Weber emerge from the shadow of Max to her rightful place on center stage. Marx’s London contempo-rary, Herbert Spencer, is of course the “classical” example of a drift out of the limelight (100 years ago) to backstage. But what accounts for the drifts, barely reflected in the textbooks we use? Per-haps there is an Andy Warhol principle operating for most figures highlighted in “contemporary” sociology, that is, every prominent name is entitled to, say, not 15 minutes but 15 years (or so) of fame, and then out they go in the historical grave-yard. If that principle is, in fact, operative because today’s sociologists are wired for amnesia, then I will predict that Bourdieu and Coleman will fade out by the end of this decade, as will have, say Luhmann.

If this is an unsettling or even depress-ing feature of the history of sociology, there is also good news. In the forgotten cubicles of the history of sociology, like treasures in the attic, probably lie figures, research, and conceptual frameworks that with a little polish can be discovered and given sparkling actuality. In the wake of American sociology’s centennial year, this is the time to refashion the vistas of the History of Sociology and lead the discipline to gain historical conscious-ness of its components and unmined treasures!

Edward A. Tiryakian, 2005-2006 Chair

the rest of the decade). He met one of the very senior faculty persons and told him of the purpose of the visit. The person re-torted, “Who is Sorokin?” I would like to think the story is apocryphal but unfortu-nately it smacks of authenticity since in 2002, the year of the 100th anniversary of Talcott Parsons the department of sociology did not pursue holding a conference to honor another great name associated with Harvard sociology. (It was held, however, at Russell Sage in New York).

I cite these two vignettes as illustrative of what Sorokin identified in the very first chap-ter of his Fads and Foibles in Modern Soci-ology as “Amnesia and New Columbuses”. As a preventive of amnesia, I would encour-age everyone who teaches the history of sociology or for that matter, who has any contacts with first year graduate students, to assign that chapter. And in a complemen-tary manner, I would equally encourage the assignment of Jeff Alexander’s lucid case for “The Centrality of the Classics” in the Anthony Giddens & Jonathan Turner vol-ume, Social Theory Today (1987).

Where to go beyond these starting points, i.e., how to go about making sociologists conscious of the relevance and significance of the history of sociology? At one level, sociology as a discipline is structured by methodology and at another by theory. I think what the History of Sociology as a section and as a field needs to do to move from a peripheral status to a center stage one—or at least to be the area that provides the limelight for center stage—is to demon-strate its methodological and theoretical importance.

As regards methodology, I am very grati-fied that the ASA Program Committee has given us the green light to organize a work-shop on “Methodologies of the History of Sociology”. Some fine works have been done by sociologists at the micro level of analysis in the intersection of biography and history (to follow from C. Wright Mills’s The Sociological Imagination): John Staude’s intellectual biography of Scheler, Irving Louis Horowitz’s study of C. Wright Mills, Barry Johnston’s of Sorokin, and Uta Gerhardt’s intellectual biography of Par-sons. At the meso level of analysis, we would include Ida Simpson’s study of the Southern Sociological Society, Martin Bulmer and Andrew Abbott’s research, among others, on The Chicago School, and at the macro level national (such as the

(Continued from page 1) histories of ASA, or Patricia Lengermann and Jill Niebrugge-Brantley’s study of women soci-ologists) or international (such as Jennifer Platt’s work on the International Sociological Association). Do they all use the same meth-odology in preparing their respective histo-ries? How would one go about looking for data? What training in historical methods is necessary? These will the major foci of the workshop, which should provide a high profile for the History of Sociology since this would be included in the regular program of ASA.

And let me suggest that in regaining a sense for the history of the discipline, besides the obvious first term graduate course in the-ory which typically tends to dish out a few classics without articulating the historical nexus of the classics or the rationale for their selection, students would get an enhanced identity by learning the history of their own department. That is, most students enter a graduate department of sociology, have con-tacts with some of the faculty, do their re-search, and leave – but what do they know about the department, its origins (what were the circumstances that led to its establish-ment?), major figures in the past and their contributions to sociology, and if any, crises that shook up the department in the past? Probably the materials for a departmental history could provide the basis for a collective graduate student effort, utilizing interviews and university archives.

What at this meso level could be extended besides departmental history is section history (ASA section history, but also of ISA). What led who to propose a section in a given field of sociology? What have been major points in the history of that section? Is such a history available?

Let me now switch from methodological to theoretical import.

At one level, I have been for a long time intrigued by several puzzles in the history of sociology. Years ago I wrote a piece on the strange mutual silence in print of Max Weber and Emile Durkheim, who of course were contemporaries who should have known of each other, given their academic prominence and that they wrote in common about major areas of sociology (economic sociology, soci-ology of religion). I have not satisfactorily solved this riddle, but it was heuristic for me and for others, and of course, it opens up asking about silence between contemporaries whose research and/or theorizing would lead one to think they must know about each other. Such “silence” is a sore in our assumptions about the diffusion of scientific knowledge and the community of scientists. So a concrete

Page 4 December 2005

HISTORY OF SOCIOLOGY CALL FOR AWARD NOMINATIONS

Graduate Student Paper Award Students who are actively enrolled (full or part time) in a graduate sociology program on December 15, 2005 may submit one scholarly paper for consideration for this award. The submission may be a sociology seminar paper, an article submitted or accepted for publication in a sociology journal, or a single chapter from a sociology thesis or dissertation. The paper should focus on a theoretical issue or empirical problem central to History of Sociology. Eligible students are invited to electronically submit a cover letter and their paper to arrive no later than March 1, 2006 to Committee Chair, Anna Xiao Dong Sun (xiaosun@Princeton.EDU). Members of the current Graduate Student Paper Award Committee are ineligible for the award.

Distinguished Scholarly Book Award This award honors sociologists who have made significant contributions to the History of Sociol-ogy by writing books on the 'cutting edge' of sociological inquiry. Monographs and edited schol-arly works published in 2004, 2005, or 2006 are eligible for consideration. The book's author(s) or editor(s) must be sociologists. All books submitted for consideration should be accompanied by a letter of nomination. Self-nominations are welcome if accompanied by a letter of support from another member of the ASA. To nominate a book send two copies of the book and two copies of a letter highlighting the book's significant contributions to the History of Sociology to Committee Chair, Dr. Kay R. Broschart, Department of Sociology, Hollins University, Box 9575, Roanoake, VA 24014 (kbroschart@hollins.edu) before March 1, 2006. Members of the current Distinguished Scholarly Book Committee are ineligible for the award.

Distinguished Achievement Award This award recognizes sociologists who have made outstanding contributions to the History of Sociology throughout their careers, or who have made ground breaking innovations or produced significant bodies of scholarly work in the History of Sociology. Nominees must be sociolo-gists. Letters of nomination should highlight the nominee's outstanding innovation(s), career and contributions to the History of Sociology. Self nominations are welcome if accompanied by a letter of support from another member of the ASA. To nominate a person for this award, send a nomination letter, vitae, and samples of the nominee's work to Committee Chair, Dr. Michael Hill, Sociological Inquiry, 2701 Sewell Street, Lincoln, NE 68502 (mhill@iwcc.edu - write ASA HOS Book Award Inquiry in the e-mail subject line) before March 31st, 2006. Members of the current Distinguished Achievement Award Committee are ineligible for the award.

Page 5 December 2005

Member Publications Cain, Leonard D. 2005. A Man's Grasp Should Exceed His Reach: A Biography of Sociologist Austin Larimore Porterfield. Lanham, MD: University Press of America.

Review of Diverse Histories of American Sociology—cont’d sociologists within U.S. sociology, and often were agents of change in the restructuring of U.S. sociology. Vicky MacLean and Joyce Williams show us that black colleges and universities, like Howard, Atlanta, and Fisk were among the first institutions of higher education to offer sociology courses, and that women’s colleges like Wellesley, Smith, and Mount Holyoke offered sociol-ogy courses before 1900. Not only did white female sociologists and black female and male sociologists pursue much of the early sociological field research (especially that relevant to societal problems), but their institutions also were frequently among the first to develop sociology as an educational program for undergraduates.

There are other interesting tidbits in later essays, such as Suzanne Vromen’s essay on the visit of French sociologist, Maurice Halbwachs, to the University of Chicago, where he came to view U.S. soci-ology as significantly lacking in theoretical sophistication. Jeffrey Crane offers an ac-count of the development of sociology in Hawaii, and Ross Mitchell reveals early parallels between the political-economic analyses of Thorstein Veblen and forgotten Canadian economist Harold Inniss. Mac-Lean and Williams conclude the volume with a second article, this time on the devel-opment of community studies in sociology, an area that had an early impetus in the work of the aforementioned white female and black female and male sociologists so long neglected in mainstream sociology.

Clearly, U.S. sociology originated as a field whose early practitioners and thinkers were committed to research for major so-cietal change. They were committed to a strong countersystem tradition, one that aggressively sides with the oppressed against injustice and calls for an involved sociology. The scholar-practitioners cele-brated in these essays were often what Antonio Gramsci called "organic intellectu-als,” people from oppressed societal sec-tors whose lived experience often provided them with deeper insights into society than analysts from advantaged sectors. Most of the sociologists discussed in this volume brought into the emerging discipline of soci-ology, often for the first time, the actual experiences, history, and culture of op-pressed peoples. Thus, their research was frequently aimed at improving the lives of those very peoples. They generally offer a clear lesson for the present day: An eman-cipatory sociology takes sides with, and takes the outlook of, the oppressed--and envisions an end to that oppression if this society is ever to become truly humane, just, and democratic.

ries. His chosen authors provide substan-tial and usually well-researched essays that help us to see better what early soci-ology was really like.

U.S. sociology begins in the late 19th century with the social settlement move-ment and numerous women sociologists (and a few male sociologists) who worked hard to bring data to bear on important societal problems of relevance to reform movements. Blasi begins this volume begins with a perspicacious 1895 essay by Jane Addams, who in her time was nationally recognized as a leading intel-lectual much like William James, John Dewey, and George Mead. Indeed, the latter were her friends and fellow luminar-ies. This essay is followed by a unique probing by Mary Jo Deegan of the lives of a celebrated founder of mainstream soci-ology, Robert E. Park, and his wife and brilliant journalist-activist working on women’s issues, Clara Cahill Park. Oddly enough, Park often attacked the sociol-ogy of women sociologists like Jane Ad-dams and his wife Clara as “do-goodism,” and Park is given credit for initially shifting sociology away from concern with socie-tal reform to a supposedly “objective” social science modeled on the natural sciences. Even more oddly, while Park spoke out against do-goodism, he himself was often involved in various social re-form movements in the Midwest and the South.

There is much food for thought in this book, and contemporary sociologists should read it carefully for insights into the too often hidden foundations of U.S. sociology. From essays by Jan Marie Fritz and Mary Jo Deegan we learn that there were numerous black and white female, and black male, sociologists, such as Jane Addams, Emily Balch, W. E. B. Du Bois, and Charles Gomillion, working as important and influential scholar-practitioners in the North and the South during the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries. As the first “public sociologists,” they worked hard to link social research and social justice issues. Many were also active in the new profes-sional sociological associations and pub-lished often in new journals like the American Journal of Sociology. From Kay Richards Broschart’s two articles we learn about the southern black female sociolo-gists, such Anna Julia Cooper and Ida B. Wells-Barnett, who did pathbreaking work in both research and sociological practice in the late nineteenth and early twentieth

(Continued from page 1) centuries. They were followed by numer-ous southern white female sociologists, like Katharine Jocher and Margaret Jar-man Hagood, who also made major contri-butions to accelerating social research and college expansion in the South. We learn here too about the pioneering re-search and teaching efforts of early south-ern male sociologists, such as African Americans Kelly Miller, E. Franklin Frazier, and Guy Johnson.

From Robert Wortham we learn of the many early contributions of W. E. B. Du Bois to the development of U.S. sociology. Du Bois did the first book length mono-graph in urban sociology, The Philadelphia Negro, and developed the first research-oriented sociology program at Atlanta University, some twenty years before such a program was developed at the Univer-sity of Chicago. Like Jane Addams, his friend and supporter, he refused to sepa-rate good sociological research from a concern with societal betterment. Re-searching a more recent era, Victor Rios, shows us that Julian Samora’s research on undocumented workers pioneered in the development of what is now an exten-sive field of critical immigration studies. Samora and his students have been par-ticularly important in moving this research field from relatively uncritical analyses of immigration as micro-level individual deci-sion-making to critical analyses of immi-gration as part of a larger (global and capi-talistic) political-economic context.

Anthony Blasi then examines the inter-esting case of William J. Kerby, an early Catholic sociologist who pioneered in a sociological analysis of such topics as lying and socialization, while Michael Hill offers an essay with much insight into the life of the early black sociologist, Jesse Lawton, and of the first racially integrated sociological organization, the National Sociological Society, which sought to ap-ply a sociological approach to racial jus-tice. Jonathan VanAntwerpen introduces us to the forgotten work of Frederick J. Teggart, a professor of “social institutions” who helped found what became the soci-ology department at Berkeley, yet was ironically enough opposed to the develop-ment of a sociology discipline modeled on natural science.

In her useful article, Bette Dickerson recounts the development of the Caucus of Black Sociologists and the Association of Black Sociologists, which countered the exclusionary racial patterns of many white sociologists, provided an important intel-lectual and social community for black

Page 6 December 2005

CALL FOR PAPERS (2006)

CALL FOR SYLLABI

When gambling, a bettor voluntarily places his or her “net worth” at risk. The wheel is spun and “net worth” increases . . . or decreases!

Some neoclassical economists were puzzled about this behavior and were tempted to describe bettors as “irrational.” Apparently with the gaming industry in the United States now grossing revenues in excess of $25 billion dollars a year, and even the conservative city-state of Singa-pore is starting a casino to bolster state revenues as well as attract fun-loving tourists from Ma-laysia, Macao and other ‘high-roller” spots, the age of gaming/gambling has arrived.

Gambling practices vary from mere entertainment to a calculated fiscal alternative to taxation. The gambling sector is so well established that the world of casino gambling sometimes seems an alternative universe to the hedging mechanisms that are vital to the world of finance and global exchange. Wealth redistribution has never been more glamorous and for every hedger seeking to avoid risk, there seems to be many others looking for the chance to venture into the world of casino risk. Even business students fumble for words when asked to distinguish gam-bling from investing.

Those who set the odds facing the bettors—the real entrepreneurial wizards of the gaming in-dustry--- use a variety of psychological strategies, strategic misrepresentations and mental heu-ristics to relieve otherwise rational economic men and women of their wealth. On the other hand, there is a growing backlash of savvy bettors that are not above what the gambling experts called “advantage playing” (also known as “cheating the house”) and who when the situation is right and the pickings are there do just that. This is a fascinating industry in which the regulators have a definite conflict of financial interest when they regulate to “protect the public” from the ravages of lady luck.

This issue of the American Journal of Economics and Sociology (AJES) will combine papers on the subject of gaming/gambling from a variety of different perspectives and different research methodologies in the social sciences.

The AJES celebrates its 65th year of continuous publication as a quarterly in 2006. All those with a scholarly interest in this subject are encouraged to submit an abstract to Professor Laur-ence S. Moss at lmos@aol.com. Commissioned papers are still subject to blind refereeing al-ways in keeping with the usual protocols of scholarly publishing. The plan is to edited the papers with a scholarly index and published in both the journal and hard/soft copies of the book in Janu-ary 2007. The publisher is Blackwell Publishers of Oxford, England and Malden, Massachusetts.

have syllabi, other instructional materials, or innovative ideas for this compilation, please be in touch with me: John Foran, Department of Sociology, Uni-versity of California, Santa Barbara, CA 93106-9430; foran@soc.ucsb.edu ; (805) 893-8199.

I would love to receive syllabi and instructional materials for the fifth edition of the ASA’s Teaching Comparative and Historical Sociology, which I have the honor of revising and editing. I am interested in syllabi for courses that are explicitly methodological as

well as in the main subject areas that are taught and researched by compara-tive-historical sociologists (you decide what these are). I would be particu-larly interested in anyone’s ideas for short essays on teaching in this area. If you

Page 7 December 2005

Page 8 December 2005

SECTION ON THE HISTORY OF SOCIOLOGY EXECUTIVE COUNCIL

Position Name Affiliation E-mail Address Chair Edward Tiryakian Duke University durkhm@soc.duke.edu

Chair-Elect Eleanor Townsley Mount Holyoke etownsle@mtholyoke.edu

Past Chair Susan Hoecker-Drysdale Concordia Univ. & Univ. of Iowa susan_hoecker@yahoo.com

Secretary-Treasurer Jill Niebrugge Brantley American University niebran@attglobal.net Council Members (2006) Donald Cunnigen University of Rhode Island dcunn@uriacc.uri.edu

Doris Wilkinson University of Kentucky dwilkin@uky.edu Council Members (2007) Larry Nichols West Virginia University larry.nichols@mail.wvu.edu Jack Nusan Porter University of Massachusetts jacknusan@earthlink.net

Council Member: (2008) Uta Gerhardt University of Heidelberg uta.gerhardt@urz.uni-heidelberg.de

Betsy Lucal Indiana University South Bend blucal@iusb.edu

Student Member Yolanda Johnson University of Nebraska-Lincoln sociyyj@hotmail.com

COMMITTEES OF THE HISTORY OF SOCIOLOGY SECTION 2005-2006 ESTABLISHED AT PHILADELPHIA ASA MEETINGS AUG 13-16 2005 Committee Name Affiliation E-mail Address

Nominating Susan Hoecker-Drysdale Concordia Univ. & Univ. of Iowa susan_hoecker@yahoo.com

Newsletter Cathy Coghlan, Editor Texas Christian University c.coghlan@tcu.edu

Webmasters Eleanor Townsley Mount Holyoke etownsle@mtholyoke.edu

Mikaila Arthur New York University Mikaila.Arthur@nyu.edu

Awards Mike Keen Indiana University South Bend mkeen@iusb.edu

Distinguished Book Award Kay Broschart Hollins kbroschart@hollins.edu

Distinguished Achievement Award Michael Hill University of Nebraska-Lincoln mhill@jwcc.edu

Student Paper Award Anna Xiao Dong Sun Princeton University xiaosun@Princeton.EDU

Membership Ed Tiryakian, Chair Duke University durkhm@soc.duke.edu

2005-2006 ASA Council Officers of the Association Elected-at-Large Cynthia Fuchs Epstein, President, CUNY Graduate Center Rebecca Adams, University of North Carolina, Greensboro

Lynn Smith-Lovin, Vice President, Duke University Judith Auerbach, American Foundation for AIDS Research

Bonnie Thornton Dill, Vice President-Elect, University of Maryland Eduardo Bonilla-Silva, Duke University

Troy Duster, Past President, New York University Evelyn Nakano Glenn, University of California, Berkeley

Caroline Persell, Past Vice President, New York University Michele Lamont, Harvard University

Franklin Wilson, Secretary, University of Wisconsin, Madison Nan Lin, Duke University

Sally T. Hillsman, Executive Officer Ann Shola Orloff, Northwestern University

Gay Seidman, University of Wisconsin - Madison

Diane Vaughan, Columbia University

Bruce Western, Princeton University

Min Zhou, University of California, Los Angeles

Frances Fox Piven, President-Elect, CUNY Graduate Center Kathleen Blee, University of Pittsburgh