Science and Technology Policy – Spring 2011
LAIS 486 (CRN 10938) and LAIS 586 (CRN 11670)

Time/Place:
Tues/Thurs, 2:00-3:15pm, Room: ____
Instructor:
Jason Delborne (delborne@mines.edu)


407 Stratton Hall, 303-273-3753
Office Hours: Tuesdays 12:00-2:00, Thursdays 12:30-2:00, or by appointment
I.
Course Description
This course introduces students to the policy environment that surrounds science and
technology. We will attend to a number of key aspects of this dynamic interaction: how
scientists participate in and influence the policymaking process; how scientific data and
interpretations become points of leverage and contention during policy debates; how federal
funding and regulatory decisions affect research trajectories; and how the governance of
science and technology implicates a variety of social forces ranging from explicit government
intervention, to corporate behavior, to university policies, to direct involvement by citizens. The
course will include historical and contemporary case studies, and students will have the
opportunity to conduct their own analyses of policy issues of interest to them.
II. Course Objectives
After completing this course, students should be able to:
1. Describe the scope of governmental actions—both regulatory and promotional—that
affect scientific practice and technological development.
2. Articulate and compare various ways for scientists to participate in the policymaking
process.
3. Discuss tensions and complementarities between democracy and science.
4. Analyze science and technology policies with sensitivity to the complexity of
policymaking processes – demonstrating expertise in understanding a specific and
current debate in science and technology policy.
III. Readings
Required Texts (CSM Bookstore)
• Pielke Jr., Roger. 2007. The Honest Broker: Making Sense of Science in Policy and Politics.
Cambridge University Press. [“Honest Broker” in syllabus]
• Sarewitz, Daniel. 1996. Frontiers of Illusion: Science, Technology and the Politics of
Progress. Temple University Press. [“Frontiers” in syllabus]
Blackboard
All other readings will be available electronically on Blackboard. See “Course Documents” and
click on the “Readings” folder. Please note the “fair use” statement regarding copyright issues,
posted along with the folder.

Delborne
Science & Technology Policy (Spring 2011)
2

IV. Assignments and evaluation
Summary

LAIS 486
LAIS 586
Class participation
200
100
Policy Analysis Project
575
575
- Topic proposal
25
25
- Annotated Bibliography
50
50
- Landscape paper
100
100
- Connections paper
100
100
- Policy presentation
150
150
- Policy brief
150
150
Office hour visit (with discussion of policy project)
25
25
Analytic Reading Memos (ARMs)
200 (8 ARMs)
200 (4 ARMs)
Class presentation/facilitation
NA
100
TOTAL
1000
1000
A = 1000-920, A- = 919-900, B+ = 899-880, B = 879-820, and so on (+/- for LAIS 586 only)

NOTE: While undergraduates and graduate students will complete similar assignments,
graduate students will be held to higher standards for evaluation purposes.
Detailed description
1. Class participation. Show up prepared for class, engage in discussion, ask questions, dare to
be wrong, listen to your peers, and share your ideas respectfully. The time each week in
discussion represents the only meaningful difference between taking the course and simply
using the syllabus as a private reading list. Preparation for class (reading, thinking, and
writing) is essential to all participants’ intellectual development, as well as to the experience
of their classmates. While I acknowledge the great diversity in levels of comfort with
speaking in front of a group, if you are not doing so at least once per class, you are not
meeting my expectations. If you feel especially shy, I encourage you to prepare questions or
comments in advance. You will not be punished or humiliated for being “wrong” or asking a
“dumb question.” At the same time, each of you should strive to make contributions that
connect to course materials, demonstrate analysis or synthesis, or marshal specific evidence
for an argument. I will evaluate your participation in two ways: 1) my subjective assessment
of the quality of your participation over the whole semester (which includes regular
attendance and arriving on time to class), and 2) a one page self-evaluation of your own
participation (including a proposed score), submitted in hard copy on the last day of class.

2. Policy Analysis Project. This assignment is the core of this course, and I have designed the
series of assignments to help you build toward a product worthy of presenting formally to
your classmates and possibly sharing with wider audiences. You may work individually, but I
encourage you to work with a partner. Please keep in mind that pairs of students will need
to double each requirement (length, time, sources) and that you will be responsible for
negotiating an equitable distribution of work – pairs of students will receive the same grade
for each assignment done cooperatively.

Delborne
Science & Technology Policy (Spring 2011)
3


a. Topic proposal (2 pages): Propose a topic for your policy analysis project. Address
the following: 1) why this topic interests you, 2) how your topic fits with course
themes, 3) if necessary, how you plan to narrow your topic, 4) what you hope to
learn, and 5) any questions or concerns you have.

b. Annotated bibliography (4 pages): Find at least 4 sources for your project and read
them (if one is a book, skimming is fine). At least one source must be peer-reviewed
and one must be from a major newspaper. For each source, list the full bibliographic
reference, provide a short summary of the argument, and discuss how this source
informs your project and/or provides evidence. Note: I expect that your final project
will rely upon many more than 4 sources – this assignment is designed to create
some early momentum for your research.

c. Landscape paper (4 pages + references): Describe the “landscape” of your project.
What are the primary issues? Who are the stakeholders? What policy decisions have
been made? What impacts are evident? What decisions present themselves in the
near future (discuss at least one)? What area do you plan to address with your policy
brief?

d. Connections paper (4 pages + references): How do the readings from the course
inform your approach to your topic? What specific questions do they demand that
you answer? How do they affect your analysis? How do they challenge the argument
that you are building? Cite at least three readings from the syllabus.

e. Policy presentation (in-class, 15 minutes each). Present your classmates with the
argument you intend to make in your policy brief. Drawing upon your two previous
papers, orient your classmates to your topic, describe insights gained from at least
two class readings, and argue for a specific policy action.

f. Policy brief (4 pages + references): Write a persuasive essay to a particular individual
or entity with the power to enact a policy change that you wish to advocate. Be as
specific as possible; acknowledge concerns, potential problems, and likely
resistance; and cite evidence to support your argument.

3. Office hour visit. Come to my office hours at least once by the end of the fifth week of class.
Bring any questions or concerns and come prepared to discuss your policy project.

4. Analytic Reading Memos. Students will sign up for four (586) or eight (486) classes to
complete analytic reading memos. In 1 page (486) or 2 pages (586), address the following
with regard to the assigned readings: main argument, connection to previously assigned
readings, evaluation of the author’s persuasiveness, and 3 questions that might be used in
class discussion. This assignment must be completed the day before class by noon in order
to assist the student presenter(s). Submit your ARMs on Blackboard as Word documents as
part of discussion threads for each week.


Delborne
Science & Technology Policy (Spring 2011)
4

5. Class presentation/facilitation (Graduate students ONLY). Each 586 student will take two
turns (with a partner) in presenting the assigned readings to the class. Presenters should
aim to emphasize new points/arguments, clarify connections to previous weeks’ themes,
and suggest ways that assigned readings are in conversation with one another. Initial
presentations should be 15-20 minutes and may include visuals or other helpful materials.
The second part of the assignment involves preparing a plan to initiate and facilitate class
discussion. You might plan a small group exercise, prepare a list of discussion questions,
initiate a role play, or consider other creative ideas. You will be responsible for 65 minutes
of class time, leaving 10 minutes for group feedback on your effort and class logistics.

6. Mid-term evaluation. Just as I will evaluate student performance throughout the semester
to encourage improvement and identify particular challenges, students will also have an
opportunity to evaluate my performance, before the end of the semester (when changes
can only make a difference to future classes). During Week 5, students will be asked to
complete an anonymous mid-term course evaluation to tell me what aspects of course
organization, teaching style, and discussion format have been the most helpful, and also to
provide any constructive criticism. I will discuss the results of this evaluation in class.

V.
Resources and rules
Format of assignments: All written assignments should be formatted with 1 inch margins, 12pt
font, and double-spaced (undergraduate ARMs may be 1½ spaced). Citations for readings from
the syllabus should simply indicate author, date, and page number if appropriate [e.g., (Collins
1995: 102)]. Citations for other readings should follow the same format within the text, and
also appear in a reference section at the end of the paper. You must turn in all written
assignments BOTH on Blackboard and in hard copy (at the beginning of class) unless otherwise
specified.

Extensions for assignments require my permission no less than 48 hours prior to when the
assignment is due (except in absolutely horrific circumstances). Under no circumstances will I
accept assignments after the last day of class – any outstanding work will negatively affect the
course grade or result in an “Incomplete.”

Disabilities: If you have a disability that could affect your participation and/or performance in
this course, please contact me as soon as possible in order to discuss appropriate and helpful
accommodations.

Writing Center: The Writing Center is a terrific resource for students at all stages in the writing
process, and you are encouraged to use it regularly. You may call 303-273-3085 to make an
appointment to meet with an advisor in the Writing Center, located in Stratton Hall 311. Check
the website (http://www.mines.edu/Academic/lais/wc/home.htm) for hours and other details.
You may also find information on the Communications Center, which could be particularly
helpful in planning for your presentations.



Delborne
Science & Technology Policy (Spring 2011)
5

Writer’s Help (Bedford/St. Martin’s online resource): I have arranged for all students in this
class to have free access to “Writer’s Help.” Since this is a new tool for me as an instructor, we
will experiment over the course of the semester with ways to benefit from this resource. Please
create your account and do some exploring early in the semester.

1. Go to www.writershelp.com
2. Click Ente
t r
e
r your
r acti
t v
i a
v ti
t o
i n
o code.
3. Enter your activation code exactly as it appears here: 49d-74u
4 -7rt
r x
t 2f8
f 8. Also enter your name
and e-mail address, which will serve as your Writer’s Help username. You won’t be able to
change your e-mail address after you register, so pick one that will be valid for the duration of
the course.
4. Create a password and password hint. The password must be at least 4 characters long and
should be something memorable.
5. Enter your instructor’s email address [delborne@mines.edu]. Doing this will ensure that you
can see any e-book pages that your instructor has assigned, and that your exercise results
report to your instructor’s gradebook.
6. Click NEXT
T at the bottom of the screen, confirm your account information, and click
CREAT
A E
T AC
A CO
C UN
U T
T to complete the registration process.
7. If you have trouble registering, contact Te
T ch Su
S pport
r at 800.936.6899
9 or
te
t c
e hsupport
r @
t bf
b w
f pu
p b.
b com
o . Otherwise, return to www.writershelp.com to log in to Writer’s
Help.

Academic dishonesty will not be tolerated. If questions arise in your mind during the semester
about plagiarism, appropriate citation of sources, or permitted collaboration on assignments,
please initiate a discussion with me. If you find yourself contemplating an action that you would
be embarrassed to disclose fully to the other students in the class or to me, I would advise you
to consult with me before moving forward. Please keep in mind that instructors have a
subscription to anti-plagiarism software which tracks all Mines student writing, inappropriate
borrowing from internet sites, and papers-for-sale.

Plagiarism: CSM policy defines plagiarism as follows: “Copying or adopting the scientific,
literary, musical, or artistic composition or work of another and producing or publishing it as
one’s own original composition or work. To be liable for ‘plagiarism’ it is not necessary to
exactly duplicate another’s work: it is sufficient if unfair use of such work is made by lifting of
substantial portion thereof, but even an exact counterpart of another’s work does not
constitute ‘plagiarism’ if such counterpart was arrived at independently.” The LAIS plagiarism
policy requires that:
a. For a first offense, the student will receive an F in the course, and the Vice
President for Student Life and Dean of Students will be notified.
b. For a second offense, the student will also receive an F in the course and further
action, normally suspension from CSM, will be taken by the Vice President for
Student Life and Dean of Students. The incident will also become a permanent
part of the student's transcript.



Delborne
Science & Technology Policy (Spring 2011)
6

VI. Course Schedule
Our semester runs from January 12 – May 5. Because this class takes advantage of a number of
guest speakers who are difficult to confirm prior to the semester, we have to maintain some
flexibility. The following schedule includes fixed dates and due dates, followed by a list of
sequential classes that will combine with guest speakers (TBA) to “fill in the blanks.” Consult
Blackboard for ongoing updates to our schedule.
Calendar
Jan 13
Introductions, orientation, review of syllabus

Jan 18
____________

Jan 20
____________

Jan 25
____________

Jan 27
DUE: Topic proposal for policy project
Class time will be allocated to presentations (2-3 min) of topics by students

Feb 1
____________

Feb 3
____________

Feb 8
____________

Feb 10
DUE: Annotated bibliography for policy project


DUE: Office hour visit (including discussion of policy project)
Mid-course evaluations of instructor in class
Topic/Reading: ____________

Feb 15
____________

Feb 17
____________

Feb 22
____________

Feb 24
____________

Mar 1
____________

Mar 3
DUE: Landscape paper for policy project
Class time will be allocated to presentations (2-3 min) of refined policy topics

Mar 8
____________


Delborne
Science & Technology Policy (Spring 2011)
7

Mar 10
____________

Mar 15/17
No class – CSM Spring Break

Mar 22
Jennifer Kuzma, Hennebach Visiting Scholar (readings TBD)

Mar 24
DUE: Connections paper for policy project
Jennifer Kuzma (readings TBD)

Mar 29
Guest speaker: Jen Schneider, LAIS


Topic: Science Communication (readings TBD)

Mar 31
Guest speaker: Jen Schneider, LAIS


Topic: Science Communication (readings TBD)

Apr 5, 7, 12, 14, 19, 21
Student Policy Presentations (in class)

Apr 26
____________

Apr 28
____________

May 3
____________

May 5
DUE: Policy Brief & Self-evaluation of class participation. Class wrap-up


and discussion of policy projects.
Sequence of classes
These classes are numbered sequentially so that you can fill in the calendar (above) as the
semester progresses. Of the 17 “blanks” in the calendar, I anticipate including 2-3 additional
guest speakers.

1. How do we think about public policy?
• Stone, Deborah. 2002. Policy Paradox: The Art of Political Decision Making. 3rd ed. W.
W. Norton & Company. Chapters 1 (“The Market and the Polis”), 7 (“Numbers”), and
Conclusion (“Political Reason).

2. Frontiers, “The End of the Age of Physics” (1-15) & “The Myth of Infinite Benefit” (17-29)

3. Frontiers, “The Myth of Unfettered Research” (31-49) & “Myth of Accountability” (51-69)

4. Frontiers, “Myth of Authoritativeness” (71-96) and “Myth of the Endless Frontier” (97-115)

5. Frontiers, “Pas de Trois: Science, Technology, and the Marketplace” (117-40) & “Science as
Surrogate for Social Action” (141-67)

6. Frontiers, “Toward a New Mythology” (169-95)

Delborne
Science & Technology Policy (Spring 2011)
8


7. Federal funding of science
• De Figueiredo, John M. and Brian S. Silverman (2007) “How Does the Government (Want
to) Fund Science,” in Science and the University, P.E. Stephan and R.G. Ehrenberg (eds.):
36-51.
• Jackson, Brian A. (2006) “Federal R&D: Shaping the National Investment Portfolio,” in
Shaping Science and Technology Policy, pp. 33-54.
• Find a newspaper or magazine article or blog to read that addresses federal funding of
science. Come to class prepared to summarize what you learned.

8. Federal R&D Budget – 2011
• AAAS Report XXXV: Research and Development FY 2011, Ch 1-4 (pp. 5-41)
• Continued discussions of articles/blogs brought in by students

9. Honest Broker, Ch 1-3 (1-38)

10. Honest Broker, Ch 4-6 (39-96)

11. Honest Broker, Ch 8, 9, Appendix (116-62)

12. Science and democracy
• Jasanoff, Sheila (2009) “The Essential Parallel between Science and Democracy,” Seed
Magazine, February 17, 2009.
• Brown, Mark B. 2006. “Survey Article: Citizen Panels and the Concept of
Representation.” Journal of Political Philosophy 14:203–225.

13. Citizen engagement with science
• Sclove, Richard E. 2000. “Town Meetings on Technology: Consensus Conferences as
Democratic Participation,” in Science, Technology, and Democracy, D.L. Kleinman (ed.):
33-48.
• Kleinman, Daniel Lee, Jason A. Delborne, and Ashley A. Anderson. 2009. Engaging
Citizens: The High Cost of Citizen Participation in High Technology. Public Understanding
of Science OnlineFirst (October 9). doi:10.1177/0963662509347137.

14. Presidential Science Advisors
• R. Pielke, Jr. and R. A. Klein, Eds. (2010) Presidential Science Advisors: Perspectives and
Reflections on Science, Policy and Politics. Springer. Read Introduction, Chapters 1 & 11.

15. Science advice to the Congress
• R. Pielke, Jr. and R. A. Klein, Eds. (2010) Presidential Science Advisors: Perspectives and
Reflections on Science, Policy and Politics. Springer. Read Part III Intro., Chapters 9 & 10.


Updated January 7, 2010