Another Howard Beale moment...

I'm at a loss as to what to make of this conference strand. Well, not entirely. Here are a few thoughts:

Why do research methods have to be "innovatory"? Wouldn't it be good if  people learned how to use the standard tool kit properly before they thought about innovation? Let's have evidence of ability to walk before we move on to running.

Why does the session on "Innovation in qualitative and quantitative methods" have no papers on quantitative methods? Didn't anyone care enough to change the title?

And the prize for the most confused title goes to: 

"Actor Network Theory: An Assemblage of Perceptions, Understandings, and Critiques of this ‘Sensibility’ and How its Relatively Unpopular Conceptual Framework Will Help to Unravel the ‘Power Flow’ Among School Leaders in School Networks".

Well, at least there seems to be a worthwhile paper by the good Professor Chandola from Manchester. As for the rest...

And think on it, it's our taxes, directly or indirectly that go to pay for this stuff. Perhaps somebody on the organizing committee has a roguish sense of humour though. The last paper of the day has the title: "Talking Rubbish".

Say after me: "I'm mad as Hell and I'm not going to take this any more!"

I am the one in ten

In case you missed it, a good write up in the Guardian for an important report on wealth in the UK. One in ten households now have sufficient assets to make them nominal millionaires. Seems like an appropriate place for this great tune by UB40.

Inequality & economic growth

Well worth watching is this conversation between Tony Atkinson and Paul Krugman on inequality and economic growth. NB The talking begins at around 43:30.

Parallel worlds - sampling

I really must stop searching for confirming evidence, but wherever I look at the moment all I seem to see are signs that sociology as I know it is doomed. 

Looking at a recent issue of a peer reviewed journal dedicated to social research methods I chanced upon an article about sampling. I'll say no more than that - there is a limit to the number of battles I can fight simultaneously - so the author won't be named and shamed,  yet. To cut a long story short, in my opinion, it could easily merit a place in Sokal and Bricmont's Intellectual Impostures. It has all the classic signs - grand sounding philosophical vocabulary, technical words thrown in at random locations, utter opaqueness and plausible deniability. 

I don't know the journal very well and had to look up the editors - all of whom seem to hold rather exalted positions in the world of (university based) UK social research. What disturbed me a bit is that the editorial board contains the names of quite a few people I respect. These people are not fools and it is inconceivable that  any of them could have refereed the article in question and found it fit for anything but the garbage bin. 

All of which strengthens my belief in the existence of a sociological parallel world in which illogicality, pretention and pseudo-science are trumps. Surely I must be deluded. Just think what would happen if those guys ever got their hands on the steering wheel...

The country, the city and social mobility

"'Country' and 'city' are very powerful words, and this is not surprising when we remember how much they seem to stand for in the experience of human communities.". So begins Raymond Williams' The Country and the City. The increasingly ludicrous Michael Gove must have intuited something like this in linking aspirations towards social mobility with his ambition to despoil the countryside reported in today's Torygraph. And all so unnecessary. 

Continental Europeans figured out long ago - as did the Scots, Liverpudlians and Londoners - that the art of urban living involves housing people in apartments. Not hideous and alienating 24 storey tower blocks but humane and spacious 4 or 5 storey buildings (with cellars) and balconies. Why do the English insist on using their urban space so inefficiently? Why do we treat it as a given that everyone prefers their own  tiny two storey box made of ticky-tacky with a postage stamp back garden? 

Incidentally, I predict that Gove is heading for the same fate as most Tory "intellectuals" - Redwood, Joseph etc - the Royal Order of the Mad Monk.

Health and austerity

Interesting piece in the Guardian today featuring the fascinating work of my new colleague David Stuckler. 

Casual observation: some of the comments from the Great British Public that follow it are downright weird. But I can live with that. The right to free speech is also a right to firmly grasp the wrong end of the stick and make a fool of yourself. What you don't have is a right to be taken seriously.

Higher education as grocery store

I want you to imagine a parallel world. In this world, which in most respects looks like our own, there are different types of grocery store. At the top of the pile is Fortnum & Mason purveying exquisite delicacies, just below them are Waitrose and Marks & Spencer, full of yummy high quality things. Next in line are Tesco, Sainsbury's and Asda for everyday shopping. Trailing at some distance are the discounters Lidl, Aldi etc - good in their own way, but containing lots of brands that you have never heard of.   

Before you are allowed into any of them you have to show your educational credentials to a security guard at the door. Anyone can shop at Lidl and Aldi, but to get into Tesco, Sainsbury's or Asda you must have got at least BBC at A level. To get into Waitrose and Marks & Spencer you need AAB and for Fortnum & Mason at least AAA. The strange thing is, whichever shop you go into, the price of your weekly shopping is the same. This really is an odd world, completely unlike our own. Or is it? You might want to read this story from the Guardian and think about it.