SOC20010 - Exam

jimi_t

Just wondering what people are concentrating on out of interest. Based on the two past papers I'm banking on a question regarding Goffman's dramaturgical approach and am studying the Frankfurt school's contribution in some detail. As long as the questions aren't too abstract (and are there :rolleyes:) I reckon I should be alright but am I wrong in assuming that Durkheim, Merton and Parsons are exempt given the essay titles?

Mushy

jimi_t wrote: »

Just wondering what people are concentrating on out of interest. Based on the two past papers I'm banking on a question regarding Goffman's dramaturgical approach and am studying the Frankfurt school's contribution in some detail. As long as the questions aren't too abstract (and are there :rolleyes:) I reckon I should be alright but am I wrong in assuming that Durkheim, Merton and Parsons are exempt given the essay titles?

Yeah, the Functionalism aspect isn't appearing, or so the tutors said anyway, due to them being in the essay.

I'm looking at interactionism a bit, for some reason a lot of focus on Georg Simmel, who incorporates conflict to an extent, and Mead, who has his idea of 'The Self'. Then looking at Lukacs' Commodity Fetishism mainly for Neo-Marxism, and Mass Culture as Domination for Frankfurt School.

They the main bits, but know the others too, so should be ok for this one.

Mushy

Just so ya know the layout, its slightly different from last two years. Its 5 questions in each section, do 1 from each. Its not 2 in A, then 8 in B.

Have noticed that dramaturgical approach twice in it...wanna tell me what it is? I cant follow the notes on it.

Also, the exact same interactionism question has appeared last two years. And that one is quite easy, just go through Weber, then the others and how they differ from Weber by adding something new into the equation.

Based on the past papers, I kniow quite a bit of it, but not enough to get decent length answers on some of them.

jimi_t

Mushy wrote: »

Have noticed that dramaturgical approach twice in it...wanna tell me what it is? I cant follow the notes on it.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dramaturgy_(sociology)

I'm just learning off chunks of it verbatim tbh. Has gotten me this far in Sociology

Also, the exact same interactionism question has appeared last two years. And that one is quite easy, just go through Weber, then the others and how they differ from Weber by adding something new into the equation.

Hoping it will come up this year in the same format, but lightning striking 3 times is a bit overly optimistic...

Based on the past papers, I kniow quite a bit of it, but not enough to get decent length answers on some of them.

What's a decent length answer - 3 1/2 to 4 pages handwritten?

Mushy

jimi_t wrote: »

Hoping it will come up this year in the same format, but lightning striking 3 times is a bit overly optimistic...



What's a decent length answer - 3 1/2 to 4 pages handwritten?

Well I wouldn't ignore it a third time if you're doing the dramaturgical approach which, if appears, would be third time in a row too.

I try and get over 4 pages as much as possible...well do this year anyway, last year I did bout 3 pages and thought that was much, but not this time.

Would love the dramaturgical approach to appear in a different section as the interaction one...would be away in a hack then. But if not, Lukacs' commodity fetishism couldn't be too bad, or mass culture Frankfurt SChool would suit me.

jimi_t

Fair point. My current issue is what sort of 'real-life' example to give for Goffman..

Mushy

jimi_t wrote: »

Fair point. My current issue is what sort of 'real-life' example to give for Goffman..

Use the ones in lecture notes...or come up with extreme examples for each bit. There's an aspect of 'anticipatory socialisation', where one becomes so used to the prospect that they have a perfect routine at the ready, so you could say that having sex fits that perfectly:D

jimi_t

Mushy wrote: »

Use the ones in lecture notes...or come up with extreme examples for each bit.

Missed those particular ones and blackboard is of no use... What was the gist of them?

Mushy

Well for misrepresentation, it uses the example of an ex-convict, lying to hide up their past, thats the only one that stuck out in my mind. Those notes are actually good, if ya go through it, it doesn't take long and are easy to understand.