3 10 39 https://susciencehistory.southwestern.edu/files/original/283c94ed86bbd276671c7faf2acf21ce.jpeg 8b4fc40263eeacd1e6be5c27640a3dfe Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Subject The topic of the resource AIDS at Southwestern Description An account of the resource While many universities have a responsibility to educate their students in practicing medicine, they all have the responsibility to provide medicine. The set of services present in a student health center on college campuses has evolved enormously, primarily due to new discoveries in the field of medicine as well as changes in the social dynamics of the United States. Putting Southwestern University in the context of the historical development of medicine and social justice establishes the university as an institution willing to acquiesce to change and generally providing the best possible resources for its students. Southwestern is also communicative and responsive to medical developments that best benefit its health services. A very current issue related to the development of medicine is the outbreak of the coronavirus (COVID-19) and the changes being made everywhere to try to control the pandemic. Southwestern University officially moved the Spring 2020 semester to distance learning on March 19th, with school services (including the health center) being provided remotely. Southwestern’s response to this presently evolving case opens up questions to historically similar situations. The best way to historically observe Southwestern’s measures for adjusting to social change and developing needs of students is through the university’s handling of the HIV/AIDS crisis during the 1980s and 1990s. Over time, there has been a significant improvement in treatment in the sphere of sexual health on college campuses in the United States. Beginning under the euphemism of “social hygiene,” prevention and treatment of sexual health issues on college campuses began during the World War II era. Due to the increasing number of women attending college as well as evolving degrees of sex positivity and freedom, treatments for sexual health became less taboo and conversations became more open. Since college campus demographics are mostly made up of young people, this movement could be seen in American universities. Unfortunately, one side of this conversation is significantly less positive than others. The outbreak of HIV/AIDS raised questions about health that were never explored before, notably regarding the nature of the epidemic and how separate groups could be disproportionally affected by disease. AIDS, formally known as acquired immune deficiency syndrome, emerged as a “leading cause of death among young adults in the United States” in the 1980s. Somewhat surprisingly, college students attending school at the height of the HIV scare were a relatively low-risk group, to use the terminology of the time, for contracting the virus. This was due in part to the proportion of heterosexual students to non-heterosexual students, since the primary reason that heterosexual adults would be at risk was associated with conditions of poverty. Therefore, most students of universities were “not in sexual networks that will include a significant proportion of heterosexual partners who have HIV.” This is not to say that a low risk level meant no action was taken. In a conference held at Southwestern regarding the outbreak, assistant professor of sociology Edward L. Kain emphasized the impact that diseases could have on a population, and warned against developing an “us vs. them” mentality. Kain made it clear that just because you “don’t fall into a high risk group, it doesn’t mean you’re not going to get it.” The low-risk environment of college campuses could be partially attributed to the response universities had to the outbreak in terms of education and prevention. Once information about the issue became more accessible and de-stigmatized, many institutions developed non-discriminatory policies towards students with HIV, experimented with peer education programs, and implemented risk assessment in health centers. It also became essential to prevent the spread of misinformation and harmful rumors. Edward Kain discussed this problem through research he conducted with his sociology students at the time of the outbreak. He concluded that rumors are born from panic, created to fill in gaps where knowledge is lacking. Kain found this to be important because the public’s attitude towards AIDS would “determine how effectively the disease is treated medically and educationally.” It was of great consequence that the knowledge cultivated by a community (in this case, Southwestern University) was accurate and easily transmitted to the public. Since the sole purpose of a university’s health center is to make medical knowledge and practice readily available to its students, the AIDS epidemic is an appropriate lens through which to assess Southwestern’s care of its students. At the height of the epidemic (and once it had become clear that this was a health threat that went beyond sexual orientation), it became vital for universities to “sponsor programs that inform students about the disease and advocate for measures to prevent transmission of the virus.” While there are no records indicating the presence of HIV antibody testing on campus at Southwestern, a 1987 issue of the Megaphone contains an article written by health center employee Jan Pickett about the issue of testing. The article gives general information regarding the importance of at-risk individuals being tested, what a test entails, and various locations and phone numbers of testing institutions. Pickett notes the importance of practicing safe sex and adopting any changes necessary to protect from the virus, making it clear that receiving a negative test result is not protection in and of itself. Additionally, there is an issue of the Megaphone published the year prior containing an article titled “Let’s talk about AIDS.” The article not only gives basic information on the AIDS crisis, but it also announces a panel discussion to take place on campus in which professionals with broad knowledge and perspective on the issue would inform students and answer questions. The panel was to include a nurse specialist, the director of the Austin AIDS Project, the Deputy Director of the Williamson County Health Department, and an AIDS patient. This event especially showcases Southwestern’s willingness to adapt and provide necessary aid to its students. In tandem with societal attitudes of the time, mentions of the gay liberation movement or the AIDS epidemic in the 1970s and 1980s in Southwestern publications were made with a tendency towards anonymity. The aforementioned article by Jan Pickett emphasizes locations for anonymous testing and promises to protect the secrecy of students visiting her office for HIV/AIDS-related questions. The first article found in the Megaphone that directly discusses the gay rights movement is from 1973, titled “Suppressed Minority: A Concerned Student Speaks Out.” The anonymous student writes to the readers, pleading for equality and understanding on campus and implying that they had faced discrimination while attending Southwestern. Therefore, it would appear it was not until the mid-to-late 1980s and the breakout of AIDS that homosexuality became a topic of sincere conversation on Southwestern campus and something under the eye of health services. The health center, in this case, acts as a middleman in the transmission of medical knowledge, though in some cases more quickly and effectively than in others. While it can be assumed that those employed within the health center are aptly qualified for their position, the changing nature of medicine requires communication of knowledge both within the field and beyond it. The evolving breadth of services provided and medical standards of the student body at Southwestern implies that this communication has been constantly occurring throughout the school’s history, as shown through samples of blank student health records from 2004 and 2018 (actual student records are not attainable due to confidentiality), requiring more and more immunizations and stamps of approval from physicians prior to attending the university. Since Southwestern does not have its own practice of medical research, discoveries, treatments, and anything else that could benefit the student body is presumably acquired from outside, credible sources. The university has done its part to remain up to date on medical developments and has adjusted its policies accordingly The history of medicine, and more specifically of medicine on college campuses, reveals a great deal about the nature of social dynamics both within a student body and within the institution itself. The liberal arts environment of Southwestern has lent to its increasingly open attitude towards change in social justice, and the relationship between these changes and medical issues can be observed through the history of health services. There have been areas in which the university’s health center has found itself behind the times, such as in the case of the delay in providing women’s health services. But otherwise, there has been a general urgency to keep up with the evolving medical needs of students. Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Elaine Goulden Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource May 8, 2020 Language A language of the resource English Title A name given to the resource Community in Crisis: Southwestern and the AIDS Epidemic Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived Barrera, Martha. “Let’s talk about AIDS,” The Megaphone, January 30, 1986, https://texashistory.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metapth634603/. Cohen, Elliot D., and Michael Davis, eds. AIDS: Crisis in Professional Ethics. Temple University Press, 1994. www.jstor.org/stable/j.ctt14bt3gc. Franki, Marie. “Health Services adds new doctors,” The Megaphone, September 21, 2006, https://texashistory.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metapth634759/. “Health Record,” Form. Georgetown, TX: Southwestern University, Special Collections, May 2004. Pickett, Jan. “Living Well at Southwestern,” The Megaphone, October 30, 1987, https://texashistory.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metapth634509/. Rollins, Laura. “AIDS: from SU to the World,” Williamson County Sun, November 14, 1987, 12. “Southwestern seminar eyes AIDS and society,” Williamson County Sun, November 1, 1987. “Student Health Record,” Form. Georgetown, TX: Southwestern University, Special Collections, 2018. “Suppressed Minority: A Concerned Student Speaks Out,” The Megaphone, May 4, 1973, https://texashistory.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metapth634200/. Turner, H. Spencer, and Janet L. Hurley, eds. The History and Practice of College Health. University Press of Kentucky, 2002. www.jstor.org/stable/j.ctt130j9xw. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Student Health Record Description An account of the resource 2018 version of the Southwestern University health form Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Southwestern University Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 2018 Language A language of the resource English Type The nature or genre of the resource Form https://susciencehistory.southwestern.edu/files/original/900e6c66ddedc4536ba0bfbbf3dbde1b.jpg 96e7160361e87eb119115e18748fe861 https://susciencehistory.southwestern.edu/files/original/dfdf865211d67b8ee29a1d7f26d9d493.jpg c4a4d6080a538543b3da13a6fe0ca547 Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource History of Psychology at Southwestern University Description An account of the resource During my time at Southwestern University, I have been able to be enrolled in many wonderful classes. Each course has been extremely unique and worthwhile. In the course entitled, Popularizing Science, we study the history of science and how many aspects of it have progressed greatly. We learn just how important science is to society as well as the past, present, and future. The goal of this class is to learn about how it affects the world. Southwestern University is just one of the many unique places where history changes constantly. Countless people have seen Southwestern’s growth throughout the years which allows for much research to be done. Due to the Special Collections department in the library, historians have been able to keep very valuable items in tack. These items include old article clippings, lectures, clothing, and even course catalogs from the beginning of the school's establishment. Many of the following sources are from Special Collections as well as scholarly articles and books. The goal of this paper is to display how I as a student can display the changing concepts of psychology by showing past items and explaining the significance of their change throughout the decades at Southwestern University. Throughout the past weeks, I have been able to collect many different forms of data and historical records about Southwestern University. The focus of my research has been the progression of the psychology department throughout the decades. My passion for this comes from the fact that I intend to major in psychology. Psychology has always been a subject of interest. As many people have learned, psychology can be applied in mostly any situation, which truly makes it one of the most diverse subjects. There are many concepts and theories that can be implemented in daily life. This is so essential that Southwestern University decided to introduce it as a major and minor. During the mid-1900s, Southwestern created the first psychology course <a href="#_ftn1">[1]</a>. In the beginning, it was slowly implemented into the education department. Some of the classes that involved psychology include “principles of education”, “school management”, “educational psychology” and “educational sociology”. This knowledge is found from a Southwestern University course catalog. During that time the professor of psychology was Oscar A. Ullrich.<a href="#_ftn2">[2]</a> Due to the fact that those were the beginning classes the full implementation of psychology was brief yet impactful. The The class “Principles of Education” in the mid-1900s at Southwestern University, hoped to discuss the psychological, administrative, and social phases of education. By implementing psychology into this class they were able to see the different ways of handling situations that come regularly in schools. Because there is such a diverse amount of ages in school, it is key to learn how to deal with certain situations within that age group. Another class mentioned was “School Management”, which focused on the discussion of the responsibilities and problems involved in the management of schools and how they are treated. This also goes along the lines of how important psychology is. Secondly, “Educational Sociology” was a course of interest because this class discusses the training of social efficiency and the gradual changes in the demands made upon school due to present social conditions and the principal lines of thought pursued. Finally, the educational psychology class is split into two parts. An introductory course in psychology was the beginning and their students would study lecture readings and have plenty of discussions with Professor Davidson. As for part two in educational psychology, topics discussed were the original laws of learning, individual differences, and the relation to education. Two of the texts that they read were Thorndike's “Educational Psychology'' and Colvin’s “The Learning Process”. All of these courses were explained in the Southwestern University catalog in Special Collections. Furthermore, I was fortunate enough to find a test from a psychology test entitled “Psychology 331” from Special Collections.<a href="#_ftn3">[3]</a> This test was really helpful because he gave me an insight into the types of questions that teachers would ask the students as well as the different levels that the students were expected to know about psychology. Here we are able to see the most relevant topics that the psychology department is teaching Southwestern students. This test was given in a way that a student must answer a question as true false but they also implemented basic knowledge questions as well as more psychological questions. This allowed for a good sense of variety as well as implementing the key values of the psychology course. An example of a true or false question is “the bee knows by instinct how to construct the honeycomb”. The next question is “the psychologist objects to you regarding flight from danger as belonging to an instinct of self-preservation because it is illogical to regard it so“. The diverse examples allow students to not just consider psychological terms or methods that were taught in class but apply them to real-life situations that they may or may not know. There are countless more tests with these same ideas. To explain this more, an example of another question on a different psychology exam was “mixing blue and yellow pigments gives green”. If anyone has ever taken an art class, they would know that the same is true but if you had not taken a psychology class before this the next question will be challenging. It states “Taste shows more sensory adaptation and smell”. In psychology for an introductory class, you learn a lot about the senses. I know because I took an introduction to psychology last semester. A test example includes a question such as “Why is depth perception critical to a person”? It is good to see how the test from the mid-1900s to now has changed but yet say the same. We are still learning the key elements of psychology but implementing it into our tests and quizzes in different ways. In the United States in the 1970s, the beginnings of development psychology came into light.<a href="#_ftn4">[4]</a> This subfield of psychology focuses on explaining growth through the lifespan. It includes thinking, feeling, and behavior change. One of the many reasons it grew was because of <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Hinde">Robert Hinde's publication</a> of “<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Biological_Bases_of_Human_Social_Behavior&action=edit&redlink=1">Biological Bases of Human Social Behavior</a>”, a text in etiological-oriented developmental psychology. At Southwestern during the mid-70s, a lecture came entitled “Behavior Modification in Public Schools Clinic Settings”. This lecture took place on March 30, 1974. This particular lecture was brought here because of its importance in understanding the development of children in public school clinic settings. There are many instances where it is difficult to find a direct problem with a person, but with the helpful methods of developmental psychology, people can get a helpful insight as to how to control a rough situation. College is still a time where adolescents are growing and developing. By having this lecture come, specialists can direct the specific advice for the age range at Southwestern. Psychology is the scientific study of human behavior and mental processes. This existed in the ancient civilizations of Egypt and Greek.<a href="#_ftn5">[5]</a> In the beginning, it was a branch of philosophy but eventually was broken down into an independent branch in the late 1800s. Psychology has been able to be diversified into many different subjects. For example, a business person could use psychology with human resources. The key values and concepts of psychology would help greatly in dealing with certain situations in a work environment. Today at Southwestern there are many different psychology groups on campus. There is psychology tutoring, a psychology club where you get together and do research, as well as a bunch of different research labs and activities that even non-majors can participate in. Those are just a few of the many different ways that knowledge is being communicated at Southwestern. By coming up with events, spreading awareness, and allowing specialists to come to campus to discuss certain topics with students, it is beneficial to everyone. All events that come to Southwestern to the psychology program are wonderful and allow anyone to visit whether it’s non-majors and even the public. Science will continue to grow and develop and it is key that people stay up-to-date with things because it could help us in the future in ways that we could not imagine today. The branch of psychology at Southwestern University continues to do such things and as students, it is important to implement ourselves in the opportunities given to us. Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Belen Micklas Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived <a href="#_ftnref1">[1]</a> Psychology 331, True or False Test, Page 2 and 7, Psychology Department, Special Collections <a href="#_ftnref2">[2]</a> Oscar A. Ullrich, Psychology Department, Faculty, Special Collections <a href="#_ftnref3">[3]</a> Psychology 331, True or False Test, Page 2 and 7, Psychology Department, Special Collections <a href="#_ftnref4">[4]</a> Greenfield, Patricia M. “The Changing Psychology of Culture From 1800 Through 2000.” Psychological Science <a href="#_ftnref5">[5]</a> “In Search of Psychology.” From Soul to Mind: The Emergence of Psychology, from Erasmus Darwin to William James Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Education Description An account of the resource Description of classes and who taught them Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Southwestern University Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived Course catalog Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1917-18 Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource Photocopy https://susciencehistory.southwestern.edu/files/original/2ccaeafa56a200a08784254100fcc516.pdf 779f1fbe7b00f70e91c2b73a4ad4ec4e Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource History of Kinesiology at Southwestern University Description An account of the resource The history of Kinesiology at Southwestern University is a history that has remained a mystery. Up until now. In this document, I plan to dive into the realm of the undiscovered and uncover the history of Kinesiology at Southwestern and the United States as a whole. I do this through first establishing the methodical approach that is used to study the history of a science, then I examine the history of Kinesiology, and finally I examine the history of Kinesiology at Southwestern University. The methodical approach that is typically used to study the history of a science is that of the application of the deficit model to the specified science. “In the 1980s, the ‘deficit model’ became popular in the English-speaking world through a movement called the ‘Public Understanding of Science’ (PUS) … It legitimised new professionals, science communicators, who were supposed to act as mediators to effectively and faithfully transmit ‘official’ knowledge to lay audiences … ”<a href="#_ftn1">[1]</a> Having a mediator between science and the public is an idea that is used at many colleges and careers around the world. In the case of Kinesiology in the “real” world, there are gyms and Personal Trainers and Physical Therapists who are mediators between the actual science and the public. In the case of universities, some clubs promote different types of sciences to make the specified science more appealing to the public and gain students who want to partake in the specified science. To study the deficit model at a university usage of non-traditional sources must be used, such as yearbooks. The application of the deficit model at Southwestern will be explained in the fourth paragraph. To examine the history of Kinesiology, one must know its connection to Physical Education. Physical Education is not referred to the Physical Education that students take during their elementary school, middle school, or high school education; instead, it refers to the academic departments of Physical Education in Higher Education.<a href="#_ftn2">[2]</a> This type of Physical Education focuses on physical activity and human movement.<a href="#_ftn3">[3]</a> The connection that Physical Education and Kinesiology have is that of “deeper roots” between the two disciplines. An aspect of these “deeper roots” consist of the curriculum that both disciplines follow. “Accordingly, the curriculum [of Physical Education] included aspects of anatomy and physiology, physics, and anthropometry… ”<a href="#_ftn4">[4]</a> With Anatomy and Physiology being a class that was required in the department of Physical Education, and it also being a class that is required to get a Kinesiology degree, it demonstrates the similarity between the two core curriculums. This commonality between the different disciplines is reiterated by Jaime Schultz in her chapter by mentioning, “Although many think that the subdisciplinary movement of kinesiology is something that originated in the mid-20th century, it is clear that it has deeper roots.”<a href="#_ftn5">[5]</a> Those deeper roots come directly from the underlying storyline connection between Kinesiology and Physical Education. “… debates raged within the emergent sub-disciplines and studies over laboratory space, curricula, and resources as well as the right name for the school’s growing scientific focus (from physical education to human kinetics and now kinesiology).”<a href="#_ftn6">[6]</a> This quote proves the direct correlation between Physical Education and Kinesiology in terms of the shift and replacement in the name of the three departments - from Physical Education, to Human Kinetics, and finally, Kinesiology. To add to the argument of Physical Education being the precursor of the departments of Kinesiology, there is the fact that, “In the early 1960s, prodded by the words of Conant and Henry, members of the American Academy of Physical Education sought to determine what should constitute the discipline’s “body of knowledge.” The subsequent Big Ten Body-of-Knowledge Symposium identified six areas of specialization … These subdomains, along with several others, are currently recognized within kinesiology.”<a href="#_ftn7">[7]</a> As Physical Education was being pushed as an academic discipline, there were six areas of specialization within Physical Education: administrative theory in athletics and physical education, biomechanics, exercise physiology, history and philosophy of physical education, motor learning/sport psychology, and sociology and sport education. These six areas are now subdomains that are recognized within Kinesiology. This demonstrates that Physical Education departments and Kinesiology departments both have a common foundation, therefore, proving the direct connection between Physical Education and Kinesiology. To firmly establish this direct connection between the history of Kinesiology of the United States and Southwestern University; that of starting as Physical Education and moving towards the title of “Kinesiology,” is the fact that “ If you take a look at Table 3-3, for example, you can see that what was once the American Academy of Physical Education gradually added “kinesiology” to its title and eventually dropped the phrase “physical education” altogether to become the National Academy of Kinesiology (NAK).”<a href="#_ftn8">[8]</a> The table mentioned in the previous quote shows the Evolution of the National Academy of Kinesiology. Essentially, the table shows that in 1904, the National Academy of Kinesiology (present) was called the “Academy of Physical Education.” In 1926 it was then called “American Academy of Physical Education. In 1993 the academy switched names once again, and it was called the “American Academy of Kinesiology and Physical Education.” Finally, in 2010 the academy switched to its current title, which is the “National Academy of Kinesiology.” This comes to demonstrate the direct correlation between Kinesiology and its precursor, Physical Education, through the replacement of the title “Physical Education” throughout the years, to “Kinesiology,” which is demonstrated around the United States and at Southwestern, respectively at different times. To begin, the main connection between the history of Kinesiology at Southwestern University and the historical development of Kinesiology in the United States is the storyline that both histories follow. Although both of these histories follow the same storyline, this storyline is fulfilled at different times. Kinesiology, as an overall field, started around the 1960s as a result of “Franklin Henry’s call from Berkeley in the 1960s for a more academic approach to the study of human movement …”<a href="#_ftn9">[9]</a> The commencement of Kinesiology at Southwestern University and that of Kinesiology in the United States is a difference of decades. According to the Southwester’ Yearbook, the first time the Department of Kinesiology is mentioned was in 1991.<a href="#_ftn10">[10]</a> Before the Department of Kinesiology was mentioned though, the Department of Physical Education was mentioned for a significant number of years.<a href="#_ftn11">[11]</a> Dr. Carla Lowry in charge of the Physical Education Department before she was the chair of the Department of Kinesiology,<a href="#_ftn12">[12]</a> meaning that Physical Education is the predecessor of Kinesiology in the case of the history of Kinesiology at Southwestern University as well. This is also seen through the application of the deficit model at Southwestern. In order to get students more involved with Physical Education there was a club called the PEARL club - Physical Education. Athletic Recreation. And Leisure - that helped promote Physical Education and fitness to the student body - a core aspect of Physical Education. Once the Department of Physical Education turned into the Department of Kinesiology, the PEARL club no longer existed and was replaced by the Kinesiology Club to help promote the new science of Kinesiology at Southwestern.<a href="#_ftn13">[13]</a> Through the connection between these two different, yet similar clubs, they demonstrate the connectedness between Physical Education and Kinesiology. Through first explaining the methodical approach that is taken to study the history of science, it helps explain why non-traditional sources such as yearbooks are utilized to support the thesis. In order to understand the history of Kinesiology at Southwestern, the history of Kinesiology as a discipline itself must first be examined to make everything more understandable. Finally, the implementation of both previous concepts are incorporated into the history of Kinesiology at Southwestern to connect everything together. Even though there is now a solid foundation on what the history of Kinesiology consists of, there is still further research that needs to be done in order to completely connect the history of Kinesiology at Southwestern as a whole without there being loose details and two unanswered questions. The first question is, how did the curriculum of the Department of Physical Education change once it became the Department of Kinesiology in the 1990s? The last question is, why did Southwestern University wait until the 1990s to officially change the name of the Department of Physical Education to the Department of Kinesiology when that change was made about three decades earlier? Through further research and more time dedicated to this topic, the answers may eventually be found. Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Julian Noyola Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived <a href="#_ftnref1">[1]</a> Agusti Nieto-Galan, Science in the Public Sphere A history of lay knowledge and expertise (Oxfordshire: Routledge, Taylor &amp; Francis Group, 2016), 3. <a href="#_ftnref2">[2]</a> Jaime Schultz, “A History of Kinesiology,” in Foundations of Kinesiology - 18th Edition, edited by Carole Oglesby (Burlington: Jones & Bartlett Publishers, 2018), 42. <a href="#_ftnref3">[3]</a> Schultz, “A History of Kinesiology,” 42. <a href="#_ftnref4">[4]</a> Jaime Schultz, “A History of Kinesiology,” in Foundations of Kinesiology - 18th Edition, edited by Carole Oglesby (Burlington: Jones & Bartlett Publishers, 2018), 43. <a href="#_ftnref5">[5]</a> Jaime Schultz, “A History of Kinesiology,” in Foundations of Kinesiology - 18th Edition, edited by Carole Oglesby (Burlington: Jones & Bartlett Publishers, 2018), 44. <a href="#_ftnref6">[6]</a> Patricia Vertinsky, "Shadow Disciplines, or a Place for Post-Disciplinary Liaisons in the North American Research University: What Are We to Do with Physical Cultural Studies?", in Playing for Change: The Continuing Struggle for Sport and Recreation, edited by Field Russell (Toronto; Buffalo; London: University of Toronto Press, 2015), 391 <a href="#_ftnref7">[7]</a> Jaime Schultz, “A History of Kinesiology,” in Foundations of Kinesiology - 18th Edition, edited by Carole Oglesby (Burlington: Jones & Bartlett Publishers, 2018), 46-47. <a href="#_ftnref8">[8]</a> Jaime Schultz, “A History of Kinesiology,” in Foundations of Kinesiology - 18th Edition, edited by Carole Oglesby (Burlington: Jones & Bartlett Publishers, 2018), 50. <a href="#_ftnref9">[9]</a> Vertinsky, “Shadow Disciplines, or a Place for Post-Disciplinary Liaisons in the North American Research University: What Are We to Do with Physical Cultural Studies?”, 391. <a href="#_ftnref10">[10]</a> Southwestern University, Sou’Wester Yearbook. Georgetown, Texas: 1991, 34, Southwestern University, A. Frank Smith Jr. Library, Special Collections & Archives. <a href="#_ftnref11">[11]</a> Southwestern University, Sou’Wester Yearbook (Georgetown, Texas: 1984), 48, Southwestern University, A. Frank Smith Jr. Library, Special Collections & Archives. <a href="#_ftnref12">[12]</a> Sou’Wester Yearbook, 1991, 34. <a href="#_ftnref13">[13]</a> Sou’Wester Yearbook, 2000, 101. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource 1984 Sou’wester Yearbook Subject The topic of the resource Southwestern University Yearbook Description An account of the resource The 1984 Sou’Wester Yearbook contains information regarding the faculty and other staff members, the different departments, several pages for clubs, and events that occurred throughout the 1984 school year. Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Southwestern University, A. Frank Smith Jr. Library, Special Collections & Archives Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Southwestern University Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1984 Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource Copyright Southwestern University. Reproduction for publication, exhibition, web-display, or commercial use by permission only, excepting Fair Use and Educational Use clauses of the US copyright law. Relation A related resource Southwesternuniversity; americana Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource Image, jpeg Language A language of the resource English Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context https://archive.org/details/souwesteryearboo1984sout/m ode/2up https://susciencehistory.southwestern.edu/files/original/a02d0914be6bd791bda7155b0d94c64b.pdf 04b035086d2cbaa3dda0ca2221d73c0e Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource History of Kinesiology at Southwestern University Description An account of the resource The history of Kinesiology at Southwestern University is a history that has remained a mystery. Up until now. In this document, I plan to dive into the realm of the undiscovered and uncover the history of Kinesiology at Southwestern and the United States as a whole. I do this through first establishing the methodical approach that is used to study the history of a science, then I examine the history of Kinesiology, and finally I examine the history of Kinesiology at Southwestern University. The methodical approach that is typically used to study the history of a science is that of the application of the deficit model to the specified science. “In the 1980s, the ‘deficit model’ became popular in the English-speaking world through a movement called the ‘Public Understanding of Science’ (PUS) … It legitimised new professionals, science communicators, who were supposed to act as mediators to effectively and faithfully transmit ‘official’ knowledge to lay audiences … ”<a href="#_ftn1">[1]</a> Having a mediator between science and the public is an idea that is used at many colleges and careers around the world. In the case of Kinesiology in the “real” world, there are gyms and Personal Trainers and Physical Therapists who are mediators between the actual science and the public. In the case of universities, some clubs promote different types of sciences to make the specified science more appealing to the public and gain students who want to partake in the specified science. To study the deficit model at a university usage of non-traditional sources must be used, such as yearbooks. The application of the deficit model at Southwestern will be explained in the fourth paragraph. To examine the history of Kinesiology, one must know its connection to Physical Education. Physical Education is not referred to the Physical Education that students take during their elementary school, middle school, or high school education; instead, it refers to the academic departments of Physical Education in Higher Education.<a href="#_ftn2">[2]</a> This type of Physical Education focuses on physical activity and human movement.<a href="#_ftn3">[3]</a> The connection that Physical Education and Kinesiology have is that of “deeper roots” between the two disciplines. An aspect of these “deeper roots” consist of the curriculum that both disciplines follow. “Accordingly, the curriculum [of Physical Education] included aspects of anatomy and physiology, physics, and anthropometry… ”<a href="#_ftn4">[4]</a> With Anatomy and Physiology being a class that was required in the department of Physical Education, and it also being a class that is required to get a Kinesiology degree, it demonstrates the similarity between the two core curriculums. This commonality between the different disciplines is reiterated by Jaime Schultz in her chapter by mentioning, “Although many think that the subdisciplinary movement of kinesiology is something that originated in the mid-20th century, it is clear that it has deeper roots.”<a href="#_ftn5">[5]</a> Those deeper roots come directly from the underlying storyline connection between Kinesiology and Physical Education. “… debates raged within the emergent sub-disciplines and studies over laboratory space, curricula, and resources as well as the right name for the school’s growing scientific focus (from physical education to human kinetics and now kinesiology).”<a href="#_ftn6">[6]</a> This quote proves the direct correlation between Physical Education and Kinesiology in terms of the shift and replacement in the name of the three departments - from Physical Education, to Human Kinetics, and finally, Kinesiology. To add to the argument of Physical Education being the precursor of the departments of Kinesiology, there is the fact that, “In the early 1960s, prodded by the words of Conant and Henry, members of the American Academy of Physical Education sought to determine what should constitute the discipline’s “body of knowledge.” The subsequent Big Ten Body-of-Knowledge Symposium identified six areas of specialization … These subdomains, along with several others, are currently recognized within kinesiology.”<a href="#_ftn7">[7]</a> As Physical Education was being pushed as an academic discipline, there were six areas of specialization within Physical Education: administrative theory in athletics and physical education, biomechanics, exercise physiology, history and philosophy of physical education, motor learning/sport psychology, and sociology and sport education. These six areas are now subdomains that are recognized within Kinesiology. This demonstrates that Physical Education departments and Kinesiology departments both have a common foundation, therefore, proving the direct connection between Physical Education and Kinesiology. To firmly establish this direct connection between the history of Kinesiology of the United States and Southwestern University; that of starting as Physical Education and moving towards the title of “Kinesiology,” is the fact that “ If you take a look at Table 3-3, for example, you can see that what was once the American Academy of Physical Education gradually added “kinesiology” to its title and eventually dropped the phrase “physical education” altogether to become the National Academy of Kinesiology (NAK).”<a href="#_ftn8">[8]</a> The table mentioned in the previous quote shows the Evolution of the National Academy of Kinesiology. Essentially, the table shows that in 1904, the National Academy of Kinesiology (present) was called the “Academy of Physical Education.” In 1926 it was then called “American Academy of Physical Education. In 1993 the academy switched names once again, and it was called the “American Academy of Kinesiology and Physical Education.” Finally, in 2010 the academy switched to its current title, which is the “National Academy of Kinesiology.” This comes to demonstrate the direct correlation between Kinesiology and its precursor, Physical Education, through the replacement of the title “Physical Education” throughout the years, to “Kinesiology,” which is demonstrated around the United States and at Southwestern, respectively at different times. To begin, the main connection between the history of Kinesiology at Southwestern University and the historical development of Kinesiology in the United States is the storyline that both histories follow. Although both of these histories follow the same storyline, this storyline is fulfilled at different times. Kinesiology, as an overall field, started around the 1960s as a result of “Franklin Henry’s call from Berkeley in the 1960s for a more academic approach to the study of human movement …”<a href="#_ftn9">[9]</a> The commencement of Kinesiology at Southwestern University and that of Kinesiology in the United States is a difference of decades. According to the Southwester’ Yearbook, the first time the Department of Kinesiology is mentioned was in 1991.<a href="#_ftn10">[10]</a> Before the Department of Kinesiology was mentioned though, the Department of Physical Education was mentioned for a significant number of years.<a href="#_ftn11">[11]</a> Dr. Carla Lowry in charge of the Physical Education Department before she was the chair of the Department of Kinesiology,<a href="#_ftn12">[12]</a> meaning that Physical Education is the predecessor of Kinesiology in the case of the history of Kinesiology at Southwestern University as well. This is also seen through the application of the deficit model at Southwestern. In order to get students more involved with Physical Education there was a club called the PEARL club - Physical Education. Athletic Recreation. And Leisure - that helped promote Physical Education and fitness to the student body - a core aspect of Physical Education. Once the Department of Physical Education turned into the Department of Kinesiology, the PEARL club no longer existed and was replaced by the Kinesiology Club to help promote the new science of Kinesiology at Southwestern.<a href="#_ftn13">[13]</a> Through the connection between these two different, yet similar clubs, they demonstrate the connectedness between Physical Education and Kinesiology. Through first explaining the methodical approach that is taken to study the history of science, it helps explain why non-traditional sources such as yearbooks are utilized to support the thesis. In order to understand the history of Kinesiology at Southwestern, the history of Kinesiology as a discipline itself must first be examined to make everything more understandable. Finally, the implementation of both previous concepts are incorporated into the history of Kinesiology at Southwestern to connect everything together. Even though there is now a solid foundation on what the history of Kinesiology consists of, there is still further research that needs to be done in order to completely connect the history of Kinesiology at Southwestern as a whole without there being loose details and two unanswered questions. The first question is, how did the curriculum of the Department of Physical Education change once it became the Department of Kinesiology in the 1990s? The last question is, why did Southwestern University wait until the 1990s to officially change the name of the Department of Physical Education to the Department of Kinesiology when that change was made about three decades earlier? Through further research and more time dedicated to this topic, the answers may eventually be found. Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Julian Noyola Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived <a href="#_ftnref1">[1]</a> Agusti Nieto-Galan, Science in the Public Sphere A history of lay knowledge and expertise (Oxfordshire: Routledge, Taylor &amp; Francis Group, 2016), 3. <a href="#_ftnref2">[2]</a> Jaime Schultz, “A History of Kinesiology,” in Foundations of Kinesiology - 18th Edition, edited by Carole Oglesby (Burlington: Jones & Bartlett Publishers, 2018), 42. <a href="#_ftnref3">[3]</a> Schultz, “A History of Kinesiology,” 42. <a href="#_ftnref4">[4]</a> Jaime Schultz, “A History of Kinesiology,” in Foundations of Kinesiology - 18th Edition, edited by Carole Oglesby (Burlington: Jones & Bartlett Publishers, 2018), 43. <a href="#_ftnref5">[5]</a> Jaime Schultz, “A History of Kinesiology,” in Foundations of Kinesiology - 18th Edition, edited by Carole Oglesby (Burlington: Jones & Bartlett Publishers, 2018), 44. <a href="#_ftnref6">[6]</a> Patricia Vertinsky, "Shadow Disciplines, or a Place for Post-Disciplinary Liaisons in the North American Research University: What Are We to Do with Physical Cultural Studies?", in Playing for Change: The Continuing Struggle for Sport and Recreation, edited by Field Russell (Toronto; Buffalo; London: University of Toronto Press, 2015), 391 <a href="#_ftnref7">[7]</a> Jaime Schultz, “A History of Kinesiology,” in Foundations of Kinesiology - 18th Edition, edited by Carole Oglesby (Burlington: Jones & Bartlett Publishers, 2018), 46-47. <a href="#_ftnref8">[8]</a> Jaime Schultz, “A History of Kinesiology,” in Foundations of Kinesiology - 18th Edition, edited by Carole Oglesby (Burlington: Jones & Bartlett Publishers, 2018), 50. <a href="#_ftnref9">[9]</a> Vertinsky, “Shadow Disciplines, or a Place for Post-Disciplinary Liaisons in the North American Research University: What Are We to Do with Physical Cultural Studies?”, 391. <a href="#_ftnref10">[10]</a> Southwestern University, Sou’Wester Yearbook. Georgetown, Texas: 1991, 34, Southwestern University, A. Frank Smith Jr. Library, Special Collections & Archives. <a href="#_ftnref11">[11]</a> Southwestern University, Sou’Wester Yearbook (Georgetown, Texas: 1984), 48, Southwestern University, A. Frank Smith Jr. Library, Special Collections & Archives. <a href="#_ftnref12">[12]</a> Sou’Wester Yearbook, 1991, 34. <a href="#_ftnref13">[13]</a> Sou’Wester Yearbook, 2000, 101. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource 1991 Sou’wester Yearbook Subject The topic of the resource Southwestern University Yearbook Description An account of the resource The 1991 Sou’Wester Yearbook contains information regarding the faculty and other staff members, the different departments, several pages for clubs, and events that occurred throughout the 1991 school year. Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Southwestern University, A. Frank Smith Jr. Library, Special Collections & Archives Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Southwestern University Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1991 Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource Copyright Southwestern University. Reproduction for publication, exhibition, web-display, or commercial use by permission only, excepting Fair Use and Educational Use clauses of the US copyright law. Relation A related resource Southwesternuniversity; americana Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource Image, jpeg Language A language of the resource English https://susciencehistory.southwestern.edu/files/original/09b0bdfeb20959568c151fc87944f74a.pdf 83b0087d442948c5e45ab9d14411d501 Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource History of Kinesiology at Southwestern University Description An account of the resource The history of Kinesiology at Southwestern University is a history that has remained a mystery. Up until now. In this document, I plan to dive into the realm of the undiscovered and uncover the history of Kinesiology at Southwestern and the United States as a whole. I do this through first establishing the methodical approach that is used to study the history of a science, then I examine the history of Kinesiology, and finally I examine the history of Kinesiology at Southwestern University. The methodical approach that is typically used to study the history of a science is that of the application of the deficit model to the specified science. “In the 1980s, the ‘deficit model’ became popular in the English-speaking world through a movement called the ‘Public Understanding of Science’ (PUS) … It legitimised new professionals, science communicators, who were supposed to act as mediators to effectively and faithfully transmit ‘official’ knowledge to lay audiences … ”<a href="#_ftn1">[1]</a> Having a mediator between science and the public is an idea that is used at many colleges and careers around the world. In the case of Kinesiology in the “real” world, there are gyms and Personal Trainers and Physical Therapists who are mediators between the actual science and the public. In the case of universities, some clubs promote different types of sciences to make the specified science more appealing to the public and gain students who want to partake in the specified science. To study the deficit model at a university usage of non-traditional sources must be used, such as yearbooks. The application of the deficit model at Southwestern will be explained in the fourth paragraph. To examine the history of Kinesiology, one must know its connection to Physical Education. Physical Education is not referred to the Physical Education that students take during their elementary school, middle school, or high school education; instead, it refers to the academic departments of Physical Education in Higher Education.<a href="#_ftn2">[2]</a> This type of Physical Education focuses on physical activity and human movement.<a href="#_ftn3">[3]</a> The connection that Physical Education and Kinesiology have is that of “deeper roots” between the two disciplines. An aspect of these “deeper roots” consist of the curriculum that both disciplines follow. “Accordingly, the curriculum [of Physical Education] included aspects of anatomy and physiology, physics, and anthropometry… ”<a href="#_ftn4">[4]</a> With Anatomy and Physiology being a class that was required in the department of Physical Education, and it also being a class that is required to get a Kinesiology degree, it demonstrates the similarity between the two core curriculums. This commonality between the different disciplines is reiterated by Jaime Schultz in her chapter by mentioning, “Although many think that the subdisciplinary movement of kinesiology is something that originated in the mid-20th century, it is clear that it has deeper roots.”<a href="#_ftn5">[5]</a> Those deeper roots come directly from the underlying storyline connection between Kinesiology and Physical Education. “… debates raged within the emergent sub-disciplines and studies over laboratory space, curricula, and resources as well as the right name for the school’s growing scientific focus (from physical education to human kinetics and now kinesiology).”<a href="#_ftn6">[6]</a> This quote proves the direct correlation between Physical Education and Kinesiology in terms of the shift and replacement in the name of the three departments - from Physical Education, to Human Kinetics, and finally, Kinesiology. To add to the argument of Physical Education being the precursor of the departments of Kinesiology, there is the fact that, “In the early 1960s, prodded by the words of Conant and Henry, members of the American Academy of Physical Education sought to determine what should constitute the discipline’s “body of knowledge.” The subsequent Big Ten Body-of-Knowledge Symposium identified six areas of specialization … These subdomains, along with several others, are currently recognized within kinesiology.”<a href="#_ftn7">[7]</a> As Physical Education was being pushed as an academic discipline, there were six areas of specialization within Physical Education: administrative theory in athletics and physical education, biomechanics, exercise physiology, history and philosophy of physical education, motor learning/sport psychology, and sociology and sport education. These six areas are now subdomains that are recognized within Kinesiology. This demonstrates that Physical Education departments and Kinesiology departments both have a common foundation, therefore, proving the direct connection between Physical Education and Kinesiology. To firmly establish this direct connection between the history of Kinesiology of the United States and Southwestern University; that of starting as Physical Education and moving towards the title of “Kinesiology,” is the fact that “ If you take a look at Table 3-3, for example, you can see that what was once the American Academy of Physical Education gradually added “kinesiology” to its title and eventually dropped the phrase “physical education” altogether to become the National Academy of Kinesiology (NAK).”<a href="#_ftn8">[8]</a> The table mentioned in the previous quote shows the Evolution of the National Academy of Kinesiology. Essentially, the table shows that in 1904, the National Academy of Kinesiology (present) was called the “Academy of Physical Education.” In 1926 it was then called “American Academy of Physical Education. In 1993 the academy switched names once again, and it was called the “American Academy of Kinesiology and Physical Education.” Finally, in 2010 the academy switched to its current title, which is the “National Academy of Kinesiology.” This comes to demonstrate the direct correlation between Kinesiology and its precursor, Physical Education, through the replacement of the title “Physical Education” throughout the years, to “Kinesiology,” which is demonstrated around the United States and at Southwestern, respectively at different times. To begin, the main connection between the history of Kinesiology at Southwestern University and the historical development of Kinesiology in the United States is the storyline that both histories follow. Although both of these histories follow the same storyline, this storyline is fulfilled at different times. Kinesiology, as an overall field, started around the 1960s as a result of “Franklin Henry’s call from Berkeley in the 1960s for a more academic approach to the study of human movement …”<a href="#_ftn9">[9]</a> The commencement of Kinesiology at Southwestern University and that of Kinesiology in the United States is a difference of decades. According to the Southwester’ Yearbook, the first time the Department of Kinesiology is mentioned was in 1991.<a href="#_ftn10">[10]</a> Before the Department of Kinesiology was mentioned though, the Department of Physical Education was mentioned for a significant number of years.<a href="#_ftn11">[11]</a> Dr. Carla Lowry in charge of the Physical Education Department before she was the chair of the Department of Kinesiology,<a href="#_ftn12">[12]</a> meaning that Physical Education is the predecessor of Kinesiology in the case of the history of Kinesiology at Southwestern University as well. This is also seen through the application of the deficit model at Southwestern. In order to get students more involved with Physical Education there was a club called the PEARL club - Physical Education. Athletic Recreation. And Leisure - that helped promote Physical Education and fitness to the student body - a core aspect of Physical Education. Once the Department of Physical Education turned into the Department of Kinesiology, the PEARL club no longer existed and was replaced by the Kinesiology Club to help promote the new science of Kinesiology at Southwestern.<a href="#_ftn13">[13]</a> Through the connection between these two different, yet similar clubs, they demonstrate the connectedness between Physical Education and Kinesiology. Through first explaining the methodical approach that is taken to study the history of science, it helps explain why non-traditional sources such as yearbooks are utilized to support the thesis. In order to understand the history of Kinesiology at Southwestern, the history of Kinesiology as a discipline itself must first be examined to make everything more understandable. Finally, the implementation of both previous concepts are incorporated into the history of Kinesiology at Southwestern to connect everything together. Even though there is now a solid foundation on what the history of Kinesiology consists of, there is still further research that needs to be done in order to completely connect the history of Kinesiology at Southwestern as a whole without there being loose details and two unanswered questions. The first question is, how did the curriculum of the Department of Physical Education change once it became the Department of Kinesiology in the 1990s? The last question is, why did Southwestern University wait until the 1990s to officially change the name of the Department of Physical Education to the Department of Kinesiology when that change was made about three decades earlier? Through further research and more time dedicated to this topic, the answers may eventually be found. Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Julian Noyola Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived <a href="#_ftnref1">[1]</a> Agusti Nieto-Galan, Science in the Public Sphere A history of lay knowledge and expertise (Oxfordshire: Routledge, Taylor &amp; Francis Group, 2016), 3. <a href="#_ftnref2">[2]</a> Jaime Schultz, “A History of Kinesiology,” in Foundations of Kinesiology - 18th Edition, edited by Carole Oglesby (Burlington: Jones & Bartlett Publishers, 2018), 42. <a href="#_ftnref3">[3]</a> Schultz, “A History of Kinesiology,” 42. <a href="#_ftnref4">[4]</a> Jaime Schultz, “A History of Kinesiology,” in Foundations of Kinesiology - 18th Edition, edited by Carole Oglesby (Burlington: Jones & Bartlett Publishers, 2018), 43. <a href="#_ftnref5">[5]</a> Jaime Schultz, “A History of Kinesiology,” in Foundations of Kinesiology - 18th Edition, edited by Carole Oglesby (Burlington: Jones & Bartlett Publishers, 2018), 44. <a href="#_ftnref6">[6]</a> Patricia Vertinsky, "Shadow Disciplines, or a Place for Post-Disciplinary Liaisons in the North American Research University: What Are We to Do with Physical Cultural Studies?", in Playing for Change: The Continuing Struggle for Sport and Recreation, edited by Field Russell (Toronto; Buffalo; London: University of Toronto Press, 2015), 391 <a href="#_ftnref7">[7]</a> Jaime Schultz, “A History of Kinesiology,” in Foundations of Kinesiology - 18th Edition, edited by Carole Oglesby (Burlington: Jones & Bartlett Publishers, 2018), 46-47. <a href="#_ftnref8">[8]</a> Jaime Schultz, “A History of Kinesiology,” in Foundations of Kinesiology - 18th Edition, edited by Carole Oglesby (Burlington: Jones & Bartlett Publishers, 2018), 50. <a href="#_ftnref9">[9]</a> Vertinsky, “Shadow Disciplines, or a Place for Post-Disciplinary Liaisons in the North American Research University: What Are We to Do with Physical Cultural Studies?”, 391. <a href="#_ftnref10">[10]</a> Southwestern University, Sou’Wester Yearbook. Georgetown, Texas: 1991, 34, Southwestern University, A. Frank Smith Jr. Library, Special Collections & Archives. <a href="#_ftnref11">[11]</a> Southwestern University, Sou’Wester Yearbook (Georgetown, Texas: 1984), 48, Southwestern University, A. Frank Smith Jr. Library, Special Collections & Archives. <a href="#_ftnref12">[12]</a> Sou’Wester Yearbook, 1991, 34. <a href="#_ftnref13">[13]</a> Sou’Wester Yearbook, 2000, 101. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource 2000 Sou’wester Yearbook Subject The topic of the resource Southwestern University Yearbook Description An account of the resource The 2000 Sou’Wester Yearbook contains information regarding the faculty and other staff members, the different departments, several pages for clubs, and events that occurred throughout the 2000 school year. Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Southwestern University, A. Frank Smith Jr. Library, Special Collections & Archives Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Southwestern University Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 2000 Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource Copyright Southwestern University. Reproduction for publication, exhibition, web-display, or commercial use by permission only, excepting Fair Use and Educational Use clauses of the US copyright law. Relation A related resource Southwesternuniversity; americana Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource Image, jpeg Language A language of the resource English Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context https://archive.org/details/souwesteryearboo2000sout/m ode/2up https://susciencehistory.southwestern.edu/files/original/e35ed324e11b3e64538e1c28de1bb776.jpg 4bf48ea6e41408ec7611bac2f028274b Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Popularizing the Wireless Transmitter Description An account of the resource The history of science is a history not often spotlighted by mainstream history, but it is a fascinating history that well deserves the recognition of historians. In the 21st century world we live in today we enjoy many comforts including but not limited by the microwave to quickly heat our food without huge fires, vaccines and germ theory to protect us against disease that might have wiped out entire continents a couple hundred years ago, and we live in an age where someone sitting on the Indian subcontinent can communicate with someone in their living room in Tucson Arizona almost instanously. The world of Twitter and other social media has linked the world in ways that would seem the world of science fiction a couple decades ago before the invention of the microchip. We live in a world that is so interconnected but yet so many people don’t know the story of how we got to this point in the year 2020. History has been argued by some scholars to be the study of stories. Essentially historians take primary accounts and sift through the data and find the puzzle that best matches the pieces. This is the same with the history of science, it is a story that doesn’t require the knowledge of the science being discovered by these great men and women of science it simply requires an understanding of how pieces fit together to compliment the whole. The globalized world of twitter and instant help from across the ocean had a starting place, and that starting place at least in the digital age began at Southwestern with an invention by a man named Robert Stewart Heyer in the year 1895<a href="#_ftn1">[1]</a> when he arguably for the first time in history sent a wireless message from his Southwestern laboratory to the jailhouse in Georgetown, a distance of over a mile. Robert Stewart Heyer, the man I knew is Heyer’s official autobiography written by his daughter Rey Heyer Brown and only 1000 copies were ever made. During his time, he was a professor of science’s, served as president of Southwestern and later served as president of Southern Methodist University in Dallas. Gugliemo Marconi is the Italian inventor and electrical engineer who went down in the history books as the first man in history to send a wireless transmission over a distance out of earshot. Marconi famously sent his transmission in the year 1901, Robert Heyer sent his signal in 1805<a href="#_ftn2">[2]</a>, six whole years before Marconi. Why did the world give the spotlight to Marconi when Heyer was actually the first to send a wireless transmission? Heyer’s feat has been collaborated by the other professors at Southwestern during his time there as well as countless students and the jailer who received his signal<a href="#_ftn3">[3]</a>. It turns out geography itself may be why the spotlight was given to Marconi. Georgetown was taken from the Tonkawa Indians was taken and settled in 1848 by George Washington Glasscock and had a steadily growing population. Even though Georgetown the town where Southwestern was situated was growing, Texas in the late 1800’s was still wilderness and besides a few towns here and there it was sparse wilderness. Telegraph lines were present but not everywhere that meant that there was little communication between settlements. Marconi who was working In Europe, a man born in Italy but setting up his company The Wireless Telegraph and Signal Company in the United Kingdom was in the most interconnected, funded and scientific areas of the world at the time. In Robert Stewart Heyer, the Man I Knew his daughter talks about other reasons, according to her he didn’t even want credit for his invention. He was unable to get a proper patent for his invention and prioritized his family over his invention. He was a tinkerer at heart and that sufficed his needs. Heyer and Marconi’s wireless transmitters although revolutionary, were not the first attempts at wireless transmission in history. The advantage of long-distance communication from everything from military maneuvers to city to city communication was a feat that had recognized significance. The very first attempts at distance communication took place by the Greeks, Persians and Chinese, simultaneously reaching the conclusion the distance communication could be advantageous independently around the same time period. They would use smoke signals on top of hills to communicate. Later in history around the beginning of the scientific revolution the advantage of distance communication was still feat that was valued and an invention called the Semaphore would demonstrate this. The semaphore used giant lever operated hands to send messages in a format that is similar to morse code to semaphore stations up to 12 miles away. A string of these stations could be set up on hilltops with a telescope at each station. But like imagining modern science in a context today without computers distance communication was limited to the eyes, and for distance communication to work a force unseen and powerful would be needed to work. The invention of the telegraph by Robert Morse was this invention. <a href="#_ftn4">[4]</a>Thanks solely to the discovery of electromagnetism by Hans Oesrsted and the invention of the battery by Alessandro Volta, this unseen communication was brought to the world. “Hardly a day intervened when General Grant did not know the exact state of facts with me, more than fifteen-hundred miles off – William Tecumesh Sherman (civil war general)”, the civil war saw the unprecedented boom of telegraph technology on both Confederate and Union sides of the war<a href="#_ftn5">[5]</a>. There was a catch to this tech however and that was in order to communicate, telegraph lines would need to be set up. These lines would span hundreds, thousands of miles at times and would take the workforce of the nation in uncharted wilderness to erect, there had to be an easier way to do things and there was. Heyer followed by Marconi would start the ball rolling on an invention that used the same electrical pulses as the telegraph machine but sent the message without thousands of miles of cables, through the spark gap transmitter. Robert Heyer and Marconi both created a wireless transmitter that worked in almost the same way. what has been classified today as a Spark Gap Transmitter, this transmitter sent an electrical shock to an oscillatory circuit, consisting of an inductance/ capacitance in sequence, essentially an electrical shock was converted to a single radio wave of non-variable frequency and wave length. Controlling the electrical pulse on the sending end, Heyer and Marconi could send a message using morse code. This technology was immediately recognized for its full potential, in full by the US Navy.<a href="#_ftn6">[6]</a> Around 1910 the US Navy conducted a huge experiment with two of its ships which were outfitted with Marconi’s radio technology, using an evolved Spark Gap-transmitter (the same type of transmitter invented by Heyer) 1000 miles away these ships were able to broadcast a clear and distinct message to a massive radio antenna sitting on the US coastline. What were the obstacles that prevented Heyer’s invention from becoming used worldwide as soon as they were invented before 1910? This was the Austin-Cohen theory, which stated radio waves decay at the inverse square root of a wavelength. This theory came into the mainstream scientific and engineering circles around the same time Heyer’s radio contraptions were being brought into the same circles. This theory actually soon had become a law, and for all early radio inventions, they all abided heavily by this theory. This theory basically inferred that a radio wave could not travel the length of the Atlantic Ocean because of this decay, and the only way to make this happen would be to create a receiver that is tall enough but the distances at stake are far too large and thus the receiver would need to be unfeasibly tall. Ultra-low frequency waves would change everything however, and the US navy demonstrated this in two tests the test in 1910 mentioned earlier and a later test in 1913. These ultra-low frequency waves (any wave between 300 hertz and 3 kilohertz) can be broadcast at a range between 100 and 1000KM. Extremely low frequency waves (ELF) waves are waves that broadcast at an even lower frequency (3 to 30 Hz) and these wavelengths can be broadcast at a range of 10,000 to 100,000 Kilometers. <a href="#_ftn7">[7]</a>These two wave discoveries opened up the door for long distance radio communication. In the 1890’s was the decade actually that the navy began to take notice, that science and engineering advancements could intertwine not just in industry but also with warfare quoting “this is the birth of a new navy”. Heyer did not invent radio and communication, but his invention is a crucial piece to an emerging science and technological puzzle that was being solved at the end of the 19the and beginning of the 20th century. Without his invention that for intents of this paper can be symbolized through Marconi (because Heyer invented the wireless transmitter first) the invention of the radio that we are most familiar with today could not have been reached if the crucial stepping stone that was Heyer’s invention was not invented first. In chapter 40 of a little history of science, it is the final chapter of the book and it concludes everything by talking about science in the digital age. This age we live in now has its own chapter, arguably it is as important in the history of science to Marie Curie’s advancements on radiation if not more so. The level of importance doesn’t matter for the case of this argument, from the early days of the Hollerieth machine and the punch card in the early 20th century to Alan Turning’s early computer work eventually that led to the invention of the microchip. Computers talk to one another, and more so now than ever in the 5G world we live in now It is almost unfathomable to imagine a world where communication with the nearest town or city is weeks of walking away, or a fire on a hilltop, even in the arms of a semaphore across the valley. History of Science by Sean F. Johnson in his chapter 2 Big Ideas and Compelling approaches helps to put Marconi and Howe’s inventions in place in the global history of science. The global history of science started with astronomy with hunter gatherer populations. Astreo- archeology shows us their connection, left behind by these people such as the ‘marriage of earth and sky’ when the serpent from Serpent Mound (a site in Ohio possibly created by the Fort Ancient culture who were hunter gatherers, but its creation remains a mystery of giant serpent with an oval in its mouth) is positioned precisely true north and every summer solstice the sun shines through a precise gap in a nearby hilltop right down the center of the serpent. Plato and his republic used their knowledge of their times to create explanations for the world that fit logically. The scientific revolution was another key point in the history of science, with scientists revising many of Plato’s and the other Greek philosophers’ ideas and creating the framework for science as we see it today. In their own subset Marconi and Heyer’s invention was one of these turning points in the history of science, they helped to create communication that’s instantaneous and global, and for that we thank them today. Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Ian Jones Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived <a href="#_ftnref1">[1]</a> Robert Stewart Heyer, the man I knew <a href="#_ftnref2">[2]</a> Robert Stewart Heyer, the man I knew <a href="#_ftnref3">[3]</a> Robert Stewart Heyer, the man I knew <a href="#_ftnref4">[4]</a> Neuenfeldt, Eric. "Telegraph." In Wild Horse: Stories, 120-40. Amherst; Boston: University of Massachusetts Press, 2016. Accessed April 27, 2020. www.jstor.org/stable/j.ctt1hd198v.12. <a href="#_ftnref5">[5]</a> Neuenfeldt, Eric. "Telegraph." In Wild Horse: Stories, 120-40. Amherst; Boston: University of Massachusetts Press, 2016. Accessed April 27, 2020. www.jstor.org/stable/j.ctt1hd198v.12. <a href="#_ftnref6">[6]</a> Yeang, Chen-Pang. "Scientific Fact or Engineering Specification? The U.S. Navy's Experiments on Wireless Telegraphy circa 1910." Technology and Culture 45, no. 1 (2004): 1-29. Accessed April 27, 2020. www.jstor.org/stable/40060578. <a href="#_ftnref7">[7]</a>Yeang, Chen-Pang. "Scientific Fact or Engineering Specification? The U.S. Navy's Experiments on Wireless Telegraphy circa 1910." Technology and Culture 45, no. 1 (2004): 1-29. Accessed April 27, 2020. www.jstor.org/stable/40060578. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Hyer Wireless Transmitter mockup Subject The topic of the resource Diagram Description An account of the resource Diagram explaining the science behind Hyer’s wireless transmitter Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource SU special Collections Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource January 21 1991 https://susciencehistory.southwestern.edu/files/original/fbd25c291b14884c933215d7576e2dc5.pdf 43c504667cad9e44aa13bc8f3eb2d55c Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource A History of the Spanish Flu at SU Description An account of the resource The Spanish influenza spread throughout the United States from 1918-1920. It was able to claim more than 675,00 American lives. While technology today allows for the fast and almost instantaneous spread of knowledge, means of communication in the early twentieth century were much less expeditious. The radio and newspaper were the two main forms of media that were available to the public. These two medias were responsible for communication knowledge from the scientists to the public. Through them, the public was able to stay continuously informed on the happenings of the country. Important information, such as updates on the rapidly spreading pandemic, were able to make people in many places aware of the threat at hand. This essay aims to understand how and why, during one of the deadliest pandemics, life at Southwestern University seemed to continue as normal. In the United States, as World War 1 was ending, it was the beginning of a new period of time in the country. The Spanish influenza was quickly spreading worldwide and by the end the pandemic, claimed more than 675,000 deaths in the United States alone. The spanish flu has been recognized to have taken place in three waves, with the first starting around spring or summer of 1918. It took a heavy toll on the young adult population as it killed roughly one in four of its victims. This was a considerably higher mortality rate, as compared to other epidemics which killed about one in every thousand.1 The Spanish flu spread with great speed across the country, largely in cities with military bases. While it is hard to pinpoint where the pandemic began, it can be said to have originated in Kansas in January of 1918. It became impossible to stop the spread once it began, as interconnected transportation networks allowed the virus to find itself all over the world. To understand how this epidemic spread with such strength and speed, it is important to look at those who spread it: the general public. How much did the public know about the Spanish Flu? How much did the public know about germs and viruses in general? It is necessary to look to the history of germ theory in order to find out the information the public had at the time. Before germ theory, nobody thought that a living organism from the outside could cause a disease. Doctors had been explaining illnesses by linking them to internal changes in the humours. Overindulgence in food and drink, or bad habits have also been seen as causes of illnesses before the concept of falling ill from other organisms.2 The introduction of germ theory was a big turning point in medicine as it brought with it the concept of warfare within the body. The realization that the body has to defend against small living creatures, was one spurred interest in how these microorganisms play a role in everyday things. While looking into the role of microorganisms in events such as baking bread or brewing beer, Louis Pasteur made many discoveries in dairy products that are still used today. Showing that bacteria and other microorganisms caused diseases in not only humans, but also in animals was important as it helped show that these organisms caused disease. Diseases were explained by doctors as contagious. This meant that the disease could be spread by contact between people. Cholera, the most feared disease of the 1800s, was a disease that doctors had trouble explaining. A major fear shared by many people, was that Cholera was spreading through the air. In order to figure out how it was spreading, English physician, John Snow, mapped out London neighborhoods. By doing this, he became sure that Cholera was being spread by water. He concluded that the feces and vomit of Cholera victims was contaminating the water, which was then pumped into the city from a public pump in Soho, central London.3 What Snow’s research did was raise awareness for the need for clean water for public health. By raising awareness, the public began to understand how they were spreading the disease. They were informed by the discoveries made by scientists like Snow, and were able to learn the importance of having clean water to avoid the rampant spread of disease. The creation of the vaccine is another example of communication between scientists and the public improving. Louis Pasteure aimed to make the Anthrax bacterium weaker, to be able to inject it into patients as a vaccine. Anthrax was a disease that was sometimes spread from farm animals to humans, and caused sores of the skin. If it is spread to the bloodstream, anthrax can kill. As Pasteure found out where the bacterium thrived and where it was vulnerable, he was able to create an anthrax bacteria that was much weaker and less able to cause disease. This made Anthrax the first human disease preventable by vaccine.4 Once Pasteur made his discovery, he invited newspaper reporters to his house soon after his creation. In front of live reporters, Pasteur was able to show how the non vaccinated animals died, while the vaccinated animals were unaffected. This helped make the public aware of the powerful steps medical science was making.5 The process of disseminating knowledge created by scientists to the public has been proven throughout the history of disease and germs to be an important process. As scientists discovered microorganisms in the air and all around us, they better understood how to prevent the spread of disease. Cholera placed a big emphasis on sanitation, while innovations like Louis Pasteure’s vaccine for Anthrax let the public know of science’s leaps forward. Though the communication between scientists and the public in instances like these were strong, other attempts of communication are not so successful. There was a fear of the flu nearly everywhere in the United States, but in some areas, the flu did not cause panic or fear. With daily reports of the influenza spreading in other countries or even the rampant spread in the US, some areas did not see the Spanish flu as an imminent threat. The reason for this seemingly irrational behavior in these places was cognitive inertia.6 This is the tendency of existing beliefs or habits of thought to blind people to change realities. Cognitive inertia was fueled by the understanding of the flu as only a seasonal visitor rather than a viral threat. It was also believed to only seldom kill the strong and healthy, which was horribly untrue. As the public began to rely more on sources such as newspapers to stay informed, news of the troops overseas and updates on the war overshadowed the pandemic in some areas. Although these areas affected by cognitive inertia were informed on what was happening in other parts of the world, they chose to ignore what scientists were saying, and instead stuck with their own beliefs. The communication between the scientist and public was further weakened by the newspapers, who focused their attention on the war overseas, rather than the viral war they were facing at home. According to the deficit model of science communication, information moves from experts to the public. This is called popularization. This creation and diffusion of information for the general public to create new knowledge is what bridges the gap between the experts and the public.7 In order for the popularization of science to occur, this relies on mediums of information exchange such as books and museums, in order for the people to become educated. While these fountains of information were readily available to observe, the newspaper and radio were essential to relay messages in a fast manner. The relationship between the experts and the public becomes increasingly important in times of uncertainty and fear, such as a pandemic. Expert sources such as the Surgeon General can be seen giving advice in The Williamson County Sun, in articles titled “How to fight Spanish Influenza”. Here, they make the public aware of different ways to stop the spread of the virus such as washing one's hands or avoiding crowds.8 While this is a step in the right direction, there seems to be a lack of a sense of urgency in making the public aware of the gravity of the situation. This was made apparent after looking through The Williamson County Sun and its issues from 1918 to 1920. While the pandemic was sweeping the nation, students and faculty alike at Southwestern seem to have been under informed. The Surgeon General allowed readers to understand how to combat the virus more effectively, but the lack of more articles like these seems strange due to the severity of the pandemic. The lack of information in the SU community about the Spanish Influenza was not due to the experts, as the communication of knowledge is dependent on the newspaper and journalists, which report to the public. Experts and the media are heavily reliant on each other to disseminate knowledge to the public. While the experts lead the communication process by producing knowledge, they rely on the media to spread it. Without experts, the media would not be able to spread any information that the public may need. The public has its own role in this process, as they agree to scientific judgements, and pledge their support for activities that scientists have deemed desirable or essential.9 In terms of participation, the public can only react and interpret the knowledge they receive. The public can express how they feel, as journalists record and translate that expression into a newspaper article. An example of this is in The Megaphone, where an article titled “Lawrence Called Home By Death Of His Father”, describes a student whose father had died of complications resulting from the Spanish influenza.10 While there was communication between the public and experts, it was not sufficient on Southwestern’s campus, as there was not enough public awareness of the virus. This may have caused the public to be unprepared for the virus that came to take a heavy toll on the SU community. As medical advancements in the world improved the quality of life, there were some things that even medical advancements cannot control. The spread of the Spanish influenza through the United states from 1918-1920 was one that ravaged the American people. Despite this, the SU community seemed nearly unfazed, and displayed no signs of panic. One cause to blame for this reaction may have been cognitive inertia. Cognitive inertia may have been one of the causes, but this stems from an uninformed public. In order to keep the general public informed, experts must communicate through the media, which provides outlets for audiences to observe. While the Spanish Influenza’s effect was felt at SU, the community may have prepared better, if media outlets such as The Megaphone and The Williamson County Sun had made the public more aware about the pandemic at hand. Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Nicolas Guarin Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived 1 Tom Dicke, “Waiting for the flu: Cognitive Inertia and the Spanish Influenza Pandemic of 1918-19,” Journal of the History of Medicine and Allied Sciences 70, no. 2 (April 2015):201, accessed February 15, 2020, https://muse.jhu.edu/article/579501. 2William Bynum, A Little History of Science (Yale University Press, 2012), 161. 3 Bynum, A Little History, 163. 4 Bynum, A Little History, 164. 5 Bynum, A Little History, 165. 6 Dicke, “Waiting for the flu: Cognitive Inertia and the Spanish Influenza Pandemic of 1918-19,” 197. 7 Bruce V. Lewenstein, Popularization, 667 8 “How To Fight Spanish Influenza,” Williamson County Sun, October 18, 1918 9 Steven Shapin, “Science and the Public,” in Companion to the History of Modern Science, ed. R.C. Olby, G.N. Cantor, J.R.R. Christie, M.J.S. Hodge (London: Princeton University Press ,1974), 992 10 Waldrop, Gayle, “Lawrence Called Home By Death Of His Father,” The Megaphone, November 5, 1918, https://texashistory.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metapth394998/m1/3/ Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Surgeon General Blue Issues Advice on Influenza Subject The topic of the resource How to fight Spanish influenza Description An account of the resource The article describes various ways to combat the Spanish influenza such as hand washing and avoiding crowds. Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource The Surgeon General Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived The Williamson County Sun, October 18, 1918, Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available The Williamson County Sun Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource October 18, 1918 Language A language of the resource English Type The nature or genre of the resource News https://susciencehistory.southwestern.edu/files/original/7311e1d7878b1021a41e1f4ad27f0433.jpg 575d6d0e2714b12943151ea9000c21fa https://susciencehistory.southwestern.edu/files/original/fe042067c18247b61fdf337e32ab87a6.jpg f44bfb1382b86ef7a3b9e82e112869e5 https://susciencehistory.southwestern.edu/files/original/888d06cbc744bca67884fc55a2400c9b.jpg c459e9025b2e181a7491c240a56676cf https://susciencehistory.southwestern.edu/files/original/ef55dca5a4e9378101423ce6cb3e7faa.jpg 0544142dfcd569b88cc899b392945d52 https://susciencehistory.southwestern.edu/files/original/d7647cc60bfdf424923eff3c3f917f83.jpg 4bb1578f732e54a6bcfe444b975a21b7 https://susciencehistory.southwestern.edu/files/original/e0a4f5b4f1e268ce25f54e75791addcc.jpg b05f11e69f85d19b46df48bf492e467d https://susciencehistory.southwestern.edu/files/original/25cf2e74b2feed35400b3efe01628ac4.jpg a3038cac30ade1719df0711f202004f0 Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource A History of Germ Theory and Vaccination at SU Description An account of the resource It is well known that with every scientific discovery comes disbelievers, nay-sayers, and even conspiracists. Since its conception, vaccinations have been contested by anti-vaccination beliefs. To learn the source of public resistance to vaccines, examples of its implementation in other nations may provide the necessary insight. Qualitative research of numerous historical, scholarly, and peer-reviewed texts reveals much about the nature of the controversial history of germ theory and vaccinations. Evidently, few physicians, and even fewer people understand the history or science behind vaccinations. There is a trend of government involvement affecting the public perception of the safety and efficacy of vaccines. Outside of America- Cuba, China, and Japan all experienced unique implementations of vaccines. The manner in which the science and history surrounding vaccinations is communicated to the public is another potential influencing factor. As B. Bensaude-Vincent points out, there is an ever present and ever increasing gap between scientists and the public. Naturally, this gap creates an uninformed public, and what fills the void instead of knowledge is uncertainty, which inevitably leads to fear. The manner in which scientific knowledge has been disseminated to the public has largely followed the deficit model. The deficit model, as B. Bensaude-Vincent explains, characterizes the public as uninformed, unintelligent, and nothing more than recipients of scientific advancements . The likelihood that the deficit model is a large influencing factor in the development of the controversy surrounding vaccines, and perhaps other scientific controversies, is great. Southwestern University adopted the deficit model to communicate scientific knowledge as early as 1891. This is evident in the Alamo and San Jacinto monthly of March that year, in which is a collection of articles by the Alamo and San Jacinto societies. The article of importance is titled “The Germ Theory of Vaccinations” by one W.D. Gordon. The article is essentially a general historical background, and simplified scientific explanation of vaccinations and germ theory. More importantly, it is an example of Southwestern utilizing the deficit model of scientific communication. W.D. Gordon himself makes the assumption that few physicians and few patients fully understand the science and history of germ theory and vaccinations. He then begins clearly explaining in layman's terms the historical and scientific backing. This correlates with Bensaude-Vincents definition of the deficit model in which the public is uninformed and simply receives the benefits without participating. There is no way for the public to participate in this model, so the article serves purely to popularize the idea of vaccinations. The communication of scientific knowledge, especially pertaining to medicine, is largely in the hands of physicians. W.D. Gordon implies however that physicians are largely uninformed when it comes to the history and science of vaccinations and germ theory. This leaves only the scientific societies such as the San Jacinto and Alamo societies at Southwestern to spread knowledge to the local public, ie Georgetown Texas. As Bruce V. Lewenstein explains, scientific societies played a large role in not only the popularization of science, but more importantly, the marketing of scientific discoveries. The involvement of scientific societies in the popularization of science with the intention of marketing the discoveries creates tension between the rich and poor. As CP Snow points out, there is already a long lasting gap between the rich and poor that is widening due to the capital requirement of science. To then go ahead and market scientific discoveries to the poorer public who already is unsure of the richer scientific population and their discoveries causes the tension to grow more. As tension mounts, it is not hard to imagine an outcome in which the uncertainty surrounding vaccinations results in an anti-scientific conspiracy. While the controversy surrounding vaccinations is in the forefront of scientific controversy, there is much to be learned from examples of controversy elsewhere. Controversy that has arisen due to the gulf between scientists and the public is nothing new or isolated. In fact, it has occurred all over the world and all throughout history. As an example, Steven Shapin points out that Official Newtonian science was initially questioned during the enlightenment, despite it being incredibly well established at the time. Similarly, the basis of vaccination is germ theory which has been researched abundantly, and the efficacy of vaccinations is unquestionable. The apparent truth is that no matter how well a scientific discovery is established, poor communication via the deficit model will get in the way of consensus. If a consensus cannot be reached, the progress of science as a whole can become stagnant. In an attempt to better understand the relationship between vaccines, and its controversy, one must research the history of vaccines and germ theory. The Alamo and San Jacinto Monthly publication from March of the year 1891 is preserved at the Sotuhwestern special collections. This specific publication was based in Georgetown, and edited by the Alamo and San Jacinto societies, consisting of Willie Boyce, R.L. Daniel, J.L. Brooks, and H.A. Alan, with the chief editor being W.D Gordon. This edition of the publication contains an article by W.D. Gordon himself titled “The Germ Theory of Vaccination ''. The article is a direct example of the attitude a respected doctor of the era held regarding vaccination. Following a detailed history of germ theory, W.D Gordon describes vaccinations as having the ‘utmost benefit to humanity’ of any other medicine. With this glowing praise, one must wonder what turn of events led to the current opposition to vaccinations. The smallpox vaccination did not make its way to Cuba until 1803 when small amounts were being transported across Latin America. It was not until one Dr. Vincente Ferrer made strides in producing and implementing the vaccine. Ferrer pioneered a new method of administering vaccines, where he utilized an infected calf. The standard option for vaccination at the time was arm to arm, which was considered much less sanitary. The introduction of his technique clashed with the opinions of physicians who preferred arm to arm. As it would seem, the main topic of discussion in Cuba has been about which method of vaccination is best. In comparison to America, neither country seems to be able to reach a consensus regarding vaccines. If physicians in Cuba were as unaware as physicians in America regarding the history of vaccines , that could be a source of the disagreement. In China, tuberculosis was a major problem up until the 1930’s when the Nationalist Party rose to power and established the Ministry of Health. Prior to that, the understanding of the disease was that it was familial, rather than a matter of germs. The Ministry of Health expanded and modernized Chinese healthcare, and classified tuberculosis as a disease that merited serious attention. Initial efforts to prevent the disease did not involve vaccinations, but rather education and isolation programs. By the 1930s the Bacillus Calmette–Guérin (BCG) vaccine was the standard preventative measure for tuberculosis, but the Chinese government had doubts about the vaccine, and claimed that its efficacy was not verifiable. It was not until a researcher named Wang Liang made strides in normalizing the vaccine in China, but the hesitance to its integration remained on a governmental level. Throughout the 1940’s, many pieces of scientific literature on the BCG vaccine were written by Chinese physicians, but the lack of consensus remained. In 1937, the second Sino-Japanese war began, and China was determined to win. To improve their odds of victory, they cut funding to research into the BCG vaccine by two thirds. Much like in America, China never seemed to be able to come to a full consensus regarding the efficacy of vaccines. It was amongst the physicians and politicians where the disagreement laid, which is to be expected, presuming the same level of ignorance regarding the history of vaccines as is present in America The citizens of China, generally speaking, required the vaccine greatly, but the lack of governmental implementation defied the needs of the people. In contrast to America, the presence of governmental implementation was one of the causes of the lack of consensus. It may be that the ongoing wars in China diluted the apparent need for a consensus to be made at all. In America, the lack of ongoing war created an increased opportunity for rumination about the efficacy of vaccinations, resulting in a lack of consensus. Japan was focused on vaccinations prior to the Meiji Restoration of 1868, before they even had a practical government. Medicine at the time was privatized, and not of the interest of the government. Medical and scientific discussion with the rest of the world was essentially non-existent. Rather, medical knowledge was privately shared amongst families, and lineage structures. Vaccines were present in Japan as early as 1804, thanks to Dutch-Japanese trade routes. The downside is that the only individuals who could obtain vaccines were Japanese physicians who could speak Dutch and knew about the value of vaccines. By the 1820’s, Dutch books detailing Jennerian vaccinations were circulating Japan. By the 1840’s, Western medicine, including vaccinations, was prevalent in Japan, but only to the rich overlords and merchants. By 1850, vaccination clinics were present in Japan, but the government was not interested in helping the implementation at all. It was not until 1860, when a government in Japan showed interest in assisting implementation. The Tokugawa government recruited experienced vaccinators to spread the immunization to thousands of Japanese children. That same year, a public clinic was opened in the capital at the time, Edo. Later that decade, the Tokugawa government relinquished its rule to oligarchs once again. Interestingly, it was the oligarchy government that really helped spread and implement vaccinations. Evidently, there was little resistance to the implementation of vaccines in Japan. The reason for the lack of resistance is that the vaccines were known by private, trusted, shaman like physicians prior to the government involving itself at all. Unlike American physicians, these shamans had a full understanding of the history and science of vaccines. The people of Japan understood the history of, trusted and used vaccines well before the Japanese government did. Because the people already understood the history of vaccines, they accepted government implementation with open arms. In contrast to America, few people knew any history regarding vaccines prior to governmental implementation, as such, the implementation was resisted. The deficit model has been the predominant method of communicating science for centuries, yet its effectiveness remains in question. Alternative models such as the participatory model may be significantly more effective at engaging the public while keeping them informed. Scientific societies are the main groups practising the deficit model, in which they condescend to the ‘uniformed’ public in layman's terms as they are simply the recipients of science and nothing more. Southwestern University had adopted the deficit model with their very own San Jacinto and Alamo scientific societies and their monthly publications. The effect the deficit model has on scientific outcomes is negative, as the public becomes more and more unsure of the scientists and their discoveries. Additionally, the fact that the discoveries were marketed predominantly to the poor from the wealthy, made the gap between the public and the scientific community even greater. Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Aidan Clark Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived Bensaude-Vincent, B. “A Historical Perspective on Science and Its ‘Others.’” University of Chicago Press, n.d., 362. Bensaude-Vincent, B. “A Genealogy of the Increasing Gap between Science and the Public.” Institute of Physics Publishing, n.d., 103. Lewenstein, Bruce V. “Popularization ,” n.d., 668. Brazelton, Mary Augusta. 2019. “Danger in the Air: Tuberculosis Control and BCG Vaccination in the Republic of China, 1930–1949.” Cross-Currents: East Asian History and Culture Review 8 (1): 139–64. doi:10.1353/ach.2019.0006. Bynum, William F. Little History of Science. Yale University Press, 2013. Conis, Elena. 2013. “A Mother’s Responsibility: Women, Medicine, and the Rise of Contemporary Vaccine Skepticism in the United States.” Bulletin of the History of Medicine 87 (3): 407–35. doi:10.1353/bhm.2013.0047. Gonzalez, Stephanie H. 2018. “The Cowpox Controversy: Memory and the Politics of Public Health in Cuba.” Bulletin of the History of Medicine 92 (1): 110–40. doi:10.1353/bhm.2018.0005. Gordon, W D. “The Germ Theory of Vaccination .” Alamo and San Jacinto Monthly 9, no. 5 (March 1891): 427–33. Jannetta, Ann. 2009. “Jennerian Vaccination and the Creation of a National Public Health Agenda in Japan, 1850–1900.” Bulletin of the History of Medicine 83 (1): 125–40. doi:10.1353/bhm.0.0185. Johnston, Sean F. History of Science: a Beginners Guide. Oxford: Oneworld Publications, 2012. Shapin, Steven. Science and the Public, n.d. Snow, CP. “The Two Cultures.” The Two Cultures, n.d., 46. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource The Germ Theory of Vaccination Subject The topic of the resource Germ theory and vaccination Description An account of the resource A monthly journal publication written by the Alamo and San Jacinto literary societies. Contains an article detailing The Germ theory of Vaccination. Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource W. D. Gordon Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived Alamo and San Jacinto Monthly, volume IX, number 5 Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Alamo and San Jacinto Literary Societies, Southwestern University, Georgetown, Texas Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource March, 1891 Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource Southwestern Special Collections Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource Southwestern University Relation A related resource All other articles in this publication. Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource Monthly journal Language A language of the resource English Type The nature or genre of the resource Article Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context Gordon, W D., “The Germ Theory of Vaccination ,” Alamo and San Jacinto Monthly 9, no. 5 (March 1891): 427–33. https://susciencehistory.southwestern.edu/files/original/31d2bd9125afef9cad51d79dc2bc4378.jpg d0980be072257daf510ebc7314b73b42 https://susciencehistory.southwestern.edu/files/original/b59611e4d37015935631f07de8224185.jpg c5b3227774b0c82a571b593b47a45722 https://susciencehistory.southwestern.edu/files/original/d13794eba94a9eb7e25a54e41d96b7ed.jpg a8f4b204f7acf38291d4fa415600a7d2 https://susciencehistory.southwestern.edu/files/original/f536e4124b3c9efc0fa558b35c3117e8.jpg 6d76409d3b4a1ce84ac49c169243a55d https://susciencehistory.southwestern.edu/files/original/a65aee3ee6c3f14301258f2f1db8c0a6.jpg 1b61ef6e0715a710453334daf3f0b93d https://susciencehistory.southwestern.edu/files/original/dfbbbdb47b81e4f727e0d3301744ab5a.jpg 538b452006605d2fcdbcc5194cd84b40 https://susciencehistory.southwestern.edu/files/original/eadf2a3bee207ee87902bd1504bc80bf.jpg 2d0a04aec3bec5b4b2cd1993a9668245 https://susciencehistory.southwestern.edu/files/original/82dc403b22d248f3c8edd205c1742b07.jpg c9c555ab0bc85b31dcf8cbd05e948d0d https://susciencehistory.southwestern.edu/files/original/91bc0b6b094d52db1d27571a1c05f2a5.jpg c9c555ab0bc85b31dcf8cbd05e948d0d https://susciencehistory.southwestern.edu/files/original/888c6ede7add0292c2a620c0e0e0c0a4.jpg 8b036dbd5ec3e00c3f5c907366625e4f https://susciencehistory.southwestern.edu/files/original/21004ae44f2b2c2aa95e34aa966cf8ec.jpg e284d454b1686a7a7b651cf8a569872c https://susciencehistory.southwestern.edu/files/original/a4c32d28d3c390639b4158cceba38439.jpg ce1a11a1126340ab65ea0cd4a641b994 https://susciencehistory.southwestern.edu/files/original/c6a85e85e09afcaaac3d0a74a53c36ef.jpg 09546282a00234a22e9a0e8725aa9206 https://susciencehistory.southwestern.edu/files/original/9929e001548d6b410c385ce472357da5.jpg 756f55512368c6cdffd2f7fd6bb42ac1 https://susciencehistory.southwestern.edu/files/original/46425189096929809d361d514ce6eb99.jpg 756f55512368c6cdffd2f7fd6bb42ac1 https://susciencehistory.southwestern.edu/files/original/6573e84699bf1160ecd1f1f29bc68889.jpg 50c8dff1a0eef2d0de1499134d5fbac4 https://susciencehistory.southwestern.edu/files/original/460b07857fdc13803f9a84ea5049a019.jpg 370600d1351e71a0fe923575eb6ffd14 https://susciencehistory.southwestern.edu/files/original/33bf10239c95bd6b9459e1c51952dda6.jpg d0980be072257daf510ebc7314b73b42 https://susciencehistory.southwestern.edu/files/original/0918c45e35fc9b0e956bc5f709adf7ac.jpg c5b3227774b0c82a571b593b47a45722 https://susciencehistory.southwestern.edu/files/original/bbc4573e372851e75e32a94bf74f7fd4.jpg a8f4b204f7acf38291d4fa415600a7d2 https://susciencehistory.southwestern.edu/files/original/f2b9725e9a7317c5fd288d00f2b70e6b.jpg 6d76409d3b4a1ce84ac49c169243a55d https://susciencehistory.southwestern.edu/files/original/d06528ee774101d4f350e2fb08778f43.jpg 1b61ef6e0715a710453334daf3f0b93d https://susciencehistory.southwestern.edu/files/original/0a02411eaa1428ce84df892443f538c9.jpg 538b452006605d2fcdbcc5194cd84b40 https://susciencehistory.southwestern.edu/files/original/01ae7cad854ebb4e29122a00ae512aaf.jpg 2d0a04aec3bec5b4b2cd1993a9668245 https://susciencehistory.southwestern.edu/files/original/18b6194b8afde9e3008bc5dd571e6087.jpg c9c555ab0bc85b31dcf8cbd05e948d0d https://susciencehistory.southwestern.edu/files/original/6da921fe0de42c27e1c8c4d5bcf6eeb3.jpg c9c555ab0bc85b31dcf8cbd05e948d0d https://susciencehistory.southwestern.edu/files/original/0a43d8fa5f3d9224cb4a5d1193b181f2.jpg 8b036dbd5ec3e00c3f5c907366625e4f https://susciencehistory.southwestern.edu/files/original/fc2fdec433aa4224b7358e028869cff7.jpg e284d454b1686a7a7b651cf8a569872c https://susciencehistory.southwestern.edu/files/original/25ab4b4fa54848177c2b1b64eaa37df7.jpg ce1a11a1126340ab65ea0cd4a641b994 https://susciencehistory.southwestern.edu/files/original/dbab95c88c23635a054ca99bb16ac64b.jpg 09546282a00234a22e9a0e8725aa9206 https://susciencehistory.southwestern.edu/files/original/314afe1f2014664fcdc26e5847b05320.jpg 756f55512368c6cdffd2f7fd6bb42ac1 https://susciencehistory.southwestern.edu/files/original/ce900f0e967b6c5e24fd6c3a3e359aca.jpg 756f55512368c6cdffd2f7fd6bb42ac1 https://susciencehistory.southwestern.edu/files/original/dc0f919a5ca7e53774b44a514a236cfa.jpg 50c8dff1a0eef2d0de1499134d5fbac4 https://susciencehistory.southwestern.edu/files/original/438269885e86052ee78fc69546a7a6b2.jpg 370600d1351e71a0fe923575eb6ffd14 Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource A Gastrointestinal Disease Hits Georgetown, Texas Description An account of the resource In the Summer of 1980, the city of Georgetown was thrown into a crisis when an outbreak of a mysterious gastrointestinal disease took the city by storm, infecting thousands within a week or two and businesses closed under the pressure.<a href="#_ftn1">[1]</a> Subsequent research culminated in a scientific article published 2 years later and confirmed local suspicions of a waterborne disease being the culprit however the primary viral agent was (and still) not identified.<a href="#_ftn2">[2]</a> Four years later, an outbreak of Cryptosporidium occurred in Braun Station, a small town near San Antonio and it’s waterborne qualities were identified for the first time.<a href="#_ftn3">[3]</a> Both towns received water from the Edwards Aquifer recharge zone and both incidents contributed to changes in wastewater regulations for said aquifer.<a href="#_ftn4">[4]</a> These two events are tied to the history of waterborne gastrointestinal epidemics and can be used to analyze how Georgetown responded to sudden outbreaks. The larger changes of environmental policies in the 1970s and 80s explain the different approaches in both cases of gastrointestinal disease These years saw an increase in environmental protection policies and the years that followed were defined by the public's response to them. In his monograph Managing the Environment, Managing Ourselves, Richard Andrews, a professor of environmental policies, writes about the long history of environmental policies in the United States. Andrews argues that the federal environmental policies of the 1970s could be summarized by the assertion of national standards and the cooperation between the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the states to implement them.<a href="#_ftn5">[5]</a> However, during the early 1980s, this federal initiative to control the environment would come under attack as President Ronald Reagan took office and dismantled many of them.<a href="#_ftn6">[6]</a> These developments contextualize the state of environmental policies leading up to and during the Georgetown epidemics of gastrointestinal disease. From all of this, these outbreaks of gastrointestinal diseases become much more understandable at the state and municipal levels. First, it brings up the question of how the changes in federal support may have influenced the research done by the City of Georgetown (1980) and of that done by the local government at Braun Station (1984-85). Secondly, the developments leading up to 1980 construct a setting in which there is a clear divide in power between the federal government and the local municipal entities. These contextual insights become visible when looking at the primary sources of the different outbreaks. When comparing the primary scientific articles published for both epidemics, one immediately sees a difference in the extent of federal aid. The article that compiles the research done for the 1980 Georgetown outbreak was published under the journal American Water Works Association and supported by grants given by the EPA and the National Institutes of Health while also being assisted by the Williamson County Health Department.<a href="#_ftn7">[7]</a> Whereas the article regarding the outbreak in Braun Station was published in Annals of Internal Medicine and gives acknowledgments to the Texas Department of Health, the San Antonio Metropolitan Health District, and was in cooperation with local medical centers.<a href="#_ftn8">[8]</a> Furthermore, the reaction by those who wrote for the Williamson County Sun during the summer of 1980 depicted the local community and officials being fed up by the amount of involvement by state and federal entities. One writer talks about how the event has put their small city under an unwanted national spotlight and that they now have to, unfortunately, deal with the National Center for Disease Control and the EPA.<a href="#_ftn9">[9]</a> Another talks about the tensions between local city manager Leo Wood and Texas state officials over the legitimacy of the state officials’ claim that the sickness is likely being transmitted through the city water supply.<a href="#_ftn10">[10]</a> These primary sources show that the 1980 case study of gastrointestinal disease in Georgetown occured right before funding was cut to federal environmental funding. They also point out a shift in power dynamics. The first paper was funded by federal agencies who gave money to local institutions to conduct the work (similar to Andrews’ claims) while the second paper was entirely conducted and funded by local and state agencies. This long-term shift from a multi directional to an entirely localized approach to environmental policies show the years between 1980-1984 as being defined by the political tensions that come with this shift. Additionally, the epistemological processes tied to the history of science can also be seen in this response to an epidemic. The interactions between Georgetown citizens and the local as well as federal ‘officials’ mirrors much of what historians of science have discussed in regards to public knowledge. Bernadette Bensaude-Vincent argues that public science was a form of “promot[ing] public opinion as a political force… “ as it raised tensions between scientists and the public.<a href="#_ftn11">[11]</a> This is a process seen in my case study as political tensions played a huge part in the 1980 gastrointestinal outbreak. When the outbreak first occurred, the Georgetown government officials were quick to state that it was not caused by water, saying that the few tests for (known) waterborne gastrointestinal diseases were inconclusive; however, many of the city residents did not agree and continued to argue that the disease had to be waterborne.<a href="#_ftn12">[12]</a> In fact, the local and state officials involvement in the crisis was described (quoted from a State epidemiologist) as “experts” running “difficult” tests<a href="#_ftn13">[13]</a> and while they failed to find any answers, the publics’ response (or rather, “rumors”) point towards a possible sewage leak being responsible for the epidemic.<a href="#_ftn14">[14]</a> This description of experts running complex tests was a reaffirmation to the public that even though scientists have not found evidence regarding the source or cause of the epidemic, they are trying. At the same time—in fact, before—the “rumors” of a sewage leakage causing the disease was a way for the public to affirm their own political influence. These tension between the public and the Georgetown officials as well as the tensions between municipal and federal officials reaffirms the historical ‘deficit model’ characterized by the assumption of a “considerable epistemological inferiority between experts and receivers of scientific discourse.”<a href="#_ftn15">[15]</a> The very first mention of the 1980 outbreak in The Williamson County Sun was a small story that gave the initial responses by Georgetown officials and experts.<a href="#_ftn16">[16]</a> It discussed how a few people (mostly old and young individuals) have been hospitalized by an unknown illness. A local doctor was quoted as saying “it is just plain old intestinal flu” and affirms that “the water supply has been checked and found to be perfectly safe. This is strictly a viral infection.”<a href="#_ftn17">[17]</a> Three days later, the front page of the weekly newspaper was strictly about the epidemic. The same local doctor and the city manager refuted the popular theory amongst people about the illness (that it was a result of pesticide use) and apparently repeated statements such as “we’ve never seen anything like this before.”<a href="#_ftn18">[18]</a> The writer cited two “passerby” who firmly believed the illness to be sourced from the water supply. The writer continued and cited the director of the Williamson County Health Department who said “you can’t just hand a bottle of water over to a laboratory and ask them to tell you what’s in it… you’ve got to know what you’re looking for.”<a href="#_ftn19">[19]</a> The tests that were conducted were for the presence of E. Coli and when they returned negative, the city manager reported “that ought to relieve some minds as far as the water is concerned” and the local doctor said “I believe we can now start looking elsewhere.”<a href="#_ftn20">[20]</a> But the city residents did not agree. The local officials’ claim disregarding a waterborne illness would continue until the state and federal agencies got involved.<a href="#_ftn21">[21]</a> These initial responses portray the tension between everyday people and local/federal governments regarding disease and how to deal with it. As historian Nieto-Galan noted that experts often downplay certain risks seen as dangerous by lay people, “while the latter question the authority and legitimacy of the experts.”<a href="#_ftn22">[22]</a> The Georgetown local officials disagreed with the public while the former disagreed with federal officials. The 1980 Georgetown outbreak of gastrointestinal disease occurred before federal funding to the EPA was cut so one would assume that the event was entirely under control. However, that was not the case. Instead, the outbreak was a convoluted case that had disagreements and tensions between people from multiple levels of power. To search for a top-down approach or bottom-up approach within this case study would take much more time and even then, such a dichotomy can not be entirely defined when looking into the societal influences that go into the history of science. Before the outbreak, the influence of the local and municipal government simply relied on the use of manually adjusted chlorine injections to clean their water, it was not till after the event that the systems saw an upgrade.<a href="#_ftn23">[23]</a> During the outbreak, the rhetoric made by Georgetown officials displayed a scenario where the experts held the truth and were in control of the situation when in fact, they weren’t. It could be argued that the virus that caused the 1980 outbreak was Cryptosporidium and because it’s waterborne qualities were not known at the time, it made sense that there was no testing for it. However, even that argument does not take away the power dynamics at play when the city officials/experts refuted the idea of a water supply problem simply on the basis that E. Coli was not found. The 1980 gastrointestinal outbreak in Georgetown Texas is a clear example of how disease is much more than a biological threat. It exists within a society and is thus influenced by a number of complex sociocultural phenomena. This case study gives students and historians of science the chance to understand how political and social power dynamics influence a historical response to epidemics on the grounds of policies and epistemology. These complex relationships between disease and societal factors are important to understand, now more than ever. As we survive through the COVID-19 pandemic and transition into a new post COVID-19 world, these are the historical actors we must pay attention to. Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Saul Zuniga Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived <a href="#_ftnref1">[1]</a> Ray Jones, “Mysterious illness strikes thousands in city,” Williamson County Sun Vol. 104 No. 5, June 19, 1980. Accessed through Southwestern University on March 1, 2020. <a href="#_ftnref2">[2]</a> Hejkal, T.W, B Keswick, R.L LaBelle, C.P Gerba, Y Sanchez, G Dreesman, B Hafkin, and J.L Melnick. “Viruses in a Community Water Supply Associated with an Outbreak of Gastroenteritis and Infectious Hepatitis.” Journal (American Water Works Association) 74, no. 6 (1982): 318-21. <a href="#_ftnref3">[3]</a> D'Antonio RG, Winn RE, Taylor JP, Gustafson TL, Current WL, Rhodes MM, Gary GW Jr, and Zajac RA. “A Waterborne Outbreak of Cryptosporidiosis in Normal Hosts.” Annals of Internal Medicine 103, no. 6 (1985): 886–88. <a href="#_ftnref4">[4]</a> Geological Society of America. Meeting (125th : 2013 : Denver, Colo.). Caves and Karst Across Time. Edited by Joshua Feinberg, Yongli Gao, and E. C Alexander. Special Papers / Geological Society of America, 516. Boulder, Colorado: Geological Society of America, 2016. 56. <a href="#_ftnref5">[5]</a> Andrews, Richard N. L., Managing the Environment, Managing Ourselves: A History of American Environmental Policy 2 nd ed. (New Haven: Yale University Press, 2006), 249. <a href="#_ftnref6">[6]</a> Richard Andrews, Managing the Environment (New Haven: Yale University Press, 2006), 255-56. <a href="#_ftnref7">[7]</a> Hejkal, T.W, B Keswick, R.L LaBelle, C.P Gerba, Y Sanchez, G Dreesman, B Hafkin, and J.L Melnick. “Viruses in a Community Water Supply Associated with an Outbreak of Gastroenteritis and Infectious Hepatitis.” Journal (American Water Works Association) 74, no. 6 (1982): 318–21. <a href="#_ftnref8">[8]</a> D’Antonio, “Normal Hosts,” 886-888. <a href="#_ftnref9">[9]</a> “Nationwide Attention,” Williamson County Sun: The Sunday Sun Vol. 6 No. 52, June 22, 1980. Accessed through Southwestern University on March 1, 2020. <a href="#_ftnref10">[10]</a> Emily Baker, “ ‘Leo says: prove it’ - State Takes Away Water Approval,” Williamson County Sun: The Sunday Sun Vol. 7 No. 1, June 22, 1980. Accessed through Southwestern University on March 1, 2020. <a href="#_ftnref11">[11]</a> Bensaude-Vincent, Bernadette. “A Genealogy of the Increasing Gap between Science and the Public.” Public Understanding of Science 10, no. 1 (2001): 102. <a href="#_ftnref12">[12]</a> Ray Jones, “Mysterious illness strikes thousands in city,” Williamson County Sun Vol. 104 No. 5, June 19, 1980. Accessed through Southwestern University on March 1, 2020. <a href="#_ftnref13">[13]</a> Ray Jones, “Mysterious illness…” 13. Accessed through Southwestern University on March 1, 2020 <a href="#_ftnref14">[14]</a> Emily Baker, “Amount of Chlorine Boosted in City Water,” Williamson County Sun Vol. 104 No. 6, June 26, 1980. Accessed through Southwestern University on March 1, 2020. <a href="#_ftnref15">[15]</a> Nieto-Galan Agustí. Science in the Public Sphere : A History of Lay Knowledge and Expertise. Abingdon, Oxon: Routledge/Taylor & Francis Group, 2016. <a href="#_ftnref16">[16]</a> “Virus sweeps Georgetown” Williamson County Sun: The Sunday Sun Vol. 6 No. 51, June 15, 1980. Accessed through Southwestern University on March 1, 2020. <a href="#_ftnref17">[17]</a> Ibid. <a href="#_ftnref18">[18]</a> Ray Jones, “Mysterious illness strikes thousands in city,” Williamson County Sun Vol. 104 No. 5, June 19, 1980. Accessed through Southwestern University on March 1, 2020. <a href="#_ftnref19">[19]</a> Ibid. <a href="#_ftnref20">[20]</a> Ibid. <a href="#_ftnref21">[21]</a> Emily Baker, “ ‘Leo says: prove it’ - State Takes Away Water Approval,” Williamson County Sun: The Sunday Sun Vol. 7 No. 1, June 22, 1980. Accessed through Southwestern University on March 1, 2020. <a href="#_ftnref22">[22]</a> Nieto-Galan Agustí. Science in the Public Sphere : A History of Lay Knowledge and Expertise. Abingdon, Oxon: Routledge/Taylor & Francis Group, 2016. 210. <a href="#_ftnref23">[23]</a> Hejkal, T.W, B Keswick, R.L LaBelle, C.P Gerba, Y Sanchez, G Dreesman, B Hafkin, and J.L Melnick. “Viruses in a Community Water Supply Associated with an Outbreak of Gastroenteritis and Infectious Hepatitis.” Journal (American Water Works Association) 74, no. 6 (1982): 318-21. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource State Takes Away Water Approval Subject The topic of the resource A case study into the history of waterborne gastrointestinal disease Description An account of the resource Williamson County Sun. Editors and authors: Ray Jones, Emily Barker, Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Williamson County Sun https://susciencehistory.southwestern.edu/files/original/7d156d1c9d4f59c7cc116471e8736bc8.jpg 9a075e3b4dfab068133dc077bf83c7f2 https://susciencehistory.southwestern.edu/files/original/1e319f19400fc7b4f6a240addf2bddba.jpg 343839be1e37b9b7d70b3b2bde00fba4 https://susciencehistory.southwestern.edu/files/original/495fdb2c31e5761304698ab0202e29e5.jpg ba9b9c982ade1f9071e76e536d65d4cd Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource A Gastrointestinal Disease Hits Georgetown, Texas Description An account of the resource In the Summer of 1980, the city of Georgetown was thrown into a crisis when an outbreak of a mysterious gastrointestinal disease took the city by storm, infecting thousands within a week or two and businesses closed under the pressure.<a href="#_ftn1">[1]</a> Subsequent research culminated in a scientific article published 2 years later and confirmed local suspicions of a waterborne disease being the culprit however the primary viral agent was (and still) not identified.<a href="#_ftn2">[2]</a> Four years later, an outbreak of Cryptosporidium occurred in Braun Station, a small town near San Antonio and it’s waterborne qualities were identified for the first time.<a href="#_ftn3">[3]</a> Both towns received water from the Edwards Aquifer recharge zone and both incidents contributed to changes in wastewater regulations for said aquifer.<a href="#_ftn4">[4]</a> These two events are tied to the history of waterborne gastrointestinal epidemics and can be used to analyze how Georgetown responded to sudden outbreaks. The larger changes of environmental policies in the 1970s and 80s explain the different approaches in both cases of gastrointestinal disease These years saw an increase in environmental protection policies and the years that followed were defined by the public's response to them. In his monograph Managing the Environment, Managing Ourselves, Richard Andrews, a professor of environmental policies, writes about the long history of environmental policies in the United States. Andrews argues that the federal environmental policies of the 1970s could be summarized by the assertion of national standards and the cooperation between the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the states to implement them.<a href="#_ftn5">[5]</a> However, during the early 1980s, this federal initiative to control the environment would come under attack as President Ronald Reagan took office and dismantled many of them.<a href="#_ftn6">[6]</a> These developments contextualize the state of environmental policies leading up to and during the Georgetown epidemics of gastrointestinal disease. From all of this, these outbreaks of gastrointestinal diseases become much more understandable at the state and municipal levels. First, it brings up the question of how the changes in federal support may have influenced the research done by the City of Georgetown (1980) and of that done by the local government at Braun Station (1984-85). Secondly, the developments leading up to 1980 construct a setting in which there is a clear divide in power between the federal government and the local municipal entities. These contextual insights become visible when looking at the primary sources of the different outbreaks. When comparing the primary scientific articles published for both epidemics, one immediately sees a difference in the extent of federal aid. The article that compiles the research done for the 1980 Georgetown outbreak was published under the journal American Water Works Association and supported by grants given by the EPA and the National Institutes of Health while also being assisted by the Williamson County Health Department.<a href="#_ftn7">[7]</a> Whereas the article regarding the outbreak in Braun Station was published in Annals of Internal Medicine and gives acknowledgments to the Texas Department of Health, the San Antonio Metropolitan Health District, and was in cooperation with local medical centers.<a href="#_ftn8">[8]</a> Furthermore, the reaction by those who wrote for the Williamson County Sun during the summer of 1980 depicted the local community and officials being fed up by the amount of involvement by state and federal entities. One writer talks about how the event has put their small city under an unwanted national spotlight and that they now have to, unfortunately, deal with the National Center for Disease Control and the EPA.<a href="#_ftn9">[9]</a> Another talks about the tensions between local city manager Leo Wood and Texas state officials over the legitimacy of the state officials’ claim that the sickness is likely being transmitted through the city water supply.<a href="#_ftn10">[10]</a> These primary sources show that the 1980 case study of gastrointestinal disease in Georgetown occured right before funding was cut to federal environmental funding. They also point out a shift in power dynamics. The first paper was funded by federal agencies who gave money to local institutions to conduct the work (similar to Andrews’ claims) while the second paper was entirely conducted and funded by local and state agencies. This long-term shift from a multi directional to an entirely localized approach to environmental policies show the years between 1980-1984 as being defined by the political tensions that come with this shift. Additionally, the epistemological processes tied to the history of science can also be seen in this response to an epidemic. The interactions between Georgetown citizens and the local as well as federal ‘officials’ mirrors much of what historians of science have discussed in regards to public knowledge. Bernadette Bensaude-Vincent argues that public science was a form of “promot[ing] public opinion as a political force… “ as it raised tensions between scientists and the public.<a href="#_ftn11">[11]</a> This is a process seen in my case study as political tensions played a huge part in the 1980 gastrointestinal outbreak. When the outbreak first occurred, the Georgetown government officials were quick to state that it was not caused by water, saying that the few tests for (known) waterborne gastrointestinal diseases were inconclusive; however, many of the city residents did not agree and continued to argue that the disease had to be waterborne.<a href="#_ftn12">[12]</a> In fact, the local and state officials involvement in the crisis was described (quoted from a State epidemiologist) as “experts” running “difficult” tests<a href="#_ftn13">[13]</a> and while they failed to find any answers, the publics’ response (or rather, “rumors”) point towards a possible sewage leak being responsible for the epidemic.<a href="#_ftn14">[14]</a> This description of experts running complex tests was a reaffirmation to the public that even though scientists have not found evidence regarding the source or cause of the epidemic, they are trying. At the same time—in fact, before—the “rumors” of a sewage leakage causing the disease was a way for the public to affirm their own political influence. These tension between the public and the Georgetown officials as well as the tensions between municipal and federal officials reaffirms the historical ‘deficit model’ characterized by the assumption of a “considerable epistemological inferiority between experts and receivers of scientific discourse.”<a href="#_ftn15">[15]</a> The very first mention of the 1980 outbreak in The Williamson County Sun was a small story that gave the initial responses by Georgetown officials and experts.<a href="#_ftn16">[16]</a> It discussed how a few people (mostly old and young individuals) have been hospitalized by an unknown illness. A local doctor was quoted as saying “it is just plain old intestinal flu” and affirms that “the water supply has been checked and found to be perfectly safe. This is strictly a viral infection.”<a href="#_ftn17">[17]</a> Three days later, the front page of the weekly newspaper was strictly about the epidemic. The same local doctor and the city manager refuted the popular theory amongst people about the illness (that it was a result of pesticide use) and apparently repeated statements such as “we’ve never seen anything like this before.”<a href="#_ftn18">[18]</a> The writer cited two “passerby” who firmly believed the illness to be sourced from the water supply. The writer continued and cited the director of the Williamson County Health Department who said “you can’t just hand a bottle of water over to a laboratory and ask them to tell you what’s in it… you’ve got to know what you’re looking for.”<a href="#_ftn19">[19]</a> The tests that were conducted were for the presence of E. Coli and when they returned negative, the city manager reported “that ought to relieve some minds as far as the water is concerned” and the local doctor said “I believe we can now start looking elsewhere.”<a href="#_ftn20">[20]</a> But the city residents did not agree. The local officials’ claim disregarding a waterborne illness would continue until the state and federal agencies got involved.<a href="#_ftn21">[21]</a> These initial responses portray the tension between everyday people and local/federal governments regarding disease and how to deal with it. As historian Nieto-Galan noted that experts often downplay certain risks seen as dangerous by lay people, “while the latter question the authority and legitimacy of the experts.”<a href="#_ftn22">[22]</a> The Georgetown local officials disagreed with the public while the former disagreed with federal officials. The 1980 Georgetown outbreak of gastrointestinal disease occurred before federal funding to the EPA was cut so one would assume that the event was entirely under control. However, that was not the case. Instead, the outbreak was a convoluted case that had disagreements and tensions between people from multiple levels of power. To search for a top-down approach or bottom-up approach within this case study would take much more time and even then, such a dichotomy can not be entirely defined when looking into the societal influences that go into the history of science. Before the outbreak, the influence of the local and municipal government simply relied on the use of manually adjusted chlorine injections to clean their water, it was not till after the event that the systems saw an upgrade.<a href="#_ftn23">[23]</a> During the outbreak, the rhetoric made by Georgetown officials displayed a scenario where the experts held the truth and were in control of the situation when in fact, they weren’t. It could be argued that the virus that caused the 1980 outbreak was Cryptosporidium and because it’s waterborne qualities were not known at the time, it made sense that there was no testing for it. However, even that argument does not take away the power dynamics at play when the city officials/experts refuted the idea of a water supply problem simply on the basis that E. Coli was not found. The 1980 gastrointestinal outbreak in Georgetown Texas is a clear example of how disease is much more than a biological threat. It exists within a society and is thus influenced by a number of complex sociocultural phenomena. This case study gives students and historians of science the chance to understand how political and social power dynamics influence a historical response to epidemics on the grounds of policies and epistemology. These complex relationships between disease and societal factors are important to understand, now more than ever. As we survive through the COVID-19 pandemic and transition into a new post COVID-19 world, these are the historical actors we must pay attention to. Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Saul Zuniga Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived <a href="#_ftnref1">[1]</a> Ray Jones, “Mysterious illness strikes thousands in city,” Williamson County Sun Vol. 104 No. 5, June 19, 1980. Accessed through Southwestern University on March 1, 2020. <a href="#_ftnref2">[2]</a> Hejkal, T.W, B Keswick, R.L LaBelle, C.P Gerba, Y Sanchez, G Dreesman, B Hafkin, and J.L Melnick. “Viruses in a Community Water Supply Associated with an Outbreak of Gastroenteritis and Infectious Hepatitis.” Journal (American Water Works Association) 74, no. 6 (1982): 318-21. <a href="#_ftnref3">[3]</a> D'Antonio RG, Winn RE, Taylor JP, Gustafson TL, Current WL, Rhodes MM, Gary GW Jr, and Zajac RA. “A Waterborne Outbreak of Cryptosporidiosis in Normal Hosts.” Annals of Internal Medicine 103, no. 6 (1985): 886–88. <a href="#_ftnref4">[4]</a> Geological Society of America. Meeting (125th : 2013 : Denver, Colo.). Caves and Karst Across Time. Edited by Joshua Feinberg, Yongli Gao, and E. C Alexander. Special Papers / Geological Society of America, 516. Boulder, Colorado: Geological Society of America, 2016. 56. <a href="#_ftnref5">[5]</a> Andrews, Richard N. L., Managing the Environment, Managing Ourselves: A History of American Environmental Policy 2 nd ed. (New Haven: Yale University Press, 2006), 249. <a href="#_ftnref6">[6]</a> Richard Andrews, Managing the Environment (New Haven: Yale University Press, 2006), 255-56. <a href="#_ftnref7">[7]</a> Hejkal, T.W, B Keswick, R.L LaBelle, C.P Gerba, Y Sanchez, G Dreesman, B Hafkin, and J.L Melnick. “Viruses in a Community Water Supply Associated with an Outbreak of Gastroenteritis and Infectious Hepatitis.” Journal (American Water Works Association) 74, no. 6 (1982): 318–21. <a href="#_ftnref8">[8]</a> D’Antonio, “Normal Hosts,” 886-888. <a href="#_ftnref9">[9]</a> “Nationwide Attention,” Williamson County Sun: The Sunday Sun Vol. 6 No. 52, June 22, 1980. Accessed through Southwestern University on March 1, 2020. <a href="#_ftnref10">[10]</a> Emily Baker, “ ‘Leo says: prove it’ - State Takes Away Water Approval,” Williamson County Sun: The Sunday Sun Vol. 7 No. 1, June 22, 1980. Accessed through Southwestern University on March 1, 2020. <a href="#_ftnref11">[11]</a> Bensaude-Vincent, Bernadette. “A Genealogy of the Increasing Gap between Science and the Public.” Public Understanding of Science 10, no. 1 (2001): 102. <a href="#_ftnref12">[12]</a> Ray Jones, “Mysterious illness strikes thousands in city,” Williamson County Sun Vol. 104 No. 5, June 19, 1980. Accessed through Southwestern University on March 1, 2020. <a href="#_ftnref13">[13]</a> Ray Jones, “Mysterious illness…” 13. Accessed through Southwestern University on March 1, 2020 <a href="#_ftnref14">[14]</a> Emily Baker, “Amount of Chlorine Boosted in City Water,” Williamson County Sun Vol. 104 No. 6, June 26, 1980. Accessed through Southwestern University on March 1, 2020. <a href="#_ftnref15">[15]</a> Nieto-Galan Agustí. Science in the Public Sphere : A History of Lay Knowledge and Expertise. Abingdon, Oxon: Routledge/Taylor & Francis Group, 2016. <a href="#_ftnref16">[16]</a> “Virus sweeps Georgetown” Williamson County Sun: The Sunday Sun Vol. 6 No. 51, June 15, 1980. Accessed through Southwestern University on March 1, 2020. <a href="#_ftnref17">[17]</a> Ibid. <a href="#_ftnref18">[18]</a> Ray Jones, “Mysterious illness strikes thousands in city,” Williamson County Sun Vol. 104 No. 5, June 19, 1980. Accessed through Southwestern University on March 1, 2020. <a href="#_ftnref19">[19]</a> Ibid. <a href="#_ftnref20">[20]</a> Ibid. <a href="#_ftnref21">[21]</a> Emily Baker, “ ‘Leo says: prove it’ - State Takes Away Water Approval,” Williamson County Sun: The Sunday Sun Vol. 7 No. 1, June 22, 1980. Accessed through Southwestern University on March 1, 2020. <a href="#_ftnref22">[22]</a> Nieto-Galan Agustí. Science in the Public Sphere : A History of Lay Knowledge and Expertise. Abingdon, Oxon: Routledge/Taylor & Francis Group, 2016. 210. <a href="#_ftnref23">[23]</a> Hejkal, T.W, B Keswick, R.L LaBelle, C.P Gerba, Y Sanchez, G Dreesman, B Hafkin, and J.L Melnick. “Viruses in a Community Water Supply Associated with an Outbreak of Gastroenteritis and Infectious Hepatitis.” Journal (American Water Works Association) 74, no. 6 (1982): 318-21. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Virus Sweeps Georgetown Subject The topic of the resource A case study into the history of waterborne gastrointestinal disease Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Williamson County Sun. Editors and authors: Ray Jones, Emily Barker, Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived Williamson County Sun Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource Sunday, June 15, 1990 Language A language of the resource English Type The nature or genre of the resource Newspaper article