Abstract
This paper argues that sociological theory provides a sound basis for analyzing the social organization and reorganization of the college or university and for guiding the activities of the college dean. Frame analysis theory, developed in the study of social movements, and the attendant concepts of frame shifts and frame disputes, are drawn on to facilitate understanding of the organizational change being experienced by many comprehensive universities today. Various university constituencies proffer sometimes competing frames that can be characterized as “old school” vs. “new school” or “theoretical” vs. “practical,” yet collective and at least moderately harmonious action is required to attend to the tasks at hand. More specifically, the processes of frame alignment detailing the way that the frames held by various individuals and groups link to larger frames, offer a valuable theoretical tool for a dean. The dean’s task is one of adjudicating frame disputes within the college, navigating frame shifts in the university and reframing the concerns of the college to both internal and external audiences. The author concludes that the use of frame analysis demonstrates that sociological theory can be a vital contributor to the leadership of colleges and universities and to leaders’ understanding of the changes occurring therein.
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
I use the term “millennial university” to refer to modern American universities in the new millennium, especially comprehensive private universities that are being redefined as more research oriented, and more specifically, more oriented to practical research and teaching. Such a demand is fueled by industry and business, but also by a new generation of students, often referred to as the “millennial generation,” who are themselves oriented to what they view as relevant and useful content, as in, for example, their incorporation of internet technologies such as “Facebook.” Such a demand on the part of students is compelling and cannot be ignored by either the university administration or the professoriate. Such demands results in adjustment in the university itself, and make the use of the term “millennial university” appropriate.
References
American Association of Colleges & Universities (2002). Greater expectations: A new vision for learning as a nation goes to college. Washington, DC: AAC&U.
Becker, H. S. (1967). Social Problems, 14(3), 239–247, Winter.
Benford, R. D. (1993). Frame disputes within the nuclear disarmament movement. Social Forces, 71, 677–701.
Benford, R. D., & Snow, D. A. (2000). Framing processes and social movements: an overview and assessment. Annual Review of Sociology, 26, 611–639.
Blumer, H. (1969). Symbolic interactionism: Perspective and method. Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall.
Coser, L. A. (1977). Masters of sociological thought: Ideas in historical and social context (2nd edn.). New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich.
Donoghue, F. (2008). The last professors: The corporate university and the fate of the humanities. New York: Fordham University Press.
Gerth, H. & Mills, C. W. (Eds.) and trans. (1946) From Max Weber. New York: Oxford University Press.
Giddens, A. (1971). Capitalism and modern social theory: An analysis of the writings of Marx, Durkheim and Max Weber. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Goffman, E. (1974). Frame analysis: An essay on the organization of experience. New York: Harper & Row.
Gouldner, A. W. (1968). The sociologist as Partisan: sociology and the welfare state. American Sociologist, 3(2), 103–116.
Hughes, E. C. (1971). The sociological eye: Selected papers. Chicago: Aldine-Atherton.
Lessor, R., Cervantes, N., O’Connor, N., Balmaceda, J., & Asch, R. (1993). An analysis of social and psychological characteristics of women volunteering to become oocyte donors. Fertility and Sterility, 59(1), 65–71, January.
Miles, L. (1984). Liberal arts in an age of technology. American Education, June. http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1011/is_v20/ai_3285487/print.
Mills, C. W. (1959). The sociological imagination. New York: Oxford University Press.
Nussbaum, M. (2006). For a conference on Tagore’s Philosophy of Education, in memory of Amita Sen, Kolkata, March 29–30. http://academic.evergreen.edu/curricular/awareness2006/Martha%20Nussbaum’s%20Liberal%20Education%20Paper.doc.
Park, R. S. (1952). Human communities. New York: Free.
Snow, D. A. (2006). Framing and social movements. In R. George (Ed.), Blackwell encyclopedia of sociology (pp. 1780–1784). Oxford, UK: Blackwell.
Snow, D. A., & Lessor R. (2007). Framing hazards in the health arena: misframings, frame disputes & frame shifts in relation to obesity, work-related diseases, and gamete transfer in infertility. Presented at Conference on Health and Social Movements, University of Michigan, October.
Snow, D., Rochford, E. B., Worden, S. K., & Benford, R. D. (1986). Frame alignment processes, micromobilization, and movement participation. American Sociological Review, 51(4), 464–481.
Steck, H. (2003). Corporatization of the university: seeking conceptual clarity. Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 585, 66–83, Higher Education in the Twenty-First Century, January.
Strauss, A. L., Fagerhaugh, S., Suczek, B., & Wiener, C. (1985). The social organization of medical work. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Thomas, W. I., & Znaniecki, F. (1918). The Polish peasant in Europe and America. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
Weber, M. (1947). The theory of social and economic organization. In T. Parsons (Ed)., Translated and by A.M. Henderson and Talcott Parsons. New York: Free.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Lessor, R.G. Adjudicating Frame Shifts and Frame Disputes in the New Millennial University: The Role of the Dean. Am Soc 39, 114–129 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12108-008-9046-x
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12108-008-9046-x