Dan C. Lortie’s Schoolteacher: A sociological study is
one of the best works on the sociology of teaching since W. Waller’s
classic study. It is a book worthy of review. Following the tradition of
symbolic interactionists, Lortie demonstrated the qualities who studied
the occupation of teaching. Using several methods to gather effective
data, Lortie has portrayed the ethos of the teaching profession.
Therefore, the work is an important book on the teaching profession
and teacher culture. Though outstanding, Lortie’s work is also flawed
in that his perspectives and methodology were adopted largely from
symbolic interactionism. First, Lortie in his work analyzed many
points regarding teacher culture; for example, he was interested in
exploring “sentiment,” “cathexis,” and “ethos.” Thus, he was more a
psychologist than a sociologist. Second, symbolic interactionism led
him to discern the teacher culture from a micro view, thereby missing
the structural aspects. For example, he did not fully discuss the issue of
gender and he ignored the issue of race. Finally, following the
qualitative sociological tradition, Lortie employed many qualitative
methods to gather data but only foucused on obtaining and presenting
interview data. Moreover, he used measurement methods that were too
simplistic for analyzing quantitative data fully.
 R. L. Larson, “Schoolteacher: A sociological inquiry,” Teachers College
Record, vol.77 no.4, pp.642-645, 1976.
 R.A. Wallace & A. Wolf, Contemporary sociological theory: Expending
the classical tradition (6th ed.). Upper Saddle River, New Jersey: Pearson
Prentice Hall, 2006.
 D. C. Lortie, Schoolteacher: A Sociological Study. Chicago, IL: The
University of Chicago, 1975.
 S. Acker, “Women and teaching: a semi-detached sociology of a
semi-profession,” in S. Walker and L. Barton (eds.), Gender, Class and
Education, Lews: Falmer Press, 1983, pp.123-139.
 A. Hargreaves, The Persistence of Presentism and the Struggle For
Lasting Improvement. London, Institute of Education, University of
 A. Hargreaves, Presentism, individualism, and conservatism: the legacy
of Dan Lortie’s Schoolteacher: A Sociological Study,” Curriculum Inquiry, vol. 40 no.1, pp.143-155.
 A. Hargreaves and P. Woods, “Introduction,” in A. Hargreaves and P.
Woods (eds.) Classrooms & Staffrooms: The Sociology of Teachers and
Teaching. Milton Keynes: Open University Press. 1984, pp. 1-11.
 J. I. Goodlad, A Place Called School, New York: McGraw-Hill, 1984.
 H. Acland, “Book review,” American Educational Research J. vol.13
no.2, pp.139-142, spring 1976.
 A. Hargreaves, “Individualism and individuality: reinterpreting the
teacher culture,” in J.W. Little & M.W. McLaughlin (eds.) Teacher Work:
Individuals, colleagues and Contexts, New York, NY: Teacher College
Press, 1993, pp.51-76.
 P. W. Jackson, Life in Classrooms. NewYork, NY: Teachers College
 K. Casey and M. Apple, ”Gender and the conditions of teachers’ work:
the development of understanding in America,” in S. Acker (ed.)
Teachers, Gender and Career, Lews: Falmer Press, 1989. pp.171-186.
 B. Troyna, ”The ‘Everyday World’ of teachers? Deracialised discourses
in the sociology of teachers and teaching profession,” BJSE, vol.15 no.3,
 D.C. Lortie, “Unfinished work: reflections on Schoolteacher,” in A.
Hargreaves, A. Liberman, M.Fullan and D. Hopkins (eds.) The
International Handbook of Educational change, vol.1, Dordrecht: Kluwer
Academic Publishers,1998, pp.145-162.
 E. G. Guba, “Essay Review,” Educational Administration Quarterly,
vol.12 no.1, p.104, 1976.
 D. C. Lortie, Schoolteacher: a sociological study. With a new preface
(2nd ed.). Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago, 2002.
 R. Wenkert “Book review,” American Educational Research J., vol.13
no.2, pp.142-144, spring 1976.