The Sociological Works of James Samuel Coleman
Introduction
According to Marsden, for exactly forty years between the attainment of his PhD in 1955 at the University of Columbia and his unfortunate death in 1995, James Samuel Coleman was a prolific, creative, prominent, and to a great extent, one of the most controversial figures in the American sociology (2). The enormous quantity of his work and its breadth that encompassed theory, substantive investigations, modeling and methodology, and strategy research makes it totally difficult to refer to him as a conventional sociologist. Born in 1926, most of Coleman’s upbringing occurred in southern and Midwestern parts of the United States where his interest in studying human interactions and social problems was aroused and nurtured. He attended three learning institutions in pursuit of his undergraduate degree and in 1949, he earned a degree in chemical engineering from the University of Purdue (Marsden 2). Nonetheless, excited by social sciences and human interactions, he abandoned his job as a chemist to enroll in the Columbia University for a graduate program in sociology. Furthermore, it was during his early years as a sociologist that he developed the first gesticulates of his work on mathematical sociology (Marsden 2). Coleman’s principal interest in the relationship between individuals and the society and how to maintain social order while balancing individual freedoms became apparent a decade later after he earned his doctorate degree. Marsden in his conclusion of the analysis of Coleman’s work denotes that “Coleman’s place among sociologists of the second half of the twentieth century is likely to remain unequalled” (19). This paper seeks to not only analyze but also criticize the sociological works by Coleman. It seeks to explore Coleman’s Substantive studies, his empirical studies on education and social policy, mathematical sociology, and his advocacy for the rational choice theory in sociology.
Substantive Studies
Communal and Organizational Pluralism
According to Coleman, Pluralism in any organization or community is important in the maintenance of social order and individual freedoms. In his dissertation of 1995, which was part of the Union of Democracy, Coleman argues that the existence of multiple origins and centers of power coupled with different routes of position or standing attainment within a society or community are important in ensuring social order and freedom (Marsden 3). In Coleman’s short monograph of 1957 entitled Community Conflict, he attributes the cause of conflicts and disputes across societies among other factors the existence of unwavering two-party system with significant disparities in the social ties of members, issues, ideals, organizational density, and factions (Lindenberg 299). Pluralism applauds the importance of legitimate competition as the only reliable avenue through which member’s concerns can be addressed in an organization or community. Coleman believed that the distribution of power in an organizations or community compromises its performance.
In the Union of Democracy, egalitarianism is attributed to the convergence of important social and historical factors that include local independence, the existence of autonomous bases of power such as the secret societies and the professional community amongst printers. Pluralism, according to Marsden, helps in the establishment of beliefs and traditions that enhance acceptance, individual freedoms and social order (4). Pluralism in communities and organization has however not escaped the criticism of various scholars who maintain that allowing the existence of different power bases is the best recipe for violence, disputes and instability. Pluralism in communities requires institutions and strong policies to address the marginalization of and oppression of specific groups of people which can easily evoke conflicts (Heckman and Neal 89). Coleman overlooks the consequences of having two or more opposing power bases within an organization or community by not examining the impacts of incongruity and disagreements between them.
Education and Social Policy
Most of the empirical studies by Coleman after completing his studies at the Columbia University focused on education. One of the most successful studies revolves around factors that influence adolescents’ behavior and actions in high school in the United States of America. According to Marsden, he opted not to study more about schools not because they were comparatively closely intertwined social systems in which he could pursue his interests in the foundations of status pluralism but out of his intrinsic interests (4). Furthermore, he argues that Coleman’s interest in the lives of adolescents showed that he had a long-standing desire to see an improvement in functioning of highs schools in America.
The Adolescent Society
The Adolescent society was among the first educational sociological studies to be conducted by Coleman in ten high schools in Midwestern United states (Marsden 5). The study sought to examine the structures, organizations, and the status systems in student bodies across American schools with the attention on macro-micro problems, the emotional and scholastic effects of the pubescent status systems on the students. Even though the value climates, roles of each system, and the sociometric structures differ from school to school, Coleman found that in general, athletic and social success were highly valued and treasured more than academic pursuits. Coleman, from his empirical study, drew the conclusion that “the adolescent subcultures in these schools exert a rather strong deterrent to academic achievement” (The Adolescent Society 265). Coleman strongly held that social relations are largely influenced by the interaction between individuals and institutions and not the interaction between persons. His finding shifted the blame of poor academic achievement from students to adults who were charged with the responsibility of organizing and creating policies that govern the education system. Coleman concluded that restructuring of the whole system was necessary if the standards of education were to be improved (The Adolescent Society 329).
Coleman’s study stressed the importance of peer influence, school and institutions in the shaping of individuals socialization at the expense of family factors (The Adolescent Society 272). According to Marsden, Coleman’s follow up on the concerns that were raised against the Adolescent Society findings made him to grow more attentive to family factors (5). The family as a social institution has been shown to influence greatly the character and socialization of individuals because it provides an opportunity to learn and develop long before schooling starts. Furthermore, the overemphasis of school and peer influence in The Adolescent society overlooks not only the role of the family but also religion as a social institution and religious practices in the social relations and character development. Coleman, in The Adolescent Society, reiterates that social relations is a function of individual-institution interaction while understating the importance of individual-individual interaction in social relations and character development (Marsden 6). Formal and informal interaction between students, administrators and other people generally has long-standing effects on social relations and character development of students beyond school.
Equality of Educational Opportunity (EEO)
According to Marsden, Coleman became center stage in public debates on education when he made his work on educational equality and opportunity public sixteen months after its initiation (7). Famously referred to as the “Coleman report”, the EEO project came into limelight at a time when educational success was a measure of inputs such as infrastructure, facilities, textbooks, teachers, equipment, salaries and qualifications, and the outputs that are investigated primarily through the use of test scores. The study examined the disparities in inputs according to regions, rural/urban environments, race or ethnic backgrounds and the outcomes of education based on how inputs and outputs relate (Marsden 6). Coleman conducted one of his largest studies that incorporated thousands of schools and close to six hundred thousand students across America. The study revealed significant race/ethnic differences in academic achievement amongst students. The analyses of the study by Coleman settled on family background as the main source of performance differences between students, followed by peer influences and lastly the characteristics of teachers. The school as an institution did not impact achievement significantly according to Coleman; a finding that sparked heated debated amongst scholars and other sociologists (Marsden 6). Based on his finding that peer characteristics had a role to play in achievement, Coleman suggested that school integration would significantly raise achievement amongst African American and other students from minority groups in American schools.
The findings of the ‘Equality and Educational Opportunity Project’ study by Coleman remains one of the most cited and quoted literature by scholars. Marsden asserts that three decades of studies and research has supported Coleman’s finding prompting the establishment of new standards of answerability and responsibility in the education sector (7). However, Coleman gave comparatively little attention and significance to the internal operations of institutions as distinct social systems. The impacts of school resources on both outcomes and post-educational outcomes cannot be wished away owing to the fact that interactions between institutions and individuals also shape social relation as implied in Coleman’s Adolescent study (Capecchi 49). Peer characteristics and influences seem to be the most agreeable determinant of achievement amongst scholars and researchers. The Equality and Educational Opportunity project till date remains a fundamental point of reference for studies that seeks to investigate the dissimilarities in educational achievement between African American and the dominant white Americans.
Games and Experimental Learning
At the verge of completing The Adolescent Society Study, Coleman developed interest in simulation gaming (Heckman and Neal 98). First, Coleman looked at games as innovations of educations that could be used effectively engage the concentration of students with the aim of changing their perception towards the role of teachers as instructors and judges. Coleman compared the traditional method of teaching that involves information assimilation and experimental learning and argued that experiential approaches to learning allows for immediate and easy connection between knowledge and action than information assimilation (“Analysis of social structures and simulation of social processes” 206). Secondly, to Coleman, games were regarded as experiments necessary for the study of social systems. According to Coleman, devising rules and regulations of a game is analogous to the development of a theory for the operation of a certain system and thus, the actual playing was a chance to test the plausibility of the theory developed. However, Coleman’s games and experiential learning lacks practicability because model gaming is largely absent in the mainstream, that is both sociologically and educationally. Heckman and Neal maintain that despite Coleman’s Games project utilization by many sociologists in the characterization of social relations, its influence on contemporary scholarship is insignificant and inconsequential (99). The games project by Coleman was largely important in the development of his intellectualism and the crystallization of his curiosity in rational choice theory (Marsden 7).
Mandatory School Desegregation
Coleman’s school desegregation and “White flight” is considered one of the most controversial sociological works by the renowned theorist (Marsden 7). Made public in 1976, Coleman found out that obligatory desegregation in schools in America fueled the movement of White people from their residential areas away from major cities (“The Role of Incentives in School Desegregation” 182). Government policies that sought to end racial segregation instead led to the migration of white people away from metropolitan areas with racial diversity leading to an upsurge in between-district racial separation although with a decrease in within-district racial separation. Coleman in his study concluded that government policies enforced through courts of law aimed at achieving desegregation were not efficient instruments of societal policy. Coleman writes that, “If a social policy does not actively employ the interests of those on whom it has an impact, it will find those interests actively employed in directions that defeat its goals” (“The Role of Incentives in School Desegregation” 189). Marsden denotes that Coleman’s findings caused heated debates with scholars and sociologists being divided on the credibility of his study (8).
Heckman and Neal maintain that the Coleman’s findings were skewed as they out rightly displayed an orientation to rational choice on his part (91, 98). Coleman gave a blind eye to the fact that mandatory desegregation to a large extent had succeeded in reducing racial discrimination in most parts where its consequences were once far reaching and detrimental. Moreover, the perceived movement by the dominant race was overlooked by Coleman because even those from minority racial groups were in constant migration from place to place (Heckman and Neal 93). Also, Coleman did not consider other reasons for the movement of white people away from the central cities thus giving too much weight on mandatory school desegregation.
Mathematical Sociology and Methods
Marsden maintains that the success of Coleman in mathematical sociology and methods was anchored in his background as a chemist and scientists before deciding to venture into sociology (11). His greatest interest was not to develop numerical indexes or represent social structures mathematically but to study social processes using mathematical principles and applications. Coleman is regarded as a central inimitable figure in mathematical sociology because of his immense contribution to the field (Marsden 11).
Structural Research Methods
Marsden affirms that in spite of Coleman’s strong interest in social processes, during his early years he was involved in a lot of structural research (12). Some of these include the sociometric analysis in his work on Adolescents Society, the examination of friendship and relations as a constituent of occupational community in the Union of Democracy among others. Coleman strongly believed in quantitative studies and thus sought to analyze social organizations keeping in mind the importance of social structures (Capecchi 46). In his book entitled Introduction to Mathematical Sociology, Coleman dedicated several chapters to the study of measures of structures and many have considered him as the bridge between sociologists and researchers from other disciplines (Marsden 16). Coleman’s contribution in the development of structural research methods helped in the transition of mathematical sociology from its traditional foundations to the modern agent-based models in the investigation of social phenomena (Introduction to Mathematical Sociology 87).
Stochastic Process Models
In Introduction to Mathematical Sociology, Coleman puts a lot of emphasis on the need to use mathematical models in the representation of social processes (26). The stochastic process models are unique from deterministic models since they deal with alterations in probabilistic allotments and distributions. In most chapters of his work, he illustrates the continuous-time model of social processes representation and the discrete space models for the study of transition. In his presentations, Coleman analyzes a wide range of social phenomena which include changes in people’s attitudes, joblessness amongst students of occupational institutions, the behavior of consumers, voting patterns and behaviors, and group contagion (Capecchi 46). These stochastic process models were helpful in Coleman’s analyses of attitudinal and behavioral changes of social mobility. Even though Coleman started developing models of rational choice theory later in 1971 because he thought stochastic models were fast becoming less prominent, Marsden asserts that their influence and importance in sociology till date according to SSCI records is enormous (11). The foundation laid down by Coleman during the introduction of process models has enabled the development of other sociologic models such as the event-history models for the analysis of longitudinal data.
Exchange Theory Model
The modeling work of Coleman in social relations started shifting to exchange theory models based on the assumptions of purposive action models with the growing interest and concentration in rational choice theory (Marsden 12). The central idea in the exchange theory that individuals in any society, community or organization act or relate in order to capitalize on their rewards appealed to Coleman as the recognized and official devices that could be used to realize micro-macro changeover. Usually, the process of capitalizing or maximizing on profits involves endorsement or disapproval, punishment or incentive and not necessarily monetary exchange (Capecchi 48). Coleman introduced the first gesture of his thoughts on exchange or purposive actions Model In his 1973 work where he used it to examine collective decisions (The Mathematics of Collective Action 15). The exchange theory model was also used to study exchange in the work market in one of his works in 1989. Scholars have observed the Coleman’s model resembles that of an open market (Marsden 8). Coleman’s believes that the instantaneous determination of value attached to various assets or even events and the allotment of power between actors are all classical depictions of micro-macro transition. As a proponent of social pluralism, Coleman concentrated on the ability of individuals to relate and create consensus harmoniously in spite of multiple opposing power bases and divergent ideals.
Theoretical Work
The Rational Choice Theory
Many years into his writing career, Coleman became a strong proponent and an enthusiastic advocate of the rational choice theory in sociology. The genesis of his inspiration and curiosity in rational choice theory according to Marsden was the exchange theory and his own ideas and beliefs that led to the creation of the simulation games hypothesis earlier in his career (13). His orientation that the best way to analyze and understand social processes was to focus on the ‘micro’ or the agents of social change also fueled his interest in rational choice theory.
In his work the Foundations of Social Theory that was done late in his career in 1990, Coleman presents one of the most integrated trans-disciplinary theoretical projects that seek to explain the running of social systems (Marsden 16; Abell 261). Coleman’s rational choice theory holds that individuals act with purpose while making the most of their utilities and effectiveness in the direction of their desired goals. However, the aspirations and utilities of each and every individual are shaped by central values and predilections that govern their environments, organizations or community as a whole. Nevertheless, Coleman acknowledges that not all actions can be considered rational although his predictions are true notwithstanding the rationality of the actions in question (Foundations of Social Theory 341). In his studies and models in the early years of his career, Coleman focused majorly on micro-macro transition, which is the evolution from personal level conduct to the behavior or conduct of an entire system (Marsden 15). However, in the rational choice theory, the orientation changed to also include macro-micro transition where he examined the impact of social structure and systems on individuals and the micro-micro transition that evaluates how individuals impacts each others socialization. However, the micro-macro transition still takes a central position in the rational choice theory with scholars arguing that Coleman overlooked the possibility of having bidirectional flow of causal arrows to cater for dialectical relationships between the levels.
In the rational choice theory, Coleman views the passage of rights and power from one individual to the other as the major structural blocks in the macro level (Abell 259). Throughout the levels, the actors remain constant and this according to Marsden brings in the aspect of subordination in the social interactions between the actors (17). Subordination leads to the establishment of a structure rather than just a platform where two or more individuals can interact thus allowing for situations where individuals of a faction can capitalize on the interest of others. The unilateral transmission of power and control of actions from one individual to the other eliminates the possibility of realizing a stable social system and this according to Coleman leads to a chaotic macro-level state. The stability of any system depends on whether norms are developed or not (Heckman and Neal 88). Norms according to Coleman are created when actors within a social system give up control over their personal behaviors and thereafter achieve some influence over others in the form of policies governing behavior. Those charged with the responsibility of controlling the behavior of others must therefore act purposively through the creation of a consensus and an acceptable mechanism of enforcing the norms (Lindenberg 299). Coleman affirms that norms are simply the macro-level phenomena that result from purposive actions and relations between individuals at the micro level of any social system.
Actors in a social system according to Coleman fall into two major categories introducing the aspect of collectivity in sociology (Abell 256; Marsden 16). These are individual actors who seek to further their own interest maximizing on their own profits and benefits and the corporate actors whose actions are meant to represent specific groups of people or collectivities. Nonetheless, both players can act concurrently leading confrontations and conflict with the authority of the collectivity (Heckman and Neal 87). The growing importance of collectivities in the modern social systems continues to favor the existence of corporate structures at the expense of elemental structures such as families because the interaction of individuals and corporate actors raises the stakes of achieving the much sought rights, freedoms and interests.
Criticism
First, the rational choice theory neglects or rather fails to clearly outline and state the causal mechanisms between its levels. The fact that processes or even interactions that have an outcome needs to be explained and the specific pathways of arriving at the outcome illustrated renders the plausibility of the rational choice theory questionable (Lindenberg 299). Coleman does not provide a clear mechanism through which individual behaviors can be transformed into the behavior of an entire system owing to the fact that behaviors differ from person to person. Secondly, the rational choice theory perpetuates insufficient psychological reductionism. Psychological reductionism holds that all social activities, behaviors and actions can be traced back to the psychological personalities of the individual actors. Since Coleman’s major orientation is from individual behaviors to the behavior of the entire system, he gives very little credit to the macro-micro levels feedback thus neglecting the principle psychological reductionism (Marsden 18). Lastly, Coleman underrates the role of culture in shaping behaviors and relations in social systems. Sociologists have continued to give credit to culture as one of the major determinants of human behavior since it dictates how people interact and associate with each other (Abell 257). A high performance and well established culture is crucial in the success of any system since culture defines how people carry out themselves not only when interacting with others but also when alone.
Conclusion
The accomplishment of Coleman as far as sociology is concerned and his unremitting influence on present-day social science is of enormous magnitude. His contribution on education and the various empirical studies that he conducted with the aim of igniting improvement in the education sector makes him one of the most iconic educational researchers in the history of America. Coleman’s research findings on education left a colossal legacy and pool of knowledge to build on and even carry on the work knowledge production in social science research and social policy formation. Without doubt, Coleman succeeded in characterizing mathematical sociology as a field through the introduction of methods and the description of measures of social processes. His contributions to the network and exchange theory continue to receive wide recognitions not only from sociologists but also other scholars from other disciplines across the world. Regarded as his most ambitious work, Foundations of Social Theory laid a firm foundation for the character, direction, development and understanding of sociological theories. Coleman’s dedication and passion and for the rational choice theory that continues to enjoy a central place in social sciences today revolutionized and inspired the establishment of a stable niche for theories in sociology. Over and beyond his numerous scholarly works, Coleman also inspired many scholars to convert into educational and rational choice sociologists who have not only ensured the continued survival of his sociologic works but have also given life to modern sociology.
Works Cited
Abell, Peter. “The Role of Rational Choice and Narrative Action Theories in Sociological Theory.” Revue Française De Sociologie, vol. 44, no. 2, 2003, pp. 255-273.
Capecchi, Vittorio. Applications of Mathematics in Models, Artificial Neural Networks and Arts: Mathematics and Society. Springer, 2010.
Coleman, James S. “Analysis of Social Structures and Simulation of Social Processes with Electronic Computers.” Educational and Psychological Measurement, vol. 21, no. 1, 1961, pp. 203-218.
Coleman, James S. “The Role of Incentives in School Desegregation.” In A. Yarmolinsky, Liebman and C. S. Schelling (Eds.), Race and Schooling in the City. Harvard University Press, 1981.
Coleman, James S. The Adolescent Society: The Social Life of the Teenager and Its Impact on Education. Greenwood Publ. Group, 1981.
Coleman, James S. Foundations of social theory. Belknap, 1990.
Coleman, James S. Introduction to mathematical sociology. MacMillan Pub Co, 1964.
Coleman, James S. The Mathematics of Collective Action. Taylor and Francis, 2017.
Heckman, James J., and Derek Neal. “Coleman’s Contribution to Education: Theory, Research Styles and Empirical Research.” In J. Clark (Ed.), James S. Coleman, pp. 81-102. Farmer Press, 1996.
Lindenberg, Siegwart. “Constitutionalism Versus Relationalism: Two Versions Of Rational Choice Sociology.” In J. Clark (Ed.), James S. Coleman, pp. 299-311. Farmer Press, 1996.
Marsden, Peter V. “The Sociology of James S. Coleman.” Annu. Rev. Sociol., vol. 31, 2005, pp. 1-24.
