Finding an appropriate place for STS within the American science and engineering curriculum has never been easy. Convincing science, engineering, and medical students, and their professors, to pay serious attention to the broader context of their respective professions seems to require a sustained dialogue across conventional disciplinary boundaries. Otherwise, STS ends up talking mostly to itself and its critics rather than to its most important audience, students (at all levels) and the general public (especially museum visitors). This essay considers a number of historical and present-day examples to argue that the founding vision of STS as a collaborative enterprise still offers some valuable lessons about how best to reach that audience.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Abrams, S. E. (1999, February 23). Science and history. H-SCI-MED-TECH [On-line].
2.
Beard, C., & Beard, W. (1930). The American leviathan: The republic in the machine age. New York: Macmillan.
3.
Bloom, A. (1987). The closing of the American mind. New York: Simon & Schuster.
4.
Brooks, H. (1968). The government of science. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
5.
Buck, P. S., & Rosenkrantz, B. G. (1984). The worm in the core: Science and general education. In E. Mendelsohn (Ed.), Transformation and tradition: Essays in honor of I. Bernard Cohen (pp. 371-394). New York: Cambridge University Press.
6.
Calvert, M. (1967). The mechanical engineer in America (pp. 87-105). Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.
7.
Chase, S. (1929). Men and machines. New York: Macmillan.
8.
Conant, J. B. (1947). On understanding science: An historical approach. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
9.
Cronon, W. (1991). Nature’s metropolis. New York: Norton.
10.
Durand, W. F. (1929). Robert Henry Thurston. New York: Alfred Hulse.
11.
Ferguson, E. (1976). Robert Henry Thurston. In Dictionary of Scientific Biography XIII (pp. 398-399). New York: Scribner.
12.
Ferguson, E. S. (1983, July 21). Surveys of engineering education, 1918-1982. National Academy of Engineering,2–2,5–5,7–7.
13.
Fleming, D. (1987). William H. Welch and the rise of modern medicine. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.
14.
Flexner, A. (1910). Medical Education in the United States and Canada. New York: Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching.
15.
Fuller, S. (1994, Fall). Teaching Thomas Kuhn to teach the cold war vision of science. Contention, 4(1), 81-106,
16.
Galison, P. (1997). Image and logic: A material culture of micro-physics. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
17.
Gillispie, C. C. (1960). The edge of objectivity: An essay in the history of scientific ideas. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
18.
Goldstein, J. S. (1992). A different sort of time: The life of Jerrold Zacharias. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
19.
Gross, P. R., & Levitt, N. (1994). Higher superstition: The academic left and its quarrels with science. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.
20.
Haraway, D. J. (1984). Class, race, sex, scientific objects of knowledge: A socialist-feminist perspective on the social construction of productive nature and some political consequences. In V. Haas & C. Perrucci (Eds.), Women in the scientific and engineering professions (pp. 212-229). Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.
21.
Harwit, M. (1996). An exhibit denied: Lobbying the history of the Enola Gay. New York: Copernicus.
22.
Heilbron, J. L., & Kevles, D. J. (1987, December 29). Science and technology in U.S. history textbooks: What’s there—and what ought to be there. Unpublished manuscript.
23.
Hershberg, J. (1993). James B. Conant: Harvard to Hiroshima and the making of the nuclear age. New York: Knopf.
24.
Hogan, M. J. (1996). The Enola Gay controversy: History, memory, and the politics of presentation. In M. J. Hogan (Ed.), Hiroshima in history and memory (pp. 200-232). New York: Cambridge University Press.
25.
Keller, E. F. (1985). Reflections on gender and science. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
26.
Kuhn, T. (1970). The structure of scientific revolutions. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
27.
Leslie, S. W. (1983). Boss Kettering: Wizard of General Motors. New York: Columbia University Press.
28.
Leslie, S. W. (1993). The cold war and American science: The military-industrial-academic complex at MIT and Stanford. New York: Columbia University Press.
29.
Linenthal, E., & Engelhardt, T. (Eds.). (1996). History wars: The Enola Gay and other battles for the American past. New York: Henry Holt.
30.
Ludmerer, K. (1985). Learning to heal: The development of American medical education (pp. 166-190). New York: Basic Books.
31.
Mahoney, M. S. (in press) “Engineering Plus”: Technical Education and the Liberal Arts at Princeton. In A. Grafton & J. Murrin (Eds.), From college to university: Essays on the history of Princeton University. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
32.
McCullough, D. (1972). The great bridge. New York: Simon & Schuster.
33.
McCullough, D. (1977). The path between the seas. New York: Simon & Schuster.
34.
McMahon, M. (1981). The romance of technological progress: A critical review of the National Air and Space Museum. Technology and Culture, 22(2), 212-229.
35.
MIT Committee on Educational Survey. (1949). Report to the faculty of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
36.
Nobile, P. (Ed.). (1995). Judgement at the Smithsonian. New York: Marlowe.
37.
Petroski, H. (1985). To engineer is human. New York: St. Martin’s Press.
38.
Post, R., & Molella, A. (1997). The call of stories at the Smithsonian Institution: History of technology and science in crisis. ICON,3, 44-81.
39.
Price, D. K. (1967). The scientific estate. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
40.
Reisner, M. (1986). Cadillac desert. New York: Viking.
41.
Snow, C. P. (1961). The two cultures and the scientific revolution. New York: Cambridge University Press.
42.
Thurston, R. (1893). Technical education in America. ASME Transactions, 14, 855-1013.
43.
Turner, S., & Sullenger, K. (1999, Winter). Kuhn in the classroom, Lakatos in the lab: Science educators confront the nature-of-science debate. Science, Technology, and Human Values, 24(1), 5-30.
44.
Wolman, A. (1965). The metabolism of cities. In G. Piel et al. (Eds.), Cities (pp. 156-174). New York: Knopf.
45.
Worster, D. (1986). Rivers of empire. New York: Pantheon.
46.
Yoder, E. (1997). The historical present: Uses and abuses of the past (pp. 87-96). Jackson: University Press of Mississippi.
