Hist/STS 5404: The Development of Modern American Science
CRN 95101, Wednesday 9:00-11:50, 427 Major Williams
Spring 2003

Instructor: Dr. Mark V. Barrow, Jr.
Office: 432 Major Williams / Phone: 231-4099 (O); 552-5876 (H)
Office Hours: M, W, 1-2 p.m., and by appt.
E-mail: barrow@vt.edu / URL: http://www.majbill.vt.edu/history/barrow/hist5404/
Listserv: HIST5404_95101@listserv.vt.edu

OBJECTIVE:
This graduate reading course is designed to provide a broad overview of the social and institutional development of modern American science. The focus is on the period after the Civil War to the present, when science has become increasingly essential to nearly every aspect of American life. Several themes will be stressed this semester: 1) the growth in scope and scale of the scientific enterprise; 2) the institutionalization and professionalization of American science; and 3) the reciprocal impact of science on society and vice versa.

REQUIRED READING:
Daniel Kevles, The Physicists
Philip Pauly, Biologists and the Promise of American Life
Leonard Reich, The Making of American Industrial Research
Steven Conn, Museums and American Intellectual Life
Robert Kohler, Landscapes and Labscapes
Diane Paul, Controlling Human Heredity
Edward Larson, Summer for the Gods
Edmund Russell, War and Nature
Lawrence Badash, Scientists and the Development of Nuclear Weapons
Stuart Leslie, The Cold War and American Science
Daniel Greenberg, Science, Money, and Politics

The required books are available from the University Bookstore, Volume Two Bookstore, and the Tech Bookstore. They are also available at the reserve desk at Newman Library or through various online booksellers (e.g., amazon.com, bn.com, bookfinder.com, etc.). In addition to the books listed above, I will occasionally pass out other short readings or post them on the Web.

COURSE REQUIREMENTS:
1. Class participation. This is a reading- and discussion-based course, so obviously full participation is critical to its success. Everyone is expected to attend each scheduled class meeting, to carefully and critically read all assigned material (including the analytical/reaction papers and questions posted by discussion anchors) before coming to class, and to actively participate in our deliberations. In addition, students may be called on from time to time to make brief presentations to the class.

2. Weekly Analytical Papers. To sharpen writing skills, help focus ideas, and facilitate discussion, each week each participant will turn in a short (ca. 1 p., double spaced) analytical paper centered on the reading for that week. Weekly analytical papers may assess the strengths and weaknesses of the assigned reading, respond to its major arguments, evaluate its use of evidence, critically examine its theoretical and/or methodological frameworks, relate it to other readings for the course (assigned or recommended), or (preferably) some combination of these approaches. Simple summaries will not suffice; these papers must come to terms with the significance of the reading. Regardless of the particular strategy you adopt for doing this, your papers should also be concise, well-written, carefully proofread, and demonstrate a thorough command of the assigned reading. Analytical papers will not receive an individual letter grade (I use a less-formal check/check+/ check- evaluation system), but they will count toward the participation component of your final grade. We may also occasionally do peer evaluations of the analytical papers.

3. Discussion Anchors. Each week one or two volunteers (depending on the final size of the class) will be responsible for leading class discussion. Discussion anchors are expected to be especially familiar with the reading for the day and to compose a brief set of questions to help guide our discussions. They might also want to locate and photocopy book reviews to share with the class and/or compile a short bibliography of and skim through other material related to the assigned reading. Discussion anchors must post their individual weekly analytical paper(s) (each anchor should complete one on weeks when there are two anchors) and a single set of broad discussion questions (which should be jointly constructed when their are two anchors) on the class listserv no later than twenty-four hours before class (you will have to use your Virginia Tech e-mail account to submit items to the class listserv). During class they will not only lead discussion, but also be available to answer questions, share resources, and summarize major arguments of the reading. No formal presentation is necessary, but discussion anchors may provide a brief introduction to the discussion if they are so inclined.

4. Short Papers. Each student will write three short papers (3-4 pp., double-spaced, ca. 750-1000 words each), one for each of the first three units we will be covering this semester. These will be due in class on the day we finish that unit. The specific topics will be assigned the week before they are due and will generally involve writing a critical/comparative review of two or more of the assigned readings from that unit. On days when short papers are due, no one needs to write a weekly analytical paper, but discussion anchors should still submit a list of discussion questions to the class listserv. Late papers may be penalized by having points deducted from them.

5. Essay Review. The final writing assignment is a longer (ca. 6-8 pp.) critical essay review of Daniel Greenberg's Science, Money, and Politics. This is due on the last day of class, December 10.

GRADES:
The final grade for the course will be based on the following formula:

HONOR SYSTEM:
Students are expected to follow the Virginia Tech Graduate Honor Code for all assignments. While I don't mind if you collaborate with others or look at published material related to the assigned readings (in fact, I strongly encourage both of these things), ultimately the ideas you express in your writing and presentations should be your own or be properly attributed. Otherwise we would all be forced to live in world of deceit and distrust that most of us would prefer not to inhabit.

A FINAL WORD:
The above discussion sounds more formal than I would like, but I think it's important to make the ground rules clear at the outset. What I want to say now is that I'm really looking forward to the opportunity to read, ponder, and discuss with you some important scholarship from a field in which I am deeply interested. I also want you to know that I am here to help you learn. Please feel free to contact me if you have any questions, concerns, difficulties related to this course, or even if you just want to chat about the issues it raises. I know that approaching a professor can be intimidating for some, but I want to assure you that I enjoy meeting with students and I do everything I possible to make myself accessible to them.

SCHEDULE:
 
Date Topic Reading
8/27 Introduction
Section I: Overview
9/3 Physics Kevles, ix-199
9/10 Physics Kevles, 200-426
9/17 Biology
Essay #1 Due		 Pauly
Section II: Sites for Scientific Research
9/24 Universities TBA
10/1 Industry Reich
10/8 Museums Conn
10/15 Laboratories and Field Sites
Essay #2 Due		 Kohler
Section III: Science and Society before World War II
10/22 Eugenics Paul
10/29 Darwinism Larson
11/5 Pesticides and Chemical Warfare
Essay #3 Due		 Russell
Section IV: Postwar Developments
11/12 The Bomb Badash
11/19 The Cold War Leslie
11/26 Thanksgiving Break
10/3 Science Policy Greenberg
10/10 Final Paper Due