The following is a deeply insightful pedagogical debate about my teaching skills excerpted from the online site RateMyProfessors.com. I can usually predict when one of these anonymous posts will appear...after a disgruntled student gets a bad grade or an enthusiastic student completes an excellent MA thesis. The truth, as always in life, is somewhere in the middle. Except of course for the last comment, which is completely accurate.
The Detractors: Professor Bowles is a “poor teacher.”
The Supporters: Just wait a minute, he is an “outstanding professor.” He "provides feedback ASAP."
The Detractors: But his knowledge is “limited to personal interest.”
The Supporters: That is wrong. Bowles really "knows his stuff" and is “extremely knowledgeable in American history.” He was "one of the best professors I have had."
The Detractors: How can you say that? He does not “provide much guidance” for his students.
The Supporters: Are you kidding me? Bowles is “always willing to help
out.” He “communicates quite a bit,” and he is “very involved” in his
classes.
The Detractors: You know “He can’t handle being corrected.”
The Supporters: I agree with you there, I mean "Don't disagree with him!!!" But he is “patient,” “extremely helpful” and “one of the best professors I have had.” The bottom line is "I highly recommend him."
The Detractors: No way. "I would not recommend him." Have you noticed the "typos common in his instructions."
The Supporters: Who cares! He has a "great sense of humor," he is "engaging," and "makes the
class a whole lot of fun with interesting written lectures and videos."
The Detractors: Maybe so, but I can tell he has a “conservative bias.” He is just "not a great teacher."
The Supporters: Yeah, but "based on his photo, he's hot!"
http://www.ratemyprofessors.com/ShowRatings.jsp?tid=1385823
This is the blog site for Mark Bowles, Professor of History at American Military University. Follow him on Twitter @TheHistoryFeed and on the web at HistoryFeed.org for all the news about history and the profession that you need to know. The views here are his own and do not represent American Public University System in any way.
Wednesday, November 13, 2013
Friday, October 18, 2013
Becoming a Footnote in History...
When I first considered going to graduate school in 1991 I set a seemingly small goal for myself—to be footnoted just
once. I shared this odd idea with my father, and while it seemed insignificant, I explained it to him like this. To be
footnoted I would have to: enjoy moderate success in grad school,
conduct work in an archives, compose a scholarly article or book based on that research, find a publisher to accept my work, pass a peer review process by experts in my field, hold one of
my published works in my hand, convince (or force) other people to read my article or book, and
impress (or infuriate) people enough to actually cite my work in their own
publication.
Therefore a single footnote of my work, from my
vantage
point of just entering graduate school, seemed like a monumental
achievement and a way to secure my legacy of literally becoming a
footnote in history.
I was fortunate to pass my way though grad school and earn a
Ph.D. in history in 1999 from Case Western Reserve University. It was in that
year that my first footnote appeared in a book (pictured below).
Zachary, Gregg Pascal. Endless Frontier: Vannevar Bush, Engineer of the American Century. Cambridge: MIT Press, 1999. |
The author cited me twice and even reproduced a drawing that
I made of an early computing device. Here are the two footnotes...the first of my career.
The footnotes (numbers 26 and 28 above) were to an article I published three years earlier, in 1996, in the Annals of the History of Computing entitled “The Age of the Analog Brain.”
Since Zachary asked my permission to use my drawing, I knew that I was going to appear in his book and anticipated the release of his book more than I did my first published article. I remember anxiously
going to Border’s Book Store (back in the day when one actually went to a store to buy a book), pulling it from the shelves, and scanning the book not for scholarly content, but for my name. Indeed, it was purely an exercise in vanity, but it meant a great deal.
My drawings reproduced in Zachary's book. |
Since that time I have managed to publish a number of books, and I
have also enjoyed serendipitously running across footnotes to that
scholarship. It is one of the many pleasures of my career. Each time I do, I think about that promise to my father long ago, who passed away in 2001.
So my message to aspiring graduate students is “Dream big…become
a footnote.”
____________________________
Here are the covers of my top ten favorite books that I appear in, not in an overtly significant way, but as a footnote to history.
Bibliography:
1.
Black, Alistair, Dave Muddiman, and Helen Plant.
The Early Information Society Information Management in Britain Before the
Computer. Aldershot, England: Ashgate, 2007.
Creager, Angela N. H. Life Atomic: A History of
Radioisotopes in Science and Medicine. Chicago: University of Chicago Press,
2013.
Dick, Steven J., and Roger D. Launius. Societal Impact of
Spaceflight. Washington, DC: National Aeronautics and Space Administration,
2007.
Downey, Gregory John. Closed Captioning Subtitling,
Stenography, and the Digital Convergence of Text with Television. Baltimore:
Johns Hopkins University Press, 2008.
Evans, Ben. Tragedy and Triumph in Orbit: The Eighties and
Early Nineties. New York, NY: Springer, 2012.
Hersch, Matthew H. Inventing the American Astronaut. New
York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2012.
Mirowski, Philip. Machine Dreams: Economic Becomes a Cyborg
Science. Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Press, 2002.
Neufeld, Michael J. Von Braun: Dreamer of Space, Engineer of
War. New York: Vintage Books, 2008.
Swade, Doron. The Difference Engine: Charles Babbage and the
Quest to Build the First Computer. New York: Viking, 2001.
Friday, October 11, 2013
Lament that the US Government will not let me view a waterfall
In riding my bike along the outskirts of a
closed national park today I was reminded of the Ken Burns documentary
entitled "The National Parks: America's Best Idea."
In it Dayton Duncan said this: "At the heart of the park idea is this notion that by virtue of being an American ... you, you are the owner of some of the best seafront property this nation's got. You own magnificent waterfalls. You own stunning views of mountains and stunning views of gorgeous canyons. They belong to you. They're yours."
Somehow, the American people have lost the right to that ownership.
Below is a waterfall that I was not allowed to explore today. Well, I could have explored it, but there is a penalty of a monetary fine. There is a maximum penalty of 6 months in prison.
Whose America is this?
http://www.pbs.org/nationalparks/
In it Dayton Duncan said this: "At the heart of the park idea is this notion that by virtue of being an American ... you, you are the owner of some of the best seafront property this nation's got. You own magnificent waterfalls. You own stunning views of mountains and stunning views of gorgeous canyons. They belong to you. They're yours."
Somehow, the American people have lost the right to that ownership.
Below is a waterfall that I was not allowed to explore today. Well, I could have explored it, but there is a penalty of a monetary fine. There is a maximum penalty of 6 months in prison.
Whose America is this?
http://www.pbs.org/nationalparks/
Monday, September 2, 2013
Prof. Bowles Discusses Capital Punishment
I recently started a heated Facebook discussion over Capital Punishment and a recent editorial in the Cleveland Plain Dealer entitled: "Ohio's vanishing stock of execution drugs is yet another sign that it's time to eliminate the death penalty in Ohio." You can read it here: http://www.cleveland.com/opinion/index.ssf/2013/09/ohios_vanishing_stock_of_execu.html#incart_river_default
I strongly agreed with this editorial and while engaging with several people on Facebook who were staunchly in favor of the death penalty, I realized that many opinions about it are simply uninformed by scholarship. As a result, I compiled the following argument for the termination of the death penalty in the United States.
I strongly agreed with this editorial and while engaging with several people on Facebook who were staunchly in favor of the death penalty, I realized that many opinions about it are simply uninformed by scholarship. As a result, I compiled the following argument for the termination of the death penalty in the United States.
What is
true of nearly all debates like this is that often one’s personal beliefs (and life
experiences) shapes the validity ascribed to the facts presented. I promised
some friends of mine who are in favor of the death penalty some quality research and opinions on this subject. And I offer the following
for your consideration. As you might expect, all of what appears below supports
my deep belief that capital punishment in America must end.
Here are some key facts about Capital Punishment from a
collection of scholars writing a book published by Duke University Press. You
can read the book: Garvey, Stephen P. Beyond Repair?: America's Death
Penalty. Durham: Duke University Press, 2003.
1. Public Opinion: Since 2000, more people are seeking the
abolition of the death penalty. This includes Republican Governor George Ryan
from Illinois who halted executions in his state after the THIRTEENTH innocent
man left death row. Read the governor’s address entitled “I Must Act” which he
presented at Northwestern University College of Law. It was reprinted in the
NYTimes here: http://www.nytimes.com/2003/01/11/national/11CND-RTEX.html
In my opinion this alone should convince anyone to rethink the death penalty.
2. Innocence: DNA technology has shown how remarkably flawed
our judicial system has been in sending men to death row. Since the 1970s over
100 men have been set free when DNA technology exonerated them.
3. Capital Juries: Interestingly judges do the sentencing in
noncapital cases, while juries sentence in capital cases. Professors John Blume
and Theodore Eisenberg have asked the question: “How do jurors decide between
life and death?” After extensive research they determined: “The results are disquieting.
Far too many unqualified jurors end up
serving; many capital jurors fail to understand the basic constitutional
principles on which their deliberations should proceed;…and a defendant’s fate
can turn not just on the facts and circumstances of his case but also on the
race of the jurors who sit in judgment of him.”
Let’s look more at race in an article published in New York
University Law Review. Consider this scholarly article entitled “Devaluing
Death: An Empirical Study of Implicit Racial Bias on Jury-Eligible Citizens in
Six Death Penalty States." The law professors simply concluded: “Stark racial
disparities define America’s relationship with the death penalty.” They
further went to explain their findings: “A new study testing internal attitudes
and stereotypes among potential jurors in six death penalty states may help to
explain the racial disparities that persist in the application of capital
punishment. Researchers Justin Levinson (l.), Robert Smith (r.), and Danielle
Young tested 445 jury-eligible individuals and found they harbored two kinds of
racial bias: they maintained racial stereotypes about Blacks and Whites and
made associations between the race of an individual and the value of his or her
life. Those studied tended to associate Whites more with "worth" and
Blacks with "worthless." The study further found that death-qualified jurors held stronger racial biases
than potential jurors who would be excluded from serving in death penalty
cases.”
4. International Law: Remarkably “Most of the nations with
which the United States prefers to keep company have abolished the death
penalty. Indeed, most of them now see capital punishment as a human rights
violation.” Therefore, this weakens our global stature in fighting against
other human rights violations. You can read more about this in a National
Geographic article which said that only 21 countries in the world executed
someone in 2012. The US had the 5th highest number of executions,
though China keeps its numbers secret. http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2013/13/130412-death-penalty-capital-punishment-culture-amnesty-international/
By the way, in December of last year 111 countries (that is
more than half of the countries in the world) sided with a UN resolution to end
state sponsored executions.
I could suggest that everyone opposed to the death penalty
read Austin Sarat’s book When the State Kills: Capital Punishment and the
American Condition. This is an academic book, published by Princeton University
Press with all the peer review and scholarship that goes along with this type
of endeavor. His central argument is that capital punishment “undermines our
democratic society.” He argues that “state executions, once used by monarchs as
symbolic displays of power, gained acceptance among Americans as a sign of the
people's sovereignty. Yet today when the state kills, it does so in a
bureaucratic procedure hidden from view and for which no one in particular
takes responsibility.” There are forces that manage to maintain this culture of
acceptable killing that includes “racial prejudice, and the desire for a world
without moral ambiguity.” Sarat, Austin. When the State Kills: Capital
Punishment and the American Condition. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton
University Press, 2001.
Other academics, this time professors of law published by
Oxford University Press, ask the following important questions: “Why does the
United States continue to employ the death penalty when fifty other developed
democracies have abolished it? Why does capital punishment become more
problematic each year? How can the death penalty conflict be resolved?” They
suggest that the reason that this remains such a divided issue is because it
reveals that “the seemingly insoluble turmoil surrounding the death penalty
reflects a deep and long-standing division in American values.” The division is
this: “On the one hand, execution would seem to violate our nation's highest
legal principles of fairness and due process. It sets us increasingly apart
from our allies and indeed is regarded by European nations as a barbaric and
particularly egregious form of American exceptionalism. On the other hand, the
death penalty represents a deeply held American belief in violent social
justice that sees the hangman as an agent of local control and safeguard of
community values.” The conclusion here is that “the most troubling symptom of
this attraction to vigilante justice in the lynch mob.” Zimring, Franklin E. The
Contradictions of American Capital Punishment. New York: Oxford University
Press, 2004.
These legal and academic studies go on and on and on…I will
list just one more from June 2013. This was from the Center for Constitutional
Rights (CCR) and the International Federation for Human Rights (FIDH) who
released their report on the death penalty in California and Louisiana. Their
main conclusion was that the death penalty in these states was “arbitrary and
discriminatory.” The authors wrote, “States must also ensure that all persons
charged with a death-eligible offense have timely-appointed, competent, and
experienced representation at all stages of a capital case, and that appointed
counsel have adequate funding to carry out the tasks necessary to provide
effective representation.” You can read the report here: http://fidh.org/IMG/pdf/2010_6_10_final_executive_summary.pdf
Finally, here are five salient points on why the death penalty does not work from Amnesty International (http://www.amnestyusa.org/.../us-death-penalty-facts)
1. Innocent people are on death row. Republican Governor of Illinois George Ryan said: "I cannot support a system which, in its administration, has proven so fraught with error and has come so close to the ultimate nightmare, the state's taking of innocent life... Until I can be sure that everyone sentenced to death in Illinois is truly guilty, until I can be sure with moral certainty that no innocent man or woman is facing a lethal injection, no one will meet that fate." Since 1973, over 130 people have been released from death rows throughout the country due to evidence of their wrongful convictions. In 2003 alone, 10 wrongfully convicted defendants were released from death row.
2. The death penalty is racially unjust. In a 1990 report, the non-partisan U.S. General Accounting Office found "a pattern of evidence indicating racial disparities in the charging, sentencing, and imposition of the death penalty." The study concluded that a defendant was several times more likely to be sentenced to death if the murder victim was white. This has been confirmed by the findings of many other studies that, holding all other factors constant, the single most reliable predictor of whether someone will be sentenced to death is the race of the victim.
3. It is costly. A 2003 legislative audit in Kansas found that the estimated cost of a death penalty case was 70% more than the cost of a comparable non-death penalty case. Death penalty case costs were counted through to execution (median cost $1.26 million).
4. It is arbitrary. Almost all death row inmates could not afford their own attorney at trial. Court-appointed attorneys often lack the experience necessary for capital trials and are overworked and underpaid. In the most extreme cases, some have slept through parts of trials or have arrived under the influence of drugs and/or alcohol.
5. It is not a deterrent. A September 2000 New York Times survey found that during the last 20 years, the homicide rate in states with the death penalty has been 48 to 101 percent higher than in states without the death penalty. FBI data shows that all 14 states without capital punishment in 2008 had homicide rates at or below the national rate.
1. Innocent people are on death row. Republican Governor of Illinois George Ryan said: "I cannot support a system which, in its administration, has proven so fraught with error and has come so close to the ultimate nightmare, the state's taking of innocent life... Until I can be sure that everyone sentenced to death in Illinois is truly guilty, until I can be sure with moral certainty that no innocent man or woman is facing a lethal injection, no one will meet that fate." Since 1973, over 130 people have been released from death rows throughout the country due to evidence of their wrongful convictions. In 2003 alone, 10 wrongfully convicted defendants were released from death row.
2. The death penalty is racially unjust. In a 1990 report, the non-partisan U.S. General Accounting Office found "a pattern of evidence indicating racial disparities in the charging, sentencing, and imposition of the death penalty." The study concluded that a defendant was several times more likely to be sentenced to death if the murder victim was white. This has been confirmed by the findings of many other studies that, holding all other factors constant, the single most reliable predictor of whether someone will be sentenced to death is the race of the victim.
3. It is costly. A 2003 legislative audit in Kansas found that the estimated cost of a death penalty case was 70% more than the cost of a comparable non-death penalty case. Death penalty case costs were counted through to execution (median cost $1.26 million).
4. It is arbitrary. Almost all death row inmates could not afford their own attorney at trial. Court-appointed attorneys often lack the experience necessary for capital trials and are overworked and underpaid. In the most extreme cases, some have slept through parts of trials or have arrived under the influence of drugs and/or alcohol.
5. It is not a deterrent. A September 2000 New York Times survey found that during the last 20 years, the homicide rate in states with the death penalty has been 48 to 101 percent higher than in states without the death penalty. FBI data shows that all 14 states without capital punishment in 2008 had homicide rates at or below the national rate.
In conclusion, I sincerely hope that the American public will become more informed about the significant debate surrounding Capital Punishment.
Professor Bowles
Wednesday, August 21, 2013
Science in Flux Twitter Experiment
I want to
announce what I believe is a Twitter first for the digital humanities: an
academic history book written for Twitter.
This is
actually a significant revision of my NASA history book I wrote in 2006 called
Science in Flux. At the time it won the American Institute of Aeronautics and
Astronautics award for best book of the year. To find it at a library near you
visit: http://www.worldcat.org/oclc/430828236.
Re-writing the
book in tweets is an attempt to compose “sound byte” aphorisms that convey the
narrative in new ways. It also invites conversation in a way that traditional
book publication cannot.
I do think that
there are very important meanings from the book related to the Cold War,
government control, and the commitment to science that are quite relevant
today.
Cyrus Mody reviewed my book in Historical Studies of the Natural Sciences. He said that my book, and four others that he reviewed, was representative of new Cold War scholarship that uncovers the “grandiose ambitions of the Cold War.” He said that Science in Flux, and other books, highlighted the “astonishing otherness of the Cold War.” You can read the review essay here: Science in Flux review
Cyrus Mody reviewed my book in Historical Studies of the Natural Sciences. He said that my book, and four others that he reviewed, was representative of new Cold War scholarship that uncovers the “grandiose ambitions of the Cold War.” He said that Science in Flux, and other books, highlighted the “astonishing otherness of the Cold War.” You can read the review essay here: Science in Flux review
I have completed
the re-write and have the story now condensed into 756 tweets. I will be starting the
tweets on September 1st and will post 3 times a day, appearing at 8:05AM,
4:05PM, and 11:55PM (EST). These will be posted on Twitter to @TheHistoryFeed
and linked to the hashtag #ScienceInFlux.
Here is a
preview of a tweet scheduled for October 30th near midnight:
10/30/2013 11:55:00 PM: Before WWII the US government
seized roughly the size of all the New England states from private
citizens. #ScienceInFlux
Along the way I
will be attaching some of the rich visual record associated with the project.
I hope you will
follow along in the narrative, and most importantly contribute your own
thoughts and ideas as we proceed through the Science in Flux journey. Spread
the news!
Inside the NASA Plum Brook nuclear reactor. |
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)