SHORT ANSWER SOCIAL JUSTICE STUDIES EXAM QUESTIONS

THE FOUR STEPS TO ANSWERING EXAM QUESTIONS:

(1) When a short answer question requires you to “explain” a particular social concept, phenomenon or process, the first requirement is to integrate your points in the answer in a way that illustrates-expounds-illuminates the meaning of the phenomenon. Therefore, short answer essay exam question responses should build your argument and demonstrate your control and understanding of the subject matter related to the question. This means that you should consider all the areas of the course – including exercises, lectures and text materials – in constructing your answer.

(2) This invariable requires the use of examples (drawn from exercises, lectures or texts) as integral to the response. The examples must not merely be attached to the response (as in, “…an example of social stratification is poverty”), but rather they must be central to the response and carried through to show all dimensions of the phenomenon (as in, “… social stratification” systems can be detected in patterns of poverty, which in our society breaks down along ethnic and racial lines … this indicates that society is hierarchically arranged in a ascending and descending order …the hierarchical arrangement of social strata in a society entails that certain categories of people have unequal and differential access to property, power and prestige (3ps) … etc., …So, even natural catastrophes like Katrina reveal patterns of poverty, pointing to the connection of social stratification with social inequality indicating a gender-coded and colour-coded society, in contradiction to liberal democratic values and the ideology of {Western} society as a meritocracy … etc., etc… ) demonstrating your thorough knowledge and application of the process.

(3) This also invariably means that statements must be “on-point” and clarifying - and not “scatter shot” comments, or “non-explanatory” comments, or “dis-jointed” comments, or “hanging” comments, or “casual” comments that require the reader to do the work of deciphering your meaning. That is your job.

For example, if you have the idea that – “maybe I didn’t say it perfectly, but you know what I mean” – your understanding is functioning at the everyday street level of “common sense,” and not the university level of structural explanation and analysis.

(4) Finally, and related, short answer exam questions at the university level should always be targeted toward displaying the “sociological” understanding of a concept, phenomenon, or process. This means that while you often begin at the everyday, commonsense understandings of “things” or phenomenon, you are always aimed at the deeper “structural” understandings.

For instance, if you are explaining what a “Hyphenated Canadian” is sociologically, you would not only connect the phenomenon to its everyday common usage {as expressed in the “Hold the Hyphen” Exercise}, but also to its structural relationship to the wider context of “ethnic” and “race” relations in society. Furthermore, sociology examines the social relations related to hyphenation in terms of the social construction and formation of social typologies, as follows: [a] primordialist (essentialist -- “your own kind”), [b] instrumentalist (interest and status-oriented); [c] identity thesis (ethnicity as a means to an end); [d] constructivist [creation of ethnicity through meaningful interaction in response to specific social consequences – e.g. political and/or insurrectionist] {see Fleras pp. 95}. Further still, sociology has also detected structural dimensions of hyphenation that are now operating at an international level as a global phenomenon {variously termed “the ethnic revolution,” “the ethnic explosion” or “the ethnic revival – which has had consequences in term of international or world issues and states-of-affairs}.” In brief, the analytic explanation begins with an everyday look/understanding of individual “hyphenation” (as a common practice in our everyday life) and moves to connect individuals to ethnic and race categories as sources of identity formation; then moves on to connect and explain the function of ethnic and race categories in society; and then moves on to connect Canadian society to international ethno-racial relations in a global context.