Joseph Wachelder

Democratizing Science: Various routes and visions of Dutch Science Shops

Science shops were established at universities throughout the Netherlands in the early 1970s with the avowed aim of democratizing science and contributing to social change. During the past few years, science shops have met with significant challenges. For one thing, they have had to adapt to various changes directly associated with the Dutch political climate, the organization of higher education, national research policies, and so on. Moreover, they have faced serious financial cutbacks. In their efforts to address these challenges, science shops have adopted various approaches, some of which have turned out to be more successful than others. Usually, the differences between the individual Dutch science shops are described and understood only in pragmatic terms, with respect to their internal organization and practices. This article, by contrast, argues that the different ways of coping with change should be understood as reflecting divergent, yet unarticulated, answers to the question of how science and technology can or should be democratized.

Frustrating Desire On Repens and Repositio, or the Attractions and Distractions of Digital games

In the emerging academic field of game studies, Roger Caillois’ Les Jeux et les hommes has already received the status of an obligatory reference. It is honoured as one of the few classic texts in game theory, but some also argue that it is not useful for analysing digital games. Caillois’ book is of particular interest for cultural theorists, though, because it presents a theory of games and play while also addressing the meaning of play. After analysing more closely why Caillois’ theory falls short when it is applied to digital games, we suggest a slight modification of its categories. Starting from the four game dimensions outlined by Caillois - competition, chance, simulation and vertigo - and his two modes of playing, paidia and ludus, we build on his theory by distinguishing two additional game characteristics, called repens and repositio. Both deal with the internal, temporal organization of a game. Repens is a specific characteristic of games that appeals to the player’s desire to discover, explore and get to know the surprises a game has in store and to make progress by learning from these surprises. Repositio denotes complementary experiences: having to retry, return, replay and repeat a certain action while getting better at it with every try. The balance, or unbalance, between repens and repositio, as characteristic elements of many digital games, determines to a large extent their attraction. Finally, repens and repositio are not only indicators of fun in the playing of digital games; they also hint at basic elements in learning theories and social theory. The study of the interplay between repens and repositio can help in clarifying the possibilities and limitations of digital games for learning purposes.

Regeneration : Generations Remediated

This paper proposes a model for a dynamic and constructivist perspective on generations. To study synchronous, contemporary interrelations between technology, media and generations, many different methodologies are available. Yet many historical, diachronic studies are marred by flaws and ambiguities in their use of ‘generation’ as a concept. To counter those problems, this paper argues for a process-oriented approach of generations – one which is modelled after Bolter and Grusin’s remediation. By distinguishing three mechanisms – immediate generation, immediate regeneration and hypermediate regeneration – the model of regeneration is linked to three theoretical concerns: the long-standing dilemmas in the sociological study of generations, the controversy around technological determinism in technology studies and contemporary challenges in research of ageing and youth cultures. The feasibility of the regeneration approach is elucidated by applying it to toys, especially educational toys. This paper also provides a methodology for the historical study of generations interacting with media and technology by recommending the combined use of three types of biographies as source materials.

TIN-20: Techniek in Nederland in de twintigste eeuw

The seven volumes of Techniek in Nederland in de twintigste eeuw, published in Zutphen by Stichting Historie der Techniek/De Walburg Pers between 1998 and 2003, are the showpiece of the Stichting Historie der Techniek (Foundation for the History of Technology). In 2,845 pages, they address the history of technology in the Netherlands during the twentieth century. TIN-20, as Techniek in Nederland in de twintigste eeuw is usually known, is the result of an ambitious undertaking funded by numerous universities, institutes, and private companies, much to the benefit of the academic history profession. It was edited by Johan Schot, Harry Lintsen, Arie Rip, and A. A. Albert de la Bruhèze, and involved dozens of other subeditors and authors. It provided support for student assistantships, Ph.D. dissertations, postdoctoral fellowships, and professorships. And it greatly enhanced the value of collaborative research projects among scholars from different universities. This review can hardly do justice to the project by sketching the contents of its seven volumes, but it will try to put its merits into perspective. The first part considers TIN-20’s aims; the second assesses its results and concludes with some personal views. Only angels come out of the blue. TIN-20 had its precursor in another multivolume work, Geschiedenis van de techniek in Nederland, or TIN-19, which dealt with the history of technology in the Netherlands during the nineteenth century.1 Although the color of the dust jackets changed from blue to red, there is much continuity between the two projects. But there is a crucial difference as well. TIN-19 had a straightforward problematique: to

From Playgrounds to PlayStation : The Interaction of Technology and Play

that the virtual contents produced by online communities are in and of themselves an incomplete data set for analysis. He establishes that there is significant insight to be had in understanding that which is absent from the records due to the exercise of technological modes of control, and therefore in understanding what, exactly, comprises those modes of control. His discussion and analysis of these technological aspects, and his discussion of how they have or haven’t been treated by existing work in the field is the book’s strongest feature. His suggestion that the designers of online communities and those who study those communities should be engaged in conversation surrounding both the design and social scientific analysis of these communities is also especially well-supported and important. More attention, however, could have been paid to the willful manipulation of technological systems by users. His discussion of reputation systems touches briefly on this phenomenon, but does not fully engage with it. A more thorough look at user-moderated content could bolster his discussion of the methodological limitations of existing research on online communities. Overall, however, the book’s analysis and conclusions are well-supported, and the text as a whole is especially valuable for those who wish to conduct serious qualitative social scientific research on online communities.