A Critical Discussion of the Contributions and Limitations of the Chicago School of Urban Sociology to the Study of Urban Social Organisation.
Title: A critical discussion of the contributions and limitations of the Chicago School of urban Sociology to the study of urban social organisation.
The Chicago school is the name given to the work conducted at the University of Chicago since the 1890’s. In order to understand the contributions made by the Chicago School to the study or social organisation, it is important to understand the context in which the Chicago school emerged. This essay opens by sharing this contextual background on urban sociology. It then goes on to describe how urban ecology was considered to be the shaper and outcome of social interactions, with a focus on the work of Robert Park and its application in the work of Ernest Burgess. It follows with a discussion of the key principles used by Louis Wirth to explain the process of urbanisation. Examples are used from the reviews of critics such as Milla Alihan and Walter Firey to critically assess the limitations of the discussed work done by the ecologists’ at the Chicago School, as well as listing some reasons as to why it may or may not be applicable to today’s urban social organisations. The essay concludes by assessing the contributions as a response of these criticisms in the work of Homer Hoyt, Chauncy Harris and Edward Ullman.
Contextual Background:
Academic studies of the city as a unique form of settlement space were rare up until the 1800s, when Max Weber, a German sociologist wrote an analysis that traced its history as a phenomenon of social organisation (Weber 1966). Soon after, the Anglo-German, Friedrich Engels wrote a critique of urban living under capitalism (Engles 1973). These efforts stood alone until the turn of the 20th Century. Just prior to World War I, the University of Chicago founded the very first departed of sociology in the US under the leadership of W.I Thomas and Albion Small, who had been a student of Weber (Gottdiener and Budd 2005). In 1913 they hired Robert Park, who possessed specific and strong
The Chicago school is the name given to the work conducted at the University of Chicago since the 1890’s. In order to understand the contributions made by the Chicago School to the study or social organisation, it is important to understand the context in which the Chicago school emerged. This essay opens by sharing this contextual background on urban sociology. It then goes on to describe how urban ecology was considered to be the shaper and outcome of social interactions, with a focus on the work of Robert Park and its application in the work of Ernest Burgess. It follows with a discussion of the key principles used by Louis Wirth to explain the process of urbanisation. Examples are used from the reviews of critics such as Milla Alihan and Walter Firey to critically assess the limitations of the discussed work done by the ecologists’ at the Chicago School, as well as listing some reasons as to why it may or may not be applicable to today’s urban social organisations. The essay concludes by assessing the contributions as a response of these criticisms in the work of Homer Hoyt, Chauncy Harris and Edward Ullman.
Contextual Background:
Academic studies of the city as a unique form of settlement space were rare up until the 1800s, when Max Weber, a German sociologist wrote an analysis that traced its history as a phenomenon of social organisation (Weber 1966). Soon after, the Anglo-German, Friedrich Engels wrote a critique of urban living under capitalism (Engles 1973). These efforts stood alone until the turn of the 20th Century. Just prior to World War I, the University of Chicago founded the very first departed of sociology in the US under the leadership of W.I Thomas and Albion Small, who had been a student of Weber (Gottdiener and Budd 2005). In 1913 they hired Robert Park, who possessed specific and strong
References: BARDO, J. W. & HARTMAN, J. J. 1982. Urban Sociology, U.S.A, F.E Peacock Publishers, Inc. BERRY, B. J., SIMMONS, J. W. & TENNANT, R. J. 1963. Urban population densities: Structure and change. Geographical Review, 53, 389-405. CORTESE, A. J. 1995. The rise, hegemony, and decline of the Chicago School of Sociology, 1892–1945. The Social Science Journal, 32, 235-254. DAVIE, M. R. 1937. “The Pattern of Urban Growth,” p.133-161, in George P. Murdock (ed.), Studies in the Science of Society, New Haven, CT: Yale University Press. ENGELS, F. 1973. The Condition of the Working Class in England, Moscow, Progress Publishers. FIREY, W. 1945. Sentiment and symbolism as ecological variables. American Sociological Review 10, 306-16. GOTTDIENER, M. & BUDD, L. 2005. Key Concepts in Urban Studies. London: SAGE Ltd. HARRIS, C. D. & ULLMAN, E. 1945. The nature of cities. Annals of American Academy of Political and Social Science, 242. HOYT, H. 1939. The structure and growth or residential neighbourhoods in American cities., Washington U.S Government Printing Office. KNOX, P. & PINCH, S. 2010. Urban Social Geography: An Introduction 6th edition, England, Pearson United Kingdom. KURTZ, L. R. 1984. Evaluating Chicago sociology: a guide to the literature, with an annotated biliography, Chicago, University of Chicago Press. PARK, R. E. & BURGESS, E. W. 1929. Introduction to the science of sociology., Chicago, University of Chicago Press. SAUNDERS, P. 1981. Social Theory and the Urban Question, USA, Hutchinston & Co Publishers Ltd. SCHNORE, F. L. 1972. Class and race in cities and suburbs., Chicago, Markham Press. SHORT, J. F. 1976. Delinquency, Crime, and Soceity, Chicago, The University of Chicago Press. SIBLEY, D. 2009a. Chicago School. In: EDITORS-IN-CHIEF: ROB, K. & NIGEL, T. (eds.) International Encyclopedia of Human Geography. Oxford: Elsevier. SIBLEY, D. 2009b. Chicago School. International Encyclopedia of Human Geography, 40-44. SIJUWADE, P. O. 2010. Urban Community and Personality: A Critical Assessment. The Social Sciences: Medwel Journals, 5, 458-466. WEBER, M. 1966. The City, NY, The Free Press. WIRTH, L. 1938. Urbanism as a Way of Life. The American Journal Of Sociology, 44, 2-24. WIRTH, L. 1945. Human Ecology. American Journal of Sociology, 50, 483-88.