The feminization of nature is a familiar story to historians of science. In The Death of Nature, for instance, Carolyn Merchant famously argued that nature’s presumed femininity acted first to restrain then to justify exploitative practices like mining in early modern Europe. Less well known are the tensions within this seemingly hegemonic discourse. This paper revisits the activities of travelers who, as women, were politically subjugated, and whose writings re-worked typically misogynistic tropes about the earth’s “womb” and “springs” to challenge prevailing views of nature and society. In Germany ca. 1800, views of nature and sexuality were rooted in cameralism, an administrative science that made all natural resources—including human and especially women’s bodies—subject to the revenue-raising enterprise of the state. Germans’ conception of the subterranean as a fertile cavity there to be penetrated and plundered was thus echoed in primers that taught “Germany’s Daughters” to emulate the “Utility and Fertility” of their natural counterparts. Some, however—like Julie von Bechtolsheim (1751-1847) and Bettina von Arnim (1785-1859)—saw in this domineering view of nature an “apt moral” (to borrow from Mary Shelley), and used the feminization of nature as the basis their social and environmental protest. Among other things, this talk will examine the relationship between Arnim’s and Bechtolsheim’s use of weaving as a metaphor for subterranean nature and their establishment of spinning mills for impoverished women, as well as the role of (literal and metaphorical) suicide in a political program grounded in the feminization of nature. 

This paper analyzes one of the most distinctive developments in science and engineering from 1965 to the present, the emergence of high-visibility campaigns to improve scientific and technical education for a broader range of young people. It details how, when, and why diversity grew into a priority for STEM access, permanently reshaping our modern cultures of science, engineering, education, and child-rearing. Analysis here focuses on evolution of STEM campaigns for girls, but offers insight into parallel histories promoting access for other under-represented groups.

. 

Fifty years ago, many ridiculed or dismissed any idea of women handling the toughest scientific subjects, associating intellectual progress with white masculinity. But over five decades, colleges, K-12 educators, museums, and non-profits devoted increasing effort to local/national/international girls’ STEM programs. Today, political leaders, corporations, and major organizations join science organizations, celebrities, parents, and volunteers in supporting science camps, books, toys, television shows, websites, all encouraging girls to pursue STEM.



Despite the scope and significance of this revolution in both professional and popular ideas about who can and should enter STEM, we have no systematic exploration yet of how this dramatic shift happened. The story is complex, both reflecting and driving changes in gender relations, plus escalating concern for girls’ psychological well-being and personal opportunities. Diversity discussions both reflected and promoted new interpretations about the nature of science itself. This paper draws on material from the NSF, NAE, AAUW, Girl Scouts, SWE and other archival/primary sources, exploring the historical growth and constraints of the girls’ STEM movement.

This paper will provide a short overview of the emergence of history of science courses in Japanese colleges after World War II. The postwar reform of the Japanese education system was performed under the control of the occupying General Headquarters of the Allied Forces (GHQ). The Civil Information and Education Section (CIE) of GHQ organized the Institute for Educational Leadership (IFEL) to train Japanese educators. The Committee on General Education of the Japan University Accreditation Association invited three American scholars from the CIE to form a new scheme for Japanese higher education and introduce general education curricula into universities. It followed the general education system in the United States of the time, which had three pillars of natural sciences, social sciences, and humanities. Among the scholars, Sidney James French, a chemist, professor, and history of science lecturer at Colgate University, discussed the significance of history of science education. Russell M. Cooper, who partly coordinated the general education curriculum at University of Minnesota, mentioned the value of historical method in science education. Several members of The History of Science Society in Japan attended the Committee; among them, Bun’ichi Tamamushi promoted the addition of history of science courses for general education and later founded the Department of History and Philosophy of Science at the University of Tokyo. Since then, the history of science has been a component of the general education system in Japan.

Normal.dotm 0 0 1 239 1415 University of Illinois 12 1 1678 12.0 0 false 18 pt 18 pt 0 0 false false false /* Style Definitions */ table.MsoNormalTable {mso-style-name:"Table Normal"; mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0; mso-tstyle-colband-size:0; mso-style-noshow:yes; mso-style-parent:""; mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; mso-para-margin:0in; mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman"; mso-ascii-font-family:Cambria; mso-ascii-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-theme-font:minor-fareast; mso-hansi-font-family:Cambria; mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin;}
In the nineteenth century it was not unusual for a self-educated researcher to make important discoveries, but that became far less likely after the establishment of modern academic disciplines. Stanford Ovshinsky’s 1961 discovery of of phase-change memory, however, offers a modern example of an important discovery made not in spite of but because of his outsider position. When Ovshinsky announced his discovery in 1968 in the prestigious journal Physical Review Letters, many academic physicists were outraged. Crystals were then considered the proper subject of solid-state physics, and using amorphous (noncrystalline) materials in semiconductor devices had not been thought possible. Equally disturbing was that Ovshinsky had no academic credentials beyond a high school diploma. In time, however, the “Ovshinsky effect” became recognized as an important contribution to materials science and the basis of new information technologies. This paper traces Ovshinsky’s path to his discovery from his beginnings as a machinist and toolmaker, his invention of an innovative lathe, his automation work, and his detour through neurophysiology to arrive at the invention of new kinds of switches. His work typically disregarded disciplinary boundaries, and it was because of his unique experience and idiosyncratic, intuitive approach that he was able to make scientific discoveries that would have been unlikely for conventionally trained scientists. Yet Ovshinsky also sought validation and support from established scientists. After his discovery, he recruited a staff of highly trained researchers and gathered a cohort of eminent scientific advisors. He became an outsider who depended on insiders.