Title: History of Science Society newsletter
ALL VOLUMES CITATION PDF VIEWER THUMBNAILS PAGE IMAGE ZOOMABLE
Full Citation
STANDARD VIEW MARC VIEW
Permanent Link: http://ufdc.ufl.edu/UF00093941/00033
 Material Information
Title: History of Science Society newsletter
Physical Description: Serial
Language: English
Creator: History of Science Society
Publisher: History of Science Society
Place of Publication: Gainesville, Fla.
Publication Date: January 2010
 Record Information
Bibliographic ID: UF00093941
Volume ID: VID00033
Source Institution: University of Florida
Holding Location: University of Florida
Rights Management: All rights reserved by the source institution and holding location.

Downloads

This item has the following downloads:

Jan2010Newsletter ( PDF )


Full Text




Vo/ 39, No 7 January 2070


NEwsletter
1 1II 3lC II "II


Table of Contents


News


HSS 2010 Annual Meeting Call
for Papers 7


Member News


How Not to Engage "Anti-
Evolutionist" Historians 12

The True Story of Newton and
the Apple 13


Darwin Film Released

The John Tyndall
Correspondence Project

Perspectives on Sciences

Adventures in Romantic
Science

2009 Prize Winners


2009 History of Science Society
Annual Meeting Survey 27

D. Kim Foundation for the
History of Science and Tech-
nology in East Asia 29


HSS Employment Survey
Report, 2008-2009

2010 Election Slate


Notes from the Inside


As we begin this new year, and new decade, the advance of the
calendar coincides with substantial changes in the HSS Executive Office.
As many of you know, the suspension of the history of science program
at the University of Florida prompted the Society to seek a new home
for the Executive Office. Even with these discouraging economic times,
we received four excellent bids and the site selection committee (Jane
Maienschein, chair; Bernie Lightman; Maggie Osler; and myself) visited
the schools with the top three offers (by the way, these officers devoted
hundreds of hours to these site visits, and I am grateful for their efforts).
We were enthusiastically received by each host and school leaders told
us that they see history of science as an important part of their plans to
restructure their universities during a time of massive cuts some seeds
of hope for the future of the history of science. In the end, the Execu-
tive Committee recommended to Council that we accept the bid from
Notre Dame University, a recommendation that Council unanimously
endorsed. We are in the process of finalizing the contract with Notre
Dame, and I expect to move with the office during the summer of 2010.
I will leave the University of Florida, the place where I was trained, with
mixed feelings, but this sadness is tempered by the excitement of joining
a well-established faculty in HPS, in a new facility at a school with a rich
tradition in the history and philosophy of science. We also plan to work
closely with the Reilly Center for the History and Philosophy of Science
at Notre Dame physically, as well as intellectually, since our proposed
offices will be adjacent to the Center. I would like to express my gratitude
to Don Howard and to my new Notre Dame colleagues for their hospi-
tality and for their graciousness in welcoming us to South Bend.
The physical move will help us make some bold changes, including
the rebuilding of the HSS Web site from the ground up. The redesign
will help us improve services to our members and to the public, and I
will welcome any suggestions that you might have for our Web site as we
begin this project.
In closing, I wish you the happiest of new years and thank you for
your membership in the HSS.
-Jay Malone
Executive Director, HSS







History of Science Society Newsletter


NEWS AND INQUIRIES


Survey New Teaching Volume on Franklin's Autobiography

Please respond to a brief questionnaire available on the MLA Web site at: www.mla.org/approaches. We are
particularly interested in your response to the final item concerning whether you would be willing to con-
tribute an essay to the volume. Like other books published in the Approaches to Teaching series, this one will
contain not only a discussion of the most important and useful materials available to the teacher of Franklin's
Autobiography but also a selection of essays by instructors.

The hope is that you will be willing to share with other colleagues your experience in teaching Franklin's
Autobiography. The questionnaire will be available on the Web site until 15 February 2010, and all responses
will be transmitted directly to the volume's editors.

Southern Association for the History of Medicine and Science Website
Southern Association for the History of Medicine and Science encourages all interested in the 5-6 March
2010 meeting to visit www.sahms.net

Smallpox Eradication Web Site
The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and Emory University today announced a new web site
devoted to documenting and preserving public health history. The emphasis will be on oral histories, unpub-
lished documents, photographs and artifacts. The site is globalhealthchronicles.org.

DHST site update
Thanks to the efforts of Prof. Fabio Bevilacqua, The Division of the History of Science and Technology site
has been updated. All new information will be found on www.dhstweb.org


EXECUTIVE OFFICE
Postal Address Physical Address
PO Box 117360 3310 Turlington Hall
University of Florida University of Florida
Gainesville, FL 32611-7360Gainesville, FL 32611
Phone: 352-392-1677/Fax: 352-392-2795
E-m ail: infc : : : -hii-,- : rg
Web site: http://www.hssonline.org/
SUBSCRIPTION INQUIRIES
University of Chicago Press
Phone: 877-705-1878; Fax 877-705-1879
E-mail: subscriptions@press.uchicago.edu
Or write University of Chicago Press, Subscription
Fulfillment Manager, PO Box 37005, Chicago, IL
60637-7363
Moving?
Please notify both the HSS Executive Office and the
University of Chicago Press.


EDITORIAL POLICIES, ADVERTISING AND SUBMISSIONS
The History of Science Society Newsletter is published in January, April, July, and
October, and sent to all individual members of the Society.
The Newsletter is edited and published in the Executive Office. The format
and editorial policies are determined by the Executive Director in consultation
with the Committee on Publications and the Society Editor. All advertising copy
must be submitted in electronic form. Advertisements are accepted on a space-
available basis only, and the Society reserves the right not to print a submission.
The rates are as follows: Full page (7 x 9.25"), $625; Horizontal or Vertical Half
page (7 x 4.6"), $375; Quarter page (3.5 x 4.6"), $225. The deadline for insertion
orders is six weeks prior to the month of publication and should be sent to the at-
tention of the HSS Executive Office. The deadline for news, announcements, and
job/fellowship/ prize listings is firm: Six weeks prior to the month of publication.
Long items (feature stories) should be submitted eight weeks prior to the month
of publication. Please send all material to the attention of the executive office:
info@hssonline.org.
2010 by the History of Science Society






History of Science Society Newsletter


Exhibition: The Rarest of the Rare-Stories Behind the Treasures at the
Harvard Museum of Natural History
In 2003, Mark Sloan photographed the behind-the-scenes collections of Harvard's Natural History
Museum. Enlisting the help of curators and department heads, he identified rare scientific specimens with
fascinating histories. Harvard's natural history collections comprise some 21 million specimens-animal,
vegetable, and mineral-from every imaginable part of the planet.

For every specimen in this exhibition, there is a story. These range from tales of wealthy explorers and obses-
sive collectors to those of visionary scientists. The items come from the farthest reaches of the globe and the
deepest depths of the sea. Some are beautiful; others are intriguing; and others simply strange. The Harvard
Museum of Natural History is a place of science, and yet it also conveys for anyone drawn to adventure and
discovery an undeniable romance. Photographer Mark Sloan seeks to capture something of both in these
images.

The exhibition is open through March 11, 2010. Further Information: www.cpnas.org

Announcing the first Notes and Records Essay Award
The first Notes and Records essay award has now been launched and is open to young researchers in the
history of science who have completed a postgraduate degree within the last five years. The criteria for entry
is that the essay should be currently unpublished, that it should be based on original research, and that it
should relate to aspects of the history of science covered by the journal.

The winning entry will be chosen by selected members of the Notes and Record's Editorial Board using the
journal's standard criteria for selection-excellence and interest to a wide audience-and the winner will be
awarded a cash prize of 500, a year's subscription to Notes and Records http://newsletters.royalsociety.
org/c/lq79QlBO52kL4vO and the opportunity to see their prize-winning essay published in the journal.
The deadline for submission of entries is 31 March 2010. Further details, including how to enter, are avail-
able from the Notes and Records website: http://newsletters.royalsociety.org/c/lq7p7EcuglMOpBV.

Request for Prize Nominations
All nominations are due 1 April 2010 unless otherwise noted. Visit www.hssonline.org/about/society
awards.html for full eligibility requirements and online nominations.
* Sarton Medal for exceptional scholarship over a lifetime. Nominations are due 1 February 2010.
* Pfizer Award for the best book aimed at a scholarly audience in history of science, published 2007-2009.
* Watson Davis and Helen Miles Davis Prize for the best book in the history of science directed to a wide
public, including undergraduate instruction, published 2007-2009.
* Suzanne J. Levinson Prize for the best book in the history of the life sciences and natural history, published
2006-2009
* Margaret W. Rossiter History of Women in Science Prize for the best article on women in the history of
science published from 2006 to 2009.
* Joseph H. Hazen Education Prize for outstanding contributions to the teaching of history of science.
* Nathan Reingold Prize (formerly known as the Schuman Prize) for the best graduate student essay. Dead-
line to submit essay is 1 June 2010.






History of Science Society Newsletter


Linus Pauling Papers Resident
Scholar Program
Oregon State University Libraries Special Collec-
tions home of the Ava Helen and Linus Pauling
Papers is pleased to announce the renewal of its
Resident Scholar Program for 2010. Grants of up to
$7,500 are available to researchers interested in con-
ducting work in the OSU Libraries Special Collec-
tions. Researchers will be expected to conduct their
scholarly activities while in residence at Oregon State
University. Historians, librarians, graduate, doctoral
or post-doctoral students and independent scholars
are welcome to apply. The deadline for submitting
proposals is 10 April 2010.

More details are available at the following link:
http://paulingblog.wordpress.com/2009/12/31/
now-accepting-applications-for-2010-resident-
scholars/

T&C has Moved
Technology and Culture has moved to its new home
at the University of Oklahoma. Contact information
for all new business, including submissions and cor-
respondence, is:

Email: techculture@ou.edu
Telephone: 1-405-325-2311

Postal address:
Suzanne Moon, incoming Editor-in-Chief
The Technology and Culture Editorial Offices
University of Oklahoma
Cate Center 4
332 Cate Center Dr. Room 484
Norman, OK 73019
USA

Bakken Museum Honored with
Leading Edge Award From As-
sociation of Science-Technology
Centers
The Bakken Museum was honored by the Associa-
tion of Science-Technology Centers (ASTC) with
the 2009 Roy L. Shafer Leading Edge Award for


Visitor Experience for its Science Assets-based School
Partnership program on October 31 in Fort Worth,
Texas. The 'Edgie' recognizes extraordinary accom-
plishments that not only enhance the performance
of the institution, but also significantly advance the
mission of science-technology centers and museums.
The Bakken's Museum's mission is to inspire a
passion for science but many children don't think
science relates to them-particularly girls, students
of color and students of poverty. Because science
and technology are rapidly changing the twenty-first
century world in which today's students live and
work, The Bakken developed the groundbreaking
Science Assets-based School Partnership program in
collaboration with the Minneapolis Public Schools
to change how students think about and approach
science.
The program successfully builds upon children's
creativity to help them develop confidence, receive
support and understand that science is a meaningful
part of their daily life. A team of Bakken educators
visit the classroom, actively involving students in
creative thinking and problem solving. As part of
the program, children are introduced to 'People of
Science' who help bring science to life in the class-
room-such as a food scientist from General Mills
whose job includes tasting cookies, and an engineer
from Medtronic who uses Silly Putty to demonstrate
his work with polymers.
The School Partnership program also includes a
professional development component. Participat-
ing teachers report increased confidence in teaching
science. Positive outcomes have led to expansion of
the program, which will serve 2,700 district fourth
graders and their teachers through 2011.
"The Bakken is honored to receive this national rec-
ognition," said Kelly Finnerty, Deputy Director for
Programs for The Bakken Museum. "We are grateful
to our educational partners at Minneapolis Public
Schools and our community funders at the Bush
Foundation, Medtronic and Boston Scientific for
their support in building the Science Assets of every
Minneapolis public school fourth grader."






History of Science Society Newsletter


Conference Report
The Dangerous Divide: The Two
Cultures in the 21st Century
On May 9, 2009, the New York Academy of Sci-
ences' Science & the City program hosted a daylong
symposium in honor of the 50th anniversary of C.P.
Snow's influential lecture on the "two cultures."
Whereas Snow focused on a gap of understanding
between scientists and literary intellectuals, speakers
at the Academy spotlighted a troubling gulf between
the scientific community today and the general
public. Because science and technology are critical
tools for responding to many of society's most trou-
bling problems, participants argued that this lack of
understanding is having dangerous consequences.

Panelists at the symposium focused on the historical
context of the two cultures divide, barriers to effec-
tive science communication, ways in which lack of
public understanding of science is affecting politics,
and ways to improve science education and science
citizenship. Topics discussed included challenges in
making science relevant to nonscientists, institution-
al pressures that are making good science journalism
more difficult, practical ways to engage politicians
on scientific issues, and recommendations for ways
to improve science education and public understand-
ing of science. Speakers stressed that professional
scientists have an important role to play in explain-
ing what they do and why it should be important to
those outside the scientific community.

The conference proceedings, including video of the
presentations, are now up at the New York Academy
of Sciences website: http://www.nyas.org/two-
cultures.


ASA: Science and Technology
Panels/Events/Meetings
A large number of STS-related sessions were featured
at the American Studies Conference in 2009.

Panel papers now available on-line, along with a pre-
conference blog. To learn more, read the papers, and
join the discussion go to the following site. http://
sites.google.com/site/asatechprogress/home

Announcement and Call for Submissions
European Journal for Philosophy
of Science (EJPS)
The European Philosophy of Science Association
(EPSA) is pleased to announce the launch of its new
journal: the European Journal for Philosophy of Science
(EJPS). The Editorial Team will be assisted in its
work by an Editorial Board of highly reputed phi-
losophers of science from around the world.

EJPS is the official journal of EPSA and will appear
three times a year, beginning in January 2011. EJPS
intends to publish first-rate research in all areas of
philosophy of science, and now welcomes submis-
sions via the on-line portal:
http://www.editorialmanager.com/epsa.

The Journal's website (still partly under construction)
is here:
http://www.springer.com/philosophy/
philosophy+of+sciences/journal/13194

Recent Doctoral Dissertations in
the History of Science
The latest batch of recent doctoral dissertations
pertaining to history of science has been downloaded
to http://www.hsls.pitt.edu/guides/histmed/re-
searchresource /dissertations/index_html.

Because of budget cuts at the host institution these
dissertation lists are now bimonthly. For further
Information: http://www.hsls.pitt.edu/guides/
histmed/researchresource /dissertations/index_
html






History of Science Society Newsletter


A New Issue of History of Psychia-
try is Available Online
December 2009, Vol. 20, No. 1

The below Table of Contents is available online at:
http://hpy.sagepub.com/current.dtl

* Psychiatry and homosexuality in mid-twentieth-
century Edinburgh: the view from Jordanburn
Nerve Hospital Roger Davidson

* Cheerful prospects and tranquil restoration: the
visual experience of landscape as part of the ther-
apeutic regime of the British asylum, 1800-60
Clare Hickman

* Child psychoanalytic psychotherapy in the UK
National Health Service: an historical analysis
Elizabeth Rous and Andrew Clark

* The vocabulary of madness from Homer to Hip-
pocrates. Part 2: The verbal group of paK euco
and the noun huooa Hdlkne Perdicoyianni-
Paldologou

* Lycanthropy in Byzantine times (AD 330-1453)
E. Poulakou-Rebelakou, C. Tsiamis, G. Pan-
teleakos, and D. Ploumpidis

* 'On alterations in the form of speech and on
the formation of new words and expressions in
madness' by L. Snell (1852) G.E. Berrios

* Essay Review: Does madness have a gender?
Lesley A. Hall

* Book Review: Susan Piddock (2007) A Space of
their Own: The Archaeology of Nineteenth Century
Lunatic Asylums in Britain, South Australia, and
Tasmania (New York: Springer). Pp. xii + 265.
63.99 ISBN-13: 978-0-387-73385-2
James E. Moran

* Book Review: Edwin R. Wallace and John Gach
(eds) (2008) History of Psychiatry and Medical
Psychology (New York: Springer). Pp. xlix + 862.
$219.00. ISBN 978-0-387-34707-3 Edgar Jones


* Book Review: Roger Bartra (2008) Melancholy
and Culture: Diseases of the Soul in Golden Age
Spain (Cardiff: University of Wales Press). Pp. x
+ 235. 75.00. ISBN 978-0-7083-2010-5
Edward Shorter

* Book Review: Richard C. Keller (2007) Colo-
nial Madness: Psychiatry in French North Africa
(Chicago: Chicago University Press). Pp. xi +
294 pages. 16.00. ISBN 0-226-42973-3
Ivan Crozier

* Book Review: Richard A. Skues (2009) Sigmund
Freud and the History of Anna 0.: Reopening a
Closed Case (Basingstoke and New York: Pal-
grave Macmillan). Pp. xii + 204. 19.99. ISBN
978-0-230-22421-6
Gavin Miller

* The mental asylum of San Servolo, Venice (1860-
1978) Mario Galzigna, Egidio Priani, Simone
Botti, and Elisabetta Basso

Darwin Year in Cuba
Cuba commemorated Darwin in many different
ways. The Cuban Academy of Sciences established
a Darwin Committee in 2008 to organize or back
commemorative activities. A group of scientific so-
cieties, as well as the University of Havana, and the
national museums of Natural History and of History
of Science were enthusiastic participants.

The Year started in November, 2008, at the School
of Biology of the University of Havana, with a
lecture by P. M. Pruna-Goodgall, the editor of the
first full Spanish translation of Darwin's autobi-
ography and author of a book on the reception of
Darwinism in Cuba. This was followed, in January,
by a talk by the then president of the International
Union of History and Philosophy of Science, Ronald
Numbers, who was a guest of the Cuban Society of
History of Science and Technology. Numbers, a pro-
fessor at the University of Wisconsin, dealt mainly
with issues examined in his recently reedited book
on the creationist movement. Several professors and
students of the Catholic seminar in Havana attended






History of Science Society Newsletter


his lecture. He later held an informal chat with them
at the seminar.

Darwin's birthday, on February 12, was commemo-
rated by the emission of four postal stamps and a
special meeting of the Scientific Council of the Uni-
versity of Havana, at which Vicente Berovides, pro-
fessor of evolution at the School of Biology and the
author of a textbook on evolution, delivered a lecture
on human origins. The Ambassador of the UK in
Cuba attended this meeting. A Cafe Scientifique
dedicated to Darwin took place at the Ministry of
Science, Technology and Environment. Several well
known specialists participated, as well as a group of
students from a vocational high school in Havana.

On February 28, 2009, at a plenary meeting of the
Cuban Academy of Sciences, Darwin was remem-
bered in a lecture by Giraldo Alay6n, a specialist
in the taxonomy and evolution of spiders from the
Caribbean region. On July 7, a panel within the
National Environmental Convention was dedicated
to Darwin. It addressed the issue on how evolution
carries on under the current anthropogenic stress.
During the following months, Educational Channel
2 broadcast a series of eight programs under the title
Evolution. Some newspapers and journals carried
articles on Darwin and the theory of evolution.

The office of the British Council in Cuba was quite
active during 2009. It brought in the Darwin Now
exhibit, which was shown in several institutions in
Havana and went on to other Cuban cities. It also
backed the participation of four Cuban researchers
in the "Darwin's Living Legacy" gathering at the
Bibliotheca Alexandrina, in Egypt, as well as the visit
of James Moore, co-author with Adrian Desmond,
of a biography of Darwin and of a recent book on
Darwin and slavery. Moore gave two lectures in
Havana.

The closure of the Darwin Year took place on No-
vember 24, during a panel organized jointly by the
University of Havana and the Academy of Sciences,
to commemorate the 150th anniversary of the publi-
cation of The Origin ofSpecies.


HSS 2010 Annual Meeting
Call for Papers
Montreal, Canada, 4-7 November 2010

The History of Science Society will hold its 2010
Annual Meeting in the Hyatt hotel in downtown
Montreal (this will be a joint meeting with the
Philosophy of Science Association). All proposals
(sessions, contributed papers, and posters) must be
submitted by 2 April 2010 to the History of Science
Society's Executive Office. Poster proposals must
describe the visual material that will make up the
poster. The HSS will work with organizers who wish
to pre-circulate papers. Electronic submissions are
strongly encouraged please go to http://www.hs-
sonline.org after 1 January 2010.
Submissions on all topics are requested. All
proposals must be submitted on the HSS Web
site or on the annual meeting proposal forms that
are available from the HSS Executive Office. HSS
members are asked to circulate this announcement
to non-HSS colleagues who may be interested in
presenting a paper or poster at the Annual Meeting.
You do not need to be a member to participate, but
all participants must register for the meeting. Appli-
cants are encouraged to propose sessions that include
diverse participants: a mix of men and women and/
or a balance of professional ranks (e.g., mixing senior
scholars with junior scholars and graduate students).
Strong preference will be given to panels whose pre-
senters have different institutional affiliations. Only
one proposal per person may be submitted. In order
to ensure broad involvement, an individual may only
appear once on the program (see the guidelines for
exceptions). Prior participation at the 2008 or 2009
meetings will be taken into consideration.
Before sending a proposal to the HSS Office,
we ask that everyone read the Committee on Meet-
ings and Programs' "Guidelines for Selecting Papers,
Posters, and Sessions," available at www.hssonline.
org/publications/Newsletter2010/ January-2010-
call-papers.html The 2010 program co-chairs are
Jamil Ragep (McGill University) and Yves Gingras
(Universitd du Quebec i Montreal).


- Cr-t 1











M-MB-Nw


History of Science Society Newsletter


Michael J. Crowe Awarded the 2010
LeRoy E. Doggett Prize
The Historical Astronomy Division of the Ameri-
can Astronomical Society is pleased to announce
that Dr. Michael J. Crowe will be the seventh
recipient of the LeRoy E. Doggett Prize for Histori-
cal Astronomy. The Prize is awarded biennially to
an individual whose long-term efforts and lifetime
achievements have had significant impact on the
field of the history of astronomy. The 2010 LeRoy
E. Doggett Prize is presented to Professor Crowe in
recognition of his research, teaching, and outreach.

Michael J. Crowe is the Reverend John J. Ca-
vanaugh Professor Emeritus in the Humanities
in the Program of Liberal Studies and Graduate
Program in History and Philosophy of Science at the
University of Notre Dame. Professor Crowe earned a
B.A. in the Program of Liberal Studies and a B.S. in
Science from the University of Notre Dame in 1958.
He earned a Ph.D. in the History of Science with
minors in Physics and Intellectual History from the
University of Wisconsin in 1965.

Professor Crowe's first book, A History of Vector
Analysis (University of Notre Dame Press, 1967,
revised Dover editions, 1985, 1994), was followed by
The Extraterrestrial Life Debate, 1750-1900: The Idea
of a Plurality of Worlds from Kant to Lowell (Cam-
bridge University Press, 1986, revised 1988, and
Dover, 1999). This magisterial and ambitious work
opened up a new and rich field for scholarship and
made the history of beliefs in alien life a legitimate
field for discussion. It is an indispensable resource
that is unlikely to be surpassed for a long time to
come. A companion source book, The Extraterrestrial
Life Debate: Antiquity to 1915, was published in 2008
(University of Notre Dame Press).

Crowe's other main research interest has been
the work of William and John Herschel. Here he


has offered new interpretations of their careers. For
example, Crowe has made a very strong case for the
importance of William Herschel's belief in extrater-
restrial life as a guiding principal in his construction
and use of large reflecting telescopes. The Calendar
of the Correspondence ofSir John Herschel (Cambridge
University Press, 1998), edited by Crowe, is an
unparalleled resource for Herschel scholarship and
many topics in 19th century science.

Professor Crowe has done much to advance
the discipline of the history of astronomy through
his teaching. He was the founding chair of Notre
Dame's Graduate Program in History and Phi-
losophy of Science and has also served as chair of
the university's Program of Liberal Studies. He has
taught for close to 50 years at Notre Dame. His
Theories of the World from Antiquity to the Copernican
Revolution (Dover, 1990, revised 2001), Modern The-
ories of the Universe from Herschel to Hubble (Dover,
1994), and Mechanics: From Aristotle to Einstein
(Green Lion, 2007) started out as course readers.
As published, they have become foundational texts
widely used in college courses throughout North
America and independently by newcomers to the
history of astronomy.

Students and colleagues describe Michael Crowe
as compassionate, inspiring, and generous in sharing
results. He has been called a cultivator of scholars as
well as scholarship.

His welcoming nature is best exemplified by
his central role in establishing in 1993 the Biennial
Notre Dame Workshops for the History of As-
tronomy. These workshops have become the premier
gathering of historians of astronomy and done much
to establish a sense of community among them.
Crowe created a space in which scholars of all ages
and backgrounds could rub shoulders and share in
convivial discussions of history-of-astronomy topics






History of Science Society Newsletter


without regard to seniority or hierarchy. Indeed,
many historians in the field have attributed their
successful launch to the welcome, encouragement,
and mutual support that they first received at one of
these forums. It has been said that if Mike Crowe
had done nothing else for the profession, his organi-
zation and hosting of the Notre Dame Workshops
is a contribution to the field of history of astronomy
that is worthy of recognition by the LeRoy E.
Doggett Prize.

Further Information: http://www.aas.org/had/
doggett/2010doggett2crowe.html



Jim Fleming was invited to speak before the US
House Subcommittee on Energy and Environment
of the Committee on Science and Technology 5 Nov
2009 on the topic history of weather and climate
control and its governance. He was asked to address
geoengineering's unique governance needs, potential
first steps for establishing international consensus,
and related topics.



The HSS Executive Committee has selected
Michael Gordin & Matthew Jones as Program Co-
Chairs for the 2011 HSS Conference in Cleveland,
OH. Dr. Gordin is a professor of history and director
of the program in Russian and Eurasian studies at
Princeton University. Dr. Jones is an associate profes-
sor of history at Columbia University.



Jeremy Greene, Harvard University, was
awarded the Rachel Carson Prize from the Society
for the Social Study of Science at its 2009 annual
meeting for his book, Prescribing by Numbers: Drugs
and the Definition ofDisease (Johns Hopkins Univer-
sity Press, 2007). The prize is awarded annually for
a book-length work of social or political relevance
in the area of science and technology studies. Past
winners have included Joseph Masco's The Nuclear
Borderlands: The Manhattan Project in Post-Cold War


New Mexico, Charis Thompson's Making Parents: The
Ontological Choreography of Reproductive Technolo-
gies, and Joseph Dumit's Picturing Personhood: Brain
Scans and Biomedical Identity.

2009 Forum for History of Human
Science Awards
2009 FHHS Article Award

Kasper Risbjerg Eskildsen, "Leopold Ranke's
Archival Turn: Location and Evidence in Modern
Historiography," Modern Intellectual History 5
(2008): 425-453.

2009 Article Award committee: Michael Pettit
(chair), Kathy Cooke, Hunter Heyck

Kasper Risbjerg Eskildsen's "Leopold Ranke's
Archival Turn" offers a brilliant interpretation of the
emergence of the archive as the most important site
in the production of historical knowledge. In a won-
derfully symmetrical and reflexive fashion, he exam-
ines how the archive came to serve as the privileged
site for history's production of truth, analogous to
the laboratory, clinic, or field-site in other disciplines.
By attending to the spaces of historical research, he
offers a novel perspective on the character of "sci-
entific history." Furthermore, he does an excellent
job of illustrating how the reorganization of the
structure of the European state made Ranke's inves-
tigative practices possible, thereby artfully connect-
ing changes in political culture with those within
the human sciences. He also brilliantly illuminates
the interplay between the political and the profes-
sional dimensions of Ranke's vision. With great care,
Eskildsen connects Ranke's personal career ambi-
tions and his conservative politics to his conception
of history and the role of the archive. The committee
also commends Eskildsen for the high qualityofhis
prose, which made his article a particularly engaging
read.

2009 John C. Burnham Award

The 2009 John C. Burnham Award Committee is
delighted to award this year's prize to Stephanie






History of Science Society Newsletter


Dupouy for her essay "Darwin, Observer of Expres-
sions." In her persuasive, original, and clearly argued
essay she presents a nuanced picture of Darwin's
strategy in his 1872 The Expression of the Emo-
tions in Man and Animals, challenging the received
wisdom that Darwin's book constitutes an evolu-
tional 'break' in the study of emotional expression.
Dupouy notes that this conventional interpretation is
not only complicated by Darwin's lack of discussion
of natural selection, but more pointedly argues that
Darwin's originality lies in his rejection of a senti-
mentalist account of expression. This sentimentalist
view, common to much nineteenth century scientific
writing on the emotions, understood expression as
the privileged and uniquely human manifestation of
the interior or intimate self. For Darwin, however,
sublime or elevated human emotions were either not
conveyed in expressive gestures, or were, as Dupouy
puts it, "ironic remnants of our animal origins."
Dupouy also sees Darwin's treatise as marking a
methodological break from his forebears in his reli-
ance on particular observations for study, his use of
photographic evidence, and his rejection of imagina-
tion, memory, and sympathy for the scientific study
of emotions. Dupouy reads Darwin's private note-
books in concert with the published text of the Ex-
pression of the Emotions, and places Darwin's work
within the rich context of early nineteenth century
scientific and aesthetic writings on the expression
of the emotions, including the work of anatomists
Louis-Jacques Moreau de la Sarthe, Charles Bell,
and Louis-Pierre Gratiolet. Dupouy's close reading,
comprehensive engagement with the historiography,
and compelling presentation of her analysis made
this essay a pleasure to read.

Thank You Volunteers
A big THANK YOU to our volunteers whose
terms expired in 2009. I have a deep appreciation for
the time and effort that our volunteers devote to the
HSS, time and effort that could be spent on so many
other tasks. I humbly and gratefully offer my thanks
to each one. -Jay Malone, HSS Executive Director
* Jane Maienschein, President


* Joan Cadden, Past President

* Rachel Ankeny, Treasurer

* Council: John Beatty, David Kaiser, Pamela O.
Long, Karen Rader and Spencer Weart

* Committee on Education: Robert DeKosky, chair;
Jessica Wang

* Committee on Honors and Prizes: Audra Wolfe,
chair; Nancy Siraisi

* Committee on Meetings and Programs: Marc
Rothenberg, chair; Pamela O. Long; Don Howard;
Marsha Richmond; Anita Guerrini; Ted Porter;
Ken Alder

* Committee on Publications: Karen Parshall, chair;
Paul Farber

* Committee on Research and the Profession: Amy
Crumpton, chair; Ron Rainger

* Derek Price/Rod Webster Prize: Sachiko Kusu-
kawa, chair

* Nathan Reingold Prize: Marcos Cueto, chair

* Margaret W. Rossiter Prize: Ida Stamhuis, chair

* Pfizer Award: Susan Lindee, chair

* Watson Davis and Helen Miles Davis Prize: Roger
Stuewer, chair

* Joseph H. Hazen Prize: Graeme Gooday, chair

* Nominating Committee: David Kaiser, chair; M.
Norton Wise; Pamela Smith; Katharine Anderson;
Thomas Sbderqvist

* Women's Caucus: Marsha Richmond, co chair

* Graduate Student Early Career Caucus: Jacqueline
Wernimont, co chair

* HSS/NASA Space Fellowship Committee: Pamela
Mack, Liba Taub






History of Science Society Newsletter


International Colloquium Held at
Queen's University Belfast (QUB) In Memoriam: Elizabeth Paris
In Memoriam: Elizabeth Paris


The colloquium entitled "The Monist
Century,1845-1945: Science, Secularism and World-
view," held October 2-3, 2009, explored the history
of natural scientific monism from the materialists to
Haeckel and beyond. In addition it tested the thesis
implied in the workshop title, namely that monism
tells us something significant about the framing
questions of intellectual, political and religious
debate in this time period.

Seated (left to right): Sander Gliboff (Indiana), Peter
Bowler (QUB), Igor Polianski (Ulm), Todd Weir
(QUB), Gauri Viswanathan (Columbia, NYC). Stand-
ing (left to right): Tracie Matysik (U Texas), Bernhard
Kleeberg (Constance), Caroline Sumpter (QUB), Nico-
laas Rupke (Gottingen), Sabine TW' ,,': (QUB), Fred
Gregory (Florida), Paul Ziche (Utrecht), David Liv-
ingstone (QUB), Robert Bud (London), Heiko Weber
(Jena), Eve-Marie Engels (Tiibingen). Notpictured:
Mark Bevir (UC B,, I


Elizabeth Paris, wife of Jay Barnet Ress and
mother of Zachary and Elysha. Cherished friend,
mother, and wife. September 4, 1968 Novem-
ber 28, 2009.

Active in Nashville's Hillsboro Neighbor-
hood Association, La Leche League, Attachment
Parenting International, and Ronald MacDonald
House. Stanford University graduate, PhD in
History and Philosophy of Science and Technol-
ogy.

Born in Cincinnati, traveled extensively,
taught at a private high school in Los Angeles
and in the Harvard University History of Science
Department. Dibner fellow. Argonne National
Lab Historian.

In lieu of flowers, please make a donation in
Elizabeth's name to the ACLU.


- ~ 1t r l






History of Science Society Newsletter


How Not to Engage "Anti-Evolutionist" Historians

Richard Weikart, Department of History, California State University, Stanislaus


In his recent brief essay in the History ofScience
Society Newsletter, "Some Thoughts on Historians and
Contemporary Anti-evolutionism," John Lynch suggests
that historians of science should engage anti-evolutionists'
historical arguments. I want to second this suggestion,
but I hope that the level of engagement will rise far above
Lynch's own attempts.

First, it would help for historians to understand the
positions of those they are engaging and to define terms
carefully, so as not to end up attacking strawmen. Lynch
and many other historians continually conflate Intel-
ligent Design (ID) and creationism, and rarely do they
provide definitions for either position. Ron Numbers, a
staunch opponent of ID and creationism, often warns
against this mistake and admits that it is a rhetorical
move to discredit ID.

ID is a broad claim that intelligence is empirically
detectable in nature, both in cosmology (fine tuning
argument) and in biology (DNA, molecular machines,
biochemical systems, etc.). ID proponents include those
who accept some form of common ancestry and thus
evolution broadly defined (Michael Behe), old earth
creationists (William Dembski, Steve Meyer, John West),
and young earth creationists (Paul Nelson). Another term
Lynch uses as a synonym for ID and creationism is "anti-
evolutionism." This term does indeed characterize most
ID proponents, but not all. Some ID proponents, such
as Behe, believe in some kind of evolution. However,
they do not believe that evolution could happen solely
through random mutations. Thus, it would be more
accurate to use the term "anti-Darwinist" for ID support-
ers, for this would include all of them, rather than simply
most of them.

We should also be careful to define creationism. In
the public arena this term usually means Genesis literal-
ists who believe in a six-day miraculous creation several


thousand years ago. If this is what is meant by creation-
ism, then ID is clearly not identical with creationism. To
be sure, young-earth creationists would belong to the ID
camp. However, ID would also include many individuals
who actively campaign against young-earth creationism.

If, on the other hand, by creationism Lynch and oth-
er historians simply mean someone who believes in some
kind of intelligent being who by some means creates
something or other at some time, then of course the vast
majority of ID proponents are creationists (except maybe
for a few skeptics, such as David Berlinski). Most people,
I suspect, are not going to find this definition ofcreation-
ism useful, however, since it includes the vast majority of
people in the world, including multitudes of scientists.
Using this definition, many biologists who clearly believe
in Darwinian evolution, such as Francis Collins, would
be creationists. Most theistic evolutionists would also be
creationists, if we use this expansive definition.

One could define creationism in other ways than
the two ways I have sketched above, of course, and that
is fine with me, as long as historians define what they
mean. Lynch and many other writers simply use the
terms ID, creationism, and anti-evolutionism as syn-
onyms without providing definitions, thus spoiling any
attempts at analysis.

Another problem with Lynch's analysis is that he
complains that ID proponents do not engage with
professional historians. After criticizing the work of three
scholars-including me-who have written about some
of the more unsavory ways that Darwinism has been
applied-by Darwinists themselves-to ethical and
social thought, Lynch complains that

Given the rigorous peer review process required for
publication in leading academic journals and presses, it
is unsurprising the ID proponents make little attempt to
engage with the community of professional historians.






History of Science Society Newsletter


The True Story of Newton and the
Apple


Unsurprisingly papers are neither presented at confer-
ences nor published in relevant journals and little attempt
is made to undergo review by practicing historians with
expertise in Darwin, his ideas, and their socio-cultural
effects.

Apparently Lynch is suffering from amnesia. I
distinctly remember meeting him at a scholarly confer-
ence on Darwinism at Arizona State University, his
home institution, in 2004. The paper I presented to that
conference was subsequently published in a peer-reviewed
anthology with University of Chicago Press. He also fails
to mention that my two most recent books-Hitler's
Ethic and From Darwin to Hitler were both published
by Palgrave Macmillan, a major academic press that did
peer-review my manuscripts. I have published six peer-
reviewed articles on social Darwinism and related themes
in leading historical journals, including one that won
the best article of the year prize from the Journal of the
History of Ideas. I discovered a letter by Charles Darwin
relating to social Darwinism that I published in Isis. My
dissertation, "Socialist Darwinism," won the biennial
prize for the best dissertation on the history of human
sciences from the Forum for History of Human Science.

In addition to all this, I have presented papers at vari-
ous conferences, including the History of Science Society
and two academic conferences on Darwinism in 2009,
one at Clemson University and the other at San Diego
State University. In 2007 I was invited to an "author-
meets-critics" session at the "Darwinism after Darwin"
Conference at the University of Leeds. Why does none
of this count as engaging professional historians and
publishing peer-reviewed work?

I look forward to Lynch and others publishing
peer-reviewed criticisms of my position, and I intend to
reply in like manner, if possible. I hope this will lead to a
fruitful exchange.


The Royal Society has announced that the origi-
nal version of the famous story of Newton and the
falling apple is being made available for the first time in
manuscript form. The story-in which Newton claims
to have received inspiration for the theory of gravitation
from seeing a falling apple in his garden-was told by
Newton to William Stukeley and originally appeared
in his 1752 biography, Memoirs of Sir Isaac Newton's
Life. The most celebrated anecdote in science exists as a
fragile paper manuscript in the Royal Society's archives,
but it can now be viewed in a fully interactive format by
anybody with internet access.

Martin Rees, President of the Royal Society and
thus Newton's modern-day successor, said: "The publi-
cation of Newton's biography as a Turning the Pages"
presentation represents our commitment to sharing the
Royal Society's history with the widest possible reader-
ship in our 350th anniversary year. Stukeley's biography
is a precious artefact for historians of science, and I am
delighted that it is being made available today, along
with other treasures from our archives, in a format that
allows anybody to view them as if they were holding
the manuscript in front of them."

The virtual manuscripts are being made available
on the same day as the publication of Seeing Further, a
lavishly illustrated new book telling the story of science
and the Royal Society, edited and introduced by Bill
Bryson. The launch of the interactive manuscripts and
book publication form part of the Royal Society's 350th
anniversary celebrations this year.

The presentations are created using innovative
software which allows users to do much more than just
turn pages-manuscripts can be magnified and rotated,
and commentaries appear on many of the pages.


Continued next page


SOctober 13






History of Science Society Newsletter
Continued from previous page


As well as collecting Newton's musings on his
own life, Stukeley also gathered material about New-
ton's younger days from residents of Grantham, where
he went to school. One story tells of him building a
perfect, working scale model of a windmill, based on
observation of a full-size version that was being built
in the area. Unimpressed by his wind-powered model,
Newton went on to build a fully functional mouse-
powered version "wh[ich] worked it as naturally as the
wind".


Other treasures from the Royal Society's archive
that are being made available include the revolution-
ary Thomas Paine's iron bridge design, the philosopher
John Locke's contribution to an early American consti-
tution, and rare and beautiful natural history illustra-
tions from the 17th through to the 19th centuries.

Turning the Pages will go live on 00:01 GMT Monday
18th January at the following URL:
www.royalsociety.org/turning-the-page


Darwin Film Released


Creation, the new film about Darwin starring Paul
Bettany and Jennifer Connelly, premiered on Friday,
January 22, in New York, Los Angeles, San Francisco,
Boston, and Washington, DC. The movie is based on
Annie's Box (Creation: Darwin, His Daughter & Hu-
man Evolution in the US.), written by Randal Keynes,
Darwin's great-great-grandson. Keynes sums up his great-
great-grandfather:

[Darwin's] love for his wife; his observations of his
children; his friendships with gardeners, schoolteachers
and pigeon fanciers; his fears about death, revolution,
bankruptcy, inbreeding...all these things found their way
into his theory. He was the most inclusive of thinkers.


National Run

The "Creation" national run began on January 22 in
these markets:
* New York City: Landmark's Sunshine Cinema
Clearview's 1st & 62nd
* Los Angeles: The Landmark
* San Francisco Bay Area:
Landmark's Embarcadero Center Cinema (SF)
Landmark's Shattuck (Berkeley)
* Washington, DC: Landmark's E Street Cinema
* Boston/Cambridge: Landmark's Kendall Square

Group rates may be available-readers should con-
tact the theater in question.

More Information

For more info about the movie, trailers, schedules,
etc., go to:
* Darwin on the Big Screen: http://ncse.com/evolu-
tion/darwin-gets-hollywood-treatment
* The official site: www.creationthemovie.com
* The Facebook page: http:// www.facebook.com/
pages/CREATION-The-Movie/39212784860
* The Twitter feed: http://twitter.com/Creation_
Movie






History of Science Society Newsletter


The John Tyndall Correspondence Project

Bernard Lightman, York University; Michael Reidy, Montana State University; and
James Elwick, York University


Last October, we learned that our application for
a three-year National Science Foundation grant had
been successful. The NSF grant will enable us to take
a major step forward in completing the goals of our
project: first, to publish a one-volume calendar of the
correspondence of the Victorian physicist John Tyn-
dall (1820-1893) and to issue multiple volumes of his
collected correspondence, both in print and, eventu-
ally, in an accessible, searchable, on-line format; and
second, to galvanize a community of scholars at var-
ied stages in their careers-from graduate students
to postdoctoral researchers to senior personnel-
around themes raised through an intense study of
John Tyndall. Now the project will be able to draw
on the expertise of scholars from fourteen universities
located in four countries that specialize in the history
and philosophy of Victorian science. Though the
main intellectual merit of the project will be the pub-
lication of Tyndall's correspondence, we are putting
graduate students at its center, thereby relying on a
cooperative model of graduate student training and
research that can be used for other similar large-scale
endeavors. What we are creating is a unique, interna-
tional, collaborative project that will provide scholars
with an important resource that is difficult to access.

Tyndall was one of the most influential British
scientists of the second half of the nineteenth cen-
tury. As the successor to Davy and Faraday at the
Royal Institution, Tyndall enjoyed a prominent place
within the scientific elite. Due to his flamboyant
lecturing style, he became well known as an eloquent
public speaker for fashionable audiences. He was a
member of the powerful group of scientific natural-
ists that included T. H. Huxley, Herbert Spencer,
and Joseph Dalton Hooker, and became a leading
figure in the debates over evolution. With a vast
international network of scientific allies and col-
leagues, Tyndall's influence reached beyond Britain.


Tyndall made contributions to the advancement of
scientific knowledge, though he is not known for
making scientific discoveries of the highest order.
He was among the first to explain the earth's natural
greenhouse effect and the role played in this process
by gases such as carbon dioxide. He also undertook
important research in electro-magnetism, thermody-
namics, sound, glaciers, and spontaneous generation,
among other subjects.

The first phase of the project-locating, col-
lecting, and digitalizing all of the estimated 8,000
extant letters-is nearly complete. Grants from the
Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council
of Canada and from the Mellon Foundation funded
the first phase of the project at York University and
provided for the transcription of approximately
2,000 letters. The NSF grant will enable us to finish
the second phase of the project, completing the tran-
scription of the rest of the letters, in the next three
years. The NSF grant establishes a second center for
the project at Montana State University, directed
by Michael Reidy, that will coordinate the work of
twelve scholars and their students, in addition to
those working at York and Montana State. The team
will include: Ruth Barton (Auckland), Janet Browne
(Harvard), Gowan Dawson (Leicester), Graeme
Gooday (Leeds), Piers Hale (Oklahoma), John Lynch
(Arizona State), Iwan Morus (Aberystwyth), Eliza-
beth Neswald (Brock), Richard Noakes (Exeter),
Simon Schaffer (Cambridge), Matthew Stanley
(NYU), and Jim Strick (Franklin and Marshall).
Montana State University will also be hiring a two-
year postdoctoral researcher to help run the project,
and in 2012 will host a conference on Tyndall and
the science of the Victorian age, combined with a
workshop for those editing the volumes of correspon-
dence. For more information on the project, go to:
http://www.yorku.ca/tyndall/.


* October 15






History of Science Society Newsletter


Perspectives on Science


by Michael Bycroft


Consider how secondary schools might teach history
of science in an ideal world.

Assessment would be kept to a minimum, and
independent research encouraged. Taught content would
cover historical research methods and a few key case
studies. Students would take the course out of a genuine
interest in the field, and teachers would get involved for
the same reason. Students (and teachers) from science
and humanities backgrounds would intermingle and
learn from each other, and academic historians would
give their advice and inspiration. The course would
capture the richness and rigor of the history of science, a
breath of fresh air in a smoggy curriculum.

Is such a course possible in today's secondary schools?
Two recent articles in this Newsletter suggest that the an-
swer, at least in the short term in the US, is "no." [1] But
a group of teachers, educators and academics in the UK
would give a more optimistic answer. Their answer takes
the form of Perspectives on Science (PoS), a course on
the history, philosophy and ethics of science that has-
at least in theory-many of the features of the fanciful
course described above.

After three years as a pilot program, PoS made its
formal debut in UK secondary schools in September
2008. Now, ten years after the course was conceived at
UK's University of York, it has entered its second fully-
fledged year. Has the child grown as its parents expected,
and has it been a tough upbringing? I spoke to some of
the people behind the course, and discovered that the
PoS format can work in practice, as well as in theory. In-
deed, it has worked well enough to spread to other school
subjects and even other countries. Student interest in the
history of science component is alarmingly low, however.
And PoS is a long way from being a mainstream part of
the UK curriculum.


Elizabeth Swinbank is a Fellow in Science Education
in York's Department of Educational Studies. She was
among the teachers and teacher trainers who raised the
idea of a PoS-style course at a teacher-training course at
York in 1999, and has been involved in the project ever
since. "PoS began with a 'wouldn't it be nice if...' conver-
sation over lunch," she says. "The initial vision was for a
course in history and philosophy of science that would
give students opportunities to discuss and explore some
of the 'big questions' that interest them in this area."

The project team agreed at the beginning-and has
insisted ever since-that those explorations should be
recognizedd as valuable in their own right, not merely a
way of getting the teacher off the subject at the end of
a more conventional science lesson." They also agreed
about the assessment of the course. "We initially thought
there would have to be an exam of some sort," says Swin-
bank, "though we were never very keen on that."

Fortunately for the project, led by Dr. John Taylor,
a teacher and Director of Critical Skills at UK's Rugby
School, these desiderata were neatly aligned with the
interests of some key UK funders. An initial grant from
the Royal Society of London was "hugely helpful," says
Swinbank, and gave the team the time and resources to
attract sponsors including the Wellcome Trust and the
then Particle Physics and Astronomy Research Council.
Wellcome appreciated PoS's goal of "promoting intel-
ligent informed discussion about ethical questions in
relation to science," says Swinbank. Edexcel, one of UK's
school examination boards, appreciated the light-weight
(and therefore inexpensive) assessment format, and
agreed to take PoS on.

Support from funders and examiners meant that the
current PoS course is, to Swinbank, pleasingly similar to
the course that the York group envisaged a decade ago.
The course text (Perspectives on Science, Heinemann)






History of Science Society Newsletter


gives equal attention to the ethics, history and philosophy
of science. Learning time is split between class-based
teaching of research and thinking skills, and indepen-
dent research projects carried out by each student. The
course can be taken over one or two years; each student is
assessed on a ten-minute oral presentation and a 6000-
word essay based on her own research.

The extended essay is one of PoS's key innovations.
Each essay is organized into an abstract, introduction,
literature review, discussion, and conclusion. Students
must reference all sources using footnotes and a bibliog-
raphy. Taylor says that this discipline has paid off, leading
to some "quite impressive work." PoS students, of which
there were 343 in UK schools in 2008, have answered
questions as diverse as "Is schizophrenia genetic?" "Can
the Kyoto Protocol be defended using a philosophical
and ethical approach?" and "To what extent was the
discovery of the structure of DNA due to meticulous
research and to what extent was it due to opportunism?"

PoS has gathered high praise from students and
teachers alike. An independent review of the course,
produced in 2008 by researchers at London's Institute of
Education (IoE), contains some glowing comments.[2]
One teacher remarked that the course provided "probably
the most enjoyable teaching I've ever done in my whole
teaching career...for once the students and I are actually
exploring knowledge, for the love of exploring knowl-
edge, rather than trying to prove that Ohm's Law is still
Ohm's Law." Another teacher noted that the oral presen-
tation gave students a rare chance to put their intellectual
colors on display: apart from PoS, students get "very
few opportunities to say 'this is what I'm intellectually
stimulated by.'"

PoS's resemblance to university study is a selling
point for both students and teachers, the report says.
"We are expecting these [PoS] students to do rather bet-
ter at university interviews," one teacher remarked. One
PoS student went on to study history and philosophy
of science (HPS) at Cambridge University, and noted
that "philosophical discussions of both Kuhn and Marx
formed a large part of my [Oxbridge] application, and I
was prepared for the rigorous debate by [PoS]." Taylor


estimates that between 3 and 6 students in a group of 30
PoS students follow HPS into higher education.

But forward thinking was not the only reason-nor
the main reason-students have taken the course. In the
IoE survey, 21% of students indicated that they chose the
course for its relevance to their future work or study. But
twice as many students said that the main enticement
was their prior interest in the history, ethics, or (most
frequently) philosophy of science.

Notably, one student took PoS after feeling "too out
of contact with science doing too many art subjects." Tay-
lor affirms that the course serves art students well. "[PoS]
certainly does attract the interest of non-science students,"
he says, "and I have seen some excellent engagement
with science from some of these. For example, students
not studying A-level biology might well learn a fair bit
of genetics in order to write a dissertation on e.g. genetic
screening."

What role have academics played in all this? Al-
though the 1999 York group had what Swinbank calls an
"amateur" interest in HPS, preparing students for higher
study has always been a goal of PoS. To this end the
project team have had "several academic advisers from
an early stage of the project," says Swinbank. Graeme
Gooday (Professor of History of Science and Technol-
ogy at the University of Leeds) and the late Peter Lipton
(philosopher of science and former head of HPS at the
University of Cambridge) were "particularly helpful and
active," she says. Gooday's contribution included organiz-
ing workshops for PoS students to help them formulate
their research topics.

Taylor and his colleagues drafted in other academics
for comment or advice on PoS, and a number of these
have lent their voices to the admiring chorus. Michael
Reiss calls the course a "breath of fresh air...an opportu-
nity for students to develop their intellectual muscles."
And Gooday writes that the course equips students with
research skills that "no existing qualification comes close
to rivalling." [3]



Continued next page


* October 17






History of Science Society Newsletter


Continued from previous page
The course has enjoyed more than one kind of posi-
tive feedback. Success has bred not praise but also more
success: the no-exam format has found such favour with
Edexcel and UK's Qualifications and Curriculum Devel-
opment Agency that in the 2009-10 year PoS is just one
of a number of topics that UK students can study in the
format pioneered by PoS. This suite of PoS-style courses
make up the Extended Project Qualification (EPQ), a
program that John Taylor now directs for Edexcel.

Taylor says that the PoS experience, along with a new
set of text books and teaching guides to go with the PoS
resources, has ensured a "smooth transition" to the EPQ.
Student numbers for all EPQ courses are around 10,000
for the 2009-10 year. There are no clear figures on how
many of these are studying the ethics, history and phi-
losophy of science. But the total figure, and the leading
role that PoS has played in the new qualification, suggest
that PoS continues to grow at a healthy rate.

But how far can PoS grow? And does the growth
of the history of science branch match that of the ethics
and philosophy branches? The IoE report and one of its
co-authors, Dr. Ralph Levinson, cast light on both ques-
tions.

Of the 358 PoS research projects considered by the
report, just 9 focused on the history of science, compared
with 65 on the philosophy of science and a whopping
260 on the ethics of science. That's 2.5% in history and
almost 75% in ethics. Moreover, the authors of the report
"did not observe any discussions of historical questions
[in class discussions during the course] and few of our
participants mentioned historical topics in interview."
Another worrying sign for historians is the report's com-
ments on the ability of students to assess their sources.
Although students had a "keen awareness" of the fal-
libility of sources, "none of the students we interviewed
demonstrated convincingly how they might identify a
good source from a weak one."

Whence this massive indifference to history? What-
ever its source, the course organizers insist that they do
not share it. Swinbank says that history was part of the
PoS package "right from the initial lunch conversation."
Indeed, it was one of the "starting points" for the whole


PoS project. Taylor says the study of the history of science
"should be encouraged" in PoS, and instructed his own
students to seek out reliable sources (including HPS aca-
demics) for their research projects. And the PoS course-
book gives equal weight to history, ethics and philosophy,
and includes a section on evaluating sources.

The report suggests that PoS's emphasis on class
discussions may be to blame. Historians rely on empiri-
cal knowledge in a way that ethicists and philosophers
do not, and class discussions alone do not generate
empirical knowledge. As the report puts it: "It is hard to
say anything about whether or not Newton's published
work was original and revolutionary without knowing a
great deal about both Newton's published work and the
scientific context in which he wrote." PoS is sometimes
championed for teaching skills rather than facts. If the
IoE report is right, PoS reminds us that it is hard to learn
the skills of history without learning some of its facts.

The teaching style of PoS may only be part of the
explanation for its treatment of history. One observer
of PoS suggested to me that the PoS team consulted
historians mainly as a "diplomatic move": as a result, "the
entire curriculum is geared towards points of philosophi-
cal interest." And insofar as PoS deals with history, it
deals with the least interesting parts of history: "the cur-
riculum does not include many of the topics in history
of science that really get our undergraduates interested
(and can thus taken an engaged critical view on them):
politics, technology, gender, warfare, media, imperial-
ism, and race." Given this neglect of the human and less
metaphysical side of science, it is "not surprising that the
history of science options are not widely pursued by PoS
students."

Whether or not these accusations are just, there is
clearly a mismatch between the history's proposed role in
PoS and its popularity in practice. A related problem is
the course's teaching burden. An interdisciplinary course
requires interdisciplinary teachers, and few teachers are
trained in the history, ethics and philosophy of science as
well as in science itself. So far, PoS teachers have mainly
been found in science departments, Taylor says, with
some help from teachers with backgrounds in ethics of






History of Science Society Newsletter


philosophy, such as religious education specialists. Dr.
Ralph Levinson, a co-author of the IoE report and Senior
Lecturer in the IoE Faculty of Culture and Pedagogy,
agrees that science teachers have been the largest single
source of teachers of PoS.

According to the IoE report, the lack of trained
philosophers teaching the course may explain why rela-
tively few students took up research projects in philoso-
phy. Could the same apply to the history component?
Levinson thinks so, noting that few historians have
taught the course. Teachers have attended PoS training
sessions and got advice from HPS academics; neverthe-
less, Levinson says, few are HPS specialists and most have
been "learning on the job."

The "amateur" aspect of PoS can be a virtue, how-
ever. "The secret about PoS," Levinson says, "is that en-
thusiasts are doing it...that's why it works: teachers enjoy
doing it and students enjoy taking it. And I think that
is the way to go." According to Levinson, PoS remains
an "outsider" in the UK curriculum. In credit terms it is
equivalent to half an A-level, but is not itself an A-level
or an AS-level, the standard qualifications for students in
the final and penultimate years at UK secondary schools.
This too has its advantages: "if you put [PoS] in the statu-
tory curriculum," Levinson says, "it will kill it."

Does this mean that for PoS there is a trade-off
between popularity and quality? Levinson hesitates, then
says "yes." "Once it gets too big...the national curriculum
authorities will get their murky hands on it." A middle
position may be best for the course, he says, so that "it
doesn't get big, but it is not small enough to collapse."

Whatever the limits on the course's growth, Taylor
and his team have worked hard-and effectively, in
Levinson's view-to extend the course to new schools,
teachers, and students. It has also caught the eye of over-
seas educators: some Australian schools have expressed an
interest in taking on the course, for example.

The big challenge is to get the word out, Swinbank
says. "We frequently find that, once they know about
PoS, all these groups [teachers, students, and HE admis-
sions tutors] are very enthusiastic but because [PoS] is


slightly out of the mainstream of what goes on in schools
and colleges, it can get overlooked." The academic com-
munity can help by "listing [PoS] in prospectuses and
on websites as a desirable entry qualification for their
courses and indicating how PoS helps student prepare
for degree-level work."

Where will PoS be in another 10 years time? Swin-
bank hopes "that the notion of students developing
researching and communication skills becomes part
of the mainstream of education post-16." Taylor looks
forward to seeing "a community of schools committed
to this approach, sharing experience and expertise with
other schools." Historians of science can perhaps wish
them every success in expanding PoS, and hope that the
history of science component expands with it.

References:
1. See the articles by Michelle Klosterman (in the January
2009 newsletter, http://www.hssonline.org/publica-
tions/Newsletter2009/JanuaryKlosterman.html) and
by Greg Macklem and Erik Peterson (in the April 2009
newsletter, http://www.hssonline.org/publications/
Newsletter2009/April_education.html).
2.Perspectives on Science project team. (2008). Summary
document. Retrieved from: wwwl.edexcel.org.uk/
Project/POS-Briefing.doc.
3.Levinson, R., Hand, M., and Amos, R. (2008). A
Research Study of the Perspectives on Science AS-level
Course. London Institute of Education.

Further information:
* Dr. John Taylor, Director of Perspectives on Science,
can be contacted at jlt@rugbyschool.net.
* The Edexcel specification for the Extended Project
Qualification, along with an exemplar Perspectives on
Science project, can be found at http://www.edexcel.
com/quals/project/level3/Pages/default.aspx.


* October 19






History of Science Society Newsletter


Adventures in Romantic Science:
Richard Holmes on passion, teamwork, and the neglected art of
Biography.

An interview by Michael Bycroft


When Age of Wonder won the prestigious Royal
Society Prize for Science Books in September last
year, it was a victory not just for good writing and
for the author Richard Holmes, but also for the his-
tory of science. Age of Wonder, a series of portraits
of the men and women of science in the Romantic
era, is only the fourth book on history to win the
22-year old prize. [1] This is a step in a new direc-
tion for Holmes, a literary biographer known more
for his work on Shelley and Coleridge than on Davy
and Herschel. But we should not be surprised to see
those four Romantic figures in the same book, says
Holmes. And there is plenty more to write about this
daring and bountiful period for science, and plenty
of ways to write about it.

The dark and wonderful world of
Romantic scientists

Q: You have said that your "books on Shelley and
Coleridge are all about people who had hope in the
world. Now come [in Age of Wonder] the scientists and
the discovery of a new kind of hope. "[2] Is it this-the
sense of hope shared by Romantic scientists and artists-
thatprompted you to shift from literary biography to
history of science? Are there other reasons for the shift?

A: Yes, one of the glories of the Romantic period for
me is its sense of hope and energy, of wider possibili-
ties, of a better world. I also hate the stultifying idea
of the Two Cultures-arts and sciences-supposedly
dividing us. The Romantics didn't believe in such a
division. In fact the specific thing that set me off was
the friendship between the poet Coleridge (whose
biography I had written) and the chemist Humphry
Davy. It is a fascinating story, ranging from their
inhaling of nitrous oxide gas together, to discuss-
ing the hardest metaphysical questions about the
nature of scientific knowledge and its role in society.


As Coleridge said, "Science
being necessarily performed
with the passion of Hope, it
is Poetical." I was also use-
fully provoked after a lecture
I gave at the British Acad-
emy in 1999, when Professor
Lewis Wolpert sprang up
from the front row and said
that Coleridge's great poem
"The Ancient Mariner" had
nothing whatsoever to do
with science. He was wrong, as it happens, but it set
me thinking-for ten years.

Q: There is a darker, less hopeful side to Romanticpo-
ets. Is there also a darker, less hopeful side to Romantic
scientists that you wanted to explore in this book?

A: Yes, there certainly is. William Herschel's as-
tronomy first raised the question of a huge, meaning-
less universe, with no cosmic Creator, and in which
every galaxy was destined to "wither and die." Davy's
chemistry showed that a great discovery like anaes-
thetics could be lost for a generation, at immense
cost in human suffering; and that a great technical
invention like the miner's safety lamp could finally
end up being used to exploit the very men it was de-
signed to safeguard. (They were sent deeper into the
mines). The advances in medicine and surgery began
to challenge the notion of human individuality or
spirit, and produced that parable of scientific hubris
and menace still universally known by the name of
Dr Frankenstein. (Mary Shelley's great novel of 1818
was actually entitled: Frankenstein, or The Modern
Prometheus, and initially it only sold 500 copies).
You can find the same questions being asked in the
poetry of Byron, Keats, and Shelley. For example in
Byron's haunting poem "Darkness."






History of Science Society Newsletter


Q: You write in Age of Wonder that you aim to "pres-
ent scientific passion, so much of which is summed up in
that child-like, but infinitely complex word, wonder."
[3] Did you aim to present the methods of scientists as
well as "passion" behind their work?

A: Yes, and these methods are not at all childlike.
They were original, daring and often highly danger-
ous. To start with, the principles of close observa-
tion, accurate measurement, and precise experiment
pioneered by the scientists-incidentally not defined
as "scientists" until 1831-are intellectually grip-
ping in themselves. But there's the physical equip-
ment they used, and often invented-like Herschel's
homemade reflectors, or Davy's voltaic batteries, or
Banks's exquisite anthropological (as well as botani-
cal) drawings, or Blanchard's balloon canopies and
barometers. Then there's the story of their actual ex-
periments, explorations and discoveries, which make
thrilling narratives in themselves, and are as rivet-
ing to write about as detective stories (or indeed as
love stories, which they often are in their own way).
Mungo Park's heroic solo exploration of the river
Niger, his psychological (or spiritual) survival when
he was robbed and left to die, abandoned and alone,
is as moving as any Romantic poem. (Indeed Robert
Southey tried to turn it into one, but it's better in
Park's own prose Travels.)

Historians and Romantic science

Q. Did you use any other writers on the history ofsci-
ence, or works in the field, as models for this book? Ifso,
what/who were they?

A: Not really, I felt I was trying to do something
quite new in this form of group biography. Indeed
it was a long and lonely business. Nonetheless there
were books which deeply encouraged me, and which
I admire greatly: James Gleick on Newton, Lisa
Jardine on 17th century science in Ingenious Pursuits,
and Jenny Uglow on the 18th century Lunar Men.
There were also certain radio and television pro-
grams which inspired me by the way complex ideas
could be discussed and clarified: Melvyn Bragg's In
Our Time, and Sir David Attenborough's revelatory


nature and environment programs, for instance.
By contrast, there were many biographical films or
biopics-about Darwin or Stephen Hawking, for
example-which warned me how not to do it.

Q. You write in Age of Wonder that "We need not
only a new history ofscience, but a more enlarged and
imaginative biographical writing about individual
scientists." [4] Do you have some individual scientists in
mind who deserve more biographical attention?

A: I think the biography of scientists is only just
starting. For example, Mike Jay's biography of the
18th century doctor Thomas Beddoes, or Graham
Farmelo's of the physicist Paul Dirac, or Georgina
Ferry's of the molecular biologist Max Perutz. Or
from a different angle, the biography of a scientific
idea (which is a different kind of group biography)
like Simon Singh's Fermat's Last Theorem or Manjit
Kumar's Quantum. Most of all there is the need for
fuller biographies of women in science, especially
during the early modern period: the Duchess of
Newcastle, Emilie du Chatelet, Mary Anning, Mary
Somerville, Caroline Herschel, Jane Marcet, for
example.

Q: Did you think that science during the Romantic pe-
riod has been given insufficient attention by historians?
Ifso, why might this be?

A: First, because many scientists still believe that
Romantic writers all hated and distrusted science
like William Blake: "Newton and Locke, sheathed in
dismal Steel" etc. See for example Richard Dawkins's
Unweaving the Rainbow, which appears to make this
mistaken assumption. Second, because there's been
an historic gap, a sort of intellectual black hole, be-
tween the death of Newton (1724) and the departure
of the young Charles Darwin aboard the Beagle,
bound for the Galapagos (1831). And third, because
this is the period of the German naturphilosophie,
a powerful and attractive kind of popular science
mysticism, which spread across Europe and is still
the source of much contemporary "alternative" sci-
ence and some glorious mumbo-jumbo too. Science
historians are nervous of that.
Continued next page


* October 21






History of Science Society Newsletter
Continued from previous page


Scientific biography: Sidetracks, foot-
steps, lateral stories and vertical foot-
notes

Q: You have described biography as a union offiction
and fact, "without benefit of clergy." [5] Did your
previous experience of marrying fact and fiction (in
your works of literary biography) make it easier foryou
to marry Romantic science with Romantic art (in this
book)?

A: No, I felt I was starting from scratch. It's not so
much "marrying" fact and fiction, as using fictional
techniques to get across facts and present them in
a revealing way. I've written a whole paper on this,
but I will give you just two examples, and in highly
compressed form. One is the use of Joseph Banks
as a kind of Greek chorus throughout the book.
The second is the method of starting each scien-
tific life in the middle, when something significant
has already happened, and only going back to the
childhood later-to see how he or she got to that
significant place. If you look in the book, you will
see how these work. A third would be the use of
"vertical footnotes" to open up "lateral stories," but
you'll have to work that one out for yourself.

Q: "Empathy is the most powerful, the most necessary,
and the most deceptive, of all biographical emotions."
[6] As a writer, did you find it harder to empathize
with the scientists in this history than with the writers?
If this was aproblemforyou, how did you overcome
it?

A: I'm not sure about this. The question of
"empathy"-and in what sense it really exists, as
opposed to "sympathy"-is a difficult one for all
biographers. (I hedged my bets there in Sidetracks
by calling it an "emotion," but I now find that
someone has written a whole MA Dissertation on
"empathy" in my books, starting with Footsteps.) I
suppose there can be a problem about understand-
ing the inner life of scientists, who may not be
so naturally inclined to confide their thoughts to
letters, journals or diaries as professional writers.
(They may not have the time, apart from anything


else.) Biographers might call this "a lack of interior-
ity." On the other hand, scientists tend to have a
natural gift for explaining things, including they
way they have approached and solved (or failed
to solve, potentially just as interesting) particular
scientific problems. There is a great and growing
interest in the informal Notebooks of scientists-
for example the Notebooks of Leonardo, Newton
and Charles Darwin have all been published and
are classics-just like the Notebooks of Coleridge.
I found the Endeavour Journal of Joseph Banks,
the laboratory Notebooks of Humphry Davy, and
the astronomical Journals of Caroline Herschel,
extraordinarily vivid and revealing.

Q: "My urge was to go directly to the original materi-
als-and most especially to the places-for myself." [7]
What were the "original materials" that shed light on
the inner lives of the scientists in this book?

A: See the long answer above. I would also include
places and objects, like Davy's laboratory equip-
ment at the Royal Institution, Herschel's house in
Bath (now a museum) and his telescopes (at the
Whipple Museum), the John Hunter collection at
the Royal College of Surgeons, or Montgolfier's bal-
loons at the Muse6 de l'Air at Le Bourget.

Q" There is a fashion, in history ofscience writing, for
biographies about non-human subjects, whether equa-
tions (E = mc2) or entities (quarks, flies, electrons).
Can you imagine writing this kind of biography, or is
the human element indispensable foryou?

A: No, the human heart is indispensable. Samuel
Johnson said he could "write the life of a broom-
stick," but I couldn't.; Mind you Shelley wrote the
life of a single cloud in a long poem of that name,
and it is scientifically impressive (the evaporation
cycle) as well as biographically beautiful.

Q. Since writing this book you have hinted at the
importance of team-work and co-operation in sci-
ence. One theme ofAge of Wonder is the Romantic
enthusiasm for the "solitary scientific 'genius"' would
this enthusiasm make it difficult to re-write Romantic






History of Science Society Newsletter


science as a story of teamwork?

A: In the Preface, I called the book "a relay race of
scientific stories." I hope there is the sense of "a great
collaborative project" running throughout it. Yet
these men and women were indeed people of "soli-
tary genius," and more important, lived in a culture
that encouraged them to think of themselves as such.
(Nowadays, one might hazard the suggestion that
scientists are encouraged by the culture to think of
themselves as "popular celebrities," though blessedly
many of them refuse to do so.) Nonetheless there are
great partnerships and rivalries (rivalry producing a
different form of teamwork, see James Watson's The
Double Helix) at this time. Difficult to think of Wil-
liam Herschel without his sister Caroline Herschel,
Davy without his young assistant Michael Faraday,
Banks without the faithful Daniel Solander, or rebel-
lious William Lawrence without his surgical patron
John Abernethy (or either without...Dr Franken-
stein).

Present success and future plans

Q: The Age of Wonder has reached a much larger
readership than typical histories ofscience. Why do you
think this is? Is it because of the history ofscience in the
book, or in spite of it?

A: Yes, it's surprising, and also a larger readership
than my literary biographies-and even more so
in America. (I was particularly amazed to get a fan
letter from NASA.) I think we are probably entering
a golden age of popular science writing, anyway, for
quite complex reasons.... But it has struck me that
in lectures, and in the signing queue afterwards, my
readers seem more evenly balanced between men
and women, and definitely younger than before. But
then that's probably because I'm definitely older than
before.

Q: Do you have plans for another book? Ifso, do you
plan to write again on the Romantic period? On sci-
ence?

A: In a word-Aha!


References
1. The number of winning history books depends on how
one counts, of course. I count David Bodanis' Electric
Universe: How Electricity Switched on the Modern World
(2006 winner), Jared Diamond's Guns, Germs and Steel
(1998), and Arno Karlen's Plague's Progress (1996) as
the only winning books that focus mainly on history.
2.Nicholas Wroe. (2008). "Following his footsteps."
Guardian, Sep 27 08. Retrieved from http://www.
guardian.co.uk/books/2008/sep/27/biographyl.
3. Holmes, R. (2009). Age of Wonder. London: Harper
Press, p. 15.
4. Ibid., p. 468.
5. Holmes, R. (2003). Biography: Inventing the Truth,
in The Art ofLiterary Biography, John Batchelor (ed.),
Oxford: Oxford University Press, p. 15.
6. Holmes, R. (2001). Sidetracks: Explorations ofa Roman-
tic Biographer. Vintage, p. 136.
7. Holmes, R. (1996). Footsteps: Adventures ofa Romantic
Biographer. Vintage, p. 136.


SOctober 23






History of Science Society Newsletter


What's In A Session?
Lessons from the HSS Meeting in Phoenix, Arizona, 19-22 Nov 2009

by Pnina G. Abir-Am, Brandeis University &" Scientific
Legacies, pninaga@brandeis.edu


The HSS Annual Meeting in Phoenix was one of the
best HSS meetings, in the opinion of my colleagues
at breakfast on its last day.[1] Besides regular attrac-
tions, such as opportunities for personal discussions
with colleagues from other parts of the country, I
had a few highlights of my own. Below, I am trying
to extract useful lessons for future HSS Meetings
from my experience with the session I had organized.
Possibly, on a future occasion, I might also com-
ment on other experiences of public interest, such as
sharing advice on publishers, clarifying the status of
ongoing job searches, and "diving" into the Grand
Canyon with a French helicopter. [2]

I organized a "special session" out of concern that a
recent book's transnational perspective might not be
sufficiently noticed, given the long prevalence of na-
tionally defined research interests. "Meet the Author:
American Hegemony and the Reconstruction of Science
in Europe after WW2 by John Krige (The MIT Press,
2006)" featured five speakers including the author,
who holds the Kranzberg Chair at Georgia Tech and
who bravely responded to four potential critics in
front of what turned out to be a rather large audi-
ence. Having previously worked on European science
institutions, (he shared the Alexandre Koyr6 Medal
for 2009 awarded to the European Space Agency
History Project-see the HSS Newsletter October
2009) Krige argued for the merit of concepts from
diplomatic history, such as "American hegemony,"
which he put to great use in his effort to explain the
reconstruction of science in key European countries,
from a transnational perspective. Chairperson Mary
Jo Nye of Oregon State University, a former HSS
President, introduced the speakers in captivating
detail, while graciously clarifying a belated change in
the list of speakers.[3]

Zuoyue Wang (California State Polytechnic Univer-


sity at Pomona), Naomi Oreskes (University of Cali-
fornia at San Diego), and Bruno Strasser (Yale Uni-
versity) strove to conform to a tight schedule under
Mary Jo Nye's watchful eye, while highlighting the
comparability of trans-atlantic and trans-pacific traf-
fic in scientists, the limitations of the linear model in
framing science policy during the Cold War, and the
role of international organizations in resisting Ameri-
can hegemony, respectively. Finally, I discussed the
book's fresh look at the role of philanthropic founda-
tions in the confrontation between communism and
anti-communism during the Cold War.

The session, held in a room large enough to have
hosted a reception the preceding evening, was well
attended and included a lively Q&A, with queries
from Allan Needell, Robert Bud, (Science Museum/
London) and Daniel Kevles. (Yale University). The
new Editor-in-Chief of Centaurus, Ida Stamhuis
(Free University of Amsterdam), indicated interest
in converting our session into a special issue of that
journal. Following good feedback from additional
colleagues, I began to reflect on our session for some
lessons for the future.

The first lesson was that our format was filling a
special need for public discussion of different, com-
plementary viewpoints. Since even award-winning
books are highlighted by a brief citation only, such
a "special session"-half as short as a regular one-
helps the attendees become acquainted in a nutshell
both with the book (the author's response included
musings on things that could be done differently)
but also with how such a book can be viewed from
the vantage of different expertisees" The second les-
son was that a paradigm change is currently taking
place toward a greater emphasis on transnational his-
tory.[4] If so, we need more such sessions to remind
us that in the early 1990s, when the late Elizabeth






History of Science Society Newsletter


Crawford of CNRS/ Strasbourg, and a small band
of survivors on the margins of national histories,
first entertained the idea of a transnational history of
science, they had to assemble that pioneering act be-
yond "the polar circle."[5] Evidently, HSS was ready
to offer a warm welcome, and not just because of the
Phoenix climate.

The last lesson pertained to balancing research lines
at HSS Annual Meetings, given its policy of allow-
ing attendees to present a paper in one session only.
Some colleagues were glad that I did not forget to
"return" to topics other than "women in science,
which compelled my attention at HSS Meetings in
2005 & 2007. This balancing remains a big chal-
lenge for me in 2010 when HSS meets in Montreal.
Should I submit a proposal to discuss my new
book[6], which solves problems in the history of
DNA structure first adumbrated in my colloquium
at the University of Montreal? or should I focus
on how I "predicted" the 2009 Nobel to a woman
chemist, the first in half a century, even though I am
not an expert on comets, which may have a similarly
low frequency? [7]

Notes
1.The lack of HSS run tours to Phoenix's Botanical
Garden and to Arizona State University's Center for
Biology & Society, come to mind as oversights in an
otherwise smooth meeting. But the Heard Museum
had a great guide, and I even found, on my own, the
wing named after our HSS colleague Joy Harvey.
Breakfast companions included Marsha Richmond
(Wayne State University), Betty Smocovitis (University
of Florida), Hamilton Cravens (Iowa State University),
and Luis Campos (Drew University).
2.See photos of the Maverick helicopter and a bend in
the Colorado River as seen from the air. I am glad to
exchange notes regarding ongoing job searches.
3. Ron Doel of Florida State University, held up by a con-
ference in Russia, was replaced by Allan Needell of the
National Museum of Air and Space, who participated
from the floor.
4. E.g. the Palgrave Dictionary of Transnational History,
2009, Eds. Akira Iriye and Piere-Yves Saunier, to which


many of us contributed but could not afford to buy,
even at a 75% author discount! I wrote the entry on
"Life and Physical Sciences."
5. My reference was to Denationalizing Science, (1992/3)
edited by E. Crawford, Terry Shinn, and Sverker
Sorlin, (Kluwer, 1993) which was based on a confer-
ence held in Abisko, Sweden, loca-ted beyond the polar
circle. I wrote the chapter on transnational objectivity
in molecular biology.
6.DNA at 50: History or Memory? A New Account of the
Discovery ofa 20th Century Icon.
7. My "prediction" refers to a project that I began two
years prior to the 2009 Nobel, entitled "The first Nobel
to an Israeli Woman Scientist? Ada Yonath and the
Ribosome."


* October 25






History of Science Society Newsletter


2009 Prize Winners


Sarton Medal:
John E. Murdoch, Professor,
Harvard University


Pfizer Award:
Harold J. Cook, Director of the
Wellcome Trust Centre for the
History of Medicine and professor at
University College London. Matters
ofExchange: Commerce, Medicine, and
Science in the Dutch Golden Age, Yale
University Press, 2007


Watson Davis and Helen
Miles Davis Prize:
Charles Seife, Associate Professor,
The Arthur L. Carter Journalism In-
stitute at New York University. Sun in
a Bottle: The Strange History ofFusion
and the Science of J'\\f',,./ Thinking,
Viking Adult, 2008

HSS/NASA Space History
Fellowship
Matthew Hersch, Ph.D. Candidate,
University of Pennsylvania


Joseph H Hazen Education
Prize:
Frederick Gregory, Professor,
University of Florida


Margaret W. Rossiter
History of Women in
Science Prize:
Monica H. Green, Professor,
Arizona State University. Making
Women's Medicine Masculine. The
Rise ofMale Authority in Pre-Modern
Gynaecology. Oxford University Press
Press, 2008

Nathan Reingold Prize:
Rachel N. Mason Dentinger, Uni-
versity of Minnesota. Molecularizing
Plant Compounds, Evolutionizing
Insect-Plant Relationships: Gottfried S.
Fraenkel and the physiological study of
insect feeding in the 1950s.


Distinguished Lecture
M. Norton Wise, Professor, Univer-
sity of California, Los Angeles Science
as HistoricalNarrative


Price/Webster:
Angela N. H. Creager, Professor, Princeton University, and
GregoryJ. Morgan, Associate Professor, Stevens Institute of
Technology. "After the Double Helix: Rosalind Franklin's Re-
search on Tobacco mosaic virus" (Isis, June 2008, 99:239-272)






History of Science Society Newsletter


2009 History of Science Society Annual Meeting Survey

by Matthew White, HSS Office


Those of us who worked at the 2009 History of
Science Society meeting this past November in Phoe-
nix, have no doubt that this was one of the HSS's
most successful conferences ever. Whether a paid
staff member or a volunteer, we heard more compli-
ments and positive reports from members who at-
tended than anyone can remember. Things are never
perfect, of course, and we did receive complaints
about the conference, as well as suggestions for fu-
ture improvements, but on balance, we received not
just an overwhelming number of compliments com-
pared to complaints, but also a noticeable increase in
the number and passion of rave reviews this year over
previous years.

Although the personal feedback is important,
the HSS realizes that we need a rigorous analysis on
which to build better meetings in the future. So in
order to gauge the opinions and thoughts of the 594
attendees of the 2009 Annual Meeting we invited
all registrants to complete our annual survey. We are
gratified that 191 people responded (32%) to this call
and would like to share the results.

We asked respondents to rank general aspects of
the conference on a scale that included very unsatis-
factory, unsatisfactory, neutral, satisfactory, and very
satisfactory. By far the least popular aspect of the
conference was the city of Phoenix itself. Of those
surveyed, 28% reported being neutral about Phoenix
and 31% responded that the city was unsatisfactory
or very unsatisfactory. The most common complaint
was a lack of grocery stores, pharmacies, and restau-
rants near the hotel. This was also a common com-
plaint heard at the conference itself. Though many
were dissatisfied with the local options for food and
shopping, some respondents did report being pleased
with local restaurants and bars.


Conversely, the Hyatt Regency, the conference
hotel, scored very well, with over 84% of respondents
being satisfied or very satisfied with the hotel. This
also corresponds to the verbal feedback we received
at the meeting itself and meshes with the experiences
of HSS staff and volunteers. The hotel staff was help-
ful and responded quickly to requests.

The disparity between the responses to the city
and to the hotel is illustrative of how difficult it can
be to find the perfect site for a meeting the size of
HSS. The Executive Office and the Committee on
Meetings and Programs weigh many variables, in-
cluding location, airport service, travel costs, conve-
nience, amenities, and expense. Locations that excel
in one or more areas do not always please in other
areas, but these surveys will continue to help us track
which variables are most important to attendees.

As for the other aspects of the conference ranked
in this opening section of the survey, most respon-
dents reported being satisfied or very satisfied: session
rooms (72% satisfied or better), A/V support (80%),
book exhibit (65%), and the program (88%). Re-
spondents were especially pleased with the registra-
tion process, both in advance of the meeting and
onsite. The former earned 90% satisfactory or above,
the latter earned 81%, and both earned only 3%
unsatisfactory or below, the lowest disapproval of all
surveyed facets of the meeting. Other than the city,
no aspect of the meeting earned disapproval ratings
in double digits. The HSS executive office was espe-
cially pleased with the high approval of the registra-
tion process as it reflects years of honing our online
processing, as well as a team of friendly and helpful
volunteers on-site.



Continued next page


SOctober 27






History of Science Society Newsletter


Continued from previous page
In addition to the general logistics of the meeting,
the HSS also wanted to gauge the interest and response
to specific parts of the program. Only 38% attended
the co-plenary sessions on Thursday night. The other
62% reported that they were busy socializing with col-
leagues and friends, both formally and informally, or
that they did not arrive early enough to attend.

This year 63% of respondents attended the
Awards Ceremony and/or the Distinguished Lecture
on Friday evening. Of those who attended many
liked the "In Memoriam" slide presentation and
others enjoyed the lecture and awards presentations.
However, some people thought we should offer more
of an opportunity for prizewinners to speak and
thank those who helped them win, as long as those
remarks are brief. The virtue of brevity in any such
remarks were very important to all respondents. M.
Norton Wise gave the Distinguished Lecture follow-
ing the Awards Ceremony and 61% judged it satis-
factory or better. The respondents found the content
challenging, however, they were split on whether the
subject was a positive development or not. The big-
gest complaint registered for the evening was the lack
of food at the reception, and it seems many people
were unaware of the cash bar.

The Poster Sessions on Saturday afternoon were
popular, although respondents were not as enthu-
siastic about them as other aspects of the program.
Though disapproval was under 10%, more people
were neutral or merely satisfied with the length,
location, and topics of the posters than with every
other aspect of the program. Respondents were fairly
unanimous that the posters were not up long enough
and were difficult to find. Though a few people had
complaints as to the content, most of the suggestions
involved logistics. This suggests that we need to keep
the posters up longer and work harder to make sure
everyone can enjoy them.

The participation rates in programs directed at
graduate and early career historians of science were
relatively low, but this is to be expected of targeted
programs. Of those responding, only 17% attended


the First Time Attendee Reception on Thursday
night and only 2% participated in the Mentorship
program. Of those participating in the Reception,
67% were satisfied or very satisfied and the big-
gest reason for not going was scheduling conflicts.
The most cited reason for not participating in the
Mentorship Program was a lack of knowledge of the
program's existence and difficulty matching men-
tor with mentee. Both reasons suggest avenues for
improvement for future meetings.

By the far the single most popular event at the
2009 HSS Annual Meeting was the Saturday eve-
ning dinner at the Heard Museum. Some 78% of
respondents attended the event (a curious number
since our own records showed closer to 70% attend-
ing), compared to the 16% who attended last year's
dinner. Every aspect of the event, from the quality
of the food and the beverages to the length to the
venue, was rated satisfactory or very satisfactory by
75% of attendees, a full 20 30 point increase over
previous years. The use of a venue outside the confer-
ence hotel was something of a risk, considering the
logistics of transportation and planning. However,
since 92% of respondents considered the venue as
satisfactory or very satisfactory the risk paid off.
Likewise, 87% of respondents judged the accessibil-
ity of the event as satisfactory or above, which means
that our fears of logistics were either unfounded or
properly mitigated or both. Some respondents sug-
gested we offer more vegetarian choices, lower the
price of drinks, provide more seating and lighting,
and expand the time the museum galleries were open
for tours. Initially we heard from attendees who did
not approve of the inclusion of the price of the din-
ner in the registration fee, but there was a noticeable
decrease in these complaints after the event. How-
ever, these few complaints aside, the experiment of
having the society dinner at a nearby cultural attrac-
tion was a resounding success and full credit for this
success goes to the Local Arrangements Committee
and the many volunteers at the museum and the
light rail stations. The overwhelming approval of the
event will be noted as plans for meetings in 2010 and
beyond take shape.






History of Science Society Newsletter


To Attend or Not to Attend?

For the first time, the HSS surveyed members
who did not attend the annual meeting to find out
why they did not come and to ascertain what we
might do to encourage their attendance in the future.
Since we had asked attendees what obstacles they
had overcome to attend, we wanted to ask those who
could not make it to the conference the same ques-
tion. We sent the survey link to all HSS members who
did not attend and received 209 responses (ca. 10%
response rate). Whether considering attendees (65%)
or non-attendees (54%), costs presented the biggest
obstacle to attending the annual meeting. The related
issue of obtaining funding was a problem for 41% of
attendees and 29% of non-attendees, and 41% of at-
tendees and 29% of non-attendees also cited the travel
time to Phoenix as a real or potential problem with
attending the conference. Other obstacles, both for
attendees and non-attendees, were conflicts with other
meetings, difficulty covering classes, and family-care
issues. 31% of non-attendees reported that they do not
consider HSS to be their primary professional soci-
ety and many commented that they did not find the
program to be interesting or directly valuable to their
work. This latter group included people who reported
affiliations with museum, business, and other profes-
sionals. This seems to suggest that a small yet signifi-
cant number of HSS members do not self-identify as
historians of science and may possibly be profession-
als in other fields who are interested in our research.
Another popular comment from non-attendees is the
placement of the HSS meeting in the calendar, being
too close to U.S. Thanksgiving or other important
dates. Of those who did not come in 2009, 87% have
attended 2 or fewer HSS annual meetings in the last
5 years, suggesting a sizeable portion of our members
rarely come to meetings, thus challenging us to find
ways to encourage their participation. More disap-
pointingly, of the 37% of the respondents who are a
student, independent scholar, or recent Ph.D., a full
57% were not aware that the HSS has NSF funded
travel grants to help participants defray costs of at-
tendance. This, too, suggests strategies to encourage
participation in the future.


D. Kim Foundation for the History
of Science and Technology in East
Asia

Back row from left to right: Stuart W Leslie, Dong-
Won Kim, Front row from left to right: Shigehisa Kuri-
yama, Christopher Cullen, Takehiko Hashimoto

The D. Kim Foundation for the History of Sci-
ence and Technology in East Asia is pleased to an-
nounce several annual fellowship awards and grants
for 2010-2011.

Established in 2008 the D. Kim Foundation is
dedicated to furthering the study of the history of
science and technology in East Asia since the start of
the 20th century.

The Foundation provides fellowships and grants
to encourage and to support graduate students and
young scholars in the field. The Foundation also pro-
motes the exchange and contact of people between
the East and West, between old and young, or from
different fields.
1.For more information, see
www.dkimfoundation.org


SOctober 29






History of Science Society Newsletter


HSS EMPLOYMENT SURVEY REPORT, 2008-2009
by Jacqueline Wernimont, Harvey Mudd College


This analysis reports on the 2008-2009 History of
Science Society (HSS) Employment Survey. This
year's survey collected data concerning jobs and post-
doctoral fellowships commencing in the fall of 2009.
The HSS office sent out approximately 100 invitations
to participate in the online survey. The invitations
were sent to the job search committee contacts and/or
human resources administrators listed in job calls. We
have collected data regarding thirty-three of these po-
sitions or grant opportunities. We would like to thank
all of the respondents for their assistance in helping
HSS track current employment trends.

The quality of the data has a significant impact on
the kind of conclusions that can be drawn from this
analysis. While a response rate of roughly one-third
has been common over the last five years of the survey,
it remains low enough to make strong conclusions
impossible. The survey was offered as an online survey
this year, in the hopes that this format would yield
a higher response rate. We do not yet see an impact
from this change. While every effort was made to
capture accurate information regarding job postings,
there is also the possibility that invitations were not
sent out to every committee considering hiring in H/P
STM. Consequently, the conclusions of this analysis
must remain somewhat provisional. Of the thirty-four
responses received, two were eliminated from analysis
because they indicated that they were doctoral fellow-
ship opportunities, rather than post-doctoral or career
opportunities.

In order to explore other avenues of data collection, we
also collected information on jobs for which we had
no response but for which press releases and depart-
mental or program websites identified the new hire
or post-doctoral fellow. This data is far more limited,
in that we were not able to identify the number total
applicants for these positions, nor the importance of


training in the History (and/or Philosophy) of Science,
Technology, and/or Medicine in the job selection
process. This approach was disproportionally suc-
cessful with post-doctoral fellowship opportunities.
The ability to garner accurate information regarding
tenure-track job offers and temporary non-fellowship
positions is limited by the kind of information dissem-
ination associated with those job opportunities. We
were able to collect data on seven positions through
these alternative means. Therefore, this report covers
a total of thirty-eight filled searches relating or poten-
tially relating to H/P STM.
Cancellation of searches was of particular concern
this year. We have report of one cancelled search and
anecdotal data regarding at least one other cancelled
search. We are unable to determine at this point how
many, if any, of the unreported searches were not
completed.
Among the searches for which we have data 39%
(12) were reported as "newly created or redefined
positions," 30% (10) were "replacement positions,"
and 27% (9) were reported as "fellowship or grant
opportunities." We do not have this data on the
seven positions that were not self-reported. While the
responses suggest a high proportion of tenure-track
or non-fellowship positions, when respondents were
asked directly regarding the temporary or permanent
status of the position, only six were reported as ten-
ure-track positions and one was a non-tenure-track
but not temporary position. The remaining 24 posi-
tions, nearly 77% of the positions, were reported as
"temporary." For the seven other jobs we are able to
determine the temporary/permanent status based on
the job call. Six of these seven positions were listed as
post-doctoral fellowships, meaning that 30 of the 38
positions (79%) for which we have information were
temporary positions.






History of Science Society Newsletter


Of the 30 positions for which we have data regard-
ing desired areas of expertise, 19 listed H/P STM as
the primary area of expertise desired, 6 listed it as a
possible area of expertise, and 5 listed it as a desired
secondary area of expertise. Of the 19 positions for
which H/P STM was a primary area of expertise, 17
required a Ph.D. or equivalent at the time of start-
ing the position. In the general pool, 26 (84%) of the
positions required a Ph.D. or equivalent at the time
of starting the position.

Permanent positions, both tenure-track and non-
tenure track, were rare in this year's survey and some
individuals indicated that their institution did not
allow for the reporting of gender or minority status.
Given the very small dataset that we have, general-
izations regarding these two important areas are im-
possible. Of the 5 permanent jobs that reported the
gender of the successful candidate, 4 of the 5 went to
women. None of the permanent jobs were reported
as filled by a minority candidate, but only three of
the institutions reported on this topic.

Within the somewhat larger set of temporary or post-
doctoral positions we see what appears to be gender
parity; of those that reported gender status, eleven
went to male scholars and twelve to female scholars.
Only one third of the respondents for temporary
positions felt able to report on the minority status
of their candidate and, of those, two reported that
their candidate was of a recognized minority status.
It is clear that in order for minority status data to be
useful, we need to find ways to improve upon the
numbers of reporting institutions or find alternative
access to such data.

Unlike in previous years, with respect to the gender
distribution of applicants to the temporary and per-
manent positions, we did not note a consistent trend
in either direction. In many cases institutions report-
ed equal or near equal numbers of male and female
applicants. On the other hand there were particular
jobs were the distribution of applicants was unequal;
one permanent but non-tenure track job had three
times as many female applicants as male applicants


and one international position received 72 % of their
over fifty applications from men. The number of
applicants for individual job or fellowship opportuni-
ties ranged from a low of 6 to a high of 59.

This year's responses spoke yet again to the impor-
tance of online media for the advertising of positions
and fellowship opportunities. 82% of those who
responded regarding advertising media indicated that
they posted to one or more online resource. While
a small number used online media only to advertise
their position, most used online resources in con-
junction with advertising in print media.

Several individuals who responded to the survey and
a few who did not complete the survey but contacted
us via email indicated that they did not feel that the
positions listed should be included in an "employ-
ment" survey. This seemed to be a particular issue
for institutions and organizations that offer post-
doctoral fellowships of various types. Given the high
proportion of employment opportunities this year
that were temporary and/or post-doctoral fellowship,
it may be worth considering how to respond to this
concern in the field. Another comment suggested
that the survey should enable respondents to report
on multiple fellowships that all fall under the same
heading (such as the National Science Foundation
fellowships or those at the Max Planck Institutes).

We wish to continue to improve the annual survey
and to optimize our data collection. At the same
time, we are concerned to maintain a level of con-
sistency that will enable comparisons over time.
There is a sense among many that the employment
landscape continues to shift, and indeed the high
proportion of temporary positions this year seems to
continue a trend seen in previous surveys from this
decade where the proportion of permanent positions
has gone from a high of 43% in 2002-3 to the 21%
reported this year. That said, the first employment
report in 1972 also commented on the relatively low



Continued next page


* October 31






History of Science Society Newsletter


Continued from previous page
numbers of permanent academic positions available
to historians of science. Obviously many things have
changed since the early seventies, but the suggestion
at that time that we can do more to think about the
variety of career options available to historians of
science may be as relevant today as it was then.

We welcome input regarding the survey and future
improvements. Please send suggestions to: Jacqueline
Wernimont, Harvey Mudd College, 301 Platt Blvd,
Claremont, Ca 91711 or, via email: JacquelineWer-
nimont@hmc.edu. I would like to express my ap-
preciation to Robert J. Malone, Marsha Richmond,
Roger Turner, and the HSS Women's Caucus and
Graduate and Early Career Caucus for their support
of the survey and assistance assembling the question-
naire and contacting respondents

[Note: The survey data is available in the online
version of this article.]

2010 Election Slate

The slate for the 2010 elections appears below.
Our thanks to the 2010 nominating committee for
their work in putting together the list of nominees:
(Liba Taub and Paul Lucier (co chairs), John Beatty,
Deborah Harkness, Pam Long). We also wish to
thank the nominees for agreeing to be nominated. A
society is only as strong as the officers who consent
to serve, and the HSS is fortunate to have so many
talented people who are willing to help the Society.
The election itself will take place in April and will be
conducted electronically. Those who wish to receive a
paper ballot should contact the HSS office: PO Box
117360, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL 32611

All HSS members are reminded that they may
nominate members for elected positions. The statu-
tory language is as follows:

I. 9. Ballots: The Nominating Committee,
consisting of two members of the Council and three
other members of the Society, shall prepare a bal-
lot to be sent to each member of the Society at least
two months before the annual meeting.... For the


Council, the ballot shall contain the names often
candidates proposed by the Nominating Committee
together with the names of other candidates nomi-
nated by petitions signed by at least fifteen members
of the Society....

Nominating petitions, together with the agree-
ment of the person nominated, must reach the chair
of the Nominating Committee within two months
after publication of the list of nominees.

For Council
(10 nominees. Members will choose 5.)
* Antonio Barrera-Osorio
* Soraya de Chadarevian
* Alexei Kojevnikov
* John Krige
* Tara Nummedal
* Brian Ogilvie
* Maria Portuondo
* Michael Reidy
* Jutta Schickore
* Betty Smocovitis

For Nominating Committee At Large
(6 nominees. Members will choose 3.)
* Ken Alder
* Greg Good
* Florence Hsia
* Gwen Kay
* Robert Richards
* Jeremy Vetter

For Nominating Committee from Council
(4 nominees. Members will choose 2.)
* John Carson
* Deborah Coen
* Mi Gyung Kim (Mimi)
* Judy Johns Schloegel




University of Florida Home Page
© 2004 - 2010 University of Florida George A. Smathers Libraries.
All rights reserved.

Acceptable Use, Copyright, and Disclaimer Statement
Last updated October 10, 2010 - - mvs