final
kumamon12
xxx.docx
2
Final Exam
Follow these instructions carefully – I will be grading, in part, how well you follow the directions for formatting and submitting your exam!
Instructions: ***Do NOT delete any text from this exam.
Type your name in the space provided above.
This is an open-book exam. Feel free to use the assigned readings, lecture outlines, and notes. Do not use outside sources (like online encyclopedias) – they will lead you astray and weaken your answers. I will be looking for answers that come from the assigned readings and lectures.
Work on the exam alone.
In your essays make sure to relate specific details from the lectures and readings to the broader themes of History of Biomedicine. If you quote directly from the course materials, you need to cite the source, for example (Lindberg, pg 255). You do not need to cite the lecture material.
Type your answers in the space DIRECTLY below the questions. Use the same font type, size, and color.
Save your completed exam as: HIST298-004_W15_FinalExam_YOURLASTNAME
DUE DATE: Please upload your completed exam through Turnitin on Learn by Friday, March 20th. (Let me know by email if you will need more time.) If you have troubles uploading your exam, please email it to me.
Part I - Writing History. (At least 750 Words -- 80 Points)
Using the following questions from the Weekly Responses, write an essay that assesses the general challenges and process of writing “Biomedical History.” NOTE: The best essays will use 3-4 of the sources. In your essay address the following points:
A) The Questions: What questions (or thesis) did the historians we have read this quarter ask in their essays and books? How do you think they chose these questions? That is, are they responding to ongoing debates in their fields? (Worth 20 Points)
B) The Sources: What kinds of sources did the historians use to answer their questions? Are these sources new ones, or are the historians using the usual sources but interpreting them in a novel way? Do you think these are the best sources available, or are they too limited or the wrong ones? (Worth 20 Points)
C) How do the historians balance their discussion of the lives of the Physicians, Nurses, Medical Researchers, Patients and others in their work, research, and medical lives? Do you think this a good balance or too heavy on one side? (Worth 20 Points)
D) The Answers: What is new about the historians answers to the questions they posed? Do you think that they made the best answer, or is something missing? What would you like to have read to make it a better answer? That is, are you convinced by their arguments? (Worth 20 Points)
Make sure to cite the essays you are using (author, page number).
Here are the readings again:
1) William Bynum, History of Medicine: A Very Short Introduction (New York; Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2008); Available as an E-book in the Hagerty Library catalogue at: http://site.ebrary.com/lib/drexel/detail.action?docID=10464218. ***Read Chapter 5, “Medicine in the Laboratory” pp. 91-117 for the background to the story.
2) Tim Fulford and Debbie Lee, “The Jenneration of Disease: Vaccination, Romanticism, and Revolution,” Studies in Romanticism, Vol. 39, No. 1 (Spring, 2000) , pp. 139-163; Available in the Readings Folder and on JSTOR at: http://www.jstor.org/stable/25601434 and,
3) Priscilla Wald, “Cultures and Carriers: "Typhoid Mary" and the Science of Social Control,” Social Text, No. 52/53, Queer Transexions of Race, Nation, and Gender (Autumn - Winter, 1997), pp. 181-214; Available in the Readings Folder and on JSTOR at: http://www.jstor.org/stable/466739
4) Stefan Timmermans, “A Black Technician and Blue Babies,” Social Studies of Science Vol. 33, No. 2 (Apr., 2003), pp. 197-229; Available in the Readings Folder and at: http://search.proquest.com.ezproxy2.library.drexel.edu/docview/809901393?pq-origsite=summon
5) Stephen J. Kunitz, “Professionalism and Social Control in the Progressive Era: The Case of the Flexner Report,” Social Problems Vol. 22, No. 1 (Oct., 1974), pp. 16-27; Available in the Readings Folder and on JSTOR at: http://www.jstor.org/stable/799564
6) Susan Reverby, Examining Tuskegee: The Infamous Syphilis Study and its Legacy (Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 2009); Available as an E-Book in the Hagerty Library catalogue at: http://site.ebrary.com/lib/drexel/detail.action?docID=10343533
Part II - Part II - Online Student Presentations (or Alternate Question). (250 Words, 20 Points)
9. Select two of the Student Presentations (In-Class or Online). Using the same points listed in Part I (as is appropriate), compare how these students investigated, assessed, and communicated their history projects. Make sure to provide direct references to the presentations in your essay.
10. Alternate Question if you missed the in class presentations: What was for you the most interesting moment in the History of Biomedicine covered in the course? Why do you think so, was it about the kinds of source material available, the questions raised at the time, did it seem familiar to you, or rather was it surprising to you?
