For Women Scientists on Wikipedia, the Devil’s in the Details

In 2011, the New York Times published a story on the gender gap on Wikipedia. A survey indicated that something like 87% of Wikipedia editors were men, despite the fact that men and women read Wikipedia in relatively equal numbers. Some in the sciences raised concerns that women scientists were being neglected on the website. The articles of women scientists were less substantial, less meticulously-cited, and failed to meet Wikipedia’s good article criteria. Despite recent efforts like the 2013 Ada Lovelace Edit-a-thon and the Royal Society Edit-a-thon, the Wikipedia articles of female scientists still bear the marks of this gender gap. Even as larger inequalities are slowly corrected, seemingly-inconsequential details reveal a troublingly gendered treatment of women scientists on Wikipedia.

Take, for example, the case of Rosalind Franklin. Her early and mostly-unacknowledged contributions to the discovery of the double-helix structure of DNA helped James Watson and Francis Crick create their DNA model, an achievement that won the two men a Nobel Prize in 1962. In the scientific community Franklin’s reputation has been (mostly) rehabilitated to correct this slight, and her Wikipedia entry addresses this controversy in a reasonably frank and detailed way. However, a look at Franklin’s “Talk” page hints at less obvious problems. In October of 2013, a user noted that “the article focuses more on her family and activities than on Franklin’s life itself. If you compare this to someone like Francis Crick…Franklin’s early life [section] is severely lacking in information about her.” And it’s true—the section of Franklin’s article on her early life and education is twelve sentences long, fewer than half of which are about Franklin herself. Mostly the reader learns that her father taught at the Working Man’s College, her uncle held a political position in the British Mandate of Palestine, and another uncle literally whipped Winston Churchill. While the latter is an interesting tidbit, it doesn’t tell us much about Franklin, and defining her by the achievements of her male relatives is a poor start to any description of Franklin’s life and work.

I’d also suggest that the names we use to talk about these women matter just as much as some of the big picture issues of Wikipedia editing. In July of 2013, an anonymous user on Franklin’s “Talk” page pointed out that in reference to the TV movie Life Story, the article referred to male characters by their first and last name (James Watson, Francis Crick, etc.) but called Franklin “Rosalind.” The user says, “The use of a first name alone to refer to a historical figure should be reserved for situations where that is necessary or appropriate.” In this case, use of their full names conferred respect and authority to the male scientists, and the casual familiarity of using just Franklin’s first name subtly dismantled her scientific credibility. Similar issues appear on the Wikipedia page history of Esther Lederberg, a microbiologist who discovered specialized transduction in the virus lambda phage and developed laboratory procedures like replica plating that changed the practice of genetics. In 2008, user DGG pointed out, “When not using the full name in a formal context, her name… is Lederberg, or E. Lederberg. It is not Esther, which would strike many people as sexist condescension.” Like Franklin, Lederberg’s authority was undercut by the use of her first name only. You wouldn’t catch anyone referring to Francis Crick as “Francis” in his Wikipedia article.

Lederberg’s Wikipedia article also contains some out-of-place trivialities that, combined with the less-than-robust nature of the rest of the entry, encourage the reader to take her less seriously as a scientist. The section “Other interests” discusses Lederberg’s love of Gilbert & Sullivan and her dislike of Michael Crichton’s pop-science fiction. The information is cited and probably true, but what relevance does it have for Lederberg’s career and legacy? The article for Lederberg’s husband and fellow scientist Joshua Lederberg contains no such fluff—it is carefully curated and clear. I’m not saying we should forget that women scientists were people with interests, but nobody is talking about how Niels Bohr liked to dance the foxtrot. The inclusion of such information in Lederberg’s Wikipedia article trivializes her work.

In the larger conversation about gender bias in Wikipedia articles, these issues—first names, Gilbert & Sullivan, an uncle who beat up Winston Churchill—may seem like nit-picks. Really, they’re emblematic of how deep the gender gap runs, how pervasive our use of gendered words and conventions is, and how elusive Wikipedia’s standard of neutral POV continues to be when it comes to the entries of women scientists.

Women? What Women? I Don’t See Any Women…

About five years ago, the topic of women in science (or rather the lack of women in science) came up in a conversation I was part of. At that, I was perplexed because I had just spent thirty-eight years working in medical laboratory science, a line of scientific work populated overwhelmingly by women. This year, I am in a class on the History of Science, Technology, and Medicine, where I learned of an effort underway to write women into Wikipedia articles that are authored overwhelming by men.

(see http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/WikiWomen’s_Collaborative)

In medical practice, the stuff that comes out of patients (blood, urine, sputum…keep on naming familiar excreta) is usually analyzed by medical laboratory scientists (MLS) and according to the U.S. Department of Labor, in 2013 72.9% of these professionals were women. In 2007, I researched a presentation for National Medical Laboratory Professionals Week at the Indiana Medical History Museum and I learned that women performed this kind of work for about one hundred years. The exact moment in time was not captured, but apparently a doctor somewhere threw up his hands (yes, I said his) and wailed something like “I don’t have time to do one more stinking urinalysis!” So he grabbed the little office girl who swept the floors, filed papers, and washed the glass urine collection bottles and said, “Honey, let me show you what white blood cells in urine look like.” This was repeated independently in other offices around the U.S. At least a few of the fair maids did not squeal and run away, and voila! a new occupation was born. The doctors found that the women possessed qualities that well suited them for laboratory work. They were neat, organized, dexterous, and were very good at doing dishes. In about ten years the discipline, then called medical technology, grew and educational requirements were placed around the participants. Today, these applied scientists are educated in most of the same courses as a pre-med curricula plus a year-long rigorous professional training program.

So why does the world not know about this cache of woman in science? Perhaps for the first eighty years, when labs were housed primarily in basements or out of the way hospital halls, rare encounters might explain it. But now? In the great Information Age? Surely, the truth is being told. The Sasquatches of health care really do exist and are typically female. So I turned to Wikipedia, the source of information so many consult today. I typed in clinical laboratory scientists and was directed to medical laboratory scientists. OK…same difference. All textual information was correct, to my knowledge, but something was strangely missing. Women.

I really didn’t expect to see the same history of the medical laboratory profession that I just described. On the other hand, I was not prepared for the photos. The site contained four photographs of medical laboratory scientists in their “work environment.” Three of the four images were of males. The last photo at the bottom of the page is of a woman in Russia in a scary looking lab with a mason jars and papers saved on spike nails. Is it crazy to expect visuals to reflect the true demographics of a group? Furthermore, two of the men are not pictured in the most typical MLS work environment (hospital or other diagnostic laboratories). One is captioned that he works in a research lab, and the third, is not captioned, but a tell-tale printout from a 1990s Hewlett-Packard Mass Spectrometer precariously perched on a ledge tells me that he is not in a typical MLS’s lab.

In fairness, I think the article’s author tried to give it a global perspective and I’m looking at just my corner of the world. But still: if someone looks at this site to construct a history of MLS, the evidence will mislead and its historically female composition will be lost. This is agnotology—how we don’t know what we don’t know. Perhaps it’s due to a persistent clinging to the History of Wonderful Important People. There aren’t many Wonderful Important People in MLS who make world-changing discoveries. But they make discoveries on individual levels. About 60-70% of treatment decisions made by your physician are based on the results of laboratory tests. Most of those results were generated by women working in an area of applied science who, as an aggregate, contribute to health care in abundantly valuable ways.

Digitally Undecided: Casual Advice on the Right Timeline Tool for You

A reader asks . . .

DEAR ADAM: This spring I’ve really enjoyed the History of Science and Technology after 1750 course. We have a project coming up, and I’m not sure where to start. The assignment is to evaluate tools for creating web-based timelines. The professor is digitally savvy, and I’m afraid I won’t select the best tool for the task. Can you please help? –DIGITALLY UNDECIDED

Dear Digitally Undecided: I understand your predicament. Don’t fret. You’re well on your way, even if you don’t realize it yet. You have noted the importance of selecting the right tool for the task. All digital timelines are not created equal. Let’s see if I can clear up the confusion by ranking the top two in each category among the five most common timeline tools. I’ll rank via cost, aesthetics, and functionality.

But before we get to specifics here’s what the top timeline tools are up to, in summary.

TIKI TOKI.

Intuitive, interactive, cross-platform integration, and boy do the timelines look great! Tiki-toki timelines offer vast customization options and the power to import photos and video from Flickr, YouTube, and Vimeo. Get out the pocket book if you want to embed these beauties on your personal site.

TIMELINEJS.

The open source revolution is in full swing, and it’s not just for Linux users anymore! (Can anyone tell me what Linux is?) TimelineJS has a lot going for it because you only need a little to get it going: totally free service that integrates seamlessly with Google Drive. Great import functionality with services such as: Twitter, Flickr, Google Maps, YouTube, Vimeo, Vine, Dailymotion, Wikipedia, and SoundCloud. The only hang up is the aesthetic: these timelines, though easily embeddable, are a little clunky.

TIMEGLIDER.

Grad students, data analysts, and serious history buffs, this tool is for you. Timeglider is text and data driven like no other. The views are a little outmoded, so you won’t get the sex appeal of Tiki-Toki. No matter: a lot of you will find the functionality wins out over aesthetics, any day. Timeglider allows you to collaborate online, tag your timelines and events, and then search those tags in endless combinations. You can even present two or more timelines together. Pocket protectors, unite!

TIMETOAST.

You can’t be everything to all people, but Timetoast comes pretty close. The aesthetics aren’t far behind Tiki-Toki, the functionality allows for online collaboration, timelines can be embedded, and a handy “Timeline”-“Text” toggle provides two layout choices. There doesn’t seem to be much in the way of user support, though.

DIPTIY.

Dipity, as far as I can tell derives its name from Serendipity (and who doesn’t love John Cusack!?) If you’re familiar with the film that’s a nice metaphor for what this timeline tool is up to: presenting the chronology of events just right, and . . . kismet! Dipity organizes web content across hot topics and displays these trends for users in a highly functional interface. Several views are available: timeline, flipbook, list, and map, so users can select the best presentation for whatever it is they are presenting (or viewing). Plus the tool is $FREE. Bonus.

**

The RANKINGS (drum roll please)

COST. because money doesn’t grow on trees, and you’re a poor college student

The winner is: TimelineJS for its open source approach, incredible cross-platform functionality, and ease of use

Honorable mention to Dipity for its cool functionality and bringing a social media flare to timeline tools

AESTHETIC. beauty isn’t just in the eye of the beholder

The winner is: Tiki-Toki. No big surprise here, if you’ve been reading along at home. These timelines are highly customizable, interactive, intuitive, and geourgeous.

Honorable mention to Timetoast for its interactive layout and two-view toggle: timeline and text

FUNCTIONALITY. can I get a hallelujah, data geeks

The winner is: Timeglider for giving you a million and one ways to present, search, and collaborate on your individual or group timelines

Another honorable mention to Dipity for the flexibility in layout ability to search by “hot topic”

**

Overall, I put Tiki-Toki and Timeglider in the head-to-head, winner takes all round. And guess what? It may be a draw. Choosing among these tools one must ask herself, what story do I want to tell? who’s my audience? how invested are they in the information? If you have an engaged cohort of hardcore historians: Timeglider is the way to go. On the other hand if you’re looking to capture the attention of newly interested parties, and if first impressions are everything: Tiki-Toki is your ticket to group engagement.

Happy timelining, folks. Don’t forget to create an entry on your timeline for the date you read this blog and made your choice!

Choosing Timeline Software

A timeline is a great way to present history and arguably one of the best all-around ways to learn history. The IUPUI Bepko Learning Center website reminds us that students’ learning styles vary comprised of visual, auditory, and kinesthetic preferences. A timeline created with well-chosen interactive software that incorporates several different elements can cater to different learning styles. The result may boost interest and understanding of historic themes.

Using a timeline can also communicate far more than dates of significant events. Timelines that mark the duration and location of events allow students to understand how historical eras emerge and how they influence history down the line (see “Time and Chronology” article in Teaching History. Jun 2012, Issue 147, p26-34. 9p.).

For this class, Professor Kelly proposed five online timeline options with the aim that one option would receive an imprimatur for use in a whole-class project. I will base my judgment of the five nominees on how well each one satisfies the needs of learners, as stated above, and the practical needs of this class project. Just to simplify matters, let’s just say that the mere exercise of creating a timeline will meet the goal for kinesthetic learners.

TimeToast clock

This is an extremely easy to use format without many bells and whistles. The expanding balloon for text keeps the appearance tidy. A slide bar allows the user to spread out or compress the timeline. An interesting example shows “legacy” events that happened after the last entry in a biographical timeline. One can link to other website, but embedding video is not an option. Each entry provides only one layer of information.

http://www.timetoast.com/timelines/geologic-timescale-98266d0e-6b3d-4537-b17f-9f2191d5cfba

 

Timeglider  http://timeglider.com/

An appealing feature of this timeline is the use of symbols and varying size of text to elucidate categories of events and their relative importance. This eliminated the need for multiple timelines for complex projects and sends a big visual shout out for critical incidents. Changing the importance/size of an event is easy: Click on the icon, and a slider appears that lets you enlarge or shrink the event. A legend sits in the same window that allows the user to easily filter types of information. This would be a good option for visual learners

Dipity  http://www.dipity.com/

Narrowing down to the last two candidates, the decisions become harder. Diptiy truly seems easy to use and add entries. It also comes with an endorsement of sorts from http://www.teachinghisotry.org, a service of George Mason University. Users can change the scope of the zoom depending on the chronology to be followed Information can be tagged and users can be granted permission for comments. The timeline builder can capture content from blog postings, photos on Flickr and YouTube videos. This product also grabs entries from the internet to form a timeline. While this seems like an excellent option, my heart is with the next candidate.

Timeline JS  http://timeline.knightlab.com/

This timeline also allows introduction of content from several internet sources with built-in functionality, meaning that on supported sites like Wikipedia, the entry is boiled down to point-and-click. While it doesn’t have the stunning look and the 3d excitement of Tiki-Toki, the roll bar across the top of the webpage allows image input for interest. The bar also adds another approach to organization. The Timeline JS site promises simple data entry via a spreadsheet, but that is a bit of a bait-and-switch.When trying the example, there was more fiddling with html than I am comfortable with. It has such a clean look and I would like to choose it, but the complex building instructions scare me way.

Tiki Toki   http://www.tiki-toki.com/

This seems to be the Cadillac of timeline software. It certainly presents the most visual pop compared to the others (meaning you have the ability to create the visual pop). The 3D feature takes you down an Appian Way of events with points of history falling behind you on your journey. It promises the ability to embed information effortlessly in your own website and to link to information on other websites and servers. I tried it and it actually works. This option will be good learning tool for this class.

Click here to see TikiToki in Action

Timeline Tools for Historians: A Review

There are a number of online timeline tools available, but only a few have features that make them both engaging and sophisticated enough for historical research. I looked at the following timeline tools: Tiki-Toki, TimelineJS, Timeglider, TimeToast, and Dipity. The three features that stood out the most to me as useful for historians are the following: ability to shift scale, map integration, and ability to cover multiple themes.

The first thing that I noticed when comparing these timeline interfaces was shifting of scale. What I mean by that is you can shift the timescale to span years, months, days, or even hours within a day. Timeglider allows you to shift the timescale to individual days, but its price makes it unattractive. Timeglider also includes a legend that divides topics by theme using symbols similar to a map legend. However, Timeglider does not offer map integration. Dipity manages to use scale in the best way out of all of the timeline tools I investigated. The Dipity timeline Norway Attacks: A Timeline of Tragedy allows you to shift the time scale all the way down to individual hours, which is essential for exploring events like the 2011 Oslo terrorist attacks or natural disasters.

Dipity also manages to include map integration, but the Norway timeline mentioned above only includes a few points on the map and none of them link to an actual story even though the points on the map are clearly newspaper headlines. Dipity’s main weak point is that it does not offer any way to categorize events on a timeline like Timeglider’s legend or Tiki-Toki’s “subtimeline” features. In fact, the cosmetic appearance of the timeline appears to be the only type of “theme” that you can change with Dipity.

Tiki-Toki is certainly the prettiest of the timeline programs I looked at. The best part about Tiki-Toki is the ability to cover multiple themes in “subtimelines” that are much easier to read than the map legend-style symbols from Timeglider. This ability to categorize makes Tiki-Toki especially useful for historians. Tiki-Toki also allows you to shift the timescale down to the day level, but Timeglider and Dipity do it much better. It also suffers from a lack of map integration. The program also includes Flickr and YouTube integration. Since Flickr and YouTube are part of the Google universe, integrating Tiki-Toki with Google Maps is likely feasible. One of the most interesting aspects of Tiki-Toki is the ability to shift your timelines into a 3D atmosphere, but this is not nearly as valuable as map integration would be. Tiki-Toki also includes a group edit functionality for teachers or other paid memberships.

TimeToast was easily the least appealing out of the group of timeline tools. It provides a basic linear timeline, no map integration, and just navigating sample timelines proved to be a chore due to site glitches and a lack of a clear user interface. Its FAQ is pretty sparse compared to other timeline tools.

TimelineJS appears to be the most useful out of all of the timeline tools covered. It includes tags for categorization, map integration, and allows you to shift the scale down to the hour and minute of a specific event if desired, but the scale itself is not as detailed as Dipity’s. TimelineJS is also integrated with GoogleDocs, YouTube, Flickr, SoundCloud, and a number of other websites. This makes it ideal if you want to use multiple forms of media in your timeline. The largest downside of TimelineJS is that it is optimized for 20-30 entries, which seems like a small number for a history timeline. TimelineJS also limits you to six categories, which further limits historical explanation.  Overall, TimelineJS is my favorite of the five timeline tools I explored due to it having map integration as well as the ability to categorize and shift scale, but Tiki-Toki and Dipity also look useful, although in a more limited way. But for the purposes of a class, I would choose TimelineJS or Tiki-Toki due to the ability to categorize themes in a way that remains clearer to the reader than the symbols used by Timeglider.

Historical Storytelling with Digital Timeline Tools

Screenshot of the "Tower of London" timeline from TikiToki. Notice the palimpsest--three timelines layered on top of each other.

Screenshot of the “Tower of London” timeline from TikiToki. Notice the palimpsest–three timelines layered on top of each other.

I remember the timelines from my high school history textbooks well, but not fondly—a march of names and dates through time, not especially welcoming to interpretation or creativity. The good news is that historians are in the position to profit from a wealth of new digital timeline technology.  In this post I will take a look at five digital timeline tools, the features they provide, and the possibilities for conveying historical information. Without sacrificing clarity or ease of use, the best timeline tools encourage the reader to really interact with history: to access primary source documents, videos, and images and think analytically about historical patterns and relationships.

If history is, in its most basic form, telling stories about the past, timelines resemble a children’s picture book. There’s room for text, but we can probably assume that the reader will be unwilling to invest a significant amount of time reading an essay on every entry. With that in mind, digital timelines should find other ways to tell their stories. Educational videos, images, or primary source excerpts are great ways to convey information and encourage active engagement with the material while providing visual interest.  Tiki-Toki, a highly customizable timeline tool, features photo, audio, and video embedding. Timeline JS places a similar importance on the integration of multimedia, also providing the means to embed social media and maps; however, it depends so heavily on these features that space for text is limited. Dipity allows for embedded photographs, video, and maps, but its visual presentation of these features is comparatively lacking. Timeglider and Timetoast are the most limiting. Timeglider allows for images but not video, and the images are confusingly disassociated from the entries they represent. TimeToast appears to have space for only one photo per timeline entry.  

One important task of the historian is to identify patterns in historical stories and articulate them to readers; these patterns impart meaning and lead readers beyond the basic “who, what, when, where” questions to consider why and how historical change occurs. Some digital timelines have a feature that will help us do just that: tagging.  We can tag individual entries in a timeline the way we might tag a post in a blog. This makes the entries sortable or identifiable according to the themes they speak to. Of these five timeline tools, only Tiki-Toki and Timeglider provide for such categorization.  In Tiki-Toki, events can be color-coded by theme, allowing the reader to visually identify patterns and make connections while moving through time.  Creators can build multiple timelines and lay them on top of one another like a palimpsest, which allows the reader to compare events happening at the same time and consider the relationship between them. Timeglider’s tagging system theoretically performs a similar function, but unfortunately it is much less user-friendly; its pop-up legend for identifying these tags clutters the screen. Timeline JS, TimeToast, and Dipity have no tagging functionality.

Finally, usability and visual appeal are concerns that we can’t discount. Timeline tools that are frustrating to work or look sloppy will discourage use. Timeline JS is very attractive and user-friendly. Its design is crisp and minimalist, but its storytelling capacity is limited; per the designers’ admission, it works best with chronological stories and discourages jumping around. Tiki-Toki is more customizable, giving the creators a great deal of control over the look and feel of the timeline, and also encourages more non-chronological movement; however, it can look cluttered and messy if not carefully curated. It is the only timeline tool to feature 3D viewing capability, which doesn’t add enormously to the content but does give the reader an immersive experience. Dipity and Timeglider both utilize a zoom function to let the reader focus in on smaller stretches of time or pull out again to see where events fall on the “big picture.” While useful in theory, this feature is frustrating to use because it is tricky to zoom to the appropriate scale. TimeToast allows the user to toggle between the timeline and text view for a more traditional reading experience, but otherwise offers little in the way of interesting functionality or visual appeal.

Digital timeline tools are a significant improvement over their paper-and-ink predecessors because, when done right, they encourage readers to really engage with historical stories. They morph from basic chronological tools to interpretive ones. In my opinion, Tiki-Toki and Timeline JS are by far the best timeline tools for historians. Users who would like to create a simple, functional, and attractive timeline with integrated images and video can do no better than Timeline JS.  However, users looking to create a more complex timeline or layer several timelines on top of one another to encourage pattern-recognition and interpretive thinking should consider Tiki-Toki.

Indiana Rivers: Water Access, Water Quality, & Water’s Future

Your first opportunity for extra credit will be on Friday, February 28.

On February 28, 2014 the IU McKinney School of Law, Environment, Energy, & Natural Resources Symposium will host the seventh annual environmental law symposium hosted byt the IU Environmental Law Society, Environmental Law Forum and Environmnetal Law Alumni. This year’s topic is: Indiana Rivers: Water Access, Water Quality, & Water’s Future.

More information is available here: http://mckinneylaw.iu.edu/events/current.cfm?eid=190

If you attend, all day, you will receive 1.5 points on your final grade.  If you complete the written assignment for extra credit projects, you will receive another 1.5 points.

History, Historiography, and Methodology

Unfortunately, many history departments across the United States no longer offer undergraduate courses devoted to historiography (if they ever did).  This means that many students never get a comprehensive introduction to the discipline, its history, and its methodologies.  That said, the IUPUI History Department requires that all students take H217, a course focused on these topics.

In addition to the material covered in H217, there are also a number of excellent texts that serve as handy guides to the history of the discipline, its methodologies and theories.  I recommend familiarizing yourself with the following introductions.

  • Appleby, Joyce Oldham, Lynn Hunt, and Margaret C Jacob. Telling the Truth About History. New York: Norton, 1994.
  • Breisach, Ernst. Historiography: Ancient, Medieval, & Modern. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2007.
  • Green, Anna, and Kathleen Troup. The Houses of History: a Critical Reader in Twentieth-century History and Theory. New York: New York University Press, 1999.
  • Howell, Martha C, and Walter Prevenier. From Reliable Sources: An Introduction to Historical Methods. Ithaca, N.Y.: Cornell University Press, 2001.
  • Novick, Peter. That Noble Dream: The “Objectivity Question” and the American Historical Profession. Cambridge University Press, 1988.
  • Smith, Linda Tuhiwai. Decolonizing Methodologies. London: Zed, 2012.

Required Texts for H374/546: History of Science & Technology II (31774/14126)

Undergraduate Required Texts 

Required for all undergraduates

  • Bowler, Peter J., and Iwan Rhys Morus. 2005. Making Modern Science: a Historical Survey. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. 0226068617
  • Paul, Dr Richard, and Dr Linda Elder. 2009. Miniature Guide to Critical Thinking Concepts and Tools. 6th ed.  edition. Foundation for Critical Thinking. ASIN: B005VTVDX8
  • Paul, Richard, and Linda Elder. 2005. The Miniature Guide to The Art of Asking Essential Questions. Foundation for Critical Thinking. 0944583164
  • Turabian, Kate Larimore. 2013. A Manual for Writers of Research Papers, Theses, and Dissertations: Chicago Style for Students and Researchers. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. 0226816389

You should choose one of the following two books for your book review

  • Rebecca Skloot. 2011. The Immortal Life of Henrietta Lacks. Broadway Books. 9781400052189
  • Oreskes, Naomi, and Erik M. Conway. 2010. Merchants of Doubt: How a Handful of Scientists Obscured the Truth on Issues from Tobacco Smoke to Global Warming. New York: Bloomsbury Press. 1608193942

Graduate Required Texts

Required for all graduate students

  • Bowler, Peter J., and Iwan Rhys Morus. 2005. Making Modern Science: a Historical Survey. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. 0226068617
  • Golinski, Jan. 2005. Making Natural Knowledge: Constructivism and the History of Science. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. 0226302318
  • McNeill, J. 2010. Mosquito Empires: Ecology and War in the Greater Caribbean, 1620-1914. Cambridge University Press. 9780521459105
  • Paul, Dr Richard, and Dr Linda Elder. 2009. Miniature Guide to Critical Thinking Concepts and Tools. 6th ed.  edition. Foundation for Critical Thinking. ASIN: B005VTVDX8
  • Paul, Richard, and Linda Elder. 2005. The Miniature Guide to The Art of Asking Essential Questions. Foundation for Critical Thinking. 0944583164
  • Turabian, Kate Larimore. 2013. A Manual for Writers of Research Papers, Theses, and Dissertations: Chicago Style for Students and Researchers. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. 0226816389