|
humanity and society (AHS Journal)
|
HUMANITY AND SOCIETY
EDITOR DAINA HARVEY, HUMANITY & SOCIETY
Biography: I earned a B.B.A (Finance) and a Double B.A. (Philosophy and Economics) from the University of Texas-Austin, a M.A. (Sociology) from the University of Houston, and a Ph.D. (Sociology) from Rutgers University. I have been at the College of the Holy Cross since 2012. I teach and do research mainly in the areas of social disruption/dislocation, food geographies, the environmental and urban precariat, cognition and culture, and social justice.
Reflexive Statement: My first week at Holy Cross, Jerry Lembcke, whose office was two doors down, stopped by my office and asked if I was going to the meeting. Thinking I had forgotten about my first departmental meeting I panicked; I quickly grabbed some things together to run out. Jerry said, “No, no, the humanists, in Nashville, next month. You know, the humanists.” I didn’t know. Jerry and I chatted for a few minutes. “Well, next year, right? You’d better be going next year.” I did. Those people that you occasionally, every few years, meet at a conference and wonder, “how have we never meet before,” and leave looking forward to seeing them next year, here they were, all in one place, at one conference. For the first time at an academic conference I was surrounded by activists; surrounded by other sociologists who scoffed at sociology (or anything) being value-neutral; surrounded by people who didn’t care about your reputation or where you were at; surrounded by people who were also scratching their heads, trying to figure out the banality of mainstream sociology. I cannot imagine a sociology without AHS. We are the counter to the political and economic order that sustains capitalism, white supremacy, colonialism, environmental racism, precarity…
I am in my sixth year as editor of Humanity and Society. I am proud that we publish the work of activists and teachers, scholars on the margins of academia and historically marginalized scholars; I’d like to think that we are one of a few journals that much like our Association is a home for good people doing good work.
Humanity & Society: the official journal of the Association for Humanist Sociology, was first published in 1977 and has been published quarterly since 1978. Humanity & Society is a peer-reviewed Sage journal with abstracts of published articles appearing in Sociological Abstracts. It features “humanist sociology,” which is broadly defined as a sociology that views people not only as products of social forces but also as agents in their lives and the world. We are committed to a sociology that contributes to a more humane, equal, and just society. Additional information, including copies of previous volumes is also available at http://journals.sagepub.com/home/has
Humanity & Society publishes articles on a wide variety of topics that include but are not limited to: studies of inequality (class, race, and/or gender); war, peace, and international relations; aging and gerontology; environmental sociology; globalization; gender and sexuality; health and mental health; social theory; sociology of knowledge and science, and linguistics; social psychology; teaching and sociology practice; social change, humanism and human rights; crime and deviance; ethnic and intergroup relations, and others
The editors cordially invite you to submit your work for possible publication in Humanity & Society. In addition to publishing articles, we also publish action notes (which describe activism the writer has participated in or observed), book review essays, multimedia review essays, and provocative “final thoughts.” In keeping with the values of the membership, the journal uses an open peer-review process where authors and reviewers are identified. In our view, this does not diminish the rigor, integrity, and validity of the peer-review process. Rather, we believe it creates a more open and honest dialogue between authors and reviewers. We find this helps to generate the kind of constructive criticism that is most conducive to improving the article, as opposed to the “destructive criticism” that too easily occurs in more traditional double-blind peer-review processes. In this light, the editorial staff is fully committed to mentoring new scholars to facilitate their professional development.
Submit your article electronically at http://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/has. Please follow the instructions for creating an account. Then the system will walk you through a step-by-step process for manuscript submission. Authors will benefit by reviewing our guidelines for contributors.
Action notes are “calls to action” based on your social observations or discussions around how to put theory into action. Action Notes are half of the length of research papers (approximately 5,000 words, including all materials) and will be peer-reviewed. Please send your Action Notes to http://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/has
Humanity & Society is a different journal—one imbued with the action and hope of humanist philosophy. At the end of each issue we hope to pique reader interest with a “Final Thought” Page. This may come in the form of a provocative image that carries a sociological or social change message, an interview with a sociologist talking about her/his craft, or even a cartoon analysis of our social world. We want these ventures to be provocative, humorous, even perplexing. We view the journal as a kind of larger curriculum vitae for humanist sociology. As the Latin translation of the term means “curriculum of my life,” we view H&S as a journal that breathes life into academic inquiry.
Please submit your “Final Thought” (image, interview, cartoon, etc.) along with a description and/or interpretation of the final thought (200 words maximum) and your biography (200 words maximum) explaining how the image/idea presented is relevant to your life. Submit at: http://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/has
Please direct your inquiries and ideas to:
Daina Cheyenne Harvey Editor, dharvey@holycross.edu
Emma Lesser, Managing Editor, emma.lesser@uconn.edu
Selina R. Gallo-Cruz, Book Review Editor, sgallo@holycross.edu
Bhoomi K. Thakore, Multimedia Editor, at bhoomi.thakore@elmhurst.edu
Deputy Editors:
Shawn Bingham, University of South Florida
Jill Bystydzienski, The Ohio State University
Woody Doane, University of Hartford
Corey Dolgon, Stonehill College
Kasey Henricks, University of Illinois-Chicago
Kathleen Fitzgerald, Tulane University
Greta Pennell, University of Indianapolis
Janine Schipper, Northern Arizona University
Joti Sekhon, Winston-Salem State University
Alan Spector, Purdue University Calumet
Melissa Weiner, College of the Holy Cross
Associate Editors:
Stephen Adair, Central Connecticut State University
Kurt Borchard, University of Nebraska-Kearney
David Brunsma, Virginia Tech
Paul Y. Chang, Harvard University
Alfreed DeFreece, Roosevelt University
Rebecca Hensley, Southeastern Louisiana University
Shirley Jackson, Southern Connecticut State University
Paul R. Ketchum, University of Oklahoma
Charles Koeber, Wichita State University
Tony Ladd, Loyola University at New Orleans
James Pennell, University of Indiana at Indianapolis
Victor Ray, University of Tennessee
Louise Seamster, Duke University
Saher Selod, Simmons University
Hephzibah Strmic-Pawl, Manhattanville College
Jeff Torlina, Utah Valley University
Johnny Williams, Trinity College
J. Talmadge Wright, Loyola University Chicago
GUIDELINES FOR REVIEWERS* (Modified January 2014)
Thank you for agreeing to review for Humanity & Society. Reviewing for the journal is an important professional service. While we hope you gain intellectual satisfaction from helping the author(s) improve her, his or their paper, we also recognize and appreciate the generous gift of your time. We suggest prompt reviews within three weeks are tremendously helpful to both the author and Humanity & Society.
Please understand that Humanity & Society, in line with its mission as the journal of a humanist sociology organization, is a non-blind peer-reviewed journal. Thus, the process is one where authors and reviewers are both identified. In our view, this does not diminish the rigor, integrity, and validity of the peer-review process. Rather, we believe it creates a more open and honest dialogue between authors and reviewers. We find this helps to generate the kind of constructive criticism that is most conducive to improving the article, as opposed to the “destructive criticism” that too easily occurs in more traditional double-blind peer-review processes. In this spirit, reviewers are asked to participate in the organization’s commitment to mentoring new scholars to facilitate their professional development.
As a reviewer, your priority is first and foremost to help the author(s) improve her, his, or their paper. Although we understand that only a fraction of submitted papers will ultimately be accepted, we view the review process as one that fundamentally helps authors to reach their full potential, be it theoretical or empirical, with their paper.
Reviews should follow a clear, comprehensible format. After reading the paper carefully, sit down and write the review. A good review is often 1,000 words or less, and provides a valuable perspective on the paper.
Begin by identifying the paper’s aims, as you see them (this may differ from the author’s statement), clearly stating what the paper argues, and what its contribution is meant to be. This should be one or two sentences that help the editor and author know whether the paper’s main point has come across. In addition, note the strengths of the paper (even if you do not think the paper as a whole is strong).
Next, present the comments you see as most central to an effective revision of the paper. The core of the review should identify whether: 1) the research question contributes to larger theory, 2) the analysis actually answers the research question, and 3) the conclusions flow from the analyses. Identifying weaknesses can help authors craft more fully developed papers, which sometimes means reframing the piece theoretically, refocusing the question, or reinterpreting the analysis.
Here, you want to provide clear advice about how the author might address the problems you have identified or the questions you have raised. For example, if you feel the author is missing crucial references that would help them build a better argument, provide those references; if you think the author needs to provide more information about methods, explain what is missing; if you have problems with the analyses or feel that they are not persuasive enough, explain how the analyses could become more persuasive.
Please be aware that reviews that are non-constructive, engage in non-useful personal attacks on the author(s), or extremely limited in term of constructive feedback are unlikely to be passed on to the authors. This said, reviewers need not be overly specific, nor do they need to provide line-by-line editing. Instead, ensuring the argument is sound is the better use of reviewers’ time and attention. The main goal of the reviewer is to improve the paper and provide a fair assessment that will help the author(s) in the long run.
BOOK REVIEW GUIDELINES
Humanity and Society (HaS) offers a book review section that aims to offer thoughtful summaries and appraisals of recently released books germane to humanist sociology. Reviewers are asked to keep the HaS mission in mind when reviewing. Humanist sociology is broadly defined as a sociology developed through rigorous and critical analyses of inequality, exploitation, and injustice while undergirded by an earnest commitment to generate knowledge that can be used to ameliorate social suffering. We are committed to a sociology that contributes to a more humane, equal, and just society and that invites diverse perspectives and forms of knowledge into the conversation.
HaS has begun to review books in thematic bundles. This, we believe, will enhance the effectiveness of the reviews, as they can be situated in a collection of topically similar texts that deliver contrasting theoretical and empirical approaches. To this end, we encourage our reviewers to address not only how individual books contribute to their own specialized field of knowledge, but to think of the broader implications of the study and its insights for understanding the general process of stratification and social change.
HaS generally does not publish unsolicited book reviews. However, we are always interested in being alerted to new books that speak to the humanist sociological tradition and to new people who wish to review those books! If you would like to suggest a book for review, please send the full bibliographic information about the book to the book review editor, Selina R. Gallo-Cruz at the address below. Also, if you would like to be considered as a book reviewer, please send a copy of curriculum vitae and a list of at least three general and three specific (no more than six) key subject areas in which you would be comfortable reviewing, to the book review editor. Please note that book reviews are limited to 750 words.
Selina R. Gallo-Cruz
Book Review Editor, Humanity and Society
Department of Sociology and Anthropology
College of the Holy Cross
1 College Street
Worcester, MA 01610
sgallo@holycross.edu
* These guidelines rely on the contributions found in Gender & Society, Sociology of Race & Ethnicity, and Societies Without Borders.
Choose this theme to customize and add content to this page.
Biography: I earned a B.B.A (Finance) and a Double B.A. (Philosophy and Economics) from the University of Texas-Austin, a M.A. (Sociology) from the University of Houston, and a Ph.D. (Sociology) from Rutgers University. I have been at the College of the Holy Cross since 2012. I teach and do research mainly in the areas of social disruption/dislocation, food geographies, the environmental and urban precariat, cognition and culture, and social justice.
Reflexive Statement: My first week at Holy Cross, Jerry Lembcke, whose office was two doors down, stopped by my office and asked if I was going to the meeting. Thinking I had forgotten about my first departmental meeting I panicked; I quickly grabbed some things together to run out. Jerry said, “No, no, the humanists, in Nashville, next month. You know, the humanists.” I didn’t know. Jerry and I chatted for a few minutes. “Well, next year, right? You’d better be going next year.” I did. Those people that you occasionally, every few years, meet at a conference and wonder, “how have we never meet before,” and leave looking forward to seeing them next year, here they were, all in one place, at one conference. For the first time at an academic conference I was surrounded by activists; surrounded by other sociologists who scoffed at sociology (or anything) being value-neutral; surrounded by people who didn’t care about your reputation or where you were at; surrounded by people who were also scratching their heads, trying to figure out the banality of mainstream sociology. I cannot imagine a sociology without AHS. We are the counter to the political and economic order that sustains capitalism, white supremacy, colonialism, environmental racism, precarity…
I am in my sixth year as editor of Humanity and Society. I am proud that we publish the work of activists and teachers, scholars on the margins of academia and historically marginalized scholars; I’d like to think that we are one of a few journals that much like our Association is a home for good people doing good work.
Humanity & Society: the official journal of the Association for Humanist Sociology, was first published in 1977 and has been published quarterly since 1978. Humanity & Society is a peer-reviewed Sage journal with abstracts of published articles appearing in Sociological Abstracts. It features “humanist sociology,” which is broadly defined as a sociology that views people not only as products of social forces but also as agents in their lives and the world. We are committed to a sociology that contributes to a more humane, equal, and just society. Additional information, including copies of previous volumes is also available at http://journals.sagepub.com/home/has
Humanity & Society publishes articles on a wide variety of topics that include but are not limited to: studies of inequality (class, race, and/or gender); war, peace, and international relations; aging and gerontology; environmental sociology; globalization; gender and sexuality; health and mental health; social theory; sociology of knowledge and science, and linguistics; social psychology; teaching and sociology practice; social change, humanism and human rights; crime and deviance; ethnic and intergroup relations, and others
The editors cordially invite you to submit your work for possible publication in Humanity & Society. In addition to publishing articles, we also publish action notes (which describe activism the writer has participated in or observed), book review essays, multimedia review essays, and provocative “final thoughts.” In keeping with the values of the membership, the journal uses an open peer-review process where authors and reviewers are identified. In our view, this does not diminish the rigor, integrity, and validity of the peer-review process. Rather, we believe it creates a more open and honest dialogue between authors and reviewers. We find this helps to generate the kind of constructive criticism that is most conducive to improving the article, as opposed to the “destructive criticism” that too easily occurs in more traditional double-blind peer-review processes. In this light, the editorial staff is fully committed to mentoring new scholars to facilitate their professional development.
Submit your article electronically at http://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/has. Please follow the instructions for creating an account. Then the system will walk you through a step-by-step process for manuscript submission. Authors will benefit by reviewing our guidelines for contributors.
Action notes are “calls to action” based on your social observations or discussions around how to put theory into action. Action Notes are half of the length of research papers (approximately 5,000 words, including all materials) and will be peer-reviewed. Please send your Action Notes to http://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/has
Humanity & Society is a different journal—one imbued with the action and hope of humanist philosophy. At the end of each issue we hope to pique reader interest with a “Final Thought” Page. This may come in the form of a provocative image that carries a sociological or social change message, an interview with a sociologist talking about her/his craft, or even a cartoon analysis of our social world. We want these ventures to be provocative, humorous, even perplexing. We view the journal as a kind of larger curriculum vitae for humanist sociology. As the Latin translation of the term means “curriculum of my life,” we view H&S as a journal that breathes life into academic inquiry.
Please submit your “Final Thought” (image, interview, cartoon, etc.) along with a description and/or interpretation of the final thought (200 words maximum) and your biography (200 words maximum) explaining how the image/idea presented is relevant to your life. Submit at: http://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/has
Please direct your inquiries and ideas to:
Daina Cheyenne Harvey Editor, dharvey@holycross.edu
Emma Lesser, Managing Editor, emma.lesser@uconn.edu
Selina R. Gallo-Cruz, Book Review Editor, sgallo@holycross.edu
Bhoomi K. Thakore, Multimedia Editor, at bhoomi.thakore@elmhurst.edu
Deputy Editors:
Shawn Bingham, University of South Florida
Jill Bystydzienski, The Ohio State University
Woody Doane, University of Hartford
Corey Dolgon, Stonehill College
Kasey Henricks, University of Illinois-Chicago
Kathleen Fitzgerald, Tulane University
Greta Pennell, University of Indianapolis
Janine Schipper, Northern Arizona University
Joti Sekhon, Winston-Salem State University
Alan Spector, Purdue University Calumet
Melissa Weiner, College of the Holy Cross
Associate Editors:
Stephen Adair, Central Connecticut State University
Kurt Borchard, University of Nebraska-Kearney
David Brunsma, Virginia Tech
Paul Y. Chang, Harvard University
Alfreed DeFreece, Roosevelt University
Rebecca Hensley, Southeastern Louisiana University
Shirley Jackson, Southern Connecticut State University
Paul R. Ketchum, University of Oklahoma
Charles Koeber, Wichita State University
Tony Ladd, Loyola University at New Orleans
James Pennell, University of Indiana at Indianapolis
Victor Ray, University of Tennessee
Louise Seamster, Duke University
Saher Selod, Simmons University
Hephzibah Strmic-Pawl, Manhattanville College
Jeff Torlina, Utah Valley University
Johnny Williams, Trinity College
J. Talmadge Wright, Loyola University Chicago
GUIDELINES FOR REVIEWERS* (Modified January 2014)
Thank you for agreeing to review for Humanity & Society. Reviewing for the journal is an important professional service. While we hope you gain intellectual satisfaction from helping the author(s) improve her, his or their paper, we also recognize and appreciate the generous gift of your time. We suggest prompt reviews within three weeks are tremendously helpful to both the author and Humanity & Society.
Please understand that Humanity & Society, in line with its mission as the journal of a humanist sociology organization, is a non-blind peer-reviewed journal. Thus, the process is one where authors and reviewers are both identified. In our view, this does not diminish the rigor, integrity, and validity of the peer-review process. Rather, we believe it creates a more open and honest dialogue between authors and reviewers. We find this helps to generate the kind of constructive criticism that is most conducive to improving the article, as opposed to the “destructive criticism” that too easily occurs in more traditional double-blind peer-review processes. In this spirit, reviewers are asked to participate in the organization’s commitment to mentoring new scholars to facilitate their professional development.
As a reviewer, your priority is first and foremost to help the author(s) improve her, his, or their paper. Although we understand that only a fraction of submitted papers will ultimately be accepted, we view the review process as one that fundamentally helps authors to reach their full potential, be it theoretical or empirical, with their paper.
Reviews should follow a clear, comprehensible format. After reading the paper carefully, sit down and write the review. A good review is often 1,000 words or less, and provides a valuable perspective on the paper.
Begin by identifying the paper’s aims, as you see them (this may differ from the author’s statement), clearly stating what the paper argues, and what its contribution is meant to be. This should be one or two sentences that help the editor and author know whether the paper’s main point has come across. In addition, note the strengths of the paper (even if you do not think the paper as a whole is strong).
Next, present the comments you see as most central to an effective revision of the paper. The core of the review should identify whether: 1) the research question contributes to larger theory, 2) the analysis actually answers the research question, and 3) the conclusions flow from the analyses. Identifying weaknesses can help authors craft more fully developed papers, which sometimes means reframing the piece theoretically, refocusing the question, or reinterpreting the analysis.
Here, you want to provide clear advice about how the author might address the problems you have identified or the questions you have raised. For example, if you feel the author is missing crucial references that would help them build a better argument, provide those references; if you think the author needs to provide more information about methods, explain what is missing; if you have problems with the analyses or feel that they are not persuasive enough, explain how the analyses could become more persuasive.
Please be aware that reviews that are non-constructive, engage in non-useful personal attacks on the author(s), or extremely limited in term of constructive feedback are unlikely to be passed on to the authors. This said, reviewers need not be overly specific, nor do they need to provide line-by-line editing. Instead, ensuring the argument is sound is the better use of reviewers’ time and attention. The main goal of the reviewer is to improve the paper and provide a fair assessment that will help the author(s) in the long run.
BOOK REVIEW GUIDELINES
Humanity and Society (HaS) offers a book review section that aims to offer thoughtful summaries and appraisals of recently released books germane to humanist sociology. Reviewers are asked to keep the HaS mission in mind when reviewing. Humanist sociology is broadly defined as a sociology developed through rigorous and critical analyses of inequality, exploitation, and injustice while undergirded by an earnest commitment to generate knowledge that can be used to ameliorate social suffering. We are committed to a sociology that contributes to a more humane, equal, and just society and that invites diverse perspectives and forms of knowledge into the conversation.
HaS has begun to review books in thematic bundles. This, we believe, will enhance the effectiveness of the reviews, as they can be situated in a collection of topically similar texts that deliver contrasting theoretical and empirical approaches. To this end, we encourage our reviewers to address not only how individual books contribute to their own specialized field of knowledge, but to think of the broader implications of the study and its insights for understanding the general process of stratification and social change.
HaS generally does not publish unsolicited book reviews. However, we are always interested in being alerted to new books that speak to the humanist sociological tradition and to new people who wish to review those books! If you would like to suggest a book for review, please send the full bibliographic information about the book to the book review editor, Selina R. Gallo-Cruz at the address below. Also, if you would like to be considered as a book reviewer, please send a copy of curriculum vitae and a list of at least three general and three specific (no more than six) key subject areas in which you would be comfortable reviewing, to the book review editor. Please note that book reviews are limited to 750 words.
Selina R. Gallo-Cruz
Book Review Editor, Humanity and Society
Department of Sociology and Anthropology
College of the Holy Cross
1 College Street
Worcester, MA 01610
sgallo@holycross.edu
* These guidelines rely on the contributions found in Gender & Society, Sociology of Race & Ethnicity, and Societies Without Borders.
Choose this theme to customize and add content to this page.
humanist sociologist
EDITOR ANASTACIA SCHULHOFF, HUMANIST SOCIOLOGIST
Biography:
Dr. Anastacia Schulhoff joined the faculty of Appalachian State University in 2017 as an Assistant Professor of Sociology. She performs the duty of The Humanist Sociologist newsletter editor for the Association of Humanist Sociology. She also serves on the Journal of Aging Studies (JAS) as an Editorial Board Member and as the Department of Sociology Inclusive Excellence Liaison at AppState. Her research interests address a broad array of issues within the field of Sociology and Gerontology. She is currently working on several research projects that range from an analysis of older adult volunteers in the Appalachian High Country, a photovoice project that looks at the influence of COVID-19 on college students’ social networks, and a cultural gerontology project that centers upon tribal nursing homes, which was her dissertation project. In the latter, she will be completing a book manuscript for publication by 2021/22 about Native American CNAs, nurses, administrators, and residents working, living, and creating identities and culture within a tribal nursing home.
Reflexive Statement:
As a graduate student at USF, I heard about AHS from Shawn Bingham who invited Marc Settembrino and I to the 2010 annual conference. He lured us in by stating, “it’s a sociological professional organization that has a bunch of older hippies and activists in it. It’s a great place to find a community with like minded sociologists.” Little did we know how at home we would feel at our very first AHS meeting. Each year that I attend the annual conference I continue to find AHS members who are kind, caring, and supportive colleagues. They do not judge or use hyper-criticism to comment upon my work. Rather, I find a group of colleagues who are there to support me as a scholar, activist, and fully embodied person who lives beyond the ivory tower. At our meetings we have enjoyable intellectual and humanist grounded conversations with one another. Indeed, I have often told others after returning home from our annual conference that “AHS is a place to feed the soul, not just the vita.”
As an educator of health science, public health, social work, and sociology students, I focus on inquiries about how health disparities and social vulnerabilities (poverty, racism, stigma, homophobia, sexism, etc.) affect minority groups’ health and lived experiences. As an expert in community-based participatory research and in using qualitative and visual patient-driven methods, I believe these methods allow the experiences of people with stigmatized illness or marginalized social positions to inform innovative public health and sociological questions. These approaches also provide the space for participants to come up with their own community and policy solutions. My goal is to honor research participants' knowledge and lived experiences and for the products of our research to shape the development of effective, patient-centered, culturally competent health programs and social policies that lessen the burden of health disparities among vulnerable communities.
The AHS newsletter, which disseminates information about the organization and its activities.
Please direct all submissions and inquiries to schulhoffam@appstate.edu.
Recent issues:
Spring 2020
Fall 2018
Spring 2018
Spring 2017
Fall 2016
Summer 2016
Summer 2015
Winter 2015
Fall 2014
Winter 2014
Fall 2013
Summer 2013
Winter 2013
Fall 2012
Summer 2011
Winter 2010
Fall 2010
Summer 2010
Winter 2009
Fall 2009
Summer 2009
Biography:
Dr. Anastacia Schulhoff joined the faculty of Appalachian State University in 2017 as an Assistant Professor of Sociology. She performs the duty of The Humanist Sociologist newsletter editor for the Association of Humanist Sociology. She also serves on the Journal of Aging Studies (JAS) as an Editorial Board Member and as the Department of Sociology Inclusive Excellence Liaison at AppState. Her research interests address a broad array of issues within the field of Sociology and Gerontology. She is currently working on several research projects that range from an analysis of older adult volunteers in the Appalachian High Country, a photovoice project that looks at the influence of COVID-19 on college students’ social networks, and a cultural gerontology project that centers upon tribal nursing homes, which was her dissertation project. In the latter, she will be completing a book manuscript for publication by 2021/22 about Native American CNAs, nurses, administrators, and residents working, living, and creating identities and culture within a tribal nursing home.
Reflexive Statement:
As a graduate student at USF, I heard about AHS from Shawn Bingham who invited Marc Settembrino and I to the 2010 annual conference. He lured us in by stating, “it’s a sociological professional organization that has a bunch of older hippies and activists in it. It’s a great place to find a community with like minded sociologists.” Little did we know how at home we would feel at our very first AHS meeting. Each year that I attend the annual conference I continue to find AHS members who are kind, caring, and supportive colleagues. They do not judge or use hyper-criticism to comment upon my work. Rather, I find a group of colleagues who are there to support me as a scholar, activist, and fully embodied person who lives beyond the ivory tower. At our meetings we have enjoyable intellectual and humanist grounded conversations with one another. Indeed, I have often told others after returning home from our annual conference that “AHS is a place to feed the soul, not just the vita.”
As an educator of health science, public health, social work, and sociology students, I focus on inquiries about how health disparities and social vulnerabilities (poverty, racism, stigma, homophobia, sexism, etc.) affect minority groups’ health and lived experiences. As an expert in community-based participatory research and in using qualitative and visual patient-driven methods, I believe these methods allow the experiences of people with stigmatized illness or marginalized social positions to inform innovative public health and sociological questions. These approaches also provide the space for participants to come up with their own community and policy solutions. My goal is to honor research participants' knowledge and lived experiences and for the products of our research to shape the development of effective, patient-centered, culturally competent health programs and social policies that lessen the burden of health disparities among vulnerable communities.
The AHS newsletter, which disseminates information about the organization and its activities.
Please direct all submissions and inquiries to schulhoffam@appstate.edu.
Recent issues:
Spring 2020
Fall 2018
Spring 2018
Spring 2017
Fall 2016
Summer 2016
Summer 2015
Winter 2015
Fall 2014
Winter 2014
Fall 2013
Summer 2013
Winter 2013
Fall 2012
Summer 2011
Winter 2010
Fall 2010
Summer 2010
Winter 2009
Fall 2009
Summer 2009