Concept Narrative Planning

Institutional Notes and Survey:

University of Edinburgh-School of Social and Political Science-Contacted

Donald MacKenzie 1977 The Development of Statistical Theory in Britain, 1865-192

1 dissertation awareded in 1972, 1 1974, 2 in 1977, 1 1979, 2 1980,

Rebecca Hanlin 2008 Partnerships for Vaccine Development: building capacity to strengthen developing country health and innovation

“This thesis examines the laws and regulations created in the 1980s and 1990s in the U.S. to hasten development, evaluation, and approval of drugs to treat serious and lifethreatening diseases, and to allow access of seriously ill patients to investigational drugs on a pre-market approval basis. Using detailed historical exposition in tandem with the social-theoretic tools of the sociology of scientific knowledge (SSK), and particularly Barnes’s account of meaning finitism, this thesis examines the social origin, definition, and case-by-case application of conceptual categories in the regulatory oversight of drug development and approval. With this approach, rules and standards for drug approval are shown not to be fossilised machinery for decision-making, but rather living, socially produced and maintained, inherently revisable resources for action. Key conclusions from this study are that: the regulatory actions taken to confront AIDS in the 1980s, often considered to be a radical break with previous practice, had their conceptual origins in the 1960s and 1970s; rule-making is often constitutionally related to a creative process of rule-‘breaking’; tacit processes of consensus outside of, and prior to, formal consensus mechanisms for rule-making are often fundamental to the rule-making process, resulting in de facto ‘rules’ on which later, formal rule-writing can be based; as predicted by finitism, newly created categories of action in drug development and approval require reinterpretation of underlying concepts in related existing categories.”


Science and technology pervade all aspects of modern life. Think of the impact of vaccines, mobile phones, jet travel or the internet on how we interact with one another and understand own place in society. How have theories of natural selection, advances in quantum physics or new medical theories and technologies changed the way we see ourselves? How have the politics of climate change influenced the science of climate change? Scholars in Science, Technology and Innovation Studies tackle such thorny issues. We seek to answer the big questions about how societies both influence and are influenced by science, medicine and technology.
The University of Edinburgh has an international reputation in all aspects of the study of science, technology and innovation in society. With the founding of the Science Studies Unit in 1964, it is here that pioneering work was done in the sociology of scientific knowledge. Likewise, Edinburgh has been the home for ground-breaking studies of the shaping of technology by cultural, economic, political and organisational factors. The founding of the Research Centre for Social Sciences (RCSS) in 1984 produced innovative and interdisciplinary research, public policy advice and consultancy on the socio-economic aspects of technology and innovation. Since 2002 the Subject Group has also provided a base for Innogen, the ESRC Centre for Social and Economic Research on Innovation, about which more can be learned here.
In the Subject Group we continue a tradition of excellence. Edinburgh scholars are working around the globe on the social and historical aspects of a range of issues including, bioscience, genomics, history of science and medicine, psychiatry, emerging technologies and innovation, information and communication technologies, science and technology policy, international development and artificial biology. You are welcome to learn more about the subject group by exploring our many activities and staff profiles.
Cornell Department of Science and Technology Studies——


Halfon, Saul
Dissertation Title: "Reconstructing Population Policy After Cairo: Demography, Woman's Empowerment, and the Population" (2000).
Current Location: Associate Professor, Science & Technology in Society, Virginia Tech.

Schmid, Sonja
Dissertation Title: "Envisioning a Technological State: Reactor Design Choices and Political Legitimacy in the Soviet Union and Russia" (2005).
Current Location: Assistant Professor, Science & Technology in Society, Virgina Tech.

Dear Gregory:
Have a look at our website - I think some of the dissertations are listed there.
nearly every dissertation out of here will have a literature review which will have some take on the STS literature of course. Not sure if that is what you mean here by "historiography".
Every Cornell dissertation is filed at Cornell library so if you search the library system you should be able to find all STS dissertations.
Stacey Stone our graduate administrator may have a list so I've copied her.
Good luck!
Trevor Pinch

Cornel Page

What is Science & Technology Studies?
In light of the importance of science and technology (S&T) in the world today, there is a need for scholarly work on its social dimensions. The Department of Science & Technology Studies is dedicated to research and teaching about scientific knowledge and technology in its social context. In their research, faculty members examine S&T both in contemporary societies and through historical investigations. The goal is to build a body of theory and empirical findings about:
o The social processes through which scientific and technical knowledge—whether packaged into texts, people, machines, images, or other forms—is created, evaluated, challenged, spread, transformed, and fitted into social relations.
 The ways people use, reconfigure, and contest scientific knowledge and technology.
• The normative issues entangled in scientific and technological developments.
• The place of science and technology in the modern world.
• Through its teaching as well as its research, the department is playing a notable role in building the emerging discipline of Science & Technology Studies (STS). Founded in 1991, the department has an internationally-known Ph.D. Program devoted to training students to conduct advanced research. It also has two undergraduate majors, Biology & Society and Science & Technology Studies. Learn More.
• The Biology & Society Major is designed for students who wish to combine training in biology with exposure to perspectives from the social sciences and humanities on the social, political and ethical aspects of modern biology. This major is intended for students who have an interest in law, medicine, health services administration and other professional schools and for preparation for graduate programs in various fields. Learn More.
• The Science & Technology Studies Major furthers students’ understanding of the social and cultural meanings of science and technology. It is ideal for students pursuing careers in law, public policy or management, as well as for scientists, engineers and others interested in science, technology and society. Learn More.
• The Minor in Science & Technology Studies also offers a way for undergraduates specializing in other fields to gain an appreciation for the social dimensions of science and technology. Learn More.
Graduate Program
he Ph.D. Program
The Graduate Field of Science & Technology Studies (S&TS) at Cornell University is devoted to training students to conduct advanced research in one of the most exciting of contemporary academic disciplines. S&TS research treats science and technology as historical and cultural productions. Research in this field therefore requires the ability to uncover how scientific knowledge, authority, and expertise operate in different social contexts, and to understand their changing historical meanings. Possible topics of investigation range from transformations in early-modern natural philosophy to the dynamics of contemporary environmental, biological, and technological change. The field transcends the boundaries of pre-existing disciplinary specialties. Such categories as “historian” or “sociologist,” are still relevant for guiding research design, but they fail increasingly to capture the transdisciplinary character of S&TS investigations.
Our aim is to bring together faculty and students with diverse backgrounds and interests in a shared effort to study science and technology with special tools for exploring distinctive questions. At the same time, these tools and questions are designed to facilitate conversations with colleagues in traditional disciplines. Our approach throughout is both descriptive (aimed at understanding how science and technology are done) and normative (for example, showing where actual practices and professed norms are in conflict).
Established in 1991, Cornell’s Department and Graduate Field of S&TS were formed from two previously independent Programs: “Science, Technology and Society” (STS) and “History and Philosophy of Science and Technology” (HPST). The department brought together a group of scholars with convergent interests committed to the rigorous academic advancement of this new and exciting field.

Database: Cornell University Library
Author/Creator: Jacob, Margaret Candee, 1943-
Title: The church and the Boyle lectures: the social context of the Newtonian natural philosophy / by Margaret Candee Jacob.
Published: [Ithaca, N.Y.] 1969.
Description: xii, 249 leaves ; 29 cm.
Database: Cornell University Library
Author/Creator: Gough, Jerry B., 1940-
Title: The foundations of modern chemistry : The origin and development of the concept of the gaseous state and its role in the chemical revolution of the eighteenth century / by Jerry Bruce Gough.
Published: [Ithaca, N.Y.] 1971.
Description: 3, xi, 201 leaves ; 29 cm.

Alongside a vital concern with issues of methodology, epistemology, and social theory, the Cornell approach to S&TS nonetheless possesses a strong empirical focus. This means that a typical piece of doctoral work takes as its core an episode, comparative study, or state of affairs about which one can ask a coherent, theoretically challenging question deriving from the analytical approaches of S&TS. The empirical material guides what can and cannot be said, while leaving considerable space for theoretical advances.

University of Twente
Innovations in science and technology involve expectations of economic profit, concerns about social impact, and challenges for regulatory governance. Genomics, nanotechnology and e-health are examples of fields of technology that mobilize interests and stir debate among many diverse actors
The Department of Science, Technology, and Policy Studies (STePS) takes the assessment and governance of innovations and emerging technologies as its central theme of teaching and research. STePS considers in particular strategic issues that are multidisciplinary: they involve developments in science, technology, politics and society, as well as interaction between them. Studies conducted within STəPS link analytical and normative perspectives, and consider not only technological innovations but also innovations in governance.

Science and Innovation Policies
Science and innovation are both a key resource and a cause for concern for industry and policy making in modern society. The production and use of scientific knowledge and its relevance for technological order and other innovations have increasingly become objects of policy making. Understanding the changing governance of science (in a broad sense) and the conceptualization of the research and innovation system are key issues for contemporary science, technology and innovation studies. Research on ‘Science and Innovation Policies’ analyzes transformation processes of the research and innovation system, the role of governance and policy making in this transformation and the processes by which scientific knowledge contributes to policy making and innovation.

Rethinking Political Judgment and Science-Based Expertise
Period: 2002-2007
Granting organization: NWO
he relationship between political judgment and scientific expertise is a troubled one. This research program intends to rethink the confusing and shifting popular images and scientific models of the links between political judgment and science-based expertise. The general research problem can be stated as: How can we describe, analyze, and assess the (dys)functions of discursive and non-discursive practices in boundary work between political judgment and science-based expertise for dealing with different types of policy problems, as manifested in the interaction between Dutch knowledge institutes and representatives of politics, policy, and interests? The empirical research is about (dys)functions of science-based expertise for political judgment as manifested in extended case histories/studies of boundary work at the science/politics nexus by five Dutch knowledge institutes, i.e. WRR, CPB, CBS, RIVM and Alterra. Based on an inventory of models of boundary work and its (dys)functions, the program intends to discover, through systematic comparative case research and analysis, the conditions under which some of these models may claim greater verisimilitude. Such empirically informed evaluative research into the meanings and functions of strategic science may suggest strategies for more productive boundary work.

Technology, Dynamics and Assessment
This research theme aims to increase understanding of the dynamics of processes of technological development and the ways in which socio-technological change can be assessed.
Understanding the dynamics of technological change is an intellectual challenge, but in modern society also of great relevance to societal actors and audiences, ranging from scientists and technologists to government agencies, business firms, non-profit organizations, and the general public. Therefore, the development of concepts and tools to assess and contribute to the development of technologies is an important part of the group’s research agenda.
Surveillance in Urban Nightscapes
Surveillance in Urban Nightscapes.
The socio-spatial effects of video-surveillance in urban nightlife districts
Research project financed by the NWO program Societal Responsible Innovation. Coordinator dr. Irina van Aalst. Department Social Geography, University of Utrecht.
The multidisciplinary research team consist of drs. Tjerk Timan (PhD student at STePs; UT); drs. Jelle Brands (PhD student Dept Social Geography, University of Utrecht; postdoc (vacancy; UU); and four senior researchers for supervision, coordination and co-authoring of publications (dr. Irina van Aalst (UU); prof.dr. Martin Dijst (UU); prof.dr Nelly Oudshoorn (UT); and dr.Tim Schwanen (UU). The project runs from October 2009-Oct 2013.
The emergence of video-surveillance technologies asks for a fundamental, critical reflection on what is called the ‘surveillance society’. The introduction of these novel technologies has major societal and ethical consequences for citizens. Although surveillance technologies promise to promote public safety for everybody, current practices of use suggest that closed-circuit television (CCTV) may produce socially exclusive spaces. Based on empirical studies, this research project aims to generate recommendations about how video surveillance’s potential to produce socially inclusive and heterogeneous spaces in and around nightlife districts can be maximized. This research is a collaborative project between the University of Twente and Utrecht University.
History of Science, Technology and Society
This research theme is directed toward broadening and deepening insight in the long-term development of science, technology and society from the perspective of social, cultural, intellectual and institutional history. As such it provides an important background and context for the contemporary and future-oriented research carried out within the department and the faculty.
Rooted in Fertile Soil: Seventeenth-Century Dutch Gardens, Natural Inquiry and Technology
Period: November 2006 - November 2009
Granting organization: NWO
PhD: A.A. Fleischer (Alette)
Promotor: Dr L.L. Roberts
Project description
The research project is called: “Rooted in Fertile Soil: Seventeenth-Century Dutch Gardens, Natural Inquiry and Technology”. The research involves gardens as sites in which the interactions of a broad range of actors and their tools helped to give rise to what crystallized as both modern science and technology. This project will fill part of this void by focusing on developments in natural inquiry and technology that grew out of Dutch gardens during the seventeenth century.
This relation between gardens, natural inquiry, and invention is illustrated by the following topics. The first presents the land reclamation of the Beemster in the early 17th century, whereby inventions (wind mills, land surveying instruments), natural inquiry, and commerce led to a representation of God’s Creation. The second focal point relates the fascination into the nature of crystals and light. It ties a garden grotto, filled with crystals and mirrors to Christiaan Huygens’s Treatise on Light, whereby in both cases nature is reshaped by geometry. The project furthermore focuses on the Dutch East India Company’s garden at the Cape of Good Hope. The Company’s garden and subsequently the Cape’s agricultural enterprise tell how Dutch settlers and merchants investigate and transform South African nature. The Company’s garden functioned as a ‘centre of accumulation’ for the VOC and as a site where Dutch and local Khoisan cultures encountered and appropriated unknown knowledges and objects.
New Project—-

New International Research Project
Governance of Discontinuation of Sociotechnical Systems—New International Research Project for STePS
The Department of Science, Technology, and Policy Studies (STePS) is pleased to announce a new international research project on the ‘Governance of Discontinuation of Sociotechnical Systems’ (short: DiscGo). It is a grant from the second round of the Open Research Area Scheme (ORA) by four European national research funding agencies, the Agence Nationale de la Recherche (ANR), Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (DFG), Economic and Social Research Council (ESRC), and the Nederlandse Organisatie voor Wetenschappelijk Onderzoek (NWO), which provides €9 million to fund ten collaborative research projects over the next three years, among which the DiscGo project is one. Project leaders in Twente are Prof Stefan Kuhlmann and Dr Peter Stegmaier

The role of industry in science policy, Panelreport
Google Book Search

More info about this book

Rip, A. (1990) The role of industry in science policy, Panelreport. In: The Research System in Transition. Eds: S.E. Cozzens, P. Healey, A. Rip, J. Ziman. Kluwer Academic, Dordrecht, pp. 103-108. ISBN 9780792308584

Genomics as a new research regime? Evidence from the Netherlands

Nahuis, R. and Stemerding, D. (2013) Genomics as a new research regime? Evidence from the Netherlands. Research policy, 42 (3). 676 - 687. ISSN 0048-7333
Social scientists commenting on developments in the life sciences have suggested that the rise of genomics in the field of human genetics does not only involve a shift in the research agenda from relatively rare monogenetic disorders to multifactorial, common diseases, but also involves a transformation on the institutional level of research regimes. In the (Dutch) genomics landscape, in which such research regimes are embedded, increasingly dominant values and objectives exert pressures on researchers to collaborate with industrial partners and to valorize knowledge results. To assess how these pressures are actually taken up and transforming research regimes, a multi-level approach is developed and applied in two case studies in which regimes are characterized in terms of the identities of actors, the knowledge and products exchanged and the principles that coordinate these exchanges. We describe the dominant regime in a typical genomics research field (Alzheimer's disease) as compared to the regime in a typical clinical genetics research field (Duchenne Muscular Dystrophy) and show whether and how these research regimes are transforming in response to landscape pressures. The analysis shows that the AD regime has not been transformed against the background of changing landscape expectations and that the DMD regime did change, but under the condition of maturation. Developments on the level of genomics research regimes follow a dynamics of their own more than reflecting a changing genomics landscape.


MIT's Doctoral Program in History, Anthropology, and Science, Technology, and Society (HASTS) trains scholars to study science and technology as activities situated in social and cultural contexts. HASTS faculty examine expert as well as popular engagement with the processes and products of technological and scientific work, and conduct research across a spectrum of geographical areas and historical periods.
Faculty members from History, Anthropology, and Science, Technology and Society share responsibility for teaching the required graduate courses and for working with students in individual tutorials, reading courses, and dissertation research.
HASTS faculty and students employ historical, ethnographic, and sociological methods and theories to investigate a wide range of topics, including:
• cultures of engineering
• the making of scientific tools and theories
• conventions of laboratory practice
• science and technology in military enterprise
• the relation of technology to economic institutions
• the relation of science and law
• the politics of race and science
• knowledge-production in biomedicine and life sciences
• agricultural and environmental history
• science education
Frank Laird "Limiting Democracy: Participation, Competence, and Energy Policy"
1985 | Advisor: Eugene Skolnikoff University of Denver

Paul R. Josephson "The Leningrad Physico-Technical Institute and the Birth of Russian Physics"
1986 | Advisor: Donald Blackmer Colby College

Richard E. Sclove "Technology and Freedom: A Prescriptive Theory of Technological Design and Practice in Democratic Societies"
1986 | Advisor: Joshua Cohen Loka Institute

Bruce Bimber ‘92
Professor, Departments of Political Science and Communication, University of California, Santa Barbara.
“I came to the STS program at MIT in the mid-1980s, as an electrical engineer who was passionately interested in the social and political dimensions of technology. In the half-dozen years before I arrived at MIT, Apple had gone public, IBM had introduced its first PC, and Time magazine had named the computer "Machine of the Year" in place of its traditional "Man of the Year." Big questions were everywhere, and the STS program re-launched me on a new career as a social scientist who studies technology.”
Hannah Landecker ‘99
“My areas of interest were (are) anthropology of cell biology, history of twentieth century biotechnology, and biological cinema. I found the program entirely by fortuitous accident: I was looking at programs in science journalism, and someone mentioned that I'd be more suited to science and technology studies. I had never heard of it before. I am now an assistant professor of anthropology at Rice University, and have just completed my first book, Culturing Life: How Cells Became Technologies, forthcoming from Harvard University Press. For me, the freedom to explore anthropological and literary modes of inquiry into life science all the while soaking in MIT's broader milieu of intense scientific and technical change was the highlight of the program.”“The HASTS program supports faculty and student research across a range of interdisciplinary topics, linked by a shared concern with the social and historical foundations of science and technology.”
Current Research Areas—-History of Technology/History of Science/ Ethnography of Science and Technology/ U.S. National Policy and Security/Environment and Agriculture/Life Sciences and Biomedicine
Clapperton Chakanetsa Mavhunga
Assistant Professor (STS)
Clapperton Chakanetsa Mavhunga is an STS scholar of Africa and an African scholar of Science, Technology and Society interested in historicizing and theorizing the role mobility plays in everyday life. He researches and teaches on African Mobilities and Mobility in Africa; Science, Technology and African Societies; Energy, Environment, and African Society; and (African) Indigenous Knowledge Production and Practice. Mavhunga received his BA Honors from the University of Zimbabwe (History, 1996), his MA from University of the Witwatersrand (History and International Relations, 2000), and his PhD from the University of Michigan, Ann Arbor (History/STS, 2008).
David Kaiser-
Germeshausen Professor of the History of Science (STS), and Senior Lecturer (Department of Physics)
Director of the Program in Science, Technology, and Society
David Kaiser is Germeshausen Professor of the History of Science and Department Head of MIT's Program in Science, Technology, and Society, and a Senior Lecturer in MIT's Department of Physics. He completed an A.B. in physics at Dartmouth College and Ph.D.s in physics and the history of science at Harvard University. Kaiser's historical research focuses on the development of physics in the United States during the Cold War, looking at how the discipline has evolved at the intersection of politics, culture, and the changing shape of higher education. His physics research focuses on early-universe cosmology, working at the interface of particle physics and gravitation.

Michael M.J. FISCHER—
Andrew W. Mellon Professor in the Humanities
Professor of Anthropology and Science and Technology Studies
Michael Fischer trained in geography and philosophy at Johns Hopkins, social anthropology and philosophy at the London School of Economics, anthropology at the University of Chicago. Before joining the MIT faculty, he served as Director of the Center for Cultural Studies at Rice. He conducts fieldwork in the Caribbean, Middle East, South and Southeast Asia on the anthropology of biosciences, media circuits, and emergent forms of life.
Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute (RPI)

Science and Technology Studies (STS)
Social Science and Humanities for the 21st Century, STS Makes the Connections To See the Big Picture
The field of Science and Technology Studies (STS) asks fundamental questions about the role of science and technology in social and environmental change. It integrates insights from the humanities and social sciences into a coherent body of knowledge that provides a basis for action.
Founded in 1982, the Department of Science and Technology Studies at Rensselaer is one of the oldest and most highly recognized programs of its sort. Our internationally recognized faculty members have backgrounds in anthropology, history, philosophy, political science, social psychology, and sociology. They bring to their courses a unique interdisciplinary perspective on science, technology, and society.
This department is one of the few in the world that offers STS degrees from baccalaureate to doctoral levels. Degree programs offered through the STS Department emphasize the cultural, historical, economic, political, and social dimensions of scientific and technological society, with a focus on ethical and values issues. Students in these degree programs can expect broad, rigorous training, with commensurate intellectual rewards.
Science and Technology Studies (STS) explores the human dimensions of science and technology. We employ tools from the social sciences and humanities to better understand how science and technology develop, and how they can contribute to a sustainable, democratic, and just future for everyone.
Undergraduate degrees offered
STS degrees provide a liberal arts education for the 21st century — combining the social science, humanities and technical education.
Langdon Winner

• Ph.D., political science, University of California at Berkeley
• M.A., political science, University of California at Berkeley
• B.A., political science, University of California at Berkeley
Praised by The Wall Street Journal as "The leading academic on the politics of technology,” Langdon Winner is a political theorist who focuses upon social and political issues that surround modern technological change.
Winner is the author of Autonomous Technology, a study of the idea of "technology-out-of-control" in modern social thought, The Whale and The Reactor: A Search for Limits in an Age of High Technology, and editor of Democracy in a Technological Society.

At present he is researching and writing on a book about the politics of design in the contexts of engineering, architecture and political theory; a book on sustainable technologies; and a collection of his essays on technology and human experience.
He has taught at The New School for Social Research, College of the Atlantic, the University of California at Santa Cruz, the University of Leiden in the Netherlands, and MIT, and has lectured widely throughout the United States and Europe.
He is past president of the Society for Philosophy and Technology. A sometime rock critic, he was contributing editor at Rolling Stone in the late 1960s and early 1970s and has contributed articles on rock and roll to The New Grove Dictionary of Music and Musicians and The Encylopaedia Britannica. In the early 1980s he was consultant on Godfrey Reggio's film "Koyaanisqatsi."

Environmental media systems: innovations at the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's National Exposure Research Laboratory

Costelloe-Kuehn, Brandon James .
This multi-sited ethnography analyzes challenges and opportunities in the design and development of digital media systems in the Office of Research and Development (ORD) at the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). Drawing heavily from interviews conducted over the course of three years, primarily with scientists at the ORD's National Exposure Research Laboratory (NERL) in Research Triangle, North Carolina, this dissertation documents and describes the forces behind emergent practices in the communication of environmental science that go beyond the limitations of a transmission model of communication. To describe the practices of my interlocutors, I introduce a model of science communication as context production. The contexts of interest are environmental media systems (EMSs), sociotechnical systems marked by diverse forms of expertise and the creation of collaborative, interactive, open, multi-directional, digital spaces. The EMSs I focus on are the National Atlas of Sustainability and the Community Multiscale Air Quality (CMAQ) modeling system. Both projects could be described as virtual laboratories. The Atlas, which is not yet available for public use, will be a publicly accessible, web-based, easily usable mapping application that draws together a multitude of demographic and ecological data sets, along with a number of tools, including an Eco-Health Relationship Browser. CMAQ is an open-source modeling system used primarily to guide regulatory policy on air quality.
Media Systems

at the U.S.
Protection Agency

National Exposure Research Laboratory
Brandon Costelloe
Kim Fortun
Mike Fortun
Dean Nieusma
, Member
Kathy High
Handbook of Science and Technology Studies -1995
“Although there is no single chapter reviewing historical studies in STS, it is not far-fetched to say that historical methods have left their imprint on the field as a whole, contributing greatly to the convergence of “science, technology, and society” with “science and technology studies” (xiii).
“The field, it seemed was intent on defining itself in ways not initially contemplated. We decided to accept this movement toward self-definition” (xiii).

David Edge-Reinventing the wheel
“Local contingencies set local targets and determined the form of the emerging interdisciplinary dialogue. Since its inception, STS has been marked by its inherent diversity; a thousand flowers have bloomed, and some withered too” (4).
“…STS holds out the ‘new’ view of science and technology as essentially and irredeemably human (and hence social) enterprises——both in the context that nourishes, supports, and directs them and their inner character. And this is a triumphant, positive humanism: not the miserable confession that ‘scientists are only human’ because you can catch them making mistakes, getting angry, being secretive and fraudulent” (5).
Science needed to be connected to economic growth (6)
Merton SSK (7)
Critical Interdisciplinary Scholarship 9
“One of the pioneers of American STS education, Stephen Cutcliffe (1989b), confirms that this remains a central motive when he writes that, ‘we are now beginning to move into a phase where STS may help to shape public response and involvement in decision making regarding scientific and technical change, both by providing an awareness of the public’s intimate involvement and by offering suggestions regarding the specific role that it has to play’” (11).
Technocratic/critical-self-awareness approach (14)
Pragmatic build bridges between technocratic and critical (18).

David Winyard on April 23:


Based on the technical discussion we had at the end of yesterday's class, plus an e-mail exchange I had with Prof. Collier, I have begun final assembly of our group project product. Key points:

1. Eventually, our work will be posted somewhere on Social Epistemology. However, Prof. Collier wants it built on the class Wiki first. So, I created a Normativity Concept Narrative page for that purpose, placing it between Welcome and Concept Narrative Planning on the left-side menu.

2. I've linked the files posted by Merc, Tim, and myself on the Normativity Concept Narrative page. {Late Addition} I linked to the Tiki Toki timeline for Crystal, Jen, and Nicole. I'll create other links, to either posted files or the Tiki Toki timeline, as desired.

3. I'm not sure whether or not all our output files should be converted to pdf versions. Any thoughts?

I plan to revise my work in view of Tim's survey of STS threads. My intent is to have a final product for us to look at on Monday, and then Prof. Collier during our final class. I know many of you are very busy. Within my workload limits, I can continue with final assembly work.

Glad to see light at the end of the tunnel…

David Winyard

Merc on 4/22/2013.
I have uploaded my results. It's a very small sample, but the results clearly point to a common heritage and normative foundation that underlie published papers. It's worth noting that my reading list was revised a half-dozen times before it was approved by the whole committee. At several times throughout the process, my chair advised me to find materials that more broadly covered the various aspects of STS theory, although he never provided specific recommendations. It took about two months (6-7 weekends) of research and revisions to get final approval.

Tim on 4/14/2013
I uploaded my progress to the files section ("Jennings Map of Norms") but was unable to figure out where or how to link it in Dave's summary below. I have increased the number of norms and I am slowly but surely identifying each of them with authors, publications, quotes and sometimes, other norms. If anyone sees that I have left out norms which you feel are crucial to STS, please let me know. Other than obvious/crucial ones, the list could go on much longer, but I also need to focus on what we deem the most important or dominant norms to go into the most detail. This may also correspond to which norms pop up in other people's findings so that we can better connect the various inquiries and evidence bases.

Jen on April 12, 2013

My apologies for not having stuff up by our deadline. I've begun a documentation record, a kind of field note diary about our planning meetings. It's under "Files" below. Please feel free to edit it, add to it, upload your new draft below. I would have simply embedded it here but it's difficult for me to upload photos with comments in an easy-to-read way. I'll have my material for my genealogy uploaded soon.

Take care!

Dave on April 10, 2013

First, the results of my normativity heritage project are posted (130410 Winyard-Norm Heritage) under the Files tab at the bottom of the page.

Second, following through on my interest in finding a way to pull together the Concept Narrative, I have adapted Tim Jennings' March 25/25 summary to introduce our respective efforts. Everyone is welcome to edit the description of their effort and add a summary statement of findings. Here is what I have so far, with the MS Word version posted (130410 Concept Narrative Introduction) in the Files tab at the bottom of the page:


This spring 2013 Virginia Tech STS course considered the nature and place of norms in science, technology, and studies of them. Its key finding: while STS focuses on how science, technology, and STS ought to work in society, STS is also a normativity battleground.

Instead of seeking a consensus view, the class adopted a divide-and-conquer approach to STS norms:

Crystal Cook & Jen Henderson explored methods to map STS genealogies for their committee members. They found…

William Davis reviewed the place of norms in the history of Virginia Tech STS. He found…

Merc Fox examined publications by her committee members and their citations. She found…

Timothy Jennings analyzed STS scholarship to identify its main threads. He found…

Gregory Nelson reviewed Handbook of STS descriptions of STS programs to identify norms. He found…

Nicole Regna examined norms in her scientific field. She found…

Adam Smith examined STS program mission statements for normative commitments. He found…

David Winyard attempted to trace STS threads in faculty dissertation advisors. He found…

My thinking is that whatever display format we choose, a text and hyperlink version of the completed introduction will be useful.

I will post my findings later today.


Crystal: I am finally back from the dead. I looked at a bunch of visual display programs last night including the Omeka + Neatline, which is way too complicated to install for our purposes. I did a trial run with a bunch of different programs and ran into road blocks on most in terms of how to visual display what we want to show. Most are way too difficult and require downloading, manipulation, or what have you. I have used Tiki-Toki before to create timelines….and I thought a timeline of the folks David sent, along with a map in another program, would get at some what we are after. What is cool with Tiki-Toki. A) It is user friendly. B) You can add a ton of narrative, photos, video and so on to it without a lot of hassle. I also thought the timeline would help us trace through time the forming of the normative…and provide a chronological narrative, at least, in some way, as to when various folks came on the STS scene.

I can add a ton of info to this…did we ever get William's info? I didn't see where it went out but maybe I am missing something. Uploaded as "A History of CSSS at VT"

Okay. I jump started with some folks' info and I must say it is looking mighty fine. See our Tiki Toki here:

If folks send me docs of their info, I will fill it in here…. I have David's spreadsheet…. So the way I see this is adding people, places, major events, classes taught— all to this timeline. I will also send you a password to add info yourselves. You can also add videos, photos, stories, etc.

I thought we would add people by their year of obtaining the PhD.

Okay. Next, as you add info here, you can also add it to a map. I am having trouble finding a very user friendly online mapping platform. I tried a bunch and most are counterintuitive. I tried all the ones here: plus one Jen suggested below and looked a couple of Open Source ones. Ideally, you could just open the program like you can with Tiki, add a plot, and say something brief about that point on the map. Anyone have any ideas?

Last but not least, I know some people were worried about where this is all going conceptually. I say we ride this ride…and we will be able to bring together some threads once we have the data in place. It is hard to make decisions before we have info. Thoughts?

Tim on March 25, 2013 (Modified 3/26)

My take on an overarching story we could tell that unifies the project:

STS is full of various norms about how science, technology and STS ought to work in society, but is also a battleground for the status of normativity overall. We offer a history of a field which has pioneered the idea that science and technology are fundamentally normative and value-laden, and yet, STS is also currently experiencing a fairly dominant recoil from actively and overtly prescriptive research. In this narrative we will map the history of various normativities of STS (including those arguments which normatively claim STS should not be normative) in an effort to promote a normative STS. In a way our history of the normative in STS already commits us to normativism; we are committed in our very epistemic-methodological decisions of this project to the idea that normativity pervades and informs knowledge, and that STS should step up and actively, critically intervene in the processes it strives to understand.

This is not a self-evident result of the project, but is admittedly the direction I would like to take. We can use some of it, or none.

Dave on March 21, 2013

In case you didn't get the e-mail:

Dear Team Mates:

1. With the semester past the halfway point, it will be important for everyone to participate in the Concept Narrative discussion at the end of next Monday's class, and probably all remaining classes, until we agree to adjourn.

2. In order to pull together our individual efforts into a coherent message (if indeed that is possible) please come to class on Monday with one or two sentences that summarize what your Concept Narrative work says about "The Normative in STS."

Thank you!

David Winyard

Adam on March 19, 01:37
I will figure out another formatting method at a later point for this information, as I cannot transition a table into Wiki DIVs easily:

Dave on March 11, 2013

Spreadsheet updated to incorporate Jen's geneologies.

Dave on March 9, 2013

LOL. No Jen, I think learning the Norms of STS is enough without learning the Norms of Excel. I'll take the info you've posted and add it to the spreadsheet by Monday at noon. And no, the spreadsheet is not suitable for our final output. It is not intuitive for casual Excel users, and never will be. Argh!

That said, I believe that the information being generated by the several projects needs to be brought together logically, so that connections between VT faculty members, STS programs, and the STS threads are identified. In my opinion, the geneologies alone do not make those connections unless they trace back to an exemplar of an STS thread (e.g. Jasonoff & co-production). So far, I've only made two connections between VT and STS threads, which is not much of a conclusion.

When logical connections are made, we can move on to making those connections visible in any way(s) that make sense: geographically, visually, humorously, etc.

Jen, thank you for what you've posted. What I need more than anything else are the exemplars for all 11 threads that Tim posted on February 13. Can anyone offer names?


Jen on March 8, 2013

Hey Dave,

I really do appreciate you putting everything into one document; I imagine that will help us keep control of the basics. However, I'm not an excel user at all and find the format counterintuitive for me. I'm happy to post what I've got in terms of my genealogy sheets (see files below) but I'm not sure how the Excel sheet is coming into play in the narrative itself. That is, I'm not that interested in having the Excel sheet represent my genealogies in the narrative. But perhaps you just wanted to organize the work so we know what's left to do?

I'm also not sure that we need to do every single faculty member in the department since, as I understand it, we need to constrain the project in a way that makes sense to us. I think that pulling information from just our respective committee members might be one way to do this. This might also offer interesting insights into gaps in normative arguments from our school's perspective. But I don't imagine our project as one of comprehensiveness but of selective representation. Does this make sense?

Other thoughts?


PS I also wanted to share another mapping structure possibility. I don't know much about it but it seems like a cross between GIS, Google Maps, and an archive.

From Dave on March 7, 2013:

Dear Team Mates:

For your review and comment, I have attached to this e-mail (and posted to the Concept Narrative page under files, bottom of page) my initial stab at pulling together the data being generated by the STS Genealogy and STS Thread projects. I envision these projects coming together eventually, with links between VT STS faculty members and exemplars of one or more STS schools of thought. When the spreadsheet is more fully populated, we can move to displaying the information in a more user-friendly way.

I volunteer to maintain the spreadsheet; we can't afford to waste time with more than one copy floating around. If you have data to add to it, send it to me. Either enter it in the spreadsheet (highlighted, so I know what you have done), or just send the information in any form you choose and I will add it. By the way, the file name prefix shows the date (YYMMDD plus a letter suffix in anticipation of multiple updates in a single day). If you send me a modified spreadsheet, please add your name to the file name.

Jen & Crystal: I highlighted the members of your committees. I will start filling in data from other VT faculty members as I collect it.

Tim & William: I've entered 11 STS Threads as Tim posted them to the Wiki on February 13. I don't know if/how the list has changed since then, and I don't have exemplars for most of the threads. Could you send me and/or post an update?

Greg: My guess is that your interest in associating schools with STS threads could fit into this format. Thoughts?

Nicole: Your work seems to be more on applying STS concepts to your interests. Perhaps there is one thread that is more interesting to you than others?

Merc & Adam: I believe you are engaged in the STS Thread project?

Thank you for participating with me in class and this project. From now through the end of the semester, I expect to have more time to devote to the group project. I look forward to the results!

David Winyard

P.S. Feel free to call me at 804-517-7413 to discuss.
P.P.S. Version 130307B uploaded.

From Dave on March 4, 2013:


For anyone who did not hear my idea at the end of class, it was to consider the Mertonian Norms of Science in the way office norms are portrayed in Office Linebacker videos. It might be fun, but I'm not sure I could endure the PAIN! :-)

Anyone interested? Capable of doing the video piece?


Science and conflicts from her discipline


RIT and Edinburgh
Handbook of STS

From Jen on Feb. 28, 2013:

David: I've noted those people I was planning to and have explored below. I did a basic genealogy for Matt W. and Janet and would be happy to share these if someone wants to do more with them, such as their publications, classes taught, etc. I've also asked questions about some people we've included who are not STS or who I've never heard of. I can add a few more to my list once I know what others are interested in. For now, I've kept to my committee. (Feb. 28).

From Dave on Feb. 26, 2013:

So, to keep track of coverage in the "VT STS Geneology Project" using the VT STS Faculty List: (I deleted staff members: Jen)

Abbate, Janet (I have some basic info on Janet, but someone is welcome to dig deeper….Jen)
Allen, Barbara: Jen
Barrow, Mark (Are we including faculty from outside STS? Tim Luke (poli sci), Bernice Housman (WGS), Mark Barrow (history)? Jen)
Breslau, Daniel: Crystal
Brown, Shannon A. (Don't know who this is:Jen)
Burian, Richard
Collier, James: Crystal
Crist, Eileen
Downey, Gary: Jen
Fitzpatrick, Anne (Don't know who this is: Jen)
Fuhrman, Ellsworth
Goodrum, Matthew
Halfon, Saul: Jen
Hausman, Bernice
Hirsh, Richard
Jones, Kathleen (Don't know who this is: Jen)
Laberge, Ann
Luke, Timothy
Mayo, Deborah (Don't know who this is: Jen)
Mogul, Nicole (Don't know who this is: Jen)
Olson, Philip
Pitt, Joseph: Irrelevant (Came to STS long after writing dissertation) (Not sure I agree; his dissertation includes STS thinkers and he affected several STSers here and via publications, which is part of the genealogy as I understand it: Jen)
Schmid, Sonja: Crystal

Shew, Ashley
Tomblin, David C. (Are we including instructors and adjuncts? Jen)
Williams, Travis L. (Post-doc; not faculty: Jen)
Wisnioski, Matthew (I have some basic info on Matt, but someone is welcome to dig deeper….Jen)
Zallen, Doris

Jen: I know you mentioned names of people you had already explored. Would you note those on this roster? I also recall your saying that some records are unavailable or irrelevant (e.g. Pitt). Could you note this also?

Anyone else working on the geneology project, please note your coverage.

Timeline and Groups/Pairs for Digital Narrative

Hi! Okay, now following Tim's idea about not having to scroll. I am interested in what we are now, for sake of clarity, calling the "academic history" of the department. I will start with the members of my committee that are also in STS, so Schmid, Breslau, and Collier. In addition to dissertations, where they went to school, advisors, etc., I am also going to look at publications AND classes taught. I am uncertain if these will point out departmental norms….but they may. I am open to having to excavate more broadly or deeply. I don't want to assume what conclusions can be made until I have material to work with. — Crystal (Sounds good to me, Jen).

From Merc on Feb. 25, 2013:

I'll work on Tim's norms.

From Tim on Feb. 21, 2013:

Hi guys, as I mentioned in that email, I'd like to keep working on identifying and mapping the norms themselves. For now I will map an array of norms and then perhaps later we can decide as a group whether to group certain ones together as a common trend and why. As I said before, some of my theoretical commitments and preconceptions may color my selections, and I think we should be up front about this. I will also try to identify these norms with several key publications and authors, possibly in a timeline form, to help us link up our different projects later.

From Dave on Feb. 19, 2013:

Hi everyone!

This is all very interesting. I look forward to the finished product!

In order for me to get to know the Blacksburg faculty, I would like to work on mapping their dissertation advisors and possibly talk to all of them to check the results we develop. If others want to work on this approach, perhaps we could simply divide up the faculty on Monday to avoid duplication?

To do the bottom-up work, it would be helpful for those working the top-down mappings (items 2 and 3 on Jen's list) to identify the leading figures in each set of norms. That way the bottom-up folks can know when a top-to-bottom link has been made. Tim Jennings post on the 13th is a good start, but some STS "strains" have no names, and there might be several leaders of others.

Finally, I am following Jen's lead in posting this at the top of the page to avoid all that scrolling. Does everyone agree this is better? If everyone agrees on Monday, I'll shuffle all the posts in newest-to-oldest order.

Now, back to reading Ravetz…

David Winyard

From Jen on Feb. 18, 2013:

Here are the five approaches to normativity in STS that we've discussed in the past few meetings. Please sign up for at least one of these areas asap.

The first deadline for bringing something tangible to the group is March 4.

We'll share our concrete discoveries/maps/drafts during the last 20 minutes of class; it would be great if groups could also suggest thoughts about formats (graphic, text, images, etc). Feel free to post relevant links or information under the headings below.

1) Map the genealogy of advisors, actual and desired to show different influences and normative trends; and/or genealogy of personal research interests and how they connect with normative threads (see photo below)


2) Map a history of norms, a more top-down mapping of norms in STS (see Tim's excellent starting list below)

3) Look for extreme normative positions and authors and trace their citation map (that is, look for who are taking extreme positions in print and who are citing them)

Gregory Will do Extreme Normative Positions

4) Map or examine funding streams for grants and research (with the idea that we may be able to reveal commitments formalized by funding even though they may not represent the actual intentions of the authors)

5) Mapping Virginia Tech and other STS mission statements and/or oral history of STS programs (via William's work)

6) Sample student dissertations from certain institutions (continental, etc.) and see how norms are manifest / being incorporated / reflected


Resources for our Digital Concept Narrative

Response by Merc Fox, 2/11/13
.. I want to counter Turner by saying that the normative is not the little Dutch boy: The normative is the dyke, with a million philosophers trying to poke through it.

From Jen on 2/11/13:
Here's a link to a quasi-article by Tufte online. Want to read this as a class next week? It's also an interesting example of a narrative that includes photos, quotes, illustrations, charts, and links. Might be a good "meta" example of our concept narrative format.

Here are some examples of how Pinterest can be shaped around different topics/issues. Each "pin" allows for a brief description.

Another option is Tumblr, which allows images, quotes, videos, pdf scans, and lengthier texts:

From Crystal on 2/11/13: Here were the resources I sent around last week:

Here is what Adam mentioned:

Photos from today: flickr:8465936759


Dave Winyard note 2/12/13

I'm coming up the learning curve on what a Concept Narrative is, so my thoughts have been on the medium more than the message. Hence my idea of using humor or irony to convey our message(s) in ways that hold audience attention.

Crystal's reference to short statements of purpose (i.e. elevator speech) was relevant. It reminded me of a Peter Berger quote: "…the comic perspective, often in a sudden flash, illuminates a social reality. Very often a joke does this in one or two sentences and more clearly than a scholarly treatise of many pages." (Not seeing how to embed it, I'll e-mail out the reference.)

Couple this thought with an image, and the concept is reinforced. I think of the dark humor of Demotivators:

It is not hard to do, but finding a good image and text comment for a complex idea can be challenging. A simple Google Image search turned up the following link:


Post by Tim Jennings, 2/13/13:
Hello all, I just wanted to share my thoughts for the project so far. Be warned that this is content-heavy and I haven’t thought much about the medium for the project yet (but who mentioned McLuhan the other day – the medium is the message?). One major way to look at normativity in the history of STS is to look at the reasons and purposes stated by scholars about what their work is supposed to do, and what STS ought to do. Some of us took a topics course with Gary Downey last year, What is STS for?, which had a lot of ideas and sources for looking at what STS scholars have been attempting to do with their work, usually having to do with some kind of critical intervention in the STEM fields. One of Downey’s ideas for mapping normative STS history was to look at the opening mission statements for major STS departments and evaluate their stated goals (but how to compare these with other, unstated goals?).

Also, I thought we could just start listing some major threads of normativity in the history of STS. These are the ones that I just wanted to throw out there. Granted these are initial potshots I have from my short time in the field, but we obviously have to go in with some sort of theoretical lens for sorting the history of STS. We can be reflexive (ahem, norm) about the decisions we make in mapping, but here are some by no means discrete or chronological normative threads to start us off:

1. Deconstruction – Inspired by Derrida and other postmodern theorists. In the early stages of constructivism, many scholars were perhaps overly excited by and felt it sufficient to merely show the situated/contingent social negotiation and production of facts and artifacts and call it a day (at least, this criticism comes from #3, below). In some ways, STSers may have been too brazen in their battle to challenge the objectivity of science without regard for the normativities of their own knowledge, hence Latour’s regretful essay, “Why Has Critique Run out of Steam? From Matters of Fact to Matters of Concern." Critical Inquiry 30, no. 2 (2004): 225-248.

2. Strong Program of SSK – not concerned with norms so much, but doing a science of science, arguably with latent normative effects of de-priviliging truth, rationality, objectivity, universality of science; war against Mertonian norms?

3. Co-production/The “let’s get beyond deconstruction” movement (e.g., Sheila Jasanoff, “STS and Public Policy: Getting Beyond Deconstruction” in Science, Technology and Society, 4:1, 1999). This trend/camp advocates responsible construction/reconstruction of science and society together. Policy/intervention-oriented, participation in panels, consortiums, etc.

4. History and Politics of Technology: showing the contingent origins, politics and value-ladenness of technological decisions and hopefully proposing responsible alternatives. (While Technology studies has its own history I am neglecting here, it was kind of tacked on later/secondarily in STS for a long time, until the Latourian normative conviction that S&T are inseparable and ought to be studied together as technoscience.

5. Democratization of science and technology – The conviction that STS ought to intervene in and democratize science and technology because they “always, already are” political and value-laden (the anti-authoritarian S&T thread). Promotion of “lay expertise” and public say, involvement in S&T.

6. Anti-industrialization of science and technology (subset of 5?). Social values and concerns, not money/economics should be the driving factor of S&T. Dismissal of endless frontier, pure/basic, non-normative science. Challenge of disinterestedness as a followed norm? Backlash: impossibility of disinterestedness, so neoliberal S&T is inevitable/acceptable (see below).

7. Consultant STS, Actor-Network Theory (ANT) in its more consultant form: studying (rather similarly to the strong program) how networks and processes of technoscientific knowledge, artifacts, and people function or come together, perhaps to make these networks more efficient for those sponsor of the study.

8. More interventionist trends of ANT: how to make the most responsible composition of networks for democratic social goals. Not necessarily dichotomous with consultant work.

9. Anti-business, anti-ANT, basically Fuller’s camp: against trends of STS that fit too well/happily with neo-liberalization of academia/knowledge. Criticizes STS for being too go-with-the-flow and a product of our heavily neoliberal time, especially the transformations in France that form the context of the formation of ANT.

10. STS as critical theory. Against the activist/ivory tower distinction; it is argued that critique should be seen as a viable form of S&T intervention in itself. (However, this possibly becomes an excuse for inaction?)

11. Embedded Humanism: having interactive ethnographers go into science/engineering labs asking probative questions in an attempt to make the process more socially reflexive. Socio-Technical Integration Research (STIR).

Again these are my initial schemas and probably each have their own problems and politics to them. A major component I have not addressed is how STS uses the terms normativity and norms explicitly, and I don’t know how to get at that quite yet. I’d like to think if there was a paper titled anything like “What is the Status of Normativity in STS,” then it is probably already on this course’s syllabus.

A parting question: should we argue/examine the normativity of ANT and other non, anti, or extra-normative movements in STS (this is itself a normative trend, in that it urges us not to critically intervene on basis of social values, but to make networks more efficient in order to secure a job for STSers). (Is this critique from Fuller fair?) In other words, should our narrative embody our own position(s) on the normativity issue itself? I don’t believe personally that we can do a purely descriptive history of normativity in STS; we have to reflexively address the normativity of our own methodology. Should our project admit that we are in part steering STS in certain normative directions with this very project? Maybe I am making this more complicated than it needs to be.


Posted by Jen Henderson Feb. 18, 2013:

Here are a couple of fun (free) sites for creating digital cartoons and narrated animations. Could be that we inject humor, as David has suggested, via these means, as well.

Unless otherwise stated, the content of this page is licensed under Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 License