October 27th, 2010

ASA Awards Ceremony and Presidential Address (2010)


JOHN LOGAN: Good afternoon everybody. Let me ask people to sit down please, and we're going to start the program. I'm John Logan and I'm Vice President of the ASA and I get this brief moment at
the beginning and at the very end I get another moment. And in between, we have the chance to congratulate a lot of award-winners and hear a presidential address from Abby Glenn. I'd like to take a
moment please to remember the number of sociologists who've died during the past year, having devoted their careers to our discipline, and, think their names are going to be scrolling in a moment. So
many people have such familiar names, I hope that they're all remembered. Now I'd like to introduce Mark Shneiburg who's going to coordinate the presentation of awards. MARK SHNEIBURG: Thank you,
John. Good afternoon, I'm Mark Shneiburg, ASA councilmember and liaison to the committee on awards, and I'm here today to MC this awards ceremony, introducing the awards, and the award presentations.
We have nine awards to celebrate today, and the awards ceremony will be followed by our presidential address. I'd like to thank you all for coming and hope that you will bear with me through a few
introductory remarks. There's part of me, my childish, pre-sociological inner teen, who rebels at formality, rebels at ceremony. At getting dressed up, observing the forms, and so on. But I confess
that there was a moment of triumph in my own bar mitzvah, sometime ago, when I broke the rules to start over again about a third of the way through my Torah part, to do what I imagined to be a nearly
perfect reading, getting a pat on the back from the Cantor. And I'm recently married this May, both of which have brought home to me the power and importance of recognition and ritual in a gathered
collectivity. For activities like these today are the means by which we collectively express and affirm our bonds and core values. Scientific discovery, intellectual and academic rigor, excellence in
commitment to teaching, public service. Activities like these are the means by which we a- or a means by which we forge and reaffirm ourselves as a community dedicated to these principles, and they
are the means by which we recognize and celebrate members of our community who exemplify or serve our core values. This is likely obvious to anyone who's read or taught Durkheim or Goffman or others.
But the tricky part here, and often less well appreciated, are the tensions and dilemmas built into this process. For acts of forging community and bonds are also acts of marking boundaries. They are
acts of making distinctions, which carry with them, risks of homogenization, and exclusion in unintentional ways. And in recognizing distinction, as recognizing excellence, distinguished service, and
the like, we also run the risk of mobilizing criteria, standards of judgment, that carry with them status hierarchies and status orders that are irrelevant to the values and purposes that we seek to
embrace and celebrate. As those who struggled with this on ASA committees know well, these are tough issues. Issues which require periodic reevaluation, complex, sometimes quite difficult,
negotiations, and frank debate over what needs to be recognized and the criteria by which excellence and distinguished contributions are to be judged. The bad news, is that there are no simple, once
and for all solutions to these issues. The good news, though, is that folks on award committees, folks in sections, ASA officers, ASA staff, council members, have taken these issues seriously. And
they've done a commendable job these last few years that I've been a part of this process, balancing competing claims of inclusion, judgment, and exclusion, reflecting on the categories and standards
used to define who and what are recognized and how they're judged. And celebrating the contributions of those who serve our community and its values in diverse forms. This is something that at least
partly satisfies both my sociological side, and that inner rebel. That Jewish kid from Queens who had his own issues of exclusion and inclusion. So for all these kinds of reasons, I'm happy to
introduce our awards and award presenters today. But before we begin with today's awards, I'd like to mention that the recipient of the 2009 WEB DuBois Career Distinguished Scholarship Award, Sheldon
Stryker, was unable to be at last year's award ceremony. I'm not sure if he's here now, but regardless of whether he is or he isn't, please, let's give him a round of applause, for Sheldon Stryker.
Thank You. Excellent. So our first 2010 award, the ASA Dissertation Award, honors the best PHD dissertation from among those submitted by advisors and mentors in a discipline. Please welcome today Amy
Wharton, as she highlights the award, and the dynamic work of this year's recipient. AMY WHARTON: On behalf of the ASA Dissertation Award Committee, I would like to present the 2010 Dissertation Award
to Dr. Cristina Mora. Dr. Mora's dissertation, "Des Muchos Uno, The Institutionalization of Latino Pan-Ethnicity, 1960 to 1990" was completed at Princeton University under the supervision of Professor
Paul DiMaggio. Dr. Mora currently holds a Provost's Career Enhancement Post Doctoral Fellowship at the University of Chicago. From commentaries about the appointment of Supreme Court Justice Sonia
Sotomayor, to pundit's discussions of Hispanic's voting patterns, the term "Hispanic" has become widespread and taken for granted in American life. Dr. Mora's dissertation examines the historical,
organizational, and political processes, that together have produced a notion of a pan-ethnic Hispanic community in the United States. She seeks to understand not only the rise of the label Hispanic,
but also the idea of pan-ethnicity as a viable form of Latino collective identification and representation. Dr. Mora's research represents sociology at its best, as she makes visible the groups,
processes, and events that have given rise to Hispanic pan-ethnicity, an idea which, as she notes, would have been virtually unthinkable is the 1970's. The committee was impressed with the scope of
Dr. Mora's project and the data that she marshals to address her research questions. Sociologists are justifiably skeptical of essentialist claims about the origins of racial or ethnic categories. In
the case of Hispanics, Dr. Mora rejects the idea of a pan-ethnic community arising naturally from shared cultural propensities. But here she goes beyond much of the previous work on racial and ethnic
formation which emphasizes the role of state actors. In contrast, Dr. Mora suggests that the construction and institutionalization of Hispanic pan-ethnicity can be traced in part to the efforts of
ethnic leaders themselves. Drawing from archival data as well as interviews with media executives, government officials, and activists, Dr. Mora's dissertation is a detailed analysis of three
historically grounded organizational case studies. One is a study of the National Console of Loraza and its change from a Mexican-American social movement organization to Hispanic civil rights
advocacy group. The second analysis focuses on the U.S. Census Bureau, and the influence of ethnic leaders on the creation of a Hispanic category of the U.S. Census. Finally, Dr. Mora's dissertation
includes an historical study of Spanish language television, particularly Univision Communication Corporation, and its transformation from a regional Mexican-American venture to a nation Hispanic
media conglomerate. While each study makes an independent contribution to the understanding of Hispanic pan-ethnicity, the committee was most impressed by Dr. Mora's ability to weave these analyses
together and create a dissertation that is far more than the sum of its parts. Indeed the crux of her argument is that Hispanic pan-ethnicity arose from a process of linked interactions between social
movement groups, policy makers, and media. Through negotiation, cooperation, and information exchange, these actors ultimately began to see their interests as overlapping and their efforts as
interdependent. In the end, Dr. Mora has provided a sociologically compelling, historically grounded, and organizationally informed analysis. Before concluding, I would like to thank the other members
of the Dissertation Award Committee for their efforts. We reviewed many fine dissertations this year, and if those dissertations nominated for this prize are at all indicative of the field, I can say
that the state of sociology is strong. Dr. Mora, your award is richly deserved and I congratulate you on behalf of the Committee and the association. Please join me in applauding. DR. CHRISTINA MORA:
Thank you very much. I'm certainly honored and humbled by the award. I'd like to start by thanking the members of my dissertation committee, Robert Wuthnow, Miguel Centeno, and King-to Yeung, all of
whom now owe me a beer at the lobby bar. More seriously, these guys read every page of multiple drafts, stayed well past office hours, and believed in me and my project, even when I doubted. I'd
especially like to thank the chair of my dissertation committee, my advisor, and my good friend, Paul DiMaggio. I think that anyone who knows Paul knows how much he values his role as a mentor, and
knows just how dedicated he is to his students. And I think that anyone who's ever been a student of Paul's knows, deep down inside, that they are amongst the luckiest in the field. I'd be remiss not
to mention that my road here today actually began as an undergraduate at my alma mater UC Berkely. And so I'd like to thank Ann Swidler, and of course Raka Ray, for almost a decade of guidance,
mentorship, and for believing that I would be up here on this stage today. Last, I'd like to note this: My dissertation could not have been possible, at all, without the support of the various
diversity initiatives that exist to assist students of color in the academy. Everything from Princeton's Office of Diversity and Academic Affairs, to programs like the Ford Foundation's Grants for
Minority Graduate Students, to initiatives like the ASA's Minority Fellows programs. It was programs like these that not only afforded me the resources to criss-cross the country, interview people,
and collect data, but that simply made graduate school affordable and viable to me. And so I do hope that the dissertation award this year might serve to remind us of the true value that the goals of
diversity serve. Not simply for the field of sociology, but for the academy more generally. So thanks very much. Princeton is a wonderful place for graduate research. MARK SHNEIBURG: The Jessie
Bernard Award is given annually in recognition of a body of scholarly work that has enlarged the horizons of sociology to encompass fully the role of women in society. Please welcome Paula England as
she presents this year's recipient. PAULA ENGLAND: On behalf of the committee and myself, I am so happy that this year's award goes to Harriet Presser of the University of Maryland. Harriet has
brought a gender lens to all her research. In doing so, she's had a transformative affect on her sub-field of demography, and more broadly on the study of work-family issues. A few examples: In the
1960's, Harriet was the first person to discover and write that a third of women living in Puerto Rico had undergone sterilization. In the 1970's she did research showing that the age at which a woman
has her first child is actually more important to many life cycle outcomes than how many children she had. This longitudinal research in some ways anticipated much work in the event history approach.
In the 1980's she lobbied to get the government to collect more data on childcare, and pointed out and showed that for many women, the unavailability and cost of childcare simply made it impossible to
hold a job; anticipating a key finding of welfare reform research later. In the 1990's she did path-breaking research on time use. She showed, for example, that many dual-earner couples work different
shifts, and that while mom is at work, dad is taking care of the kids. More generally, she showed how our new 24/7 service economy is affecting time use, affecting families, and affecting gender
inequality. In all of these areas, what really strikes me is that Harriet has been ahead of the curve. She's been ahead of the curve because she makes acute, empirical observations of things others
simply failed to notice. She notices things where others fail to notice them, because she sees their social significance. Please join me in congratulating Harriet Presser. HARRIET PRESSER: Thank you
so much, Paula, for that lovely introduction. Can't read my notes here. Well I want to also thank the selection committee in general for this wonderful honor. And, I especially want to thank the four
outstanding gender scholars in the Department of Sociology and in Women's Studies at the University of Maryland who nominated me. That's Suzanne Bianchi, Patricia Hill Collins, Bonnie Thorton Dill,
and Claire Moses. It's awkward to acknowledge a discipline, but I'm so grateful I found Sociology in the late 1950's, after an early divorce, with a young child, and uncertain what to do with my life.
This is a field that enables one to research and teach on issues that link the heart and mind. How very gratifying this has been. And thanks to the women's movement especially, and feminist scholars
amongst us, gender issues have become core to the field, just as they are core to our everyday lives. There were hurdles for all of us as feminists, being considered too political, too unscientific-
even those who did highly quantified data analysis, and certainly marginal to the field. Well, it's really thrilling that times have changed. The knowledge we generated helped to make that change. But
there's so much more to explore about the processes that continue to contribute to gender inequality, both domestically and internationally. I know, many of you are plugging away, and I wish you the
great pleasure of receiving an award like this sometime in the future, in the name of a woman I've known, and greatly admired, Jessie Bernard. Thank you. MARK SHNEIBURG: The Public Understanding of
Sociology Award is given annually to a person, or persons, who've made exemplary contributions to advance the public understanding of sociology, sociological research, and scholarship among the
general public. Please welcome Laura Beth Nielson as she presents this year's recipients. LAURA BETH NIELSON: On behalf of the committee it's my pleasure to tell you that Professor Valerie Jenness is
a co-winner of the Public Understanding of Sociology Award this year. The award is given in recognition of her scholarly work documenting the social movement behind hate crimes laws, and her growing
expertise and participation in the messy real world of policy making. In the aftermath of James Byrd Junior and Matthew Shepard's slayings, professor Jenness gave interviews to leading newspapers and
radio stations, helping the public make sense of these heinous crimes, and providing them with the context to understand hate crime laws and their efficacy. In addition, Professor Jenness works
extensively with police departments developing policies and practices for the implementation of hate crime enforcement, as well as with our frontline responders to hate crimes, policemen themselves.
Professor Jenness is Professor of Criminology at Law and Society, and Professor of Sociology at UC Irvine, and today's Pubic Understanding of Sociology winner. PROFESSOR VALERIE JENNESS: Thank you
Laura Beth, and thank you to the entire committee, and the American Sociological Association. I am deeply honored, I'm deeply honored to receive this recognition on behalf of myself and many people
with whom I've worked, and many people implicated in the work we've collectively achieved. I'm also particularly honored to receive this in light of the previous recipients. I'm pleased to receive it
in light of Jack Leven receiving it last year, my fellow researcher and comrade in what some call the hate crime industry, Jack. And I'm pleased to receive it in light of Frances Fox Piven being a
previous recipient, one of my academic heroes and I think I saw her buzzing around somewhere, Frances. There's a light in my in my face but I really am honored to be in the list of previous
recipients. And I'm pleased to receive it along with Doris Wilkinson, whom you'll hear more about in a few minutes. I thought about what to say, and I tried to develop some comments, and then it
happened again. Something happened on the way to the meetings that I'm sure has happened to many of you, if not something similar, namely: I was in a cab, and I was doing my seven mile route from my
home to the Orange County Airport, and as is often the case, making chit-chat with the cab driver- this is always dangerous. And he asked me where I was going and what I was doing, and I said "I'm
going to some meetings," and he said "Which ones?" and I said "The American Sociological Association meetings. Annual meetings." We had about five minutes left in the cab, and he asked what was
sociology. Cognizant of time and cognizant I've been through this terrain before, I tried as best I could and I found we were talking about communists. We were talking about social workers. We were
talking about activists, and we were talking about psychologists, and now I have about one and a half minutes left before we get to the Orange County Airport. Perhaps over drinks I can tell you how I
did that in a minute and a half. Now my own route to getting to this moment with the cab driver, not unlike many other moments with cab drivers, is really quite complicated and much too long to do in
the two minutes they've allocated. But I wanted to say the route to enhancing the public's understanding of sociology, for me has been quite complex, quite meandering, sometimes quite disillusioning,
but always rewarding and always exciting. That's what makes receiving this particular award quite affirming for me. In the current moment, many of my most treasured professional moments in my life
come as a researcher and educator, trying to communicate to various constituencies and various communities, the value of what we do, all of us. The value of a sociological perspective, the value of
documenting and describing and explaining basic social structures and social processes, and all of the complexities that surround them. And the value of somehow connecting that to important issues of
the past, issues of the day, and certainly issues of the future. For me, these are valuable professional moments, done certainly in the classroom and far beyond the classroom. What I want to do is to
suggest that explaining and convincing people of the value of what we do, and the value of a sociological perspective is a very important task and it's an easy task for me because I'm a true believer,
and it's easy to explain things you believe in. But for me a sociological perspective is not about being a true believer, it's about a lot of backdrop, and a lot of help. So what I want to do is
conclude my comments with some well placed thank yous. I want to begin by always thanking my mother. I was told this is being recorded, and now that I know she might watch it I better thank her. She
doesn't understand what I do and how I do it and why I do it, so maybe this isn't an appropriate award- I've been trying. But she's always supported my efforts and trusted my judgments, and that's
meant a world to me. Moving beyond my mother, I want to thank a number of institutions. I don't have time to thank the number of people, but a number of institutions beginning with the University of
California Santa Barbara Sociology Program. As I move through my career I become increasingly aware of the value of the training you get back when you're learning the craft, and the science, and the
trade. So I want to give a shout out to the University of California Santa Barbara Sociology Department. Fast forward, I also want to thank the University of California, Irvine, my current home.
Despite all the troubles that the University of California faces right now, and they are many and they are deep, it's a hospitable, wonderful place to do what we do. Finally, I want to thank two final
groups of people. The many publics with whom I've been privileged to engage, from politicians, to legislators, to prisoners, to cab drivers, to everything in between. It is a joy to talk about
sociology with these diverse groups of people. And I want to thank you my sociological colleagues, friends, and collaborators that produced the information and the understandings that it is my honest
pleasure to get to talk about in public. Thank you very much. LAURA BETH NIELSON: Doris Wilkinson, Professor of Sociology at the University of Kentucky, is the second co-winner of the Public
Understanding of Sociology Award today. She's best known within sociology for her pioneering work on critical race theory, and the sociology of health and illness. She's a co-winner of the Public
Understanding of Sociology Award in recognition of, among many accomplishments, her creative use of social and cultural history exhibits as public education tools to convey an understanding of
sociological processes. Her curiosity about black physicians in Kentucky in the 1920's led her to complete a historical analysis that culminated in a popular 1988 public exhibition entitled "Forgotten
Pioneers in a Southern Community," that explain how, by 1985, there were only ten black doctors practicing in Lexington, Kentucky. This exhibit was made into a documentary by Kentucky Education
Television, and also became a much sought after display at local, state, and national libraries and museums. On behalf of Doris Wilkinson, Esse Manuel Rutledge is here to accept her award. ESSE MANUEL
RUTLEDGE: It is really indeed an honor and a pleasure to accept this award promoting the public understanding of sociology for Doris Wilkinson, who has been a long time friend and colleague of mine. I
will read a statement that she submitted to me for reading. Hence, it is as follows. I am exceedingly grateful for having been selected as one of the recipients of the 2010 ASA Award for promoting the
public understanding of sociology. In addition to having had the chance to teach and write about social realities, I have framed a different mode of interpreting the social world through public
presentations and public humanities. Projects such as "Warriors in the Shadows: Women of the Underground Railroad." This wonderful award represents the culmination of my career that has transcended my
workplace ... . I owe thanks not only to the ASA committee that selected me as one of the recipients of the 2010 award, but also thanks to many friends and colleagues, across the country who granted
me an opportunity to serve in a leadership role as president of the DCSS, the SPSS, and ESS. At the beginning of this century, under the progressive leadership of Judith Lorber, the ESS awarded me its
Senior Scholar Award. Many good wishes to all of my countless friends and colleagues. And thank you again, for this most cherished honor. I accept the award in honor of Doris, and I know that she
would have been here, but because of some health problems she was not able to attend. Thank you. MARK SHNEIBURG: This annual award honors the intellectual tradition of Oliver Cox, Charles S. Johnson,
and E. Franklin Frasier. Please welcome Mary Johnson Osirim as she presents this year's recipient. MARY JOHNSON OSIRIM: Good evening everyone. Oliver Cox, Charles Johnson, and E. Franklin Frasier were
distinguished sociologists, whose scholarship substantially expanded the field of race and ethnic relations, and was dedicated to the advancement of the African American community. In her life, and
work as a scholar, teacher, administrator, and public intellectual, Delores P. Aldrigde, is a trailblazer who exemplifies this tradition. Delores Aldridge is the Grace Towns Hamilton Distinguished
Professor of Sociology and African American Studies at Emery University. So here she is, receiving this award in her hometown. We commend her for her many publications on gender, health, and education
in the African American community, for her anti-aparthide work, for her support of sustainable development projects in West Africa, for her leadership of numerous professional and community
organizations, and for her teaching and mentoring of countless numbers of students. Her life as a scholar-activist makes us truly proud to be sociologists. Please join me in congratulating Delores
Aldridge. DELORES ALDRIDGE: Thank you so much Mary, you did a splendid job in pulling together information about me. And when I travel again across this country and around the world speaking, I will
look for you to come and present it in that very brief format. It was wonderful thank you. Thank you so very much, ASA, and the ASA Award Committee for this most significant award, named for Oliver C.
Cox, Charles S. Johnson, and E. Franklin Frasier. Cox's work pioneered global world-class theory. Charles S. Johnson provided some of the most significant research on race and the South and was one of
our finest administrators as president of Fisk University. And of course, E. Franklin Frasier, who was one of the architects of Clark Atlanta University's School of Social Work, and whose work was and
still is, most controversial, as he delved deeply into the life blood of the black community with provocative research on families, religion, and social class. Each of the three advocated against
inequality and for social justice. I would not dare to think my life and work approaches that of these sociological giants. However, I would say that this award comes at the apex of my career,
followed by awards I have received from other social science organizations, namely the WEB DuBois Award from the Association of Social and Behavioral Scientists, the A. Wade Smith Award from the
Association of Black Sociologists, and the Charles S. Johnson Award from the Southern Sociological Society. I accept this award for both myself and all the pioneering black women sociologists whose
lives have not often been as celebrated as those of the men. I wrote about some of these pioneering black women sociologists in my last book "Imagine a World: Pioneering Black Women Sociologists,"
published by the Academic Press, wherein I attempted to present the lives of women such as Jacqueline Jackson, Doris Wilkinson, to mention a few. These women did their sociology, but they did it a
little bit differently than men did theirs. These women have been activists as well as scholars. I can recall when I was in the civil rights movement with Martin Luther King Junior, going to jail,
that it was not a luxury to simply write and do my research, but that I needed to be out there, with hands on experience. So I looked to all of the folk of this award, for whom this award is named,
Cox, Johnson, and Franklin Frasier for inspiration. I accept this award for both myself and for all the pioneering black women sociologists, whose lives have not been celebrated. I wrote about some of
these as I mentioned in that one work, but also in other works. This Cox, Johnson, Frasier Award is a huge honor for me, celebrating these remarkable sociologists, and I take such great pride in
receiving this award from the American Sociological Association in my home town, Atlanta Georgia. Thank you so much. MARK SHNEIBURG: The Award for Excellence in the Reporting of Social Issues honors
individuals for their promotion of sociological findings and a broader vision of sociology. Please welcome Deborah Carr as she presents this year's recipient. DEBORAH CARR: Thank you. Ok. On behalf of
the committee I'm delighted to honor this year's award winner, Sebastiao Salgado. Brazilian born documentary photographer Sebastiao Salgado originally trained as an economist before turning his eye to
visual representations of global social issues. His in depth projects explore the issues of inequality, development, urbanization, environmental degradation, labor, migration, and globalization, which
the committee recognizes and praises as corresponding to the core themes of sociology. Salgado has photographed in over one hundred countries, yielding over a dozen major works and books which he
exhibited worldwide. Salgado has committed to documenting a comprehensive set of human and sociological issues with skill and beauty, reaching a wide audience through the medium of photography. So I'd
like to award the award to Sebastiao Salgado. He's, he's not here. Sebastiao Salgado is very sorry that he cannot accept his award in person, but you will soon see why, and he sends along his brief
remarks. "Dear members of the American Sociological Association, I am very happy, and very proud to receive this prestigious award, and I would very much have liked to be present. Unfortunately it is
impossible, I will be working at that time on an assignment in Indonesia among Papua communities as part of my ongoing project Genesis. I would like to offer you my most sincere gratitude and my most
friendly greetings. Thank you." MARK SHNEIBURG: The Distinguished Career Award for the Practice of Sociology honors outstanding contributions to sociological practice through work that has facilitated
or served as a model for the work of others, work that had significantly advance the utility of one or more specialty areas in sociology, and by so doing had elevated the professional status or public
image of the field as a whole. Or work that has been honored or widely recognized outside the discipline for its significant impacts, particularly advancing human welfare. Please welcome Karen Walker
as she presents this year's recipients. KAREN WALKER: Good evening. On behalf of the committee for the Distinguished Career Award for the Practice of Sociology, I'd like to present this year's award
to two winners. The first Jan Marie Fritz, is an internationally recognized leader in clinical sociology. She has practiced across multiple areas in service, research, practice, and teaching. Within
the academy she has been tireless in promoting clinical sociology and helping to create training certification and accreditation programs. Outside the academy, she has conducted workshops, consulted
and provided conflict resolution services in many countries on topics including mediation, environmental justice, and cultural competency. A current focus is reviewing the eighteen National Action
Plans that are based on the UN Security Council Resolution 1325 Women, Peace, and Society. Her work assists the countries that are developing or revising their plans. Her publications have been
translated into many different languages. As a leading clinical sociologist who has expanded and defined the field for future generations of sociologists, we present this year's Distinguished Career
Award for the Practice of Sociology to Dr. Jan Marie Fritz. Please join me in congratulating her. DR. JAN MARIE FRITZ: Thanks. I was glad one of the presenters mentioned her mother, I think I'll start
with my mother who's ninety-six, and she wanted to know if I was getting cash. My mother who also jokes about things-yeah that's something to think about, and you know. So. There could be a sale
after, think about this. My mother also wanted to know if this was a perfect attendance award. So for some of you who go to a lot of meetings that's also something to think about. The last time I had
anything to do with this award was many years ago, when I nominated Dr. Charles Gomillion for this, and it meant so much to him. And I'm just thinking about how that was so important, because he took
that racial gerrymandering case to the US Supreme Court, did all those years of work for the Tuskegee Civic Association, and really had not been recognized by sociology. His closet was filled with
awards, under the bed was filled with awards, and we had not paid attention. So I'm appreciative that the award is here. I want to thank the selection committee, and particularly the person who
nominated me, which I really didn't realize at the beginning, but it was Carla Howery. And for many of you who knew Carla, you know why that's important. In thinking about awards in general, I
represented the International Sociological Association to the annual meeting in Kazakhstan of sociologists, and so I was in Almaty. And they, one day were going to have their awards, and I finally
realized that they were going to go all day, these awards, you know. And some of you are probably thinking "Why am I sitting here listening to all of this?" And this was a whole day of it, so you know
what I was thinking. After I was lulled into some kind of consciousness, I began to realize this was really nice, you know. And it was respect and appreciation for all the people who were there. And
it was wonderful to be part of it actually. And so in that spirit I would like to share where my respect and appreciation is. Some of you may not even know these names: Robert Sevigny, Jacque Creon,
coming out of Quebec, ... in his laboratoire in Paris. Their movement in clinical sociology is both international and interdisciplinary and I am thrilled to be part of what they are doing. I also
would like to thank the network that has come of people who are on the Commission for the Accreditation for Programs in Applied and Clinical Sociology. They have standards in place for undergraduate
and masters programs and the work of developing a doctoral program accreditation. And I'm thinking is it going to be a sociology program that goes through that doctoral accreditation first? Or are we
going to look at an international program? Or are we going to look at an interdisciplinary program? I'd like to see it at home. We have a strong tradition from the 1929 here in this country, and I'd
like to see more attention paid. Last but not least, my appreciation for all of those of you who have Carla Howery has touched your life, has opened a door for you, your student, your regional
association. If you have your imaginary glass with you, I'd like you to raise that to her, and I wish she was here with us now. Thank you very much. KAREN WALKER: The second winner. Ross Koppel is a
leading sociological practitioner with an expansive, wide ranging, and impressive record, both nationally and internationally, of academic achievement, commitment, and service to the discipline, and
practical impact on the lives of the disabled and ill. His work has significantly improved public transit for the disabled in Boston. And the federal government's understanding of the costs of
Alzheimer's disease. His methodological practices in those areas have become models for the research on other transit systems and diseases. His work on medical informatics has also saved thousands of
patients' lives. Koppel's extensive record of publications spans four decades, and his leadership of several professional organizations reflects what it means to use sociology for the public good and
contribute to our discipline's knowledge and methods. And we present the second of this year's Distinguished Career Award for the Practice of Sociology to Dr. Ross Koppel. Please join me in
congratulating him. ROSS KOPPEL: Thank you. About twenty five years ago I was on the committee to select honorees for this award. And I was about two standard deviations younger than everybody on the
committee, and whenever I'd suggest somebody they'd say "So young," and I'd say "She's seventy four," and they'd say "See?" So there was one candidate who was about sixty eight and despite his youth
he had the advantage of a dread disease, and I watched his candidacy rise and then somebody came in and announced that he had been misdiagnosed, he was healthy, and his chances metastasized in front
of him. So, when I was informed I won this award, I was deeply honored but scared out of my mind that the ASA knew something about my health that I didn't. But, more seriously, in the past thirty
years, thirty five years, god... Sociology, the use of sociology, has enabled me to sue the MBTA Boston Transit System for a few billion, and win, on behalf of the disabled, to secure several billion
dollars for the study of Alzheimer's and the caregivers of Alzheimer's, and to become the most hated man on the list of manufacturers of healthcare information technology. So I'm very appreciative of
all of that. But other than my health and some awards, there's another paradox about this award, and that is while I'm enthralled that we honor sociological practice, I wonder on some level how we can
differentiate practice from the rest of sociology. Our founders expected us to use sociology to create a better world, and unfortunately we seldom emphasize that part of our work in comparison to our
writings and to our scholarship. The great news however, is that recently the ASA and our discipline have re-embraced public sociology, applied sociology, and the idea of using sociology for good. So
it encourages me that maybe we can give up this award, and have the practice of sociology be a part of all of sociology, and so there won't be a separate award for this. But before we superannuate
this award, I want to accept it. I'm deeply honored, and I thank you very much. MARK SHNEIBURG: The Distinguished Contributions to Teaching Award is given to honor outstanding contributions to the
undergraduate and/or graduate teaching and learning of sociology that improve its quality of teaching. Please welcome Katherine McClelland as she presents this year's recipient. KATHERINE MCCLELLAND:
Keith Roberts, Professor of Sociology at Hanover College, and this year's recipient of the Distinguished Contributions to Teaching Award presents a profile of teaching related activities that is both
broad and deep. He has managed the very difficult feat of being both a cosmopolitan and a local when it comes to teaching matters, by making outstanding contributions and taking on leadership roles on
his own campus, in his region, and on the national level. Nationally, Keith has long been a mainstay of ASA's teaching and learning community. His presentations and publications on deep learning and
writing across the sociology curriculum have pushed us to move beyond the practical questions that drive many of us to these forums, and to think more deeply about the intellectual and sociological
basis of this field. He has been in the forefront of the association's drive to bring sociology into the high schools, and has actively sought to involve high school teachers in the dialogue about
teaching and learning. He's a familiar face at both national and regional meetings, where he's led workshops and served on a range of committees and working groups too numerous to mention here. And
most recently he has stepped forward to help others benefit from these opportunities by setting up, with Jean Valentine, a financial award to help graduate students and new faculty attend. Fittingly,
this award is funded by royalties from his popular textbooks, and funds by his publishers. Locally, Keith is also an exemplary advocate for teaching on his home campus. In addition to his stints as
department chairman of sociology, Keith is likely the only recipient of this award to have also chaired a physical education department. During his tenure in that position he used his pedagogical
expertise to guide the department in transitioning from a traditional PE major to one in Exercise Science. Through the many groups he's convened and the committees he's initiated Keith has nurtured a
supportive culture of teaching among his on campus colleagues, while also providing a means to introduce and discuss new pedagogies. Thus in presenting this award to Keith Roberts, we honor a
sociologist who has spent his career advancing the cause of teaching and learning. He has done so in all possible venues, from the local to the national level. For all his contributions, and for all
the lives he has touched through them, we are pleased to present him with ASA's 2010 Distinguished Contributions to Teaching Award. KEITH ROBERTS: We are a privileged profession, we professors. We get
to work with young minds, and things of the mind, and to pursue a life of the mind, and somebody is even willing to pay us to do it. It's incredible. It's a privilege to receive this award, a
privilege that is exhilarating, a bit bewildering, and deeply humbling. It's a bit bewildering to be honored to do something you just love to do. And it's humbling because there's so many deserving
people in the teaching movement in sociology. As Kathleen McInnis said a couple of years ago when she received this award, we all teach, all of us. And if we're going to do it we have an ethical
obligation to do it well. The section on teaching and learning is an extraordinary, supportive group of people, a section that has a win-win culture. If you have any interest at all in deep learning-
that is, not just short term memorization in order to take an exam, but truly deep, long-lasting learning, the section on teaching and learning, and the department resources group are where those
conversations are most rich. If you teach, you belong to this section. Join us. So on behalf of all those people who've contributed so very much to teaching, I accept this award as this year's symbol
of that commitment to teaching by a whole community of people. Thank you to Hans Mauksch, who started the teaching movement, to Carla who sustained it, and to all of you who have worked so hard on
behalf of effective, scholarly teaching. And so let your applause be for all of those people who are part of our community that help us all in so many ways. MARK SHNEIBURG: The Distinguished Book
Award is presented annually for a single book or monograph published in the three preceding calendar years. Please welcome David Yamane as he presents this year's recipients. DAVID YAMANE: The
recipient of this year's award was selected one year ago from among forty six books that were nominated. So as you can imagine I'm presenting this award on behalf of a very, very hard working
committee. Reading the nominated books each year is very inspiring of course, but it's also very humbling. And you can imagine that choosing one distinguished book from among the many that are
nominated is quite difficult. The one book, the fact that one book stands out from among the rest, is a truly awesome achievement, and this year we honor "Inheriting the City: The Children of
Immigrants Come of Age" by Philip Kasinitz, John H. Mollenkopf, Mary Waters, and Jennifer Holdaway. "Inheriting the City" is collectively authored, as you just heard, and while we might see this as an
unfair advantage, anyone who's collaborated in research and writing knows that the transaction costs of doing that can be quite high. In this case the joint authorship seemed to magnify the individual
contributions of these distinguished scholars, yielding countless insights into the lives of children of immigrant parents. And many of those insights are chronicled in your award booklet. I'd add
that the empirical foundation of this book is impressive but not oppressive. It's built on a survey of over three thousand young adults, follow up interviews with over three hundred of those, and
ethnographic fieldwork in dozens of sites. And yet, one never feels as if they're being assaulted by these data. And consequently this is going to be a book of interest to sociologists, and citizens
alike, as befits this award. "Inheriting the City" is truly a distinguished work of scholarship for which we thank and congratulate the authors, two of whom are here today to accept the award, Philip
Kasinitz and John Mollenkopf. JOHN MOLLENKOPF: As with the other award recipients we are deeply grateful and humbled by this recognition. In a project so large, and long, and complex, it clearly
would've been impossible without a tremendous amount of support from a variety of sources. This was truly something that was built on the shoulders of many people who helped us, and we would like to
recognize several groups of those helpers. And I'll begin by mentioning a few, and then Phil will conclude our brief remarks. We would like to begin of couse by recognizing our missing partners, Mary
Waters, and Jennifer Holdaway. They're both in China on a project that was planned more than a year ago. Both would very much liked to have been here, but it wasn't possible for them. We would also
like to recognize our co-honoree from whom you'll hear in a second, Alejandro Portes, who with Reban Rumbo did such an incisive and brilliant job of setting the intellectual agenda for the field that
we have developed in this book. We would also to acknowledge the people that supported this along the way. It was as I said a large and complex, and expensive project, the initiative for which was
taken by the Russell Sage foundation, and we would especially like to acknowledge Eric Wanner, the president of Russell Sage, who's Committee on Immigration really has driven forward this important
field within our discipline. And in particular we would also to acknowledge Harriet Zuckerman from the Mellon Foundation, and Katherine McFate who was then at the Rockefeller Foundation and now is at
the Ford Foundation. Russell Sage put up the initial amount of money to get this project rolling forward, but if it weren't for the additional support from these other sources, we would never have
been able to gather all the resources necessary. We would also very much like to recognize our loved ones. Our spouses who supported us through this process, in Phil's case Lisa Gibbs, in mine
Kathleen Gerson. They not only supported us and tolerated the grumpy mood we sometimes got into when we were working on this project, but they inspired us. And just to show that this is not a one
gender source of support; Rick Baily who is Mary Water's husband, and Guy Padulo who is Jennifer's husband, both supported them tremendously, and Rick in particular is a model of equal parenthood and
support for Mary. And I know if she were here she would be saying those words. Now there are many others we want to acknowledge as well, and I'll turn it over to Phil. PHILIP KASINITZ: Thank you. This
is indeed a truly humbling award and of course we have to thank the committee. It was quite a surprise and quite an honor. Obviously we need to thank our colleagues at the City University of New York,
which is a truly exciting place to study these kind of issues and has become a real center for fascinating research on the topic. We need to thank the dozens of social scientists who were involved in
one phase or another. There are four names on the cover, which is already a lot, but if you open the book in the preface, there's like a page and a half, of the names of other people. We could be a
small ASA section at this point. And so I don't dare try to name names, partially because I don't have the time and partially because I'm sure to slight somebody by omission. But just to say that many
of the people, many of them in this room, contributed mightily to our work in addition to doing their own work based on our data, and we're very, very much in their debt. Obviously we need to thank
our two editors at our two publishers, Michael Aaronson of the Harvard University Press, and particularly Suzanne Nichols of the Russell Sage Press, Russell Sage Foundation Press I should- it's a
different place. Suzanne made extraordinary efforts to keep us on track, not always easy, throughout the development of the book, and then towards the end made some really interesting innovations to
make sure that the book was available at a reasonable price, and we are very, very thankful for her. Finally and most important, we need to thank the thousands of young New Yorkers who generously
shared their time with us. Young people are coming up in a really tough town, facing some really difficult problems, in a very tough time. And doing so with, well often with the creativity and
resilience, and grace, that I have consistently found awe inspiring. They have an important story to tell. And really the only thing we can offer by way of recompense is that we tried to the best of
our limited abilities to get that story right. Thank you very much. MARK SHNEIBURG: Our final award. The 2010 WEB DuBois Career Award of Distinguished Scholarship honors scholars who have shown
outstanding commitment to the profession of sociology, and whose cumulative work has contributed in important ways to the advancement of the discipline. Please welcome Robin Wagner-Pacifici as she
presents this year's recipient. ROBIN WAGNER-PACIFICI: On behalf of the WEB DuBois Career Award of Distinguished Scholarship Committee, I am very happy to present this year's award to Alejandro
Portes. Alejandro Portes is a world renowned scholar of international migration whose innovative, agenda setting work has advanced the discipline of sociology theoretically and methodologically.
Professor Portes has analyzed the causes and consequences of immigration, the structures of informal economies, the experiences of immigrants in trans-national communities, and in a term he coined,
"ethnic enclaves." Across the sociological domains of economic and political sociology, national development, urbanization, and Latin American politics and class structure, Professor Portes has forged
new paradigms and re-oriented thinking. A fellow of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences, a member of the National Academy of Sciences, former president of the American Sociological Association,
and one of the most prolific of sociologists, Alejandro Portes has earned the WEB DuBois Career Award, in recognition of a lifetime of distinguished scholarship, mentorship, and service to sociology.
Please join me in congratulating Alejandro Portes. ALEJANDRO PORTES: Well officially I have to thank the committee, and Robin for those very nice words, and for this remarkable honor. As I look around
the audience, I cannot see many people because of the lights, but I was looking at them before, and I can say that I can identify many people, many of our colleagues who will also be in competition
and deserving of this award now or in the future. So in that sense, the fact that it has been given to me in this case, I find it deeply humbling and lucky. Since indeed there are many of us who this
careers stage I think equally or more deserving. Is it going to be about, it's about forty years since I began my career as an assistant professor at the University of Illinois, and the journey since
then have had a lot of bumps. Two years later at the University of Texas at Austin, I got five rejections in a row. And after doing that I thought that my career was finished. Sort of started looking
into law school, because five rejections were kind of serious, serious stuff. But, persisted and found that, that successes along the way require, that took a lot of effort. This, certainly this
career is very, very rewarding but no bed of roses, and each of them was like four parts effort and persistence, and one part idea, and it needed this kind of this work. So I want to share that with
the young, the younger generation among us, the younger sociologists: Hang in there! If you get, that is if you that letter from the editor saying we regret that to inform you, and so on, don't get
too discouraged, that is part of the process. And that would, in a sense make you grow and develop in other directions, because there are many that is certainly journal publishing is very important
but not the only part of the things that we, that we do. Well, to make things short, I think that behind every so-so scholar, that's the familiar proverb goes, behind every so-so scholar, there is a
great sociologist. And in my case that person is my spouse of twenty five years, collaborator, and friend despite those, all those years, Patricia Fernandez-Kelly, to whom I'd like to dedicate this
award. Lastly, this, a career award, when coming of course being such a great honor, is also slightly reminiscent of a gold watch. That is, it is, you have gone, it is fine, and then march into the
sunset. I'd like to inform my colleagues here that I interpret this great award for which I'm so honor as a mid career recognition and I intend to engage and debate with all of them, if health
permits, for many, many years to come. Thanks again to the committee and to the American Sociological Association. JOHN LOGAN: Well I, I get to add my own congratulations to the award winners, and not
just to congratulate them, but to thank them for the work and the devotion and the commitment and the persistence that allowed them to do what they accomplished. And also to mention how inspiring it
is to hear this list of accomplishments and to ask myself "How do these people do it?" It is inspiring. I'm sure you are an inspiration to your colleagues and to your students as you are to all of us,
so thank you, thank you very much for your work. And I'd like to invite everybody, at the close of this ceremony to the reception just outside the hall. When Evelyn Glenn finishes her speech and
you've finished applauding, it's straight out the doors, to a chance to talk to talk to each other, to meet the award winners, congratulate them yourselves, and perhaps even have a chance to touch the
hem of the dress. Fine people. And it's my pleasure to have the role of introducing Evelyn Glenn for her presidential address. I don't know Evie very well but I've been learning over the last couple
of years. And I went back to the biographical sketch that Myra Marx Ferree published in footnotes a year ago, and noticed that it began with these words: Evie Nakano Glenn is a wise Asian American
woman. And, of course that's a phrase that has a certain ring to it, and I think that Evelyn has showed us through her career that indeed a wise Asian American woman can make unique contributions to
sociology. And I know that she's going to see this opportunity to give her presidential address as a tribute to that career, and well deserved. I'm most impressed with the multidimensionality of her
scholarship. I know that she's most widely understood as a person who's focused on issues of gender and the experience of women, but what is most important to me is how easily and naturally she
relates those questions to issues of race and labor, and especially citizenship, which became the theme for this program this year. And always historically grounded and always with awareness of the
importance of place and context. And especially I'm impressed at how naturally she weaves together all these complicated themes into the same body of work. I've also noticed that she's a very quiet
person, and very soft-spoken, and I was surprised from that presentation of self, to read in Myra's auto-biographical sketch that Evie had chosen the title "Looking Back in Anger" as the title of an
essay that she wrote about her experiences as a woman in graduate school at Harvard. "Looking Back in Anger" is not a title chosen by an easy pushover person at all. She's quiet and soft spoken but I
see very much a well-tempered steel. I've worked with her for two years on various roles within the association. I know that she shaped this year's program with a very clear view about what she wanted
to accomplish, and she accomplished it efficiently and effectively. As the president of ASA she reacted very quickly this year to the anti-immigrant politics in Arizona, which is a direct reflection
of some of the same commitments in her own work, and in the theme behind this program. She was always willing to listen to other people, and I found even when I was a minority view I felt that I'd
been listened to, and she led ASA with purpose, and with determination. So it's my great pleasure to introduce Evie Glenn, President of the ASA, for this final step in our program today. EVELYN NAKANO
GLENN: I may be known as quiet and soft-spoken, but members of my family call me "Mama the Fist." Thank you John for that lovely introduction. And it's really lovely to see so many people that I have
known over the years and who have expressed genuine delight and happiness for me, and to also, you know, in other words being surrounded by so many friends over so many years. I do want to express
some specific appreciation to some people without whom this occasion would not have been possible. First the members of the 2010 Program Committee, and you should know that they worked for a full two
years to create the array of thematic sessions that are related to the program theme. So I'm going to name them individually. Rick Baldoz, Jose Calderon, Craig Calhoun, Myra Marx Ferree, Elizibeth
Higginbotham, Amanda Lewis, Clarence Lo, John Logan, Mercedes Rubio, and Don Tomaskovic-Devey. Second I also want to give, yes give them a hand. I also want to thank members of the local arrangements
committee with the chairs, Leslie Reed and Shyril Leggin who set up the sessions that have to do with the local region, the tours, etc. So I want to thank them very much. And then, most of all I also
want to thank the fantastic ASA staff. We've been, I've been really lucky to work closely with executive officer Sally Hillsmen, and meeting manager Carime Jenkins. And I want to tell the
president-elect, and the president-elect-elect, that you will not be able to fail, actually. They make it impossible, so I'm very grateful for the staff. And I'm also very grateful that my partner of,
dare I say forty eight years, I've joked about this before, about a being a child bride, but. My children, our children, Sara, Antonia, and Patrick, sons in law Paul and Scott, and our family friend
Jean, who could be here tonight, to support. And we did not bring our pets with us, but everybody else is here. And a final set of acknowledgements. When I selected citizenship as the theme for this
meeting, the program committee and I were cautiously hopeful that all of our many sections would find topics that would relate to their particular concerns and interests. Now little did we suspect
that by the time of the meeting, the meanings of citizenship, inclusion, participation, and rights, would be perhaps the hottest and most contentious issues in America. For this we can thank
politicians and media personages, who have inflamed public passion by advocating for racialized nationalism, for restrictions on immigrant rights, and most recently for repealing the fourteenth
amendment, so as to end birthright citizens. And I should mention if that were the case I would not be a citizen. Sorry. Immediately I make a mistake with my, I can't go backwards I guess it turns
out. Alright. In choosing the theme "Toward a Sociology of Citizenship," I wanted the meetings to stimulate us to think about two inter-related questions. First, what can sociology contribute to an
understanding of citizenship? And secondly, what can the study of citizenship contribute to sociology? So as to the first question of what sociology has to offer, in law and political science, the
heretofore dominant fields in the study of citizenship, citizenship has usually been viewed as a formal status that is define by legal documents and state policies. The special strength of sociology
may lie in its focus of social processes by which citizenship is formed. In particular sociologists can highlight how citizenship is constructed through face to face interactions, and through
historically in place specific practices that occur within larger social structures. With regard to the question of what the study of citizenship offers the many subfields of our discipline, I would
argue citizenship is omni-relevant. Citizenship affects not only public life in the form of political participation and the formation of public policy, but also importantly, private life, including
household formation, and interpersonal relations. The lack of citizenship or legal status affects household formation and may indeed fracture families. Exclusion from citizenship rights interacts
with, and magnifies other social inequities. Considering what is as stake then, it is not surprising that many of the most galvanizing social movements have been organized to extend and expand
citizenship, or contrarily to shore up boundaries and to restrict rights. My talk is divided into two major sections. In the first section I will outline an approach that I have developed in my own
work. I built on the work of British sociologist T.H. Marshall, to examine the frequent disjunction between formal and substantive citizenship. Marshall argued that 20th century reforms expanded
social rights, free and compulsory education, and basic welfare provisions that enabled working class Britons to finally exercise their civil and political rights. Citing historical cases, I argue
that social citizenship is certainly necessary, but it's not sufficient for people to enjoy substantive citizenship. One needs to look also at local practices that serve to recognize, or to deny
standing to certain groups and individuals. In the second section I examine the contemporary case of undocumented immigrant students, and their struggles to gain access to public higher education.
Their situation illustrates the multiple levels at which citizenship is constructed and contested from the national to the local. Additionally, the activism of undocumented students speaks to the
importance of insurgent movements in redefining the scope and meaning of American citizenship. At its most general level, citizenship refers to full membership in the community within which one lives.
Membership in turn implies certain rights in, and reciprocal obligations toward the community. T.H. Marshall, writing from the perspective of post World War II Britain, famously distinguished among
three types of rights that emerged sequentially. Civil, in the eighteenth century, political in the nineteenth, and social in the twentieth century. Thus for Marshall the history of rights in Britain
was linear and progressive. However, his account does not capture the complexity, dynamism, and fluidity, of citizenship we find in the United States. Examination of historical changes in the status
of women, blacks, Native Americans, and other originally excluded groups reveals that their trajectories have been far more torturous, as they experienced periods when they lost rights that they had
enjoyed earlier. For example blacks, especially free blacks, had more rights at the beginning of the nineteenth century than they had fifty years later. After the American Revolution, requirements for
private manumission were liberalized in the upper South, resulting in a sizable growth in the free black population. New state constitutions written after the revolutionary period allowed free blacks
who could meet general property requirements to vote, serve on juries, and hold office. Starting in 1819 however, under the banner of universal white manhood suffrage states expanded voting rights for
propertyless white men, while simultaneously disenfranchising African American men, even those with property. By the late 1850's, most free blacks were barred by their states from voting, and they
were ruled by the supreme court, in the Dred Scott decision, not to be citizens. Still, Marshall's formulation of citizenship as differentiated into several aspects rather than being a unitary status,
remains exceedingly useful. The idea of multiple dimensions draws attention to the fact that people can be citizens in some respects, but not in others. Also useful, has been Marshall's notion that
social citizenship is essential for there to be substantive citizenship. As sociologists, we should be attentive to the difference between having rights in theory, and being able to exercise rights in
practice, that is to be substantive citizens. Indeed I would argue sociologists can make a valuable contribution by being attentive to the processes that enable or disable individuals and groups from
realizing and exercising rights. Citizenship is not just a matter of formal legal status, it's a matter of belonging, which requires recognition by other members of the community. During the Jim Crow
era, which flourished until the 1960's, ordinary people maintained segregation in the South on a daily basis. For example, segregation of street cars meant that whites rode at the front and blacks at
the rear. However, often there was no fixed physical line. Rather, the line marking the white section was established by how far back whites chose to sit. Thus, segregation of public conveyances was
carried out and enforced not only by white drivers and conductors, and the police, but also importantly by white passengers. Contrarily, men and women may act on the basis of schemas of race, gender,
and citizenship that differ from those in formal law or policy. For example, when the US took over the Southwest in 1848 it agreed under the treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo, that all Mexicans residing in
the territory would be recognized as US citizens unless they elected to remain citizens of Mexico. In an era when full citizenship rested on white racial status, Mexicans by implication became white.
Indeed, that was the explicit policy of the federal government. For this reason, Mexicans were not enumerated separately from whites in the census prior to 1930. However, Anglos in the Southwest
increasingly did not recognize the official whiteness of Mexicans, and often refused to view them as Americans entitled to political and civil rights. As a result, even though segregation of Mexicans
was technically illegal, de facto segregation was rampant. Public sites of consequence such as hospitals, municipal buildings, banks, stores, and movie theaters, were Anglo territory. When Mexicans
entered Anglo territory, they were refined to certain restricted times or sections. According to one observer, Mexican women quote "Where only supposed to shop on the Anglo side of town on Saturdays,
preferably during the early hours when Anglos were not shopping." End quote. In Anglo run cafes, Mexicans were allowed to eat only at the counter or use carry-out, and in theaters they were relegated
to the balcony. Additionally Mexican children were assigned to separate segregated schools, and municipal swimming pools barred colored patrons except on the day before the pool was cleaned. According
to one historian, de facto segregation in the Southwest was quote "maintained through the actions of government officials, the voters who supported them, agricultural, industrial, and business
interests, the residents of white neighborhoods, parent-teacher association members. In short, all those who constituted the self-identified white public." End quote. Another example is one that
touches on my own family history. My mother Lillian and her two sisters Nancy and Heady were born and raised in the Sacramento Delta region of California. The photo shows my grandmother in the middle,
my mother on the right, and her sister Nancy on the left. Their parents, that is my grandparents, worked at various times as sharecroppers or employees of a white landowner. In the 1920's and 1930's,
my mother and aunts were required to attend a segregated oriental school in Courtland. The Courtland School District, along with other Delta districts, established oriental schools as early as 1906
without any official approval or permission from the state or the federal government. Not until fifteen years later in 1921 did the California legislature pass a law that allowed school districts to
establish separate schools for Indian children, and for children of Chinese, Japanese, and Mongolian parentage. Courtland's actions are an example of how local practices determine substantive
citizenship. A set of related issues arose over school bussing. The education section of the California constitution required that rural districts provide transportation for school children. My mother
recalls that the bus driver picked up children both white and Asian along a route that wound through the school district. However, when the driver stopped at the white school, he ordered all the
children to debark, calling out "All high binders off." High binders being an epithet for the Chinese. The Chinese and Japanese American children then had to walk a mile to the oriental school, even
through pouring rain in the winter season. The question is, did the school district establish the driver's route, or did he take it upon himself to refuse to take the Asian American children to the
oriental school? We can never know for sure, but given my reading of other historical instances, and the driver's use of the racial epithet, I suspect that he could've been acting on his own account
as a white American citizen, enforcing the boundaries of the nation and community, and marking Asian American children as aliens not entitled to rights. We all know that the driver reflected the
prevalent anti Asian sentiment among white Californians that eventuated in 1942 in the removal and incarceration of a hundred and twenty thousand Japanese Americans. The majority of whom, like my
mother and her sisters, were born in the US, and thus legally US citizens. Just as the boundaries of citizenship have been drawn and policed, not just by formal law and designated officials,
challenges to exclusion have been made not just through formal legal channels but also in informal and disguised ways. Returning to the example of street car segregation. Black men and women
challenged segregation not only by bringing legal suits and organizing boycotts, but also by individuals refusing to move to the back of the streetcar. Historical records suggest that enforcement of
streetcar segregation was one of the most frequent sparks for spontaneous black resistance. North Carolinian, sorry. North Carolinian Mary Mebane recounted several instance of blacks in Durham
refusing to move, and told of one incident in which a black woman came to the defense of a fellow passengers, who refused to move when ordered. The woman shouted "These are negro seats! The government
plainly says these are negro seats." Mebane noted with satisfaction that in this instance, the driver backed down. Excluded groups have also acted on concepts of citizenship that differed from those
of the dominant society. Elsa Barkley Brown found that in post reconstruction Richmond and other parts of the South, African Americans operated in two separate political arenas: Internal and external.
The external arena corresponded to institutions of the larger white dominated political order. The internal arena corresponded to the organizations and activities of the African American community. In
this internal realm, black women were enfranchised, and participated in all public forums, rallies, meetings, and conventions, and they considered black men's vote a collective resource of the African
American community. White northern observers were stunned when thousands of African American women attended the Virginia Republican Convention that took place from December 1867 to March 1868. A New
York Times reporter wrote that the entire colored population of Richmond was in attendance. Noting that women domestic workers made up a large portion of attendees, he reported quote "White households
were forced to get their own meals, or make do with a cold lunch." Black men and women attended not to be mere observers, they expected to take an active part, and they did so. Engaging in heated
debates in the gallery, making their concerns known to candidates, and supporting black speakers who looked up toward them while making oratorical points. Outside convention hours they gathered at
mass meetings to discuss and vote on the positions that black male delegates should take. Community votes were taken by voice or by standing, and all in attendance, women, men, and children voted. The
actions of African American women participating and voting in internal political meetings were rooting in an alternative conception of democratic representation. They were engaged in what
anthropologist James Holston calls insurgent citizenship. In Holston's words, quote "Contemporary citizenships develop as assemblages of entrenched and insurgent forms." End quote. He describes
insurgency as a counter-politics to the dominant historical formulations. At its most effective, insurgency quote "Destabilizes the present, and renders it fragile by defamiliarizing the coherence
with which it usually presents itself." Close quote. In this case African American women were throwing into question the individualistic conception of citizenship and what constitutes appropriate
political behavior. I now turn from historical examples to a contemporary case study, that of undocumented students in higher education. Certainly two of the most contentious areas of debate over
rights today are over immigration and public education. And this was so even before the passage of the show your papers law in Arizona, that is currently being debated in federal courts. Two central
debates are whether immigrants are entitled to full civil, political, and social rights, and whether all children, including racial minority and low income children are entitled to equality in
education. These two areas of contention overlap in the contemporary situation of so-called undocumented immigrant students. I say so-called because the designation "undocumented," as well as the even
more derogatory term "illegal," are relatively recent constructions applied to Latino and other non-European origin immigrants residing within the US without official papers. It is apparent that
illegal and undocumented, are racial-ethnic designations, given that countless European immigrants have resided in the US in the recent past without legal permission, without being labeled illegal.
The terms are particularly problematic in the case of the students I am talking about because they did not enter the US voluntarily, but were brought as children by their parents. Also, having been
raised and educated in the US, they are culturally and socially American. Let me start with the story of David, a student at UC Berkley, who has taken several classes from me. Soon after he was born
in Mexico, David's parents entered the US without papers, leaving him behind with his grandparents. In 1994 when he was six, his parents arranged for him to join them. David entered a local public
elementary school in Riverside county California. At first he struggled with English, but he flourished in math and science. He says he always loved school, in fact he found it to be a refuge from the
disorder in the rest of his life. He and his family, his parents and younger US born siblings lived in shared quarters with other immigrant families. They moved every few months in search of work. As
a result David attended twelve or thirteen different school even before high school. Despite the frequent moves, he excelled, earning mostly A's, joining math clubs, science teams, and honors
societies wherever he was. David graduated from high school with honors in 2006. David is among the estimated sixty five thousand undocumented youth who graduate from high school in the United States
each year. Their growing presence is partly a byproduct of inconsistent federal immigration policies that on the one hand encourage immigration to fill labor needs, and on the other try to discourage
immigration through stepped up border controls and punitive policies. As border controls have become stricter, undocumented immigrants have tended not to return regularly to their countries of origin,
because of the difficulty of reentering the United States. Thus their residence in the US tends to be longer and more continuous. Many have also moved out of the Southwest into other parts of the US,
including right here to Georgia and other parts of the Southeast. Over time, as in David's case, immigrants send for children who are undocumented like their parents or give birth to children who are
birthright US citizens. Here are some questions raised by David's case: Should he and other undocumented students who are academically qualified be admitted to public universities in their states on
the same terms as citizens and legal residents? If so, should they be charged tuition as in state students or as foreign students? Should they be eligible for financial aid from the state? What about
federal aid, Pell grants, and student loans? In order to address these questions we need to examine the multiple levels at which educational rights are constituted in the United States, and that's the
national, state, and local. First the national: A right to education is nowhere stated in the US Constitution. In this regard the US diverges from the international community. For example, the UN
declaration of human rights, and the European Union Declaration of rights, both assert that education is a fundamental right. US federal courts have produced a great deal of rhetoric about the
centrality of education to a democratic citizenry, but have eschewed pronouncing it to be a fundamental right on a par with other unstated rights, such as the right to privacy, the right to travel,
and the presumption of innocence. There was however one hugely significant federal ruling that extended K through twelve education to undocumented youth. In 1982 the US Supreme Court heard the case of
Plyler V. Doe, which was brought by a student challenging a Texas statute that allowed local school districts to deny enrollment to children who had not been legally admitted to the United States.
Justice Lewis F. Powell, writing for the majority restated his assertion in prior cases that there was no constitutional right to education. However, his opinion also stated that undocumented
immigrant children were persons, and thus covered by the fourteenth amendment provision of equal protection for all persons. Undocumented students could not be excluded from public schools unless it
could be clearly demonstrated that their exclusion served some necessary public good, which Texas had failed to show. This ruling established that immigrants, including undocumented ones, were
entitled to public elementary and secondary education. The Plyler decision left undecided, however, the right to access to higher education. It did lead to there being a critical mass of undocumented
high school graduates who wanted to continue their education. I now move to the state level. The constitution of all 50 states contain provisions for a system of free public schools and for state
responsibility for funding these schools. Some legal scholars argue that these constitutions, by establishing obligation on the part of the state to provide education, by implication create a claim
right on the part of residents to receive an education. State courts have varied in their interpretation, as to whether their state constitution education clauses create a claim right. The supreme
court of Missouri has said no, while courts in Kansas and New York have said definitely yes. Thus, in those states, children have a state defined right to education. This unevenness in state
interpretation of educational rights also holds in the case of access to public colleges and universities. Some thirty two states have considered legislation to allow undocumented students who have
graduated from high school in the state and fulfill other requirements, to pay in-state tuition. As of January 2010, the ten shaded states show on this map, plus Wisconsin, had passed such laws. In
two of these states, Texas and New Mexico, undocumented students are also eligible for state financial aid. Studies show that offering in-state tuition makes a considerable difference. In states with
such provision, one and a half times more noncitizen Latinos enroll in colleges than similar students in states without such provisions. On the other side of the ledger, several states, including
Georgia, Colorado, Mississippi, Alaska, and yes Arizona, have passed legislation or voter initiatives denying in-state tuition rates to undocumented students. South Carolina has banned undocumented
students from enrolling in all of its public colleges and universities. North Carolina has barred them from community colleges since 2007. Demonstrating the fluidity of this situation, in 2008
Oklahoma rescinded its 2003 granting in-state tuition to undocumented students. Meanwhile, court challenges to in-state tuition have been filed in several states. So, absent of federal right to
education, the social citizenship right to education at the state level is mixed, and indeed contradictory from one state to the next. Looking now at the local and individual practices that affect the
right to education, here is some more of David's story. As a high school senior, David applied to and was accepted at several UC campuses. He visited Berkley and was dazzled. He described the
experience as being, as like being at Hogwarts. He had not thought about how he would pay for college however. His parents could not help him and he had very little savings. He had won a few small
scholarships, but he did not have nearly enough to register. As the summer started he grew despondent, but rallied and finally resigned himself to enroll at his local community college. So there is a
certain resemblance here. After two years of successful study, he again applied to Berkley, and was accepted as a transfer student with junior standing. He still did not know how he would pay tuition
for his first semester. Although unable to hold a formal job, he had saved some money by tutoring other students in math. A group of friends, hearing about his dilemma, held a fundraiser for him and
raised nearly four thousand dollars. With his savings from tutoring, and the gift from friends, he was able to enroll as a junior at Berkley in fall of 2008. He took a class with me during his first
year at Cal, and another in his second year. From what I have observed, David and other undocumented students occupy an in between space that Cecilia Menjivar calls "Liminal legality." A kind of grey
area between the extremes of legal and illegal. Menjivar uses the concept to characterize the situation of Salvadorian immigrants who, while not legal residents, are covered by special legislation
that provides some protections such as authorization to work and protection from stays of deportation. I extend the concept of liminal legality to the situation of undocumented students enrolled in
colleges and universities. The decision in the Plyler case gave them legal standing as students entitled to K through twelve education, on the same terms as legal immigrants and citizens. The
university, by admitting them, and offering them in-state tuition and in the case of Texas and New Mexico offering them financial aid, is granting them de facto recognition as members of the
community. However, once they go off campus, such as onto the Telegraph Avenue shopping area adjacent to the Berkley campus shown here, they lack standing. They cannot get a job at chain stores and
eateries near campus, they cannot drive a car, sign a voter initiative, or drink in a bar. In short, to do the things that other students take for granted. They also have to hold in suspense the
question of what they will do once they graduate from college, since under current law they cannot work legally. Unfortunately David was unable to scrape together money to pay his fees for his second
year. Nonetheless he unofficially enrolled in classes. He approached professors, most of whom he had studied with before, and asked to be included on their class lists. He attended classes, took
exams, and wrote all the papers, but he was not able to get official credit. In short, David's identity as a college student rested on recognition from his professors and fellow students rather than
on official registration. Despite their vulnerability, undocumented students have not been quiescent. Like reconstruction era African Americans, undocumented students have not allowed their lack of
formal franchisement to deter them from acting in the public political realm. They have organized to lobby legislatures, educate the public about pending legislation, and publicize their public
opinions. Indeed, undocumented students were key players in successful efforts to persuade state legislatures to pass those very in-state tuition laws that I described earlier. I don't have time to
mention all of the examples of student activism but I'll mention two. In 2002 students at Lee High School in Houston Texas who were about to take advantage of the new legislation allowing them
in-state tuition established Jovenes Inmigrantes Por Un Futuro Mejor. The group counseled immigrant high school students, advocated for educational access, and forged coalition with other groups
fighting for immigrant rights. Subsequently, chapters of JIFM were organized at the University of Houston, the University of Texas, Austin, Texas A&M, and Prairie View A&M. In southern California, AB
540 students, as they prefer to be called, came together under the umbrella of the UCLA Labor Center. Following the labor centers model of championing the cause of day laborers and other undocumented
works, AB 540 students at UCLA have conducted research interviewing undocumented students, and have claimed their own voices by publishing a collection of their own testimonios. Immigrant high school,
community college, and university students in other states, including New York, Illinois, Wisconsin, and Florida, have banded together to support students threatened with deportation, and to fight for
educational rights. These immigrant student groups draw on a language of social justice, international human rights, and domestic civil rights. They ally their cause with that of low wage immigrants
such day laborers and domestic workers, and of low income African Americans who have been relegated to poorly funded, low performing public schools. Accordingly, student activists have adopted the
techniques of the African American civil rights movements, and the Chicano labor movement. Staging teach-ins, sit-ins, strikes, demonstrations, and rallies. Here are some images of a rage of small and
large public demonstrations. Washington DC students stage a mock graduation. St Paul, Minnesota a demonstration for the DREAM Act. In Los Angeles thousands of high school students demonstrate against
an anti immigrant law. And in Westchester County, New York a rally for passage of the DREAM Act. As these demonstration slides show, the greatest galvanizer has been the proposed federal DREAM Act.
The Development, Relief, and Education of Alien Minors Act. The purpose of the Act would be to help individuals who meet certain requirements to enlist in the military or attend college and have a
path to citizenship. The earliest versions were introduced in the US Senate in 2002 and 03, when it was approved by the Senate Judiciary Committee but not brought to a full vote. In 2006, a new
version of the DREAM Act was included in a bipartisan comprehensive immigration reform bill, jointly introduced, and here you'll have to recall the past, Senators John McCain and Edward Kennedy. The
comprehensive bill would have regularized the status of millions of undocumented immigrants. But the House and Senate failed to reconcile their versions, so the reform failed. The DREAM Act was
reintroduced as a standalone bill in the House and Senate in 2007 and again in 2009 with a hundred and eleven representatives and 34 senators as cosponsors. There is thus substantial support for the
federal DREAM Act, but also virulent opposition, with a climate poisoned by nativist, anti immigrant, and anti Latino demagoguery. To date, the bill has not been brought to a full vote in either House
or Senate, and the chances look dim for the present session. Regrettably then, David's story is without full resolution. Just a month ago he received two private scholarships, which allowed him to
partially clear his tuition bills for 2009 and 10, and to pay tuition for 2010-11, so that he can graduate next June. However he still has no path to legal status and citizenship. So what is the
importance of the undocumented immigrant student movement to a sociology of citizenship? It is after all, a small and marginal movement within the overall context of US society. I would argue that it
is precisely at the margins of society that we can see the possibilities for change. Change almost never starts at the center, but rather at the margins and, and in between spaces. The activism of
undocumented students, like that of African American women in the post reconstruction South is a form of insurgent citizenship. Indeed, the very existence, and day to day experiences of undocumented
college students upsets the coherence of the legal-illegal dichotomy that anchors immigration policy. This dichotomy, as we have seen, harnesses the dominant trope of criminality to dehumanize
immigrants. Thus, at virtually every immigrant demonstration some protesters, many of them undocumented themselves, carry homemade signs reading "No human being is illegal." Further by framing access
to higher education as a human right and social justice issue, they challenge dominant formulations that submerge and impoverish social rights, even of those who are formal citizens. Indeed their
struggle is occurring within a larger context of a decade's long disinvestment in public education that is eroding the social citizenship rights of all children and youth. There have been growing
alliances among K through twelve, community college, and public university faculty, students, and staff, to lobby state legislatures to restore funding to all levels of public education. Immigrant
students' assertion of education as a fundamental right resonates with the message that education is a public good that needs to be supported by the public. Thus I would argue the fight of
undocumented students remind us of the importance of robust social citizenship, to ensure that there is social justice. A final thought: On one hand, the obstacles faced by those struggling to be
recognized as members of the nation they have called home for all or most of their lives seems almost insurmountable. On the other hand, I look around at the hundreds of us in this room, and at the
responses of our forty five sections to bring sociological research and theories to bear on issues of citizenship. And I am filled with hope that our work, our efforts, our outreach can make a real
difference. As I complete my year as your president, it is this hope that I will retain and cherish. Thank you.