Historians Of Science Face Up To Funding Crisis, Employment Crunch

Employment Crunch Author: Peter Gwynne Sidebar: How to Reach the Institutions One of the unpublicized victims of the heated congressional debate over the federal budget for fiscal 1996 is the discipline of history of science. In an environment of general uncertainty, one sure thing is that the field will lose significant funding. As a result, new Ph.D.'s as well as postdocs and junior faculty face intense and growing competition for academic posts. One year ago, for example, Harvard University's history of science department advertised for a junior faculty specialist in history of medicine. The department sought an individual with a newly minted Ph.D., or possibly a year or two of postdoctoral experience. But the list of applicants included several highly accomplished individuals who had already had spent time as assistant professors. Academic posts at Harvard are always in demand. Nevertheless, according to Peter Galison, head of the history of science department, the candidates were both great in number and exceptionally well-qualified. Sacrificial Discipline: Former department head Fred Gregory says science history is regarded as "a luxury unit" by schools in hard times. Frederick Gregory, a science historian and former chairman of the history department at the University of Florida, notes that universities "are getting top-notch people a little more easily than they did in the past." To Roberta Bivins, a historian of medicine at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology who will receive her Ph.D. this summer, that indicates a serious job crunch. "Several of my friends have had quite of lot of difficulty getting tenure-track jobs," she says. "New Ph.D.'s are being bumped out of academic positions they would normally expect." Adds Bruce Lewenstein, an associate professor in the departments of communication and science and technology studies at Cornell University: "There are very few positions available in mainstream history of science." That scarcity stems in large measure from what the AIP History Newsletter, published by the American Institute of Physics Center for the History of Physics, calls "unprecedented cutbacks" in federal funding. The discipline is on the verge of losing the majority of its grants from the National Endowment for the Humanities (NEH). The National Science Foundation is struggling to maintain last year's level of funding for the subject. And no nongovernmental major sources of funding have yet emerged to compensate for the losses. 'Serious Cuts': Michael Sokal notes that the congressional opposition to NEH funding for the field is "almost entirely ideological." "These are real cuts-serious cuts-for the funding of history of science," says Michael Sokal, a professor of history at Worcester Polytechnic Institute who has just completed an assignment as a program officer in the division of educational programs at NEH. The federal cuts don't have a direct effect on the availability of faculty positions. But they do so indirectly by reducing the amount of money available for research and support of graduate students. For while research in the discipline costs relatively little, history of science relies more than most fields on government funds to support that research. 'A Great Deal Of Pain': Gerald Holton cites funding pressures. The reduction in funding alarms long-time science historians, who have seen their subject grow from a fringe topic to a significant discipline that links science and the humanities (F. Hoke, The Scientist, Nov. 15, 1993, page 1). "There is a great deal of pain," declares Gerald Holton, Mallinckrodt Professor of Physics and Professor of History of Science at Harvard University. "Exactly at the time when they are understanding the process of discovery of scientific research and development and passing on that knowledge to policymakers, historians of science, technology, and medicine are under the greatest pressure in funding for jobs." The environment "puts younger people in a really tight situation," adds Merritt Roe Smith, a historian of technology who is director of the program in science, technology, and society at MIT. "Basically, the job market has got very tight in the past three years." Why is that a concern? Robert Overmann, program director for science and technology studies at NSF, argues that the field has significant value in present-day decision-making. "By asking the right questions, you get important insights into how science develops," he says. "We hope to fund projects that address issues of modern concern." Is history of science suffering more than other academic disciplines? Some observers doubt it. "The larger [funding] picture is affecting everybody," argues Gregory. "We're not in worse shape than other humanities and the sciences." Weaning the Field: Arnold Thackray notes the need for the discipline to supplement federal funds with private support. Arnold Thackray, Joseph Priestley Professor of History of Science at the University of Pennsylvania, points out that the discipline's lean years are following an era of plenty. In the 1960s, as the subject started to grow, he recalls, there were two jobs for every qualified candidate. That ratio started to balance out only in the last two decades. As the field grew in those years, so did the scope and activities of societies and other groups associated with it-along with government funding. "History of science was clearly the best-funded humanistic discipline from the federal point of view," says Thackray, who is executive director of the Philadelphia-based Chemical Heritage Foundation, which studies the history of chemistry. "Thus, the pain is disproportionately high." Graduate students, postdoctoral students, and junior faculty members are suffering most. But as some observers see it, the current situation gives them the opportunity to think of careers outside the academic world. That process would have become inevitable in any case, because, as a result of the subject's growing popularity among students, the number of Ph.D.'s in history of science is growing much faster than the number of faculty positions. "The supply of tenure-track jobs at Harvard is limited, but there are good prospects-in academe and here-for history of science graduates," states Jeffrey L. Sturchio, a Ph.D. in history of science who is now executive director, public affairs for European human health issues at pharmaceutical company Merck and Co. Inc., based in Whitehouse Station, N.J. Nonacademic possibilities include posts in museums, corporations, and consulting organizations. An employment survey released last summer by the History of Science Society in Seattle points to the need to consider non-academic work. The survey, by Julie R. Newell of Southern College of Technology in Marietta, Ga., focused on academic positions in history of science that started in the fall of 1994. Searches for the posts attracted 1,314 applicants, of whom 15 were hired. While several individuals probably applied for more than one post, "the fact that the responses document only 15 hires is cause for considerable concern," reported Newell. Since then, academics infer, the situation has almost certainly worsened considerably, as a result of huge cuts in federal funding for the fiscal year that started on October 1. "We used to have 31 programs in history of science at NEH; we have four now," laments Daniel Jones, program officer in NEH's division of research and education programs. The decrease occurred over the past year. The cuts include humanities studies of science and technology. This $1 million-per year-program provided researchers with direct grants of about $100,000 apiece for three years of work in history of science, which often involved graduate students as well as faculty members. In the 11 years after it started in 1984, the program disbursed $9,348,443 to 461 applicants. "I think [the discipline] is going to lose a lot of productivity," forecasts Jones. "Those grants gave people a lot more time to do research. Books and papers will still be published, but at a slower pace." In other times, science historians would have relied on the National Science Foundation (NSF) to compensate for funding lost from NEH. But that agency has its own budgetary battles to fight-and history of science isn't on the front line. "It was a difficult budget [for history of science] last year," reports NSF's Overmann. "We're operating as if there won't be any cuts this year." That means no better than a flat budget as far as history of science is concerned. Overmann's fiscal 1995 budget was about $2.5 million. The proposed figure for fiscal 1996 is close to that, but the budget itself remains in limbo. Keith Benson, a professor in the department of medical history and ethics at the University of Washington, who is executive secretary of the History of Science Society, points out another difficulty with NSF funding: The agency's awards are small in amount. "If you take a grant of $60,000 per year and your institutional overhead is a typical 48 percent, your salary is going to be low," he states. As government administrators and aca- demics tell it, history of science has lost its NEH funds as a result of politics and misfortune, rather than any lack of academic merit. The driving forces in cutting NEH's funding are freshmen members of Congress, many of whom have come to Washington with a distaste for sociology and related humanities subjects. The opposition to NEH "is not really about balancing the budget," asserts Sokal. "It's almost entirely ideological." Within that context, history of science programs just happen to have found themselves supported by the wrong agency at the wrong time. "Nobody in Congress is targeting history of science," asserts Overmann, "but the subject is guilty by association." Harvard's Holton regrets the precipitate nature of congressional actions. "It takes several years of being a congressperson to see the relationship between science and society," he says. "Many don't realize that America now is the world-class place to learn [about science in general]. That will change dramatically as the new policymakers get their way." Pointing out that fact has cut little ice, however. "I've talked to legislators about it, and they've turned a deaf ear," says Benson. For much of the past 20 years, historians of science and related topics have had few concerns beyond guaranteeing a steady supply of students. In the 1980s, recalls MIT's Smith, "there were more jobs than students in the history of technology." That has changed significantly. Students now abound in history of science, technology, and medicine departments. Yale University, for example, has 14 graduate students in the history of medicine. Galison reports that the number of majors in his department increased from 80 to 150 within the past five years. "There's been an explosion of interest in the subject," he says. While Galison sees no single cause for that explosion, he suspects that growing interest among students in the integration of different academic subjects has contributed strongly. However, this very success has sown the seed of future problems. In the 1980s, as more universities started programs in the histories of science, technology, and medicine, graduates in those fields found faculty positions so easy to secure that few needed to pursue opportunities outside academe. But with tight reins on funding for all humanities subjects, the growth in faculty positions has stopped. Indeed, some history of science programs are being cut back. "The subject is regarded as a luxury unit-one of those sacrificed when push comes to shove," observes Gregory. The government picture is not entirely bleak. NEH has maintained some fellowship programs for university and college teachers, including the four mentioned by Daniel Jones. It hopes to fund new collaborative projects in its 1997 budget. Those will, according to Jones, be large projects that involve more than one person or require a fellowship of more than one year. "History of science will complete with other disciplines [across the humanities spectrum] for the projects," adds Jones. In another effort to keep at least some history of science graduates from falling off the academic cliff, NSF has reinstituted small grants, aimed largely at postdoctoral studies, through its Science and Technology Studies Program. Professional-development and postdoctoral fellowships provide $32,000 per year, plus amounts for travel and expenses, for up to two years. Small Grants for Training and Research provide up to $100,000 per year for one postdoctoral fellow or three graduate students, working with a senior investigator. Certain Uncertainty: Bruce Lewenstein notes science-history postdocs' stressful situation. Photo: Charles Harrington On the down side, Lewenstein points out, "the trouble with any kind of postdoctoral life is that you don't know what's coming next." In addition, the number of such grants is limited. Even if NEH manages to keep its collaborative grants, it will make available no more than $4 million per year for all humanities subjects. Although they have historically provided little support for the field, nongovernmental sources of funds do exist. At MIT, the Dibner Institute for the History of Science and Technology, headed by Evelyn Simha, offers residential fellowships for science historians. Several foundations -- including the Mellon Foundation and the John Simon Guggenheim Foundation, both in New York City-have funded work in the history of science. Noting that one graduate's problem is another's opportunity, Arnold Thackray suggests a more ambitious reach for funds. "It's difficult to wean the field from the teat of the federal government, but the fundamental truth is that the amount of wealth being created by science and technology today is extraordinary," says Thackray. "First-generation entrepreneurs like Bill Gates identify with the achievements of their fields as they reach years of maturity. They should be willing to fund the discipline." How can historians of science persuade figures like Gates to open their purses? By asking about the history that they helped to make, suggests Thackray. Seeking support of that type will demand a change in mind-set. "It will require a painful awakening from the myth of not needing or answering to patrons," warns Thackray. "The humanities have always needed patrons, and always will." If patronage is too much to bear for individual historians of science, there's an alternative that once was even more unthinkable: "There are very good reasons to look for work outside the academy," says Michael Sokal."There are many ways in which historians of science can do well and do good in the real world, and contribute to scholarship in the subject." One such opportunity is in museum work. "The National Museum of American History [in New York City] probably has the greatest concentration of science historians anywhere in the world, none of whom is an academic," says Merck's Sturchio. "The core of this work is a solid approach to a historical subject. You can get a lot accomplished without the distractions of teaching." Sturchio himself, who received his Ph.D. in history and sociology of science from the University of Pennsylvania in 1981, illustrates other paths of opportunity outside academe. In 1989, after working for a museum, consulting, and spending a year at the AT&T Archives in Warren, N.J., he joined Merck as a corporate archivist. His major task was to create a centennial history of the company. "When companies decide to make an investment in history, they give you the tools to do it," he relates. "Merck printed 65,000 copies of its history in five languages, with a budget far greater than an NEH grant. The author of an academic monograph would be lucky to sell 650 copies." Since completing the history, Sturchio has worked in publishing, public policy, and public affairs for Merck. "I've moved progressively further from spending all my time on history of science," he tells The Scientist. "While I still have the instincts of an academic historian, I swim in a very different pond"-a pond that is, he says, intellectually and professionally satisfying. Consultant: Philip Cantelon's company works on government and corporate science-history projects. Not all science-based companies want to hire historians on a permanent basis. But several offer opportunities to consultants. Philip Cantelon, for example, left Williams College after nine years as a professor of political history to help found History Associates. The Baltimore-based consulting company works on government, corporate, and litigation-related projects involving the history of science and technology. Cantelon has tackled a history of Washington, D.C.-based MCI Communications Corp. that took an in-depth look at the communications industry-a project that took him about four years-and less time-consuming work for national laboratories. Consulting requires its practitioners to throw away several vestiges of academic thinking. For example, says Cantelon, he needs to market himself and his work. "I think a lot of historians, particularly those who have come out of the academy, are not particularly comfortable with that," he states. When he recruits, he adds, "I look for someone with a lot of flexibility. I don't want narrowly trained individuals." Another nonacademic area has recently started to attract historians of science: science writing. William Broad of the New York Times majored in history of science, as did Wade Roush, the Boston-based correspondent for Science magazine. Graduates in science history face one major problem when they seek work beyond the ivory tower. Because, as Thackray points out, "the profession is amazingly academic," its teachers have little understanding of outside agendas and corresponding opportunities. "A lot of people in my area are interested in going outside academe," says graduate student Roberta Bivins, "but faculty advisers can't help them." However, that shows some signs of changing. "We've been purposely trying to recruit students whom we feel will not go into academic careers," explains MIT's Smith. "It's important to bring in people for careers in the public arena." Peter Gwynne is a freelance science writer based in Marstons Mills, Mass. Sidebar: How to Reach the Institutions

Historians Of Science Face Up To Funding Crisis, Employment Crunch

Interested in reading more?

Become a Member of