Cathryn Carson

Managing the research university : Clark Kerr and the University of California

In the 1950s and 1960s, Clark Kerr led the University of Californias Berkeley campus, and then the University of California as a whole. Throughout these years, he developed a system of managerial strategies. This paper shows how Kerrs administrative views drew upon his background in industrial relations, his liberal theories of pluralistic industrial change, and contemporary understandings of American business organization.

Teaching global perspectives: engineering ethics across international and academic borders

Recent policy reports on responsible innovation emphasize the need to make ethics integral to advanced engineering programs. Students, however, usually perceive ethics as a set of rules and principles embedded in codes rather than as a set of open-ended approaches and a potential source of innovative research questions. We report on the pilot offering of an intensive summer program for graduate students, Global Perspectives: Engineering Ethics Across International and Academic Borders, which aimed to shift this perspective by creating opportunities for students to explore the challenging situation of ethics within graduate engineering education and specifically to engage in collaborative, interdisciplinary ethics research. By synthesizing scholarship from the philosophy of emotion, student voice, and early engagement, we aimed to create a space for student exploration, collaborative learning, and active knowledge production. The student commentaries that follow the article serve as the programs prelimina...

Weimar Culture and Quantum Mechanics: Selected Papers by Paul Forman and Contemporary Perspectives on the Forman Thesis

The Forman Thesis Quantum Physics in Its Cultural Context: Revisiting the Forman Thesis Comparative Cases: Cross-Disciplinary and Cross-Cultural.

Science Advising and Science Policy in Post-War West Germany: The example of the Deutscher Forschungsrat

The Deutscher Forschungsrat (GermanResearch Council) attempted to anchor scienceadvising and science policy in West Germanyafter the Second World War. Promoted by acircle of élite scientists, the councilaimed to establish institutions and mechanismscomparable to those in Great Britain, theUnited States, and other scientific powers.After a two-and-a-half year existence, iteventually failed. The reasons for its failure,some local, some global, display thedifficulties facing research policy in theearly years of the Federal Republic.

Efficient techniques for computer simulations of heteroepitaxial growth

A new discrete Monte Carlo technique suitable for simulations of the kinetics of heteroepitaxial crystal growth has been developed and tested on a 103 atom system. The technique offers sizable speed advantages over previous simulation methods and allows for realistic three‐dimensional studies of the kinetics of both pseudomorphic and misfit growth modes and of the transformation between them. Elements of the method are of general utility and can also be used to substantially improve the efficiency of continuous‐space Monte Carlo and molecular dynamics simulations of growth and other atomic transformations.

Objectivity and the Scientist: Heisenberg Rethinks

Argument Objectivity has been constitutive of the modern scientific persona. Its significance has depended on its excision of standpoint, which has legitimated the scientist epistemically and sociopolitically at once. But if the nineteenth century reinforced those paired effects, the twentieth century brought questioning of both. The figure of Werner Heisenberg (1901–1976) puts the latter process on display. From the Kaiserreich to the Federal Republic of Germany, between quantum mechanics and interest group politics, his evolution shows an increasing openness to perspectival pluralism, together with an attempt to save some form of objectivity as discursive coherence. Heisenberg’s self-understanding and the reactions of his publics display the transmutation of the persona as objectivity was rethought. By the end of the day, speaking “as a scientist” would mean something different from what it had at the start.

Integrating Social-Scientific Literacy in Nuclear Engineering Education

This introductory chapter explains the historical background, outline, basic concept, and objective of the Program for Advanced Graduate Education system for nuclear science and engineering with Social scientific literacy (PAGES), under which the 2011 summer school was organized and this book was developed. Early efforts and trials in PAGES started in 2008 toward integrating social sciences in nuclear engineering education mainly by organizing summer schools as a test bed. Various important insights on how pedagogically effective integration could and should be achieved were obtained through the summer schools held in 2008–2010. When the Fukushima Daiichi accident occurred in March 2011, the organizing committee of the 2011 summer school, which consisted of the authors of this chapter, immediately recognized that this would be a time when PAGES faced a test with regard to its effectiveness, and the previous efforts under PAGES should be fully utilized to understand and address the accident. The organizing committee concluded that while it is still in its infancy, the PAGES approach successfully established an integrated framework for both engineers and social scientists. It changed the perspectives of the participants, both the students and the organizers, and it laid groundwork that the organizers hope that they and others will be able to build upon.

Engineers, Social Scientists, and Nuclear Power

The PAGES collaboration (University of Tokyo and University of California, Berkeley) brought together nuclear engineers and social scientists to try out new ways of engaging engineering graduate students with societal issues around nuclear power. The program was built around seminars and summer schools. Because of the Fukushima Daiichi disaster, it ended up culminating in a weeklong program for students in summer 2011 to examine the Fukushima Daiichi accident as a socio-technical catastrophe and an invitation to rethink nuclear engineers’ possible roles in a post-Fukushima world. This chapter reflects on the PAGES collaboration and the Fukushima Daiichi summer school from the perspective of one of the social scientists involved. It narrates the experience of collaborating across disciplinary boundaries at a moment of challenge and in a space where social science is not well anchored to start. Out of this narrative, the chapter aims to draw some potentially generalizable suggestions for social scientists who are trying to engage engineers and graduate students, given the constraints of time, attention, and trust.

Heisenberg and the Framework of Science Policy

In the decades after 1945, new structures were created for science policy in the Federal Republic. To the establishment of the postwar framework Heisenberg contributed as much as any other figure. This was true even though, on the whole, he took no great pleasure in the venture, nor was he always particularly adept at it. His conceptions revolved around certain key notions: autonomy and centralization, elite advisory bodies and relationships of trust, modernization and international standards. These show up at many levels of his activity, from the Max Planck Society to national and international advisory committees to the Humboldt Foundation itself. His opinions were shaped by encounters in the Federal Republic, but they also grew out of his experience of the Third Reich. At a moment like the present, when the postwar settlement is under review, it is interesting to reflect on the inherited system: on the extent to which it reflects the situation of the postwar decades and the intuitions of those who, like Heisenberg, created it. Speaking on the history of science policy, which is often thought boring, is a dangerous undertaking in the late afternoon. Dangerous, too, is speaking about it before so many listeners with personal experience. Yet for a symposium for Heisenberg’s centennial, the topic is important. In the decades after 1945, Heisenberg and his colleagues faced a onetime opportunity to shape a new system in creation. The science policy of the Third Reich, if such had existed, had been a disaster. At a moment when a new political order was being formed, science was the rising star on the international horizon. The science policy system was not created from scratch. Nonetheless, it confronted a new state and new options. Even though Heisenberg often thought of the task as a burden, he contributed to defining its framework as much as any other single person. Thus there is historical interest in examining the postwar settlement under construction. The topic is also significant for us in the present, because that postwar settlement has since come under review. The world has changed since Heisenberg’s times. Principles that seemed persuasive in his day have seemed less so to his successors. In the years since those criticisms were first articulated, we have seen the framework gradually being rethought. Thinking over those more recent experiences, we can gain by examining the structures he helped put into place. This contribution will proceed by laying out Heisenberg’s contribution to the framework of science policy [1, 2]. Moving quickly and schematically, it will focus on institutional and structural presuppositions and legacies, giving less emphasis to moments of decision. (History need not proceed chronologically.) The account will deal with Heisenberg’s two main concerns, advising and institution-building, and offer reflections on what he accomplished. Fortschr. Phys. 50 (2002) 5– 7, 432 – 436 # WILEY-VCH Verlag Berlin GmbH, 13086 Berlin, 2002 0015-8208/02/5-705-0432

Computer simulation studies of the growth of strained layers by molecular-beam epitaxy

17.50þ.50/0