The body through the lens: anatomy and medical microscopy during the enlightenment

This thesis examines the role of microscope technology in informing medical and anatomical knowledge during the Enlightenment. Past historians have claimed that microscopy generally stagnated until the popularisation of achromatic microscopes and cell theory in the middle of the nineteenth century. As evidence for this decline, historians have pointed to the poor quality and slow development of microscope designs until the popularisation of achromatic microscopes in the 1820s. In contrast, this thesis highlights the role of specific Enlightenment-era microscopes in answering medical and anatomical questions. It suggests that medical microscopy was far more advanced than previous scholarship has ascertained. Thus far, instrument historians have focused more attention on competing instrument makers as opposed to rival instrument users. This thesis presents several case studies which explore both makers and users. These concern the histories of Enlightenment-era epidemiology, reproduction theory, anatomy, and physiology as well as the different types of microscopes which influenced these fields. In terms of methodology, this thesis neither follows nor casts doubt on any particular theory of historical development; rather, it attempts to shed further light on available primary sources and their contexts. Presenting key case studies illustrates the difficulties that early microscope users faced in acquiring and publishing new observations. To explore the practice of early microscopy further, this thesis presents re-enactments of these case studies using Enlightenment-era microscopes and modern tissue samples. Thus, this thesis is a call to broaden the scope of primary sources available to historians of science and medicine to include instruments and re-enactments. This thesis finds that technological advances did not correlate to microscopical discovery in medicine or anatomy. Both simple and complex microscope designs aided anatomical and medical research. Broader advances in anatomy, physiology, and medical etiology dictated the utility of medical microscopy. Although various groups, such as the French clinicians, saw little need for microscopy towards the end of the eighteenth century, microscope-based evidence continued to play a diagnostic role among lesser-known practitioners despite its lack of visibility in medical literature.</p

Academic Domains as Political Battlegrounds: A Global Enquiry by 99 Academics in the Fields of Education and Technology

This article theorizes the functional relationship between the human components (i.e., scholars) and nonhuman components (i.e., structural configurations) of academic domains. It is organized around the following question: in what ways have scholars formed and been formed by the structural configurations of their academic domain? The article uses as a case study the academic domain of education and technology to examine this question. Its authorship approach is innovative, with a worldwide collection of academics (99 authors) collaborating to address the proposed question based on their reflections on daily social and academic practices. This collaboration followed a three-round process of contributions via email. Analysis of these scholars’ reflective accounts was carried out, and a theoretical proposition was established from this analysis. The proposition is of a mutual (yet not necessarily balanced) power (and therefore political) relationship between the human and non-human constituents of an academic realm, with the two shaping one another. One implication of this proposition is that these non-human elements exist as political ‘actors’, just like their human counterparts, having ‘agency’ – which they exercise over humans. This turns academic domains into political (functional or dysfunctional) ‘battlefields’ wherein both humans and non-humans engage in political activities and actions that form the identity of the academic domain

Academic domains as political battlegrounds : A global enquiry by 99 academics in the fields of education and technology

Academic cognition and intelligence are ‘socially distributed’; instead of dwelling inside the single mind of an individual academic or a few academics, they are spread throughout the different minds of all academics. In this article, some mechanisms have been developed that systematically bring together these fragmented pieces of cognition and intelligence. These mechanisms jointly form a new authoring method called ‘crowd-authoring’, enabling an international crowd of academics to co-author a manuscript in an organized way. The article discusses this method, addressing the following question: What are the main mechanisms needed for a large collection of academics to collaborate on the authorship of an article? This question is addressed through a developmental endeavour wherein 101 academics of educational technology from around the world worked together in three rounds by email to compose a short article. Based on this endeavour, four mechanisms have been developed: a) a mechanism for finding a crowd of scholars; b) a mechanism for managing this crowd; c) a mechanism for analyzing the input of this crowd; and d) a scenario for software that helps automate the process of crowd-authoring. The recommendation is that crowd-authoring ought to win the attention of academic communities and funding agencies, because, given the well-connected nature of the contemporary age, the widely and commonly distributed status of academic intelligence and the increasing value of collective and democratic participation, large-scale multi-authored publications are the way forward for academic fields and wider academia in the 21st century.peerReviewe

Academic domains as political battlegrounds:A global enquiry by 99 academics in the fields of education and technology

This article theorizes the functional relationship between the human components (i.e., scholars) and non-human components (i.e., structural configurations) of academic domains. It is organized around the following question: in what ways have scholars formed and been formed by the structural configurations of their academic domain? The article uses as a case study the academic domain of education and technology to examine this question. Its authorship approach is innovative, with a worldwide collection of academics (99 authors) collaborating to address the proposed question based on their reflections on daily social and academic practices. This collaboration followed a three-round process of contributions via email. Analysis of these scholars’ reflective accounts was carried out, and a theoretical proposition was established from this analysis. The proposition is of a mutual (yet not necessarily balanced) power (and therefore political) relationship between the human and non-human constituents of an academic realm, with the two shaping one another. One implication of this proposition is that these non-human elements exist as political ‘actors’, just like their human counterparts, having ‘agency’ – which they exercise over humans. This turns academic domains into political (functional or dysfunctional) ‘battlefields’ wherein both humans and non-humans engage in political activities and actions that form the identity of the academic domain. For more information about the authorship approach, please see Al Lily AEA (2015) A crowd-authoring project on the scholarship of educational technology. Information Development. doi: 10.1177/0266666915622044.</p

Academic Domains As Political Battlegrounds: A Global Enquiry By 99 Academics in The Fields of Education and Technology

This article theorizes the functional relationship between the human components (i.e., scholars) and non-human components (i.e., structural configurations) of academic domains. It is organized around the following question: in what ways have scholars formed and been formed by the structural configurations of their academic domain? The article uses as a case study the academic domain of education and technology to examine this question. Its authorship approach is innovative, with a worldwide collection of academics (99 authors) collaborating to address the proposed question based on their reflections on daily social and academic practices. This collaboration followed a three-round process of contributions via email. Analysis of these scholars' reflective accounts was carried out, and a theoretical proposition was established from this analysis. The proposition is of a mutual (yet not necessarily balanced) power (and therefore political) relationship between the human and non-human constituents of an academic realm, with the two shaping one another. One implication of this proposition is that these non-human elements exist as political actors', just like their human counterparts, having agency' - which they exercise over humans. This turns academic domains into political (functional or dysfunctional) battlefields' wherein both humans and non-humans engage in political activities and actions that form the identity of the academic domain. For more information about the authorship approach, please see Al Lily AEA (2015) A crowd-authoring project on the scholarship of educational technology. Information Development. doi: 10.1177/0266666915622044.Wo