Module SOC2039 for 2021/2
- Overview
- Aims and Learning Outcomes
- Module Content
- Indicative Reading List
- Assessment
Undergraduate Module Descriptor
SOC2039: Sociology of Family and Gender
This module descriptor refers to the 2021/2 academic year.
Module Aims
The aim of this module is to provide you with a better understanding of the interplay between family patterns, welfare policy and gender norms and to enable you to address related policy questions, e.g.: Why do women in some countries are more likely to drop out of the labour market after having children than in others? How come that European countries with higher female employment rates also demonstrate higher fertility levels? Do more egalitarian couples have higher union stability?
| On successfully completing the programme you will be able to: | |
|---|---|
| Module-Specific Skills | 1. Demonstrate knowledge of current issues and debates in the sociology of gender and family. 2. Demonstrate an understanding of empirical studies in the field. 3. Assess the role of welfare policy in accounting for cross-country variations in family and work practices. |
| Discipline-Specific Skills | 4. Demonstrate an understanding of key concepts pertaining to the sociology of the family. 5. Demonstrate an understanding of theories and arguments in the field; 6. Understanding of relevant research methods employed in family and gender studies. |
| Personal and Key Skills | 7. Engage in group work to prepare presentations for class discussion; 8. analyze existing literature in the field; 9. demonstrate written analytical skills by producing an essay on deadline; and 10. work independently, within a limited time frame, and without access to external sources, to complete a specified task. |
Module Content
Syllabus Plan
Whilst the module’s precise content may vary from year to year, it is envisaged that the syllabus will cover some or all of the following themes:
- Families in the 21st century: An overview of recent trends in post-industrialized societies
- Theories of gender in the context of the family institution
- Social and political aspects of reproductive behaviour
- Women’s education and fertility: A dynamic relationship
- Family policy and the opportunity costs of children
- ‘Doing gender’ and the division of paid and unpaid labour
- Who cares? Social aspects of care work
- Trends in assortative mating and union formation
- Union stability and the gendered division of labour
- Gender perspectives of union dissolution
- The relationship between gender equality and family dynamics
Learning and Teaching
This table provides an overview of how your hours of study for this module are allocated:
| Scheduled Learning and Teaching Activities | Guided independent study | Placement / study abroad |
|---|---|---|
| 22 | 128 |
...and this table provides a more detailed breakdown of the hours allocated to various study activities:
| Category | Hours of study time | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Scheduled Learning and teaching activity | 22 | Weekly 2 hour lectures where we go over topics and materials |
| Guided independent study | 48 | Reading and preparing for seminars (around 4-6 hours per week); |
| Guided independent study | 80 | Study tasks directed by the module leader: e.g. 25 hours for essay, 15 hours for presentation, 40 hours for the final exam |
Online Resources
This module has online resources available via ELE (the Exeter Learning Environment).
How this Module is Assessed
In the tables below, you will see reference to 'ILO's. An ILO is an Intended Learning Outcome - see Aims and Learning Outcomes for details of the ILOs for this module.
Formative Assessment
A formative assessment is designed to give you feedback on your understanding of the module content but it will not count towards your mark for the module.
| Form of assessment | Size of the assessment (eg length / duration) | ILOs assessed | Feedback method |
|---|---|---|---|
| Presentations in pairs | 10 minutes each | 1-8 | Verbal, written |
Summative Assessment
A summative assessment counts towards your mark for the module. The table below tells you what percentage of your mark will come from which type of assessment.
| Coursework | Written exams | Practical exams |
|---|---|---|
| 50 | 50 | 0 |
...and this table provides further details on the summative assessments for this module.
| Form of assessment | % of credit | Size of the assessment (eg length / duration) | ILOs assessed | Feedback method |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Essay | 50 | 2,000 words | 1-6,8,9 | Written Feedback |
| Examination | 50 | 1 hour | 1-6,8,10 | Written Feedback |
Re-assessment
Re-assessment takes place when the summative assessment has not been completed by the original deadline, and the student has been allowed to refer or defer it to a later date (this only happens following certain criteria and is always subject to exam board approval). For obvious reasons, re-assessments cannot be the same as the original assessment and so these alternatives are set. In cases where the form of assessment is the same, the content will nevertheless be different.
| Original form of assessment | Form of re-assessment | ILOs re-assessed | Timescale for re-assessment |
|---|---|---|---|
| Essay | Essay | 1-6, 8, 9 | August/September re-assessment period |
| Examination | Examination | 1-6, 8, 10 | August/September re-assessment period |
Indicative Reading List
This reading list is indicative - i.e. it provides an idea of texts that may be useful to you on this module, but it is not considered to be a confirmed or compulsory reading list for this module.
Basic reading:
Esping-Andersen, G. (2009). The Incomplete Revolution: Adapting to Women’s New Roles. Cambridge: Polity.
Esping-Andersen, G. and Billari, F. C. (2015). Re-theorizing family demographics. Population and Development Review, 41(1): 1-31.
McDonald, P. (2013). Societal foundations for explaining low fertility: Gender equity. Demographic Research, 28(34): 981-994.
Hochschild, A. R. (1989). The Second Shift: Working Parents and the Revolution at Home. London: Piatkus.
Hochschild, A. R. (2000). Global Care Chains and Emotional Surplus Value, in Giddens, T. and Hutton, W. (Eds.). On the Edge: Globalization and the New Millennium, London: Sage Publishers, pp. 130-146.
Gornick, J. C. and Meyers, M. K. (Eds.) (2009). Gender Equality, Transforming Family Division of Labour. London: Verso.
Ellingsaeter, A L. (2010). Feminist politics and feminist conflicts: Daddy’s care or mother’s milk? In Scott, J., Crompton, R. and Lyonette, C. (Eds.) Gender Inequalities in the 21st Century: New Barriers and Continuing Constraints. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.
De Laat, J. and Sevilla-Sanz, A. (2011). The fertility and women's labor force participation puzzle in OECD countries: The role of men's home production. Feminist Economics, 17(2): 87-119.
Hobson, B. and Olah, L. S. (2006). Birthstrikes? Agency and capabilities in the reconciliation of employment and family. Marriage & Family Review, 39: 197-227.
Kravdal, O. and Rindfuss, R. R. (2008). Changing relationships between education and fertility: A study of women and men born 1940 to 1964. American Sociological Review, 73: 854-873.
Torr, B. M. and Short, S. E. (2004). Second births and the second shift: A research note on gender equity and fertility. Population and Development Review, 30(1): 109-130.
Oppenheimer, V. K. (2003). Cohabiting and marriage during young men’s career-development process. Demography, 40(1): 127-149.
Kalmijn, M. (2011). The influence of men’s income and employment on marriage and cohabitation: Testing Oppenheimer’s theory in Europe. European Journal of Population, 27: 269-293.
Lewis, J., Knijn, T., Martin, C. and Ostner, I. (2008). Patterns of development in work/family reconciliation
policies for parents in France, Germany, the Netherlands, and the UK in the 2000s. Social Politics, 15(3): 261-286.
Blossfeld, H. –P. Müller, R. (2002). Union disruption in comparative perspective: the role of assortative partner choice and careers of couples. International Journal of Sociology, 32(4): 3-35.
Härkönen, J. and Dronkers, J. (2006). Stability and change in the educational gradient of divorce: A comparison of seventeen countries. European Sociological Review, 22(5): 501–517.
