The Evolution of History of Science

She came to Harvard wanting to be a doctor, and she knew science would be in her future. But what Alana C. Ju ‘10 did not know was that she would end up writing science fiction about genetically-modified crops that take over the world or fiddling with a microscope that once belonged to Mark Twain.

Freshman year, Ju got her introduction to History and Science in associate professor Sarah Jansen’s History of Science 130: “Biology and Society.” Around a seminar table with juniors, seniors, and graduate students, she explored everything from Aristotle to the Human Genome Project.

Two years later, she is writing her junior tutorial paper on the “re-emergence of electroshock therapy in the 21st century” and leading an effort to revive a nationwide History and Science journal.

Starting this year, more students may have opportunities to follow in Ju’s footsteps. As the concentration evolves within the changing college environment, it has undergone two main adaptations that are intended to attract more students to the history of science department.

DEPARTMENTAL REVOLUTION

Now, potential concentrators will have two choices to make: They can either choose the “History of Science” track, intended for humanities-oriented students who do not want to take science courses beyond the core requirements, or “Science and Society,” the track that will maintain much of the old concentration’s expectations for students to focus in specific area of science.

In addition, students in the former honors-only concentration will have the option of not writing a thesis.

Director of Undergraduate Studies Steven Shapin said that the chief reason behind the changes was to increase the visibility of the concentration and to reach out to those students who may not know much about it.

“Students come to Harvard knowing that there is a subject called economics or electrical engineering,” he said. “No one comes to Harvard knowing there is a subject called history of science.”

Indeed, the concentration has always faced a unique publicity challenge. Alice J. Belser, program manager for undergraduate students, said that she heard many students say that they regretted not knowing about the concentration before their senior year.

“It’s not immediately obvious to everyone what it’s all about,” said Anne Harrington, chair of the history of science department. “To some people it just seems like you do some history and you do some science, but the intellectual heart of the program is to ask big questions about the stakes of science, not just to do it but why it matters.”

AN EVOLVING POPULATION?

Professors hope that the greater flexibility to craft a plan of study in the concentration will attract bigger numbers.

“We don’t have to be small and elite…we can be ambitious and inclusive,” said Harrington. “There was something in the ’60s and ’70s that History and Science was a bit squirrely and academic in the negative sense of the word.”

She added that while the concentration has always held a special place in the University—as a bridge between the sciences and the humanities—its honors-only status scared away many people. The removal of the thesis requirement creates another option for students, and it also reflects the department’s commitment to enable students to adapt the concentration to their particular needs, professors said.

In fact, Shapin said, some concentrators felt that they weren’t getting as much out of the thesis experience as they would have liked.

“Some students regard the thesis as a crowning achievement and others quite frankly feel like they could benefit from more coursework,” Shapin said.

Harrington added that the department still encourages students to conduct their own research. And whether or not they choose to write a senior thesis, all concentrators still take History of Science 98, a junior year tutorial that culminates in a 25 to 35-page research paper.

But despite the professors’ endorsement of these changes, students harbor mixed reactions. Urvesh M. Shelat ’09, a member of a student-faculty committee that discussed the changes last year, said he is ambivalent about the changes. While he said that the amendments are interesting ideas that will definitely attract more students to the department, Shelat said that it may also change the concentration’s demographic.

“The way that I see it, since the thesis is required and there’s a selection process, the end result is that you get a very highly-motivated group and interesting students,” he said.

Katherine E. O’Donnell ’10 said she shares similar concerns.

As a junior concentrator, she can decide whether or not she wishes to finish the concentration through the old requirements or through one of the new tracks. While she said that she is happy that she now has so many choices within one concentration, she is also upset that now that students can choose not to write theses. The History and Science concentration depends on scholarship, she said, and the thesis is an instrumental part of the learning experience.

“The prestige of the concentration is going to go down,” O’Donnell said. “It was kind of nice being in an honors-only concentration, but I also like the fact that it is going to open up to a lot more people.”

HISTORY IN THE MAKING

Ju said that people will still put considerable thought into their concentration choice, and although students who decide on History and Science will each have their unique reasons, she expects that concentrators will remain just as passionate as they are now.

She does predict, however, that the share of pre-medical students in the concentration will increase.

“Medicine and Society,” one of the two honors-only subfields within the “Science and Society” track, allows students to combine medical school requirements with a more holistic look at health through a social and humanities angle. Shapin said that the creation of this option reflects the trend of senior theses about biomedicine’s role in the modern world.

Also within the “Science and Society” track is the “Mind, Brain, and Behavioral Sciences” subfield, and Harrington said that the department is considering the possibility of developing an “Engineering and Society” choice as well.

Harrington also said that the department is looking to connect the undergraduate research conference with the journal that Ju is trying to restart. She added that the faculty will hold a town hall meeting in early December to discuss more plans for improving the undergraduate curriculum.

While the department wants to expand—“everyone hopes that there will be more concentrators,” Shapin said—the department still wants to preserve its best attributes.

“We’re the kind of concentration that you can drop into your professor’s office hours, and we do want our numbers to grow but not grow to the point that it’s not possible,” Harrington said. “We retain a commitment to the personal touch and to the careful close one-to-one mentoring of students—that commitment remains unbroken.”