CHSTM

HS 20181 [10 CREDITS]/HS 20681 [20 CREDITS]

SCIENCE, MEDIA AND THE PUBLIC

Semester 2, 2008-2009

Lecturer: Dr David A. KirbyCentre for the History of Science, Technology and Medicine

Room 2.26, Simon BuildingTel: 275.5837

Email: david.kirby@manchester.ac.uk

Lectures/Seminars: Simon 3A, Tuesdays 14:00 – 16:00

1

If you enjoy this course and would like to continue with study in this area at postgraduate level, CHSTM runs two Masters degrees and has a strong PhD and MPhil programme.

The Centre for the History of Science, Technology and Medicine (CHSTM), is a major international focus for research in the history of modern science, technology and medicine. It includes the Wellcome Unit for the History of Medicine and the National Archive for the History of Computing.  The interests of Centre staff lie predominantly in 19th and 20th century history, mostly in Britain, Europe and the USA, but also including STM in developing countries. It gained a 5 in the 2001 RAE. The department is small and informal, with a lively postgraduate community, and strong formal and informal seminar programmes.

MSc/Dip History of Science, Technology & MedicineThis innovative MSc course aims to provide a comprehensive historical introduction to 19th - and 20th Century science, technology and medicine in their wider social, economic, cultural and political contexts, including training in historical and social science methods. A variety of option courses are available. Assessment is by essay, examination and a 15,000-word dissertation. (1year full-time, 2-3 years part-time) MSc Research Methods in History of Science, Technology & MedicineThis new MSc course also provides a historical introduction to 19th - and 20th Century science, technology and medicine in their wider social, economic, cultural and political contexts, but places special emphasis on systematic and wide-ranging training in historical and social scientific approaches. A variety of option courses are available. Assessment is by essay, coursework exercises and a 15,000-word dissertation. Students accepted for this degree are able to apply for Economic and Social Research Council studentships. (1year full-time, 2-3 years part-time). Research degrees: PhD/MPhilTwo research degrees are offered: PhD (3 years full-time, 6 years part-time) and MPhil (1 year full-time, 2 years part-time). The MPhil can be regarded as a preparatory degree for the PhD, or as a free-standing research Master's. We expect PhD applicants to have a strong background in HSTM (e.g. a good MSc in the subject, or considerable exposure to HSTM at undergraduate level). Alternatively, students can take one of our taught postgraduate courses before applying to go on to do research. These courses are designed to give you the intellectual grounding and practical skills you need to do original research in HSTM.   Full details of all CHSTM’s activities and courses can be found at www.ls.manchester.ac.uk/chstm.

2

Course Outline*Week Date Lecture Viewing/Reading Seminar

Week 1 Feb. 3 Introduction Thinking Critically About Science, the Media, and the Public

Week 2 Feb. 10 Public Understanding of Science and Policy Making

Greenberg (2001) Participatory Science

Week 3 Feb. 17 Science in Museums and Science CentresGuest Lecture: Dr. Sam Albierti

Friedman (1996) Science Museums/Science Centres

Week 4 Feb. 24 News Content Gregory and Miller (1999)

Analysis of Science in the Press

Week 5 Mar. 3 News Production Gregory and Miller (1999)Dunwoody (2008)

Journalistic Practices Across Media

Week 6 Mar. 10 Media Frames and Media Effects

Discussion of Newscast Project

Week 7 Mar. 17 Popular Science Books and Magazines

Turney (1999) Review of Popular Science Magazines

Week 8 Mar. 24 Science Documentaries Nova “Cancer Warrior”Bennett (1999)Pineda (2004)

Are science documentaries docudramas?

Week 9 Apr. 21 Wildlife and Nature Films

March of the PenguinsBouse (2003)

Natural History Film Renaissance

Week 10 Apr. 28 News Cast Presentations

Presentation De-Briefing

Week 11 May 5 Science in Fiction Fringe “Pilot”Kirby (2008)

Science on Dramatic Television

Week 12 May 12 Reading Week

(*I reserve the right to deviate from this outline at any time.)

3

IntroductionIn 2002 the Geological Society of America sent out a Press Release about geologist Kevin Pope’s challenge to the theory that dust from an asteroid impact caused the extinction of the dinosaurs. News media from the Guardian to Radio 4 to BBC News picked up the story. Other geologists responded to Pope’s claims in newspapers, on the radio and on television. A Time magazine article about this story contained a still from Dinosaur (2000) with the caption, “Even Disney has accepted the asteroid theory.” implying through its caption that a Disney film works as a cultural barometer to the acceptance or rejection of scientific thought. The Time article showcases the uphill battle Pope faces to get his scientific ideas on the map since “even Disney” accepts the asteroid theory. Pope is not only fighting other scientists, but also previous media representations, created with the help of scientists who accept the asteroid impact theory, in the news, on the internet and in movies such as Deep Impact, Armageddon and Dinosaur. Realizing that “even Disney” is treating the asteroid theory as “scientific fact,” Pope reached out to the public and other scientists through alternative communication routes: sending out a press release to promote his findings.

This episode clearly indicates that science communication is a much more complex process than merely publishing in scientific journals and attending scientific meetings. It also raises some fascinating questions about the nature, contexts and goals of science communication. Why was this particular story picked up by the media? Why was a respected scientific institution sending out a Press Release? How does a Disney film relate to scientific research? Introduction to Science Communication examines these types of questions as it explores the structure, meanings, and implications of science communication. Today the sciences are linked to society through many different channels of communication. The public interfaces with science during controversies on science and technology issues that involve scientists as well as journalists, politicians and the citizenry as a whole. Therefore, we will look at the contexts in which science communication occurs including the “public communication of science and technology” (PCST). We investigate the motivations of and constraints on people involved in producing information about science for non-professional audiences while analyzing the functions of public communication of science and technology. We will also try to link knowledge about PCST to research in communication more broadly, in order to develop new knowledge about science communication. To broaden our understandings of PCST we will construct our own public communications about science and technology.

ObjectivesBy the end of this course, you will

understand the communication of science, technology and medicine from a Communication Studies perspective

comprehend Science Communication's place in scientific practice appreciate the purposes and goals behind the communication of science become familiar with the public spaces for science, including the mass media and

science museums increase your media literacy skills develop interpretative and analytical thinking improve your general communication skills

4

TeachingThe module will be taught in 11 weeks in semester 2. Each week there will be a two-hour lecture/seminar. The two hours will be divided between 1) a lecture, 2) a general discussion of the lecture, various media texts, and required readings and/or 3) small group discussions of students’ reports on the required readings/viewings.

The seminar component of the course is crucial to your comprehension of science communication. Therefore, attendance at these seminars is compulsory. This also means that everyone does the reading and everyone comes to class prepared to explore the readings. To "explore the readings" means you've read the required texts, you've thought about them, and you're ready to see where the arguments lead. It also means you've identified inconsistencies or problems with the logic and are ready to criticize the text if you feel it is lacking. You will usually find material that is intellectually challenging: it may require multiple readings to make sense, or it may challenge beliefs you already have (even though you may not have known that you have them). You will be expected to justify your reactions to the texts with specific references to the texts or, when relevant, to other texts. I have included some notes on critical reading at the back of this syllabus. Please read through these tips as they will help you in understanding and analyzing academic texts. They will improve our discussions and will help improve your written responses.

ReadingsEach week has one or two texts which are “required reading.” Required texts are just that, required for that week’s seminar. The “further reading” lists are useful for the discussion at hand and I strongly urge you to examine a few of these before our seminar. The further reading will also be important for your seminar coursework and for your longer essay work.

All of the readings are available through JRUL either online, in the shelves, or through the Short Loans Collection. Talk to a librarian if you need help finding a resource. If you cannot track something down, let me know ASAP. Many of the further readings come from J. Gregory and S. Miller (1999) Science in Public (London: Plenum Trade). This is a useful resource that you may want to own for yourself. You can easily obtain this book through Amazon.co.uk, some other internet book seller.

Plagiarism Plagiarism is a very serious offence, comparable to cheating in exams. It consists of passing off others’ work as though it were your own (e.g. lifting passages – either word-for-word or closely paraphrased – from books, articles, the internet, etc.). Even ‘recycling’ parts of your own work, which has been submitted for assessment at this University or elsewhere, constitutes plagiarism.

It is not difficult for staff, who are all professional academic writers, to recognize instances of plagiarism. Likewise, software for detecting material lifted from the internet is regularly employed in this regard.

It is your responsibility to familiarize yourself with the University’s policy on plagiarism before you prepare and submit any coursework so that you do not inadvertently commit this offence. Please see the University’s guide to avoiding plagiarism:www.humanities.manchester.ac.uk/studyskills/assignments/plagiarism/#top

5

Here, plagiarism is defined, and various misuses of sources are analyzed for their errors. Since academic writing typically draws on the work and specific language of other writers, it is vital that you understand the (often subtle) distinctions between ethical use of others’ texts and unethical appropriations of the work of others. The penalties for plagiarism range from being required to resubmit the piece of work in question (with a maximum possible mark of 40%) for minor instances to expulsion from the University in serious ones.

DisabilityThe University of Manchester is committed to providing all students access to learning in the way most beneficial to them. It is important to tell us about any additional support that you need. If you have a disability, a learning difficulty or any condition that YOU FEEL may affect your work then you might want to tell us about it. Please feel free to approach us to discuss any additional needs that you have. You may wish to email us, or we can arrange a meeting. Any discussion we have will be confidential. If you wish, you can also inform the Disability Support Office. It is based on the lower ground floor of the John Owens Building. You can drop in, but for appointments/enquiries telephone 0161 275 7512, or email disability@manchester.ac.uk.

AssessmentThere are two modes of assessment for this course:

For undergraduates taking the course as a 10-credit module (HS20181), assessment is by means of seminar response assignments, news media project, and an essay

For undergraduates taking this course as a 20-credit module (HS20681), assessment is by means of seminar response assignments, news media project, an essay, an exam, and a longer project.

10 credits (HS20181)(50%) Continuous assessment: News media project and presentation (50%) Exam

20 credits (HS20681) (25%) Continuous assessment: News media project and presentation(25%) Exam(50%) 3000 word research project based on a case study

1. Exam (required for all students): There will be a two hour examination for this class, which will count towards 50% of the overall course mark for 10-credit students and 25% of the overall course mark for 20-credit students. The date, time, and location of the final examination will be announced as soon as it has been determined. The scheduling and administration of the final examination will follow standard University procedures.

The exam will ask you to respond to short answer questions and essay questions which will require you to draw on both the lecture material and the seminar reading. The final examination will not contain multiple choice questions. All examinable material will be covered by the lectures, the seminar discussions, and the required readings. The format for the exam will be reviewed in more detail at the final class meeting on Tuesday, May 5. At that meeting, we will discuss the exam format, review the central themes of the course and discuss study strategies.

6

2. News Cast Presentation (required for all students):Each student will come up with a 120 second radio newscast based on scientific research conducted here at the University of Manchester. You will want to make the newscast “exciting,” but you must also be conscious of oversimplification and misunderstandings. What is the major point of the story? What is exciting about the research? How can you explain the science in such a condensed format? To obtain material for your newscast you will interview a staff member on their latest research findings. More details will be discussed in class in Week 6.

There are four components to your newscast:

Recorded Presentation: You will deliver your newscast in electronic form in Week 10 (April 28) followed by a short Q&A from the audience. The timing of your newscast presentation plays a role in the assessment of this assignment. Therefore, it is your responsibility to make sure the presentation is timed properly at 120 seconds. Information on recording the newscast will be discussed in class in Week 6.

Script: You must turn in a typed version of your script.

Log: You must also keep a “log” of how you dealt with the process of writing the script. You will not be able to convey the entire story for any piece of scientific research within a two minute newscast. Therefore, your log provides us insights into how you condensed your material. The goal of this assignment is not to turn you into a newscaster (although some of you may have these ambitions). Rather, it is to help you better understand journalists’ constraints as they translate science for a public audience. Please approach us if you would like advice.

Academic Justification: You must also write a 1000 word formal academic justification in which you draw on scholarly sources to justify your choices in designing the news script. Scholarly sources can come from lecture, recommended readings, or ones you identify on your own.

You will present your newscast in Week 10. The written component of this project is due that week (script, log, and justification) and no credit will be given if you do not hand it in at your presentation.

Bear in mind that you will have a good deal of other work at this time, so don’t leave your project until the last minute.

We will spend the seminar in Week 6 discussing newscast presentations.

3. Project (HS20681 students only)For those taking the 20-credit version of the course, there is an additional piece of assessment. This will normally be a project, such as a more extended (3,000-3,500-word) essay, critical literature survey or perhaps even designing a piece of popular science communication. This project is a substantial piece of work, and is intended to allow you to explore in depth issues of interest to you, and to allow you more scope for independent research and creative writing.

All students intending to take the 20 credit version of this course must attend a meeting with us in the first few weeks of term. A sign-up sheet will be circulated in Week 2. We

7

will then meet regularly throughout the semester to discuss your progress and work on any emerging issues.

Some topics are suggested below; other topics or forms of assessment may be agreed in consultation with the lecturer. The 3000-word project is to be submitted (two copies with anonymous cover sheet) to be posted in the CHSTM essay box outside room 2.21 in the Simon Building by 3.00pm on Monday 18 May 2009.

In addition, responses are required to be type written. Hand written assignments will not be accepted under any circumstances. PC clusters are available on campus for those who do not own computers.See www.itservices.manchester.ac.uk/pcclusters/pcclusterlocations/ for locations.

HS20681: Final ProjectStudents taking the 20-credit version of this course are required to submit an additional project. This could take the form of an essay or a review essay of books/films/other media. This project is due no later than Monday 18 May at 3pm. Two copies should be handed in to the CHSTM Essay Box (outside 2.21 Simon Building).

The topic of the project can be anything connected with the course, although we need to agree to the topic in writing in advance.

Possible topics might include: Discuss how the success of Walking With Dinosaurs changed the nature of the

wildlife television program especially with regards to “blue chip” versus

“presenter led.”

Explore the representation of science in children’s media (television shows, books,

etc.)

Explore the relationship between politics, science and the media with regards to

nuclear science.

An analysis of the ways in which popular science magazines communicate

science. How do they differ from newspapers or television shows?

How are forensic science programmes, like the Discovery Channel’s “New

Detectives” and “The FBI Files,” construed as “science” programming?

Explore the differences between science on the radio and science on television.

8

Week 1

Lecture: IntroductionFor today’s class we will outline the broad aims and scope of this course.

Required Viewing/ReadingNone

Seminar: Science, the Media, and the PublicIn this seminar we will discuss concepts central to the course. What is science? What is communication? What constitutes the media? Who are the public? While you may think you know the answer to these questions, they are actually highly contentious and debatable.

Further readingChalmers, A. F.(1994) What is this thing called science?: An Assessment of the Nature

and Status of Science and its Methods (Cambridge, MA: Hackett Publishing Company).McQuail, D. (2000) McQuail's Mass Communication Theory (London: Sage

Publications).Logan, R.A. (2001) “Science Mass Communication: Its Conceptual History,” Science

Communication, 23(2): 135-163. (online)Weigold, M.F. (2001) “Communicating Science,” Science Communication, 23(2): 164-

193. (online)

9

Week 2

Lecture: Public Understanding of Science and Policy-MakingScientists and policymakers frequently cite the “public understanding of science,” but rarely ever define the term. Does it refer to science literacy? Appreciation of science? An understanding of science as a process? Or is it public engagement with science? In this class we will discuss the development of the public understanding of science movement including recent criticisms.

Seminar: “Public Understanding of Science” for whom?Several recent critics of the public understanding of science (PUOS) movement have been asking the question: Who benefits from the “public understanding of science?” We will explore that issue in this seminar.

Required readingGreenberg, D. (2001) Science, Money and Politics (Chicago: University of Chicago

Press), Chapter 13, “The Public Understanding of Science,” pp. 205-233.

Seminar Discussion Questions:Address the following questions based on the Greenberg reading:

How does Greenberg define PUOS? What arguments does Greenberg believe that scientists use for promoting the

PUOS? What does Greenberg think are the actual goals of the PUOS movement? Why does he not believe the PUOS is necessary? Which piece of evidence do you feel best supports Greenberg’s argument? Provide one counter argument to Greenberg’s contentions.

Bring your responses to the class for discussion.

Further readingPearson, G. et al. (1997) “Scientists and the Public Understanding of Science,” Public

Understanding of Science, 6: 279-289. (online)Gregory and Miller (1999) Science in Public, Chapter 1.House of Lords (2000) Science and Society (found at www.parliament.the-stationery-

office.co.uk/pa/ld199900/ldselect/ldsctech/38/3801.htm).Miller, S. (2001) “Public Understanding of Science at the Crossroads,” Public

Understanding of Science, 10: 115-120. (online)Nisbet, M. (2005) “The Multiple Meanings of Public Understanding: Why Definitions

Matter to the Communication of Science,” CSICOP, <www.csicop.org/scienceandmedia/definitions>.

U.S. National Science Foundation (2004), Science and Engineering Indicators 2004, Chapter 7 on “Science and Technology: Public Attitudes and Understanding,” at www.nsf.gov/sbe/srs/seind04/c7/c7h.htm

Wynne, B. (1996) “Misunderstood Misunderstandings: Social Identities and Public Uptake of Science,” in Irwin and Wynne, eds. Misunderstanding Science, pp. 19-46.

10

Yearly, S. (2000) “Making Systematic Sense of Public Discontents with Expert Knowledge: Two Analytical Approaches and a Case Study,” Public Understanding of Science, 9: 105-122. (online).

Week 3

Guest Lecturer: Dr Sam Alberti, Manchester Museum and Centre for Museology

Lecture: Science Museums and Science CentresThe twentieth century saw phenomenal change in the museum world, and the way in which science, technology and medicine were displayed. The museum has often been cast as an intermediary between the scientific establishment and the public. In this lecture we’ll examine the role of museums and science centres in science communication, and the different sorts of science, technology and medicine on display.

Required readingFriedman, A.J. (2000) “Museums, Communities, and Contemporary Science,” in

Museums of Modern Science, ed. S. Lindqvist (Canton, MA: Science History Publications), pp. 43-51.

Seminar Discussion Questions What’s the difference between a science centre and a science museum? Do museums present contemporary science, or the history of science? What advantages do exhibitions have over other science communication media

(films, TV, print media)? What disadvantages?

Further readingButler, S.V.F. (1992) Science and Technology Museums (Leicester: Leicester University

Press).

Durant, J., ed. (1992) Museums and the Public Understanding of Science (London: Science Museum in association with the Committee on the Public Understanding of Science).

Lindqvist, S., ed. (2000) Museums of Modern Science (Canton, MA: Science History Publications).

MacDonald, S., ed. (1998) The Politics of Display: Museums, Science, Culture (London and New York: Routledge).

MacDonald, S., ed. (2002) Behind the Scenes at the Science Museum (Oxford: Berg). (eBook)

Pearce, S.M., ed. (1996) Exploring Science in Museums (London: Athlone). Reference book at Kantotowich Library. 069.1/P2

11

Week 4

Lecture: News Content Science communication scholars have devoted enormous attention to the nature and extent of science communication through the news media. Over the next several weeks we will explore the various elements in the news media’s relationship with science including the types of science covered and the quantity of science coverage, the production of news media, the constraints on journalists, the interactions between scientists and journalists, the types of stories chosen, and the structure of science news stories.

Seminar: Analysis of Science in the News We will analyze news articles from a critical perspective. Please bring in three news articles from recent newspapers that deal with science, technology or medicine. Try to find different types of story (different newspapers, different kinds of science etc) and be prepared to critically analyze and discuss these articles in the seminar.

Required readingGregory and Miller (1999) Science in Public, Chapter 5, pp.104-120.

Further readingBell, A. (1994), The Language of News Media (Blackwell) [JRUL 401/B148].Bucchi, Massimiano (2004) Science in Society (London: Routledge), Chapter 7.Gascoigne, T. and J. Metcalfe (1997) “Incentives and Impediments to Scientists

Communicating Through the Media,” Science Communication, 18(3): 265-282. (online)

Hansen, A. (1994) “Journalistic Practices and Science Reporting in the British Press,” Public Understanding of Science, 3: 111-134. (online)

Hornig Priest, Susanna (2001) “Cloning: A Study in News Production,” Public Understanding of Science, 10: 56-69. (online)

Klaidman, Stephen (1991) Health in the Headlines: the Stories Behind the Stories (Oxford: Oxford university Press).

Nelkin, D. (1995) Selling Science: How the Press Covers Science and Technology (NY: W.H. Freeman).

Pellechia, M.G. (1997) “Trends in Science Coverage: A Content Analysis of Three US Newspapers,” Public Understanding of Science, 6: 49 - 68. (online)

Perloff, R. (1998) “Impediments in the Production and Consumption of Science Technical Communication,” Science Communication, 20(1): 81-90. (online)

Peter Peters, H. (1995) “Interaction of Journalists and Scientists,” Media, Culture and Society, 17: 31-48. (online).

Reah, Danuta (1998): The Language of Newspapers (Routledge) [JRUL 070.942/R38].

12

Week 5

Lecture: News ProductionWe continue from last week’s lecture exploring the constraints and journalistic practise impact news production of science.

Required readingGregory and Miller (1999) Science in Public, Chapter 5, pp. 121-131.Dunwoody, S. “Science Journalism,” in Bucchi & Trench (eds) Handbook of Public

Communication of Science and Technology (London: Routledge): 15-26.

Seminar: Journalistic Practices Across MediaJournalistic practices differ across media. In this seminar we will compare coverage of science, technology or medicine across television, radio, newspaper and the internet.

In Week 4 stories will be chosen for this seminar based on the BBC’s website for Science and Nature <www.bbc.co.uk/sn/>.

13

Week 6

Lecture: Media Frames and Media EffectsAlthough the difficulties and limitations of media effects studies are well documented, there are indications that mass media impacts public attitudes towards science, science literacy and personal behavior. In this lecture we will examine agenda setting activities, ‘framing’, and ‘entertainment education’.

Seminar: Genetics in the NewsDiscussion of Radio Newscast project.

Further readingChew, F. et al. (1995) “Sources of Information and Knowledge About Health and

Nutrition: Can Viewing One Television Programme Make a Difference?” Public Understanding of Science, 4: 17-29. (online)

Condit, C. et al. (2001) “An Exploratory Study of the Impact of News Headlines on Genetic Determinism,” Science Communication, 22(4): 379-395. (online)

Conrad, P. (1997) “Public Eyes and Private Genes: Historical Frames, New Constructions, and Social Problems,” Social Problems, 44(2): 139-154. (online)

Joffe, H. and G. Haarhoff (2002) “Representations of Far-Flung Illnesses: The Case of Ebola in Britain,” Social Science & Medicine, 54: 955-969. (online)

Krosnick, Jon et al. (2000) “The Impact of the Fall 1997 Debate about Global Warming on American Public Opinion,” Public Understanding of Science, 9: 239-260. (online)

McComas, Katherine and James Shanahan (1999) “Telling Stories about Global Climate Change: Measuring the Impact of Narratives on Issue Cycles,” Communication Research, 26: 30-49. (online)

McCombs, M. and G. Estrada (1997) "The News Media and the Pictures in Our Heads," in Iyengar and Reeves, eds. Do the Media Govern? (Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage), pp.237-247.

Gerbner, G. (1987) “Science on Television: How it Affects Public Conceptions,” Issues in Science and Technology, 3: 109-115.

Sparks, G., T. Nelson and R. Campbell (1997) “The relationship between exposure to televised messages about paranormal phenomena and paranormal beliefs,” Journal of Broadcasting and Electronic Media, 41: 345-59.

14

Week 7

Lecture: Popular Science Books and Magazines Towards the end of the 18th century up-to-date information on the latest events and the most interesting innovations in all scientific fields of knowledge started circulating around Europe. Since that time there has been steady growth in the number and type of written texts dealing with popularized science which are read for entertainment. Today there are dozens of popular science magazines for readers to choose from including classic magazines such as Popular Science and new, cutting edge magazines like Wired. Likewise, the surprising success of books such as Bill Bryson’s A Short History of Nearly Everything and Dava Sobel’s Longitude have fuelled a renaissance in science publishing. Does this reflect a genuine public interest in science, or efforts by publishers to make science ‘sexy’ and saleable? In this session we think about the roles of popular science books and literature, and ask what sort of impression of science they convey.

Required Viewing/ReadingTurney, J. (1999) “The Word and the World: Engaging with Science in Print,”” in E.

Scanlon et al. Communicating Science: Contexts and Channels (London: Routledge), pp. 120-133.

Seminar: Popular Science MagazinesFind an article from any popular science magazine such as Discover, New Scientist, or Popular Science. For a brief list of magazines see: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Science_and_technology_magazines

Seminar Discussion Questions: How do readers experience popular science magazines as “science?” What kind of

science is this? What styles of discourse-photographic, linguistic etc-are used to construct this

image of science? How are these articles “entertaining”?

Further readingBurnham, J.C. (1987) How Superstition Won and Science Lost: Popularizing Science and

Health in the United States (New Brunswick: Rutgers U. Press).Cassidy, A. (2005) “Popular Evolutionary Psychology in the UK: An Unusual Case of

Science in the Media,” Public Understanding of Science, 14(2): 115-141.Charney, D. (2003) “Lone Geniuses in Popular Science,” Written Communication, 20(3):

215-241Gregory, J. (2003) "The Popularization and Ex-communication of Fred Hoyle's Life from

Space Theory,” Public Understanding of Science, 12: 25-46.Mellor, F. (2003) “Between Fact and Fiction: Demarcating Science from Non-Science in

Popular Physics Books,” Social Studies of Science, 33 (4): 509-538.Paul, D. (2004) “Spreading Chaos: The Role of Popularizations in the Diffusion of Scientific Ideas,” Written Communication, 21(1): 32-68.Turney, J. (2004) “Accounting for Explanation in Popular Science Texts: An Analysis of

Popularized Accounts of Superstring Theory,” Public Understanding of Science, 13(4): 331-346.

15

Week 8

Lecture: Science DocumentariesTelevision is important. We all watch it, some us watch it more than 20 hours a week. It exists in the very heart of contemporary culture, though whether that existence is invigorating or poisonous (or both) is still unknown. In terms of science on television, the science documentary is a significant genre that has included well regarded and popular shows such as Horizon and Nova. According to the U.S. National Science Foundation’s Science and Engineering Indicators, science documentaries are a significant source of science information for many adults. Given the amount of science on television and its role in science education it is important to understand exactly what messages science documentaries send about science, the decisions that go into the construction of these shows, and the possible tradeoffs between entertainment and education.

Seminar: Are science documentaries docudramas?The BBC's director of television, Jana Bennett, lays out a number of characteristics that she believes science documentaries must follow in order to be commercially successful. In this seminar we will analyze a particular science documentary from a critical perspective to look for these characteristics and to determine what they mean for science communication.

Required ViewingNova, “Cancer Warrior” (2001)http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/cancer/program.html

Required ReadingBennett, J. (1999) “Science on Television: A Coming of Age?,” in E. Scanlon et al.

Communicating Science: Contexts and Channels (London: Routledge), pp. 158-173.Pineda, D. (2004) “Editing a Science Documentary: More than Words (Literally!),”

Science Editor, 27(2):47-49.http://www.councilscienceeditors.org/members/securedDocuments/v27n2p047-049.pdf

Discussion QuestionsPlease analyze the narrative structure of “Cancer Warrior.” This involves thinking about the show’s “plot,” its storyline, and its construction. Is there a hero/heroine or a central character? What dramatic elements are included in the show? Essentially I would like you to consider a critical response addressing those elements which make this television programme both “science” and “entertainment.”

Further readingCollins, H.M. (1987) “Certainty and the Public Understanding of Science: Science on

Television,” Social Studies of Science, 17: 689-713.Belling, C. (1998) “Reading the Operation: Television, Realism, and the Possession of

Medical Knowledge,” Literature and Medicine, 17(1): 1-23.W. Göpfert (1996) “Scheduled Science: TV Coverage of Science, Technology, Medicine

and Social Science and Programming Policies in Britain and Germany,” Public Understanding of Science, 5: 361-374.

Myser, C. & D.L. Clark (1998) "Fixing" Katie and Eilish: Medical Documentaries and the Subjection of Conjoined Twins,” Literature and Medicine, 17(1): 45-67.

16

Silverstone, R. (1985) Framing Science: The Making of a BBC Documentary (London: British Film Institute).

Week 9

Lecture: Wildlife and Nature FilmsWildlife and nature films have a long history going back to the earliest days of cinema. The surprising recent success of March of the Penguins in the U.S. speaks to the continuing popularity of these films. In fact, there are now several television channels devoted specifically to this type of programming including “Animal Planet” and the “National Geographic Channel.” The BBC’s Natural History unit in Bristol is also considered one of the most successful of its divisions. In this lecture we will explore the various categories of wildlife film, their differences from other forms of science documentaries, and the impact of reality television on wildlife programming.

Seminar: Natural History Film RenaissanceMarch of the Penguins has a standard structure for a wild film by following a group of Emperor penguins through a single breeding season. Yet, the film was a massive success at the box office and is the second highest grossing documentary in history. In this seminar we will explore this typical wildlife documentary to identify the basic characteristics of the natural history film genre. We will also dissect the film to understand why this particular film became a box office smash.

Required ViewingMarch of the Penguins (2005)

Required readingBousé, D. (2000) “False Intimacy: Close-ups and Viewer Involvement in Wildlife Films,”

Visual Studies, 18(2): 123-132. (online)

Discussion Questions If we consider this to be a standard wildlife film, what can it tell us about wildlife

films in general? What behaviours are considered “essential?” How does this film match with Bousé’s notion of “intimacy”? Why do you think political conservatives embraced this film? Is this film “authentic? Why or why not?

Further readingAdams, T. E. (2005) “Phenomenologically investigating mediated “nature”, The

Qualitative Report, 10(3): 512-532.Bagust, P. (2008) “‘Screen Natures’: Special Effects and Edutainment in ‘New’ Hybrid

Wildlife Documentary,” Continuum, 22(2): 213-226.Bousé, D. (2000) Wildlife Films (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press).Jeffries, M. (2003) “Natural History Versus Science Paradigms,” Science as Culture,

12(4): 527–545.King, M.J. (1996) “The Audience in the Wilderness: The Disney Nature Films,” Journal

of Popular Film and Television, 24(2): 60-68.Mitman, G. (1999) Reel Nature: America’s Romance With Wildlife on Film (Cambridge:

Harvard University Press). Pierson, D. P. (2005) "‘Hey, They're Just Like Us!’ Representations of the Animal World

in the Discovery Channel's Nature Programming,” J. of Popular Culture, 38: 698-712.

17

Scott, K. (2003) “Popularizing Science and Nature Programming,” Journal of Popular Film and Television, 31(1): 29-35.

Week 10 – News Cast Presentations

Week 11

Lecture: Science in FictionScience is frequently incorporated into fictional media, such as science fiction novels, TV shows, fictional films, and comic books. It would be a mistake to dismiss this form of science communication, especially when we consider that more people watch the television show CSI than read all popular science magazines combined. Likewise, science fiction films have routinely topped the worldwide box office the past two decades. We will focus on several elements of science and fictional media including, the role that science plays in fictional narratives, the differences among media texts, and the context by which science is communicated through these texts.

Seminar: Science on Dramatic TelevisionIt is considered by some people to be a “golden age” for science on television. A large percentage of television shows feature science whether they be dramatic (11th Hour), police procedural (CSI), comedic (Big Bang Theory), or science fiction (Battlestar Galactica). While many in the scientific community complain about the “accuracy” of science in fiction, the incorporation of science into fictional products is not a straight forward process. We will examine how science had been integrated into a new television show, Fringe, in order to understand the constraints of using science on television.

Discussion Questions How does this text reflect the cultural meanings of science? Please think about

each individual aspect of science in the text as well as “Science” as a whole. What role does science play in this show? In what ways do you think scientific authenticity has been changed for dramatic

reasons? I what ways do you think scientific authenticity could have been maintained?

Required ViewingFringe, “Pilot”

Required readingKirby, D.A. (2008) “Hollywood Knowledge: Communication Between Scientific and

Entertainment Cultures,” in Cheng et al. Communicating Science in Social Contexts (New York: Springer), pp. 165-180.

Further readingKirby, D.A. (2003) “Scientists on the Set: Science Consultants and Communication of Science

in Visual Fiction,” Public Understanding of Science, 12(3): 261-278. (online)Lederer, S.E. & J. Parascandola (1998) “Screening Syphilis: Dr. Ehrlich’s Magic Bullet

Meets the Public Health Service,” Journal. of the History Of Medicine, 53(4): 345-370.Rabkin, E. (2001) “The Medical Lessons of Science Fiction,” Literature and Medicine,

20(1): 13-25. (online)Haynes, R. (1994) From Faust to Strangelove: Representations of the Scientist in Western

Literature (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press).

18

Week 12 – Reading WeekFaculty of Life Sciences

CRITERIA FOR MARKING THEORY PAPERS

K KnowledgeC CoverageU UnderstandingA AwarenessR Reading

Percentage Marks Criteria100 20/ Outstanding answer with high degree of

originality/flair/insight. Possibly considered “perfect” because a better answer could not be given even by the examiner.

K Contains all of the relevant information with no errors or only insignificant errors

C Addresses all aspects of the subject

U Displays an excellent understanding of the subject within a wider context

A Gives extensive evidence of critical awareness and independent thinking

R Has read extensively beyond the essential material

9519 Outstanding answer with clear evidence of

originality/flair/insight.90 18

85 17 Excellent answer, with evidence of supplementary reading and some originality /insight in its approach

K Contains all of the relevant information with no or very few minor errors and no major errors

C Addresses all aspects of the subject

U Displays a good understanding of the subject within a wider context

A Contains evidence of critical awareness and independent thinking

R Has read beyond the essential material

80 16 Very good answer, well presented with clear, logical arguments, and conveying a clear depth of understanding or breadth of coverage. Evidence of some original thought.

7515

Generally accurate, organised and well-informed, logical and thorough. Definite indication of extra study, attempts to analyse70 14

65 13 Reasonably comprehensive – covering most important points , even if limited to lecture material. Possibly some minor omissions

Iii/IIii borderline

K Contains most of the relevant information but may include some minor errors though no major ones

C Addresses all aspects of the subject but might not give adequate coverage to all aspects

U Displays an understanding of the subject within a wider context but this might not be substantial

A Contains some evidence of critical awareness and independent thinking but depends mainly on factual information

60 12

19

R Has read and understood at least some of the essential material

55 11 Adequate answer, but limited to lecture material, with some minor errors or omissions. Little or no cross referencing between lectures.

K Contains the central core of essential information but may include some minor errors and a few major errors

C Does not address all aspects of the subject and might not give adequate coverage to the aspects that are addressed

U Has some understanding of the subject within a wider context but this might be limited

A Little evidence of critical awareness and independent thinking

R Might have read the essential material, but probably with limited understanding

50 10

45 9 Incomplete answer. Information is Sparse, possibly poorly organised with some or many inaccuracies.

K Contains only a limited amount of the relevant information and may include minor and major errors

C Addresses some aspects of the subject but coverage of these aspects is incomplete

U Has only a limited understanding of the subject within a wider context

A Very little, if any, evidence of critical awareness and independent thinking

R No evidence of having read the essential material

40 8 Pass/compensatable fail borderline. This mark is the bare minimum required for a clear pass and represents attainment of the minimal standard requisite with intended learning objectives

35 7 Deficient answer. Many omissions. Some relevant facts and general approach sensible.

K Contains very little relevant information, though some is present, and may include minor and major errors

C Addresses a few aspects of the subject but coverage is very incomplete

U Has little or no understanding of the subject within a wider context

A No evidence of critical awareness and independent thinking

R No evidence of having read the essential material

30 6 Compensatable fail/outright fail borderline. Deficient answer. Many omissions. Some relevant facts and general approach sensible. This answer is barely enough to achieve above an outright fail having barely achieved some of the intended learning objectives

25 5 Answer largely irrelevant, but displays some understanding of the general subject

K Contains very little relevant information and what is present is incomplete and probably out of context, and there may be many minor and major errors

20 4

20

Answer largely irrelevant, the information may be poorly structured, confused with many errors

C Coverage is sketchy and unfocussed

U Has no understanding of the topic within a wider context

A No evidence of critical awareness and independent thinking

R No evidence of having read anything

15 3

102

Answer mostly irrelevant, a very poor answer which may only vaguely address one aspect of the question.

K Just a few relevant words and phrases and there may be many minor and major errors

C Coverage is wholly inadequate

U Has no context

A Totally lacking in critical awareness and independent thinking

R No evidence of having read anything

5 1 Hardly any answer – maybe one or 2 key words implying the most basic awareness of the subject

0 No answer, or answer totally irrelevant/incorrect. (including cases where the question has been mis-read).

CHSTM Resit Policy

(This policy applies only to those students who have failed the entire course.)a) If the student failed just the exam, a resit exam is set.

b) If the student failed because coursework was of poor quality, s/he must resubmit coursework in August. Where the original coursework submitted was an essay, the resit essay should be on a new topic - specified by the lecturer - so that the student is not effectively given two goes at the same original topic. Where other kinds of coursework were failed, lecturers should use their discretion in setting the resit-task.

The deadline for resubmitted coursework will be the first day of the August resit-period in order that resit marks can be sent to home-departments in time for their early Sept. examiners meetings.

If the student failed because coursework was not submitted by the final deadline (generally the date of the exam), the student must resubmit coursework in August (as per previous paragraph), but a penalty will be levied (on the grounds that the indolent should pay a price), namely: maximum mark achievable is 40%.

c) If the student failed both the exam and coursework, s/he must sit the resit exam and submit new coursework.

21

Some Notes on Critical Reading of Academic Texts

Critical writing depends on critical reading. Most of the papers you write will involve reflection on academic texts - the thinking and research that has already been done on your subject. In order to write your own analysis of this subject, you will need to do careful critical reading of sources and to use them critically to make your own argument. The judgments and interpretations you make of the texts you read are the first steps towards formulating your own approach.

Critical Reading: What is It?

To read critically is to make judgements about how a text is argued. This is a highly reflective skill requiring you to "stand back" and gain some distance from the text you are reading. (You might have to read a text through once to get a basic grasp of content before you launch into an intensive critical reading.) THE KEY IS THIS:

* don't read looking only or primarily for information* do read looking for ways of thinking about the subject matter

When you are reading, highlighting, or taking notes, avoid extracting and compiling lists of evidence, lists of facts and examples. Avoid approaching a text by asking "What information can I get out of it?" Rather ask "How does this text work? How is it argued? How is the evidence (the facts, examples, etc.) used and interpreted? How does the text reach its conclusions?

How Do I Read Looking for Ways of Thinking?

1. First determine the central claims or purpose of the text (its thesis). A critical reading attempts to assess how these central claims are developed or argued.2. Begin to make some judgements about context . What audience is the text written for? Who is it in dialogue with? (This will probably be other scholars or authors with differing viewpoints.) In what historical context is it written? All these matters of context can contribute to your assessment of what is going on in a text.3. Distinguish the kinds of reasoning the text employs. What concepts are defined and used? Does the text appeal to a theory or theories? Is any specific methodology laid out? If there is an appeal to a particular concept, theory, or method, how is that concept, theory, or method then used to organize and interpret the data? You might also examine how the text is organized: how has the author analyzed (broken down) the material?

22

4. Examine the evidence (the supporting facts, examples, etc) the text employs. Supporting evidence is indispensable to an argument. Having worked through Steps 1-3, you are now in a position to grasp how the evidence is used to develop the argument and its controlling claims and concepts. Steps 1-3 allow you to see evidence in its context. Consider the kinds of evidence that are used. What counts as evidence in this argument? Is the evidence statistical? literary? historical? etc. From what sources is the evidence taken? Are these sources primary or secondary?5. Critical reading may involve evaluation. Your reading of a text is already critical if it accounts for and makes a series of judgments about how a text is argued. However, some essays may also require you to assess the strengths and weaknesses of an argument. If the argument is strong, why? Could it be better or differently supported? Are there gaps, leaps, or inconsistencies in the argument? Is the method of analysis problematic? Could the evidence be interpreted differently? Are the conclusions warranted by the evidence presented? What are the unargued assumptions? Are they problematic? What might an opposing argument be?

Some Practical Tips

1. Critical reading occurs after some preliminary processes of reading. Begin by skimming research materials, especially introductions and conclusions, in order to strategically choose where to focus your critical efforts.2. When highlighting a text or taking notes from it, teach yourself to highlight argument: those places in a text where an author explains her analytical moves, the concepts she uses, how she uses them, how she arrives at conclusions. Don't let yourself foreground and isolate facts and examples, no matter how interesting they may be. First, look for the large patterns that give purpose, order, and meaning to those examples. The opening sentences of paragraphs can be important to this task.

3. When you begin to think about how you might use a portion of a text in the argument you are forging in your own paper, try to remain aware of how this portion fits into the whole argument from which it is taken. Paying attention to context is a fundamental critical move.

4. When you quote directly from a source, use the quotation critically. This means that you should not substitute the quotation for your own articulation of a point. Rather, introduce the quotation by laying out the judgments you are making about it, and the reasons why you are using it. Often a quotation is followed by some further analysis.

23