Abstract
Symbolic interaction stresses the personal definition of the situation, while frame analysis seeks to uncover the background assumptions within which interaction takes place. Although some see these as opposing approaches, the argument here is that they are complementary, particularly where social change undermines previous rules for interacting. The argument is illustrated by focusing on the emergence of student evaluation of teaching as an institutionalized method of increasing accountability, and the meaning of these evaluations for administrator-, faculty, and students is considered against the background rules of relationship among the three categories. The closing section examines the impact of social position on selfexpression using Mead's "I" and "me" concepts.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.