STS 5105 Fall 2015
Contemporary Issues in Science and Technology Studies
Instructor: Barbara Allen
Email: ballen@vt.edu
Time: Wednesday 7PM- 9:45PM**
**Note: For the first 5 classes, from Aug 26- Sept 23, the class meets in-person in
Falls Church or via polycom in Blacksburg. After that date, the class meets online
until the end of the term. The online portion of the class will be conducted via
Scholar, Virginia’s open-source online course site. This will be our asynchronous
classroom for the last part of the class.
Course Description:
This course is the first of two courses that introduce students to the social
studies of science and technology. This class primarily focuses on the
emergence and development of the social studies of science from the early part of
the century through the 1980’s or so. In order to understand this important
movement, it is necessary to spend a few weeks studying some formative social
science scholars from the late 19th century and the early 20th century. Several weeks
will be spent reading and analyzing these background social science texts.
I have several content-related goals in this course. The first is to provide
an understanding of the pertinent social theories of the early through mid twentieth
century to the 1990s. Next, the readings and discussions will look at science
through these various social lenses focusing on a series of debates that are
formative in STS Class discussion will be geared toward understanding the
historical and theoretical underpinnings of the STS discipline toward facilitating
current STS concepts and framings.
I also have several methodological and pedagogical goals for the course. I
want students to learn how to read critically and analytically. The short, essays and
online discussions will be oriented toward this goal. I also want to teach one
specific graduate tool, useful for those wanting to complete the doctoral program:
the ability to successfully complete PhD prelim exam questions. The course as well
as the prelim-style final exercise also helps you “map” of the development and
emergence of the social study of science for future work and study in STS.
Course Requirements:
The course consists of readings, discussions, writing assignments, and a final
exam. Your final grade will be based upon a combination of attending and
participating in classes (and the virtual classroom), and completing the writing
assignments and exam.
There will be a number of short writing assignments due (almost every
week). The writing assignments should make evident that you understand the main
concepts, themes and theories of the weeks’ reading and that you can put these in
your own words and comment on them (instructions to follow in class).
Class attendance (or online class discussion) is mandatory unless you notify me in
advance of a problem or are ill. Not attending regularly and participating in
discussions will adversely affect your grade.
Ethics, Courtesy, and Honor Code:
All students must visit the Honor Code website and carefully read the section
at: http://ghs.grads.vt.edu/student/avoiding.html. Note that anytime you use
someone’s actual text or ideas, you need to cite your source. Rearranging someone
else’s words and not citing constitutes plagiarism as does using their ideas without
giving credit. Many problems in the past have stemmed from student’s “liberal” use
of web-based material. Please avoid this.
Online Procedures and Requirements:
From Sept 24 to the end of the term, the course will be conducted fully online.
Weekly Critical Essays:
A short critical essay is due by Tuesday 11PM each week on the assigned readings
beginning with week 2 until the end of the term—except for week 5 when no essay is
due. These essays are designed to help you clarify your thoughts on the readings,
develop ideas for Forum “discussions”, and maintain a dialogue with the professor.
Care should be taken in these assignments to produce a well-thought-out critical
essay that engages questions the readings have taken up. The framing of the essay
is up to each student but it should not be a reiteration of what the student has
posted on Scholar but an analysis that extends outside the bounds of the Forum
threads or is maybe not covered by the threads at all.
The essay should be in .doc or .docx format, single-spaced, font 14, and about 500
words not including quotes. If you quote from the assigned readings, you only need
to cite the author and page number in parentheses—you do not need a full
bibliographic citation. These will be delivered to DropBox in Scholar.
Weekly Forum “Online Discussion” Participation:
Active participation each week in the online Forum discussion board is crucial once
the class moves online from Week 5 on. Two kinds of posts are required each week:
1) Two substantive critical/analytical posts (SP), and 2) At least three comments
and responses (C+R) to other students’ SPs. Here are the instructions and deadlines
for the two kinds of posts:
Each week, on Thursday morning, discussion threads will be posted. The two
required SP postings to be counted in the weeks’ thread must be posted by Sunday
at 5PM. Subsequently, in response to other students’ posts, students should post 3
C+R postings a week in total and these should be posted by Monday at 11PM.
What is a posting? A SP posting is usually a two- or three-paragraph statement that
explains, engages with, clarifies, elaborates, develops and critiques one or more
aspects of the thread topic or the ongoing discussion of it. You may also choose to
engage with a student response insofar that it further analyzes the readings of the
week (or previous weeks). At the end of your post, you may, if you wish, add a
question(s) posed to the discussion group and the instructor. There is no length rule
for C+R postings—they can be any length and the format more open. The instructor
will also be online reading and responding.
Weekly post and submission deadline summary beginning Week 6:
SP (substantive posts) all 3 due by 10PM Sunday
C+R (comments and responses) all 3 due by 11PM Monday
Weekly Critical Essay (500 words) due in DropBox by 10PM Wednesday
Week 5 trial online posting (with comments from me and tentative grade):
For Week 5, we will do a trial run of the online Forums discussion. Everyone will be
required to post 2 SPs by Sunday at 5PM and 2 C+Rs by Monday at 11PM. No
weekly critical essay will be due this week. We will discuss these in class Sept 23 to
be sure that everyone understands the online process that begins the following
week.
Posting advice: Each week’s reading consists of a selection of articles and book
chapters. Please be sure to have read the material the thread is about before
posting. Comments like “I believe this” or “I feel that” or “I disagree with X” imply
the reading was not done and the student is stating only opinions. A better
approach are responses to the threads that substantiate positions and develop
analyses based on the reading(s).
Assignment Due Date Policy:
All assignments must be submitted as called for in the syllabus. Late written
assignments will not be accepted without prior arrangement. If you need special
accommodation, please discuss the details with the instructor in advance so that
appropriate arrangements can be made.
Grading Criteria (and advice) for Written Assignments:
1. Quality of Conceptualization: Ability to assimilate and use concepts developed in
the readings.
2. Quality of Argumentation: Ability to make an informed and persuasive argument
using the readings. Documentation of points made by explicit references to passages
in the texts.
3. Organization (for essays and final exam): clear set of points, clear introduction
and conclusion.
4. Quality of the writing: clarity, grammar, spelling, referencing (open parenthesis,
author, date, page number, close parenthesis and then period), etc. Use single
spacing with line breaks for paragraphs. There is no need to include a bibliography.
5. Essay Length: keep it around 500 words (not including quotations); this is
deliberately concise to force you to learn what to leave out, to make your words
count, to work out your arguments clearly before writing.
6) Organizational Logic: Written assignments (essays, Forum postings, final exam)
should not be a series of points strung together in an ad hoc way. Use devices like
explicit announcements of your structure and points– e.g. “Firstly…”, “Secondly…”,
“Thirdly/Finally…” or “The arguments that logically follows from the master claim
are three”
7) Scholarly language: Avoid normative talk. This is not a class where you are asked
for your personal opinion, feelings or beliefs. It does not value confessional or
normative discourse but analytical understanding and argumentation. You are
asked to formulate arguments based on the readings and our classroom interaction.
Thus no "I believe" or "I feel" or "I agree with Marx" since this class is not about your
personal beliefs or feelings but about your ability to analyze issues and concepts.
8) Engage the readings: Refer specifically to the texts under consideration (cite
author, date and page); use detail in the service of argumentation. Never include a
quotation without citation. Avoid citing texts not on the syllabus, though citing
previous weeks’ texts is OK and encouraged, if relevant. References at the end are
unnecessary since the instructor already knows this information. Your writing
should demonstrate that you've read the text and understood it.
9) Avoid historical narrative: You should organize your writing around of series of
substantive conceptual points. Avoid historical description such as “Weber was
born in” or “Marx studied X” or “Calvanism emerged during such and such
situation”, etc.
10) Get to the point: Get to the point and state your overall thesis (for essays and
final exam) at the outset and then use points (see #6) to organize your answer.
Vague, abstract, or “airy” description is merely evidence that you have not done or
do not understand the readings.
11) Concise and precise: Concentrated analytical writing is a skill this class is
designed to engender. Your space is limited so make every sentence count.
Demonstrate that you have grasped the material and worked out what you want to
argue before writing rather than trying to figure out what you want to say as you
write.
Grading Policy:
65% of the grade is determined by your weekly essays and your positing on the
Forums. 35% of the grade is determined by the final exam. The exam is answering
two questions (choose from at least 4 questions) in a take-home, open book, open
note, exam of 2000 words per question. The exam questions and length are similar
to those found on the PhD prelim exam. The final exam questions will be in Scholar
on Nov 29.
Once the class moves online, you will be given a grade every two weeks that is a
cumulative assessment of your postings on the Forums and your essays. This is a
total of 4 grades.
Required Books (used immediately, so please purchase right away from your
favorite internet bookstore)
Craig Calhoun, et.al. eds. (2007) Classical Sociological Theory, 2nd Editon.
Anthony Giddens (1971) Capitalism and Modern Social Theory.
Weekly Readings (all available in PDF form except for the 2 books above):
IMPORTANT: Each week the readings are arranged in an order that will help
you better understand the arguments. For your benefit, please read them in
the order listed on the syllabus, not the order they appear in the “resources”
section of the Scholar site.
Week 1 reading assignment is to be done before the first class, Aug 26. Week 2
reading assignments is to be done by class Sept 2, etc.
Note that readings may be changed as determined by instructor.
Week 1 (Aug 26): Class Introduction: Read Introduction to Classical Sociological
Theory and Capitalism and Modern Social Theory
Week 2 (Sept 2): Foundational Sociologists: Karl Marx
Also read selection on Karl Marx: Calhoun pp. 75-95; 122-130, and Giddens. pp. 1864. Come to class prepared to discuss the readings in depth.
Week 3 (Sept 9): Foundational Sociologists: Emile Durkheim
Read Calhoun pp. 133-192 and Giddens, 65-81; 95-118. Come to class ready to
discuss readings in depth.
Week 4 (Sept 16): Foundational Sociologists: Max Weber
Read Calhoun pp. 203-274 and Giddens119-132; 141-170; 178-184
Week 5 (Sept 23): Modernity and the Scientific Revolution
Robert Merton. Ch 11, “The Puritan Spur to Science,” In The Sociology of Science.
(Chicago).
Joseph Ben-David. (1991) Ch. 14, “Scientific Growth,” In Scientific Growth. pp. 299320 (Berkeley: U. Cal Press).
Boris Hessen. (1971) Section on Thermodynamics in The Social and Economics Roots
of Newton’s Principia. (New York: Howard Fertig).
Bruno Latour. We Have Never Been Modern. pp. 13-35.
Sandra Harding. (1988) Ch. 3 “Voyages of Discovery,” in Is Science Multicultural? pp.
Elizabeth Potter. (2001) “Conclusion,” Gender and Boyle’s Law of Gases. pp. 180-185
(Indiana U Press).
***The class now moves online for the remaining weeks.
Week 6 (Sept 30): Thought, Social Structure and Knowledge
Marx, Karl. “Theses on Feuerbach,” and “The Ruling Class and Ruling Ideas,” pp. 6468 in The German Ideology. (International Publishers).
MacKenzie, Donald. “Statistical Theory and Social Interests: A Case Study,” Social
Studies of Science. 8 (1978): 35-83.
Steve Woolgar. “Interests and Explanations in the Social Study of
Science,” Social Studies of Science. 11 (1981): 365-394.
Durkheim, Emile. (1915) Ch. 3 “Totemic Beliefs—Continued,” in The Elementary
Forms of Religious Life. pp. 165-169. (Free Press).
Hess, David. (1994) Ch. 2 “The Cultural Construction of Science and Technology”
(read only pp. 18-39). Science and Technology in a Multicultural World. (Columbia
U Press).
Week 7 (Oct 7): Empiricism, Conventionalism and the Social Construction of
Knowledge
Ludwik Fleck. (1979; orig. 1935 ) “Introduction to Thought Collectives,” in Genesis
and Development of a Scientific Fact. pp. 38-51 (U Chicago Press).
Thomas Kuhn. (1996; orig. 1962) Ch. 12, “The Resolution of Revolutions,” in The
Structure of Scientific Revolutions. pp. 144-159 (U Chicago Press).
Bruno Latour and Steve Woolgar. “The Transformation of Statement Types,” pp. 8188. Laboratory Life. (Princeton U. Press).
Harry Collins. (1985) Ch. 4, “Detecting Gravitational Radiation: The Experimenters’
Regress,” in Changing Order. pp. 79-111. (Sage).
Week 8 (Oct 14): Exchange, Prestige and the Reward System
Karl Marx. Ch. 1 “The Commodity,” (Section 4 and Ch. 4 “The General Formula for
Capital,” in Capital. Vol. 1 (Vintage).
Mauss, Marcel. (1967) Ch. 1 “Gifts and the Obligation to Return Gifts,” in The Gift.
(Norton).
Hagstrom, Warren. (1965) Ch. 1 “The Social Control of Science,” in The Scientific
Community. pp. 9-23 (Basic Books).
Merton, Robert. (1973) Ch. 20 “The Matthew Effect in Science,” in The Sociology of
Science. (Univ. of Chicago Press).
Rossiter, Margaret W. “The Matilda Effect in Science,” Social Studies of Science
23(1993): 325-41.
Latour, Bruno, and S. Woolgar. Ch. 5 “Cycles of Credit,” in Laboratory Life.
(Princeton).
Week 9 (Oct 21): Norms, Universalism, and Particularism
Merton, Robert. (1973) Ch. 13 “The Normative Structure of Science,” in The
Sociology of Science. (U. of Chicago Press).
Mulkay, Michael. “Norms and Ideology in Science.” Social Science Information.
15.4/5(1976): 637-656.
Cole, Stephen. (1992) Ch. 7, “Is Science Universalistic?” and Ch. 8 “Conceptualizing
and Studying Particularism in Science,” In Making Science. (Harvard U. Press).
Long, J.S. and Mary F. Fox. “Scientific Careers: Universalism and Particularism.”
Annual Review of Sociology 21 (1995):45-71.
Martinson, B, et. al.”Scientists Behaving Badly, Nature Vol 435 (2005): 737-738.
Week 10 (Oct 28): Networks and Knowledge
Ben-David, Joseph. (1991; orig. 1965) “Social Factors in the Origins of a New
Science,” In Scientific Growth. pp. 49-70 (U. of Calif. Press).
Mullins, Nicholas. “The Development of a Scientific Specialty.” Minerva 10 (1972):
52-82.
Latour, Bruno. (1983) Ch. 6 “Give Me a Laboratory and I will Raise the World.” In
Karin Knorr-Cetina and M. Mulkay (eds.) Science Observed. pp.141-170 (Sage).
Callon, Michel. “Four Models of the Dynamics of Science.” read only “Model 4,” pp.
51-60. in Jasanoff et al., Handbook of STS.
Kleinman, Daniel. (2003) Ch. 2 “Traversing the Conceptual Terrain,” In Impure
Cultures (U. of Wisconsin Press).
Week 11 (Nov 4): Power and Fields
Weber, Max. Ch. III “The Types of Legitimate Domination.” in Roth and Wittich (eds.)
Economy and Society pp. 212-216 (U. Cal Press).
Lukes, Steven. (1986) “Introduction” in Lukes, ed. Power. (NYU Press).
Swartz, David. (1997) Ch. 6. “Fields of Struggle for Power,” in Culture & Power. (U.
Chicago Press).
Bourdieu, Pierre. (2004) Ch. 2 “A World Apart.” Science of Science and Reflexivity.
(U. of Chicago Press).
Albert, A, and D. Kleinman (2011) “Bringing Pierre Bourdieu to Science Studies,”
Minerva 49: 263-273.
Week 12 (Nov 11): TBD
Week 13 (Nov 18): Summary, etc.
Hess, David (2013) “Neoliberalism and the History of STS Theory,” Social
Epistemology, Vol 27: 177-193.
More readings TBD
Thanksgiving Break Nov 23-29
*** Final exam questions and instructions loaded into “Resources” in Scholar
on Nov 29.
Week 14 (Dec 2) No reading or posting due. Time to work on Final Exam questions
Week 15 (Dec 9):. No reading or posting due. Time to work on Final Exam
questions
Dec 13: Final exam due by midnight in Scholar Drop Box