UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA RIVERSIDE Science for Survival: The Modern Synthesis of Evolution and The Biological Sciences Curriculum Study A Dissertation submitted in partial satisfaction of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Education by Lisa Anne Green December 2012 Dissertation Committee: Dr. Margaret Nash, Chairperson Dr. Begoña Echeverria Dr. John Wills Copyright by Lisa Anne Green 2012 The Dissertation of Lisa Anne Green is approved: ___________________________________________ ___________________________________________ ___________________________________________ Committee Chairperson University of California, Riverside Acknowledgements One thing I learned in researching and writing this dissertation is that the construction of knowledge is truly a social enterprise. I am indebted to many people who helped to make this work possible. I thank my Dissertation Committee, whose guidance and encouragement were essential to my intellectual growth and the completion of this dissertation: Begoña Echeverria, John Wills, and especially my advisor Margaret Nash. Dr. Nash’s commitment to her graduate students is truly exemplary, and her wise counsel provided the beacon of light I needed to navigate the often foggy terrain. My early thinking on this project benefitted greatly from conversations with Reba Page and Douglas Mitchell of the Graduate School of Education at UCR. I owe special thanks to Betty Smocovitis of the University of Florida, whose insights were invaluable and whose book Unifying Biology was foundational to this project. I also greatly appreciate the contribution of BSCS Director Arnold Grobman, who breathed life into my archival research. A number of archivists and librarians were essential to the completion of this dissertation. I would like to especially thank Roy Goodman, Charles Greifenstein, and Earle Spamer of the American Philosophical Society Library; Dave Frasier of the Lilly Library at Indiana University; John Skarstad of Special Collections at the University of California, Davis, and Byllee Simon and the staff of the Biological Sciences Curriculum Study for their assistance with archival materials. I am also grateful for the assistance of the special collections staff at the Smithsonian Institution Archives and the following universities: Harvard University; University of California, Riverside; University of iv Chicago; University of Florida; and the University of Michigan. Special thanks to Janet Moores, Maria Mendoza, and Esther Arroyo of UCR Interlibrary Loan for their efforts in procuring numerous books and materials. My writing on this and other projects has benefitted greatly from my participation in the History Writing Group organized by Margaret Nash in the Graduate School of Education at UCR. My thanks go out to those whose read and commented on various drafts: David Berman, Deb Parr, Jennifer Silverman, JoeAnn Nguyen, Kathleen Adams, Kay Clapper, Lee Levin, Lois Nettleship, Mark Groen, Paul McHenry, Scott Smith, Terry Tomlinson, Wayne Shapiro, and Zach Haberler. I would like to thank those who generously provided financial support for various aspects of the dissertation process. These included the American Philosophical Society, the John U. Michaelis family, and the University of California, Riverside. In addition to important financial support, they provided encouragement to pursue this project. I thank Judy Maddox, who transcribed the interview with Arnold Grobman, provided editorial assistance, and was a wonderful “cheerleader.” Thanks also go to Phyllis Green for her encouragement and editorial work on an early draft. I am grateful for my wonderful father and mother, William and Betty Houck, who created and encouraged my interest in science from an early age. I will never forget the many trips to the Franklin Institute in Philadelphia or staying home from school to watch the history-making space launches of the 1960s. Finally, I would like to thank my family, Ruth and Alf Jorgensen, DeWayne Green, and James Green for their unfailing patience and love. I especially appreciate the v understanding and support of my husband DeWayne throughout the long process of graduate school. vi ABSTRACT OF THE DISSERTATION Science for Survival: The Modern Synthesis of Evolution and the Biological Sciences Curriculum Study by Lisa Anne Green Doctor of Philosophy, Graduate School of Education University of California, Riverside, December 2012 Dr. Margaret Nash, Chairperson In this historical dissertation, I examined the process of curriculum development in the Biological Sciences Curriculum Study (BSCS) in the United States during the period 1959-1963. The presentation of evolution in the high school texts was based on a more robust form of Darwinian evolution which developed during the 1930s and 1940s called “the modern synthesis of evolution.” Building primarily on the work of historians Vassiliki Smocovitis and John L. Rudolph, I used the archival papers and published writings of the four architects of the modern synthesis and the four most influential leaders of the BSCS in regards to evolution to investigate how the modern synthetic theory of evolution shaped the BSCS curriculum. The central question was “Why was evolution so important to the BSCS to make it the central theme of the texts?” Important answers to this question had already been offered in the historiography, but it was still not clear why every citizen in the world needed to understand evolution. I found that the emphasis on natural selection in the vii modern synthesis shifted the focus away from humans as passive participants to the recognition that humans are active agents in their own cultural and biological evolution. This required re-education of the world citizenry, which was accomplished in part by the BSCS textbooks. I also found that BSCS leaders Grobman, Glass, and Muller had serious concerns regarding the effects of nuclear radiation on the human gene pool, and were actively involved in informing the public. Lastly, I found that concerns of 1950s reform eugenicists were addressed in the BSCS textbooks, without mentioning eugenics by name. I suggest that the leaders of the BSCS, especially Bentley Glass and Hermann J. Muller, thought that students needed to understand genetics and evolution to be able to make some of the tough choices they might be called on to make as the dominant species on earth and the next reproductive generation in the nuclear age. This was science for survival. viii Table of Contents Introduction ............................................................................................................1 Significance...........................................................................................................9 Chapter 1: Historiography ..................................................................................10 The Modern Evolutionary Synthesis ..................................................................11 The History of Science and the Modern Evolutionary Synthesis .......................15 The History of Education and the BSCS ............................................................19 Mainline and Reform Eugenics ..........................................................................28 Sources ................................................................................................................32 Chapter 2: Why Evolution? ................................................................................36 Evolution in the 19th Century ..............................................................................37 The Modern Synthesis of Evolution ...................................................................40 The Modern Synthesis at the 1959 Darwin Centennial Celebration...................49 Conclusion ..........................................................................................................65 Chapter 3: Hermann J. Muller and Reform Eugenics .....................................67 Biographical Background ...................................................................................69 Muller, Evolution, and Education .......................................................................74 Muller and Eugenics ...........................................................................................80 Muller Takes It on the Road ...............................................................................83 Muller and the Darwin Centennial ......................................................................86 Muller’s Most Controversial Paper .....................................................................90 Values in Education ............................................................................................96 Conclusion ..........................................................................................................98 ix Chapter 4: H. Bentley Glass, Arnold Grobman, and John A. Moore ...........100 H. Bentley Glass ...............................................................................................101 Arnold B. Grobman ..........................................................................................112 John A. Moore ..................................................................................................120 Summary ...........................................................................................................136 Chapter 5: Curriculum Deliberation ...............................................................138 Organizational Precursors