Portal de Periódicos da CAPES

‘To hold the subject’s territory’: the Swedish Association of Biology Teachers and two curricular reforms, 1960–1965

2009; Taylor & Francis; Volume: 39; Issue: 2 Linguagem: Inglês

10.1080/00467600802294424

1464-5130

Jonas Hällström,

Historical Education Studies Worldwide

Abstract The aim of this article is to investigate and analyse the cultural boundaries of school biology, and to a certain extent the natural science subjects in general, in two Swedish curriculum reforms, from the viewpoint of the Swedish Association of Biology Teachers (ABT). Thomas Gieryn’s concept of boundary‐work is thus used in analysing how the ABT acted to ‘hold the subject’s territory’. The ABT had substantial influence on the content of the new biology curricula, although this was sometimes achieved after internal conflict and required support from other actors, especially university biologists. Upper secondary biology had the highest status and was seen as a science, related to modern biological research and curriculum development, particularly in the USA. Despite the efforts of the ABT boundary‐work was unsuccessful in respect of the timetable; the natural science subjects were reduced both at the lower and upper secondary level, in contrast to what happened in many other Western countries. Keywords: educational reformhistorysciencesecondary education Acknowledgements This research was financed by the Swedish Research Council (Vetenskapsrådet), to which the author is grateful for support. The author would like to thank Mats Sjöberg, Bengt‐Göran Martinsson and the anonymous reviewers for commenting on earlier versions of this article. Notes 1Mikael Hård and Andrew Jamison, Hubris and Hybrids: A Cultural History of Technology and Science (New York and London: Routledge, 2005), 56, 245–48; Michael Godhe, Morgondagens experter. Tekniken, ungdomen och framsteget i populärvetenskap och science fiction i Sverige under det långa 1950‐talet (Stockholm: Carlssons, 2003), 15–19. 2John L. Rudolph, Scientists in the Classroom: the Cold War Reconstruction of American Science Education (New York: Palgrave, 2002), 1–8; David Layton, Interpreters of Science: A History of the Association for Science Education (London: John Murray & the Association for Science Education, 1984), 234. 3C.P. Snow, The Two Cultures and the Scientific Revolution: the Rede Lecture (New York: Cambridge University Press, 1959); Mary Waring, ‘Background to Nuffield Science’, History of Education 8 (1979): 223–37; Emma Eldelin, ‘De två kulturerna’ flyttar hemifrån. C.P. Snows begrepp i svensk idédebatt 1959–2005 (Stockholm: Carlssons, 2006), 9, 43–61; Kristine Hays Lynning, ‘Portraying Science as Humanism – A Historical Case Study of Cultural Boundary Work from the Dawn of the “Atomic Age”’, Science & Education 16 (2007): 491–6. 4David H. Kamens and Aaron Benavot, ‘World Models of Secondary Education, 1960–2000’, in School Knowledge in Comparative and Historical Perspective: Changing Curricula in Primary and Secondary Education, ed. Aaron Benavot and Cecilia Braslavsky (Hong Kong: Comparative Education Research Centre & Springer, 2006), 135–42. 5Exceptions include, for example, Harry Lindholm, Föreningarna för matematisk‐naturvetenskaplig undervisning. Fortbildning och skolpolitik 1933–1971 (Uppsala: Föreningen för svensk undervisningshistoria, 1991); Staffan Wennerholm, Framtidsskaparna. Vetenskapens ungdomskultur vid svenska läroverk 1930–1970 (Lund: Arkiv, 2005); and Daniel Lövheim, Att inteckna framtiden. Läroplansdebatter gällande naturvetenskap, matematik och teknik i svenska allmänna läroverk 1900–1965 (Uppsala: Uppsala University, 2006). 9Donnér, ‘Biologilärarnas förening – 50 år’, 6. All translation from Swedish into English was carried out by the author. 6Subject or teacher associations have received relatively little attention in the history of education and science. However, Layton’s Interpreters of Science traces the origins of the British Association for Science Education and its precursors from the early twentieth century. Edgar Jenkins, ‘The Association for Science Education and the Struggle to Establish a Policy for School Science in England and Wales, 1976–81’, History of Education 27 (1998): 441–59 focuses on the ASE’s internal policy‐making. Ivor F. Goodson, Learning, Curriculum and Life Politics: The Selected Works of Ivor F. Goodson (London and New York: Routledge, 2005), 56–67 analyses the origins and development of the English school subject geography from the point of view of the Geographical Association and its lobby activities, from the end of the nineteenth century onwards. John L. Rudolph, ‘Turning Science to Account: Chicago and the General Science Movement in Secondary Education, 1905–1920’, Isis 96 (2005): 353–89 deals in part with the American Central Association of Science and Mathematics Teachers. In the Scandinavian context there is also Lindholm, Föreningarna för matematisk‐naturvetenskaplig undervisning, which follows the history of the Swedish Association for Mathematics and Natural Science Teaching. There are a few studies that partly or as a whole deal with secondary school biology, for example, William V. Mayer, ‘Biology Education in the United States During the Twentieth Century’, Quarterly Review of Biology 61 (1986): 481–507; Dorothy B. Rosenthal and Rodger W. Bybee, ‘Emergence of the Biology Curriculum: A Science of Life or a Science of Living?’, in The Formation of School Subjects: The Struggle for Creating an American Institution, ed. Thomas S. Popkewitz (New York: Falmer Press, 1987), 123–44; Philip J. Pauly, ‘The Development of High School Biology: New York City, 1900–1925’, Isis 82 (1991): 662–88; Philip J. Pauly, Biologists and the Promise of American Life: From Meriwether Lewis to Alfred Kinsey (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 2000), 171–93; Rudolph, Scientists in the Classroom; Edgar Jenkins, From Armstrong to Nuffield: Studies in Twentieth‐Century Science Education in England and Wales (London: John Murray, 1979), ch. 4; Ivor F. Goodson, Studying Curriculum: Cases and Methods (Buckingham: Open University Press, 1994), 40–50; Ole Andreas Isager, Den norske grunnskolens biologi i et historisk og komparativt perspektiv (Oslo: Universitetet i Oslo, 1996); Wennerholm, Framtidsskaparna; and Lövheim, Att inteckna framtiden. 7The Swedish undervisningsplan and later läroplan constituted official, national documents that prescribed the content and goals for the Swedish school, much like the German Lehrplan. The term curriculum will be used as a rough English translation. The Swedish kursplan was also an official document included in the läroplan that prescribed the content and goals for specific subjects. It will accordingly be referred to as subject‐specific part of the curriculum. 8Layton, Interpreters of Science; RA (Riksarkivet), BF E1:7, letter from the ABT to the National Agency for Education, 16 November 1965. In the early 1960s the ABT was organised as a national association with an executive committee, a board and annual meetings, but it was also made up of local sections with their own boards. In 1965 there were four local sections, the Southern, Western, Dala and Stockholm sections. Decision‐making was mainly carried out by the executive and the board, although all important questions were submitted to the annual meeting: RA, BF B1:1, annual reports of the ABT for 1962 and 1963; E1:5, letter from the executive committee to the members, November 1962; Tore Donnér, ‘Biologilärarnas förening – 50 år. Några tankar inför ett jubileum’, Biologen 49, no. 2–3 (1983): 8. 10The source material utilised in this study is minutes of the ABT executive committee, board and annual meeting, ABT annual reports and official statements as well as the ABT journal – Medlemsblad för Biologilärarnas förening (MB) for 1960–1964 and Biologen for 1965. Private letters have supplemented this material when relevant. Furthermore, various curricula as well as parliamentary documents such as official reports (SOU) and bills have also been used. The method employed is a hermeneutic method, that is, a method of interpretation. The stance put forward here is historicist, that is, that meaning is determined by the context in which the source material was written as well as the historian’s own context: Peter Burke, History and Social Theory (Cambridge: Polity Press, 1992), 17–21; Ian MacLean, ‘Reading and Interpretation’, in Modern Literary Theory: A Comparative Introduction, ed. A. Jefferson and D. Robey (London: B.T. Batsford, 1986), 122–4, 136–8. 11Goodson, Studying Curriculum, 42. 12Thomas F. Gieryn, Cultural Boundaries of Science: Credibility on the Line (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1999), 1–25; Thomas F. Gieryn, ‘Boundary‐Work and the Demarcation of Science from Non‐Science: Strains and Interests in Professional Ideologies of Scientists’, American Sociological Review 48, no. 6 (1983): 781–95 (quote on p. 791). In recent years Gieryn’s boundary‐work concept has been employed in studies within curriculum history and history of science education. See, for instance, John L. Rudolph, ‘Portraying Epistemology: School Science in Historical Context’, Science Education 87 (2003): 64–79 and Hays Lynning, ‘Portraying Science as Humanism’. 13In this context closure means finished, conclusive boundary‐work for the cultural map of biology that went into the curriculum: Wiebe E. Bijker, Of Bicycles, Bakelites, and Bulbs: Toward a Theory of Sociotechnical Change (Cambridge, MA and London: MIT Press, 1995), 84–8. 14Gieryn, Cultural Boundaries of Science, 6–12. There is a wide range of literature relating to the role of place and space in the construction of science. Along with Simon Naylor one can roughly divide such studies into those that deal with actual geographies of science, that is, the spaces where scientists have worked such as laboratories, schools, museums, cities, regions, and those which address the ‘cultural spaces’ or cartographies of science, such as the cited works of Gieryn: Simon Naylor, ‘Introduction: Historical Geographies of Science – Places, Contexts, Cartographies’, British Journal for the History of Science 38 (2005): 1–12. See, for example, Steven Shapin and Simon Schaffer, Leviathan and the Air‐Pump: Hobbes, Boyle, and the Experimental Life (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1985), 333–42; Steven Shapin, ‘The House of Experiment in Seventeenth‐Century England’, Isis 79 (1988): 373–404; Pauly, ‘The Development of High School Biology’; and David N. Livingstone, Putting Science in Its Place: Geographies of Scientific Knowledge (Chicago and London: University of Chicago Press, 2003). 15Sixten Marklund, Skolsverige 1950–1975. Del 3, Från Visbykompromissen till SIA (Stockholm: Liber, 1983), 91–111; Sixten Marklund, Skolsverige 1950–1975. Del 6, Rullande reform (Stockholm: Liber, 1989), 168–89; Gunnar Richardson, Svensk utbildningshistoria. Skola och samhälle förr och nu (Lund: Studentlitteratur, 1999), 192–8. 16The folkskola was often unisex in the countryside but divided in the cities. Other vocational schools at both lower and upper secondary level were, for example, verkstadsskola, lärlings‐ och yrkesskola, technical upper secondary school (tekniskt läroverk) and higher commercial school (handelsgymnasium): Sixten Marklund, Skolsverige 1950–1975. Del 1, 1950 års reformbeslut (Stockholm: Liber, 1980), 14–41; Jonas Hallström, ‘Elementary School Technology Education in Sweden, ca. 1900–1920’, in PATT 18, Pupils’ Attitudes Towards Technology, International Conference on Design and Technology Educational Research 2007, Teaching and Learning Technological Literacy in the Classroom, ed. John R. Dakers, Wendy J. Dow and Marc J. de Vries (Glasgow: Faculty of Education, University of Glasgow, 2007). 17Richardson, Svensk utbildningshistoria, 59–91; Sven Hartman, Det pedagogiska kulturarvet. Traditioner och idéer i svensk undervisningshistoria (Stockholm: Natur och kultur, 2005), 34–8, 47–54. The ABT and the other subject associations were mainly interested in secondary education, that is, läroverket, before the reform and the last three years of compulsory school (högstadiet) and the gymnasium after the reform. 18Hartman, Det pedagogiska kulturarvet, 245–8. 19SOU 1948:27; Government Bill No. 54, in Bihang till riksdagens protokoll 1962, 1 saml., C9, 23 February 1962, 5; Richardson, Svensk utbildningshistoria, 72–5; Marklund, Skolsverige 1950–1975. Del 1, 76–81. 20SOU 1961:30; Government Bill No. 54, in Bihang till riksdagens protokoll 1962, 1 saml., C9, 23 February 1962, 1–10; Richardson, Svensk utbildningshistoria, 75, 189–92. The proposal was presented as a couple of separate official reports as well as a school law, but for the sake of simplicity they are seen as a unified proposal. This proposal and the proposal for a reform of upper secondary education were both sent to different bodies and associations for comment. The official response of a particular association in the form of a written statement is called remissvar in Swedish. 21RA, BF A1:2, minutes of the executive committee, February 21, 1961; E1:5, letter from the Ministry of Education and Ecclesiastical Affairs, July 17, 1961, letter from the chairman of the ABT to the board, August 3, 1961, and minutes of the board, October 21, 1961. 22Marklund, Skolsverige 1950–1975. Del 3, 32–111. The Conservative Party was initially against the reform but yielded rather late in the process. 24RA, BF E1:5, Official statement of the ABT regarding the 1957 School Commission’s proposal, October 1961, 1–2. 23Government Bill No. 54, in Bihang till riksdagens protokoll 1962, 1 saml., C9, 23 February 1962; RA, BF E1:5, Official statement (remissvar) of the ABT regarding the 1957 School Commission’s proposal, October 1961, 1. 25The School Commission and the 1960 Upper Secondary School Commission both wanted to reduce the total number of weekly hours in secondary education, and referred mainly to the pupils’ health but also to the general reduction of hours in working life as reasons for this cut: SOU 1961:30, 197–8; SOU 1963:42, 331–6. 26SOU 1961:31, 16; Läroplan för grundskolan (Stockholm: National Agency for Education, 1962), 117–21. Cf. Sixten Marklund, Skolsverige 1950–1975. Del 5, Läroplaner (Stockholm: Liber, 1987), 169–81; Rudolph, Scientists in the Classroom, 137–64; Lövheim, Att inteckna framtiden, 137–44, 170–1. Lövheim claims that both science and humanities were reduced compared with the previous compulsory school experiments. 27SOU 1961:30, 199; Government Bill No. 54, in Bihang till riksdagens protokoll 1962, 1 saml., C9, February 23, 1962, 163–64. The School Commission argued against the view that the status of a subject was dependent on its allotted number of hours only; a thorough revision of the curriculum, new teaching methods and cooperation between subjects could give a subject a qualitative boost that counterbalanced the loss of hours: SOU 1961:30, 314–15. 28Rachel Carson, Silent Spring (Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 1962). 29Håkan Thörn, Rörelser i det moderna. Politik, modernitet och kollektiv identitet i Europa 1789–1989 (Stockholm: Tiden/Athena, 1997), ch. 7; Donald Worster, Nature’s Economy: A History of Ecological Ideas (Cambridge and New York: Cambridge University Press, 1994), ch. 16; Björn‐Ola Linnér, The World Household: Georg Borgström and the Postwar Population‐Resource Crisis (Linköping: Linköping University, 1998), 227–34; Sverker Sörlin, Naturkontraktet. Om naturumgängets idéhistoria (Stockholm: Carlssons, 1991), 256–8. 32RA, BF E1:5, statement from Östra real, not dated. 30Tomas Englund, Läroplanens och skolkunskapens politiska dimension (Göteborg: Daidalos, 2005), 199–207; Birger Bromsjö, Samhällskunskap som skolämne (Stockholm: Stockholm University, 1965), 51–67. 31RA, BF B1:1, annual report of the ABT for 1961, January 3, 1962; E1:5, Official statement of the ABT regarding the 1957 School Commission’s proposal, October 1961, 2. Tore Linnell, secretary and editor of the journal MB, worked at Östra real. 33RA, BF E1:5, Official statement of the ABT regarding the 1957 School Commission’s proposal, October 1961, 3–4. 34Government Bill No. 54, in Bihang till riksdagens protokoll 1962, 1 saml., C9, February 23, 1962, 1–10; Richardson, Svensk utbildningshistoria, 75, 189–92. 35SOU 1961:31, 16; Läroplan för grundskolan, 117–21; Kursplaner och metodiska anvisningar för realskolan (Stockholm: National Agency for Education, 1955), 20–1, 128–37. Evolution was hardly noticeable at all in the realskola curriculum. 36RA, BF B1:1, annual report of the ABT for 1961, January 3, 1962; Astrid Wallerius and Tore Linnell, ‘Göteborg, årsmötesplats i år’, MB 28 (1962): 3–9. 37RA, BF A1:2, minutes of the board, May 31, 1962 (official and handwritten). 38Hugo Grimlund and Harald Wallin, 1933 års läroverksstadga med förklaringar och hänvisningar jämte timplaner och undervisningsplan (Stockholm: Norstedts, 1939), 326–30. 39RA, BF A1:1, minutes of the board, October 31, 1959. 40RA, BF B1:1, annual report of the ABT for 1960, January 3, 1961; SOU 1963:42, 76–77; Richardson, Svensk utbildningshistoria, 62, 79–83; Henrik Román, ‘Pedagogiken, gymnasieutbildningen och 1960‐talets skolreformer – om reformhistoriebruk och en historia i andra hand’, Studies in Educational Policy and Educational Philosophy, no. 3 (2003): 1–12. 41RA, BF B1:1, annual report of the ABT for 1960, January 3, 1961; ‘Gymnasiebiologin åter i stöpsleven. Hur vill vi själva ha den?’, MB 26 (1960): 5–10. 42 Bildung was an ambiguous concept since its inception, and the elitist, neo‐humanist meaning that it most often acquired in Scandinavia was derived from the German philosopher and pedagogue Wilhelm von Humboldt, who was Minister of Education in Prussia in the early 1800s. The concept also had an undercurrent related to the ‘practical’ natural sciences and technology that grew in strength in the twentieth century: Sven‐Eric Liedman, Ett oändligt äventyr. Om människans kunskaper (Stockholm: Bonniers, 2001), 350–5; Sten Högnäs, ‘The Concept of Bildung and the Education of the Citizen: Traits and Developments in the Nordic Countries 1870–2000’, in Nordic Lights: Education for Nation and Civic Society in the Nordic Countries, 1850–2000, ed. Sirkka Ahonen and Jukka Rantala (Helsinki: Finnish Literature Society, 2001), 29–31; Hård and Jamison, Hubris and Hybrids, 111; Hallström, ‘Elementary School Technology Education in Sweden’. 43Cf. Lövheim, Att inteckna framtiden, 37–8. 44Gymnasiebiologin åter i stöpsleven’, 7. 45RA, BF B1:1, annual report of the ABT for 1960, January 3, 1961; ‘Gymnasiebiologin åter i stöpsleven’, 5–10. 46Astrid Wallerius and Tore Linnell, ‘Årsmötet’, MB 27 (1961): 4–10; Bror Forsman, ‘Biologi, special‐ eller allmänbildningsämne’, MB 27 (1961): 14–18; Karl‐Erik Näsmark, ‘Allmänbildning eller specialkunskaper i skolbiologin – lyder frågan’, MB 27 (1961): 18–21. 47Cf., for instance, Layton, Interpreters of Science, 238; Bromsjö, Samhällskunskap som skolämne, 65. 48RA, BF E1:5, minutes of the annual meeting, January 3, 1961; Wallerius and Linnell, ‘Årsmötet’, 8–9 (including quote); SOU 1963:42, 79–81; Wennerholm, Framtidsskaparna, 151–61; Lövheim, Att inteckna framtiden, 145; Eldelin, ‘De två kulturerna’ flyttar hemifrån, 93–121, 138–45. 49RA, BF A1:2, minutes of the board, October 28, 1962. 50RA, BF A1:2, minutes of the executive committee, September 26, 1962, minutes of the board, October 28, 1962; B1:1, annual report of the ABT for 1962, January 2, 1963. 51RA, BF B1:1, minutes of the annual meeting, January 2, 1963; ‘Årsmötet’, MB 29 (1963): 8–15. 52’Årsmötet’, 13. GU representative Wickbom, for instance, would not disclose anything about the reform or the proposed curriculum: RA, BF B1:1, minutes of the board, January 2, 1963 (handwritten). 53RA, BF B1:1, minutes of the annual meeting, January 2, 1963. 54Mayer, ‘Biology Education in the United States’, 486. By this time, the physics counterpart to BSCS – PSSC, the Physical Science Study Committee – had already made a deep impression on the Association for Mathematics and Natural Science Teaching. The PSSC came to influence the physics curriculum for upper secondary school: Lindholm, Föreningarna för matematisk‐naturvetenskaplig undervisning, 127–39. 55Mayer, ‘Biology Education in the United States’, 484–92; Rudolph, Scientists in the Classroom, 137–64. 56The proposal was really presented in a number of separate official reports, but for the sake of simplicity they are seen as a unified proposal. See primarily SOU 1963:42 and 43. 57RA, BF A1:2, minutes of the executive committee, September 18, 1963; minutes of the board, November 17, 1963; E1:7, ‘Hur ett remiss‐svar kommer till’, apology by Donnér and Linnell, February 1964. 58Geography had been removed from the proposed curriculum, and it was feared that the same thing would happen to biology if the ABT did not close ranks. Lennart Hultgren, external biology expert for the GU, wrote to Linnell that ‘[t]hose in authority have no respect for biology whatsoever, and active propaganda is being made in political circles, even by school representatives, for a removal of biology from the upper secondary level’: RA, BF E1:7, letter from Lennart Hultgren to Tore Linnell, January 7, 1964. 59RA, BF E1:7, letter from Tore Linnell to the ABT board, January 18, 1964 (including quote), ‘Hur ett remiss‐svar kommer till’, apology by Donnér and Linnell, February 1964. 61RA, BF E1:7, letter from Axel Björklund to Tore Linnell, January 22, 1964. 60RA, BF E1:7, letter from Ove Almborn to Tore Linnell, January 22, 1964. 62RA, BF E1:7, Official statement of the ABT regarding the proposal of the GU, February 15, 1964; SOU 1963:42. 63Linnér, The World Household, 227–34. 64George S. Papadopoulos, Education 1960–1990: the OECD Perspective (Paris and Washington, DC: Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development, 1994), 11–15, 26–32; Wennerholm, Framtidsskaparna, 122–50; Lövheim, Att inteckna framtiden, 137–60. 65Paul Duvigneaud and L.C. Comber, Biology To‐day, Its Role in Education: Report of an OECD Working Session on the Teaching of School Biology, Hellebaek (Denmark), June 1964 (Paris: Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development, 1966), 7; Rudolph, Scientists in the Classroom, 118–25, 139–43; Hays Lynning, ‘Portraying Science as Humanism’, 483–86. 66RA, BF E1:7, Official statement of the ABT regarding the proposal of the GU, February 15, 1964, 2. 67RA, BF E1:7, Official statement of the ABT regarding the proposal of the GU, February 15, 1964, 5. 68Yet the biology experts in the GU had managed to increase it by one hour per week compared with what was originally suggested: RA, BF E1:8, minutes of the annual meeting of 1964, undated; Elsa Wicklund and Tore Linnell, ‘Årsmötet’, MB 30 (1964): 9–15. 69RA, BF E1:7, Official statement of the ABT regarding the proposal of the GU, February 15, 1964, 5–6. The Danish Gymnasium was still an elitist institution, however, which meant that it was more specialised: Hays Lynning, ‘Portraying Science as Humanism’, 484. 70This modern focus was also quite natural considering the composition of the whole biology expert group in the GU: Professor Nils Fries (botany, physiology), Associate Professor Peter Perlmann (cell physiology), Principal Torsten Wickbom (genetics, cell physiology) and teacher Lars Öhman (zoology, cell physiology): RA, BF E1:8, minutes of the annual meeting of 1964, undated; Wicklund and Linnell, ‘Årsmötet’, 10. 71RA, BF E1:6, letter from Lennart Hultgren to Tore Linnell, January 14, 1964; E1:7, Official statement of the ABT regarding the proposal of the GU, February 15, 1964, 7–9; E1:8, minutes of the annual meeting of 1964, undated; Wicklund and Linnell, ‘Årsmötet’, 10–11. 72Nils Uddenberg, Idéer om livet. En biologihistoria. Band II, Arvets natur, känn dig själv (Stockholm: Natur och kultur, 2005), 88–99; Liedman, Ett oändligt äventyr, 224–9. In 1962, for example, the designers of the DNA double‐helix model, Francis Crick, James Watson and Maurice Wilkins, received the Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine: Nobel Foundation, nobelprize.org, cited November 3, 2006. 73Rudolph, Scientists in the Classroom, 154–6. The BSCS textbooks emphasised genetics, biochemistry, cell physiology, ecology and ethology at the expense of classical morphology and systematics: Mayer, ‘Biology Education in the United States’, 490. 74Government Bill No. 171, in Bihang till riksdagens protokoll 1964, 1 saml., C32, October 16, 1964, 245–6; Lövheim, Att inteckna framtiden, 165–9. 75RA, BF E1:7, Official statement of the ABT regarding the proposal of the GU, February 15, 1964, 3–5. 76RA, BF A1:2, minutes of the executive committee, May 4, 1964; E1:7, letter from Tore Linnell to Torsten Wickbom, April 2, 1964, letter from Wickbom to Linnell, April 4, 1964. 77RA, BF E1:7, letter from Wickbom to Linnell, April 4, 1964. 78Government Bill No. 171, in Bihang till riksdagens protokoll 1964, 1 saml., C32, October 16, 1964, 1–4. 79SOU 1963:42, 43; Official statement of the ABT regarding the proposal of the GU, February 15, 1964; Läroplan för gymnasiet (Stockholm: National Agency for Education, 1966), 73, 326–9; Wicklund and Linnell, ‘Årsmötet’, 11. 80Torsten Wickbom, ‘Skolbiologin inför framtiden’, Biologen 31 (1965): 1–4. 81Lindholm, Föreningarna för matematisk‐naturvetenskaplig undervisning, 141–7; SOU 1963:42; Government Bill No. 171, in Bihang till riksdagens protokoll 1964, 1 saml., C32, October 16, 1964; Läroplan för gymnasiet, 69–78. 82SOU 1963:42, 140–204, 367–76. 83Wennerholm, Framtidsskaparna, 259–72; Sörlin, Naturkontraktet, 199–226; Björn‐Ola Linnér, Att lära för överlevnad. Utbildningsprogrammen och miljöfrågorna 1962–2002 (Lund: Arkiv, 2005), 34–83. 84Wickbom, ‘Skolbiologin inför framtiden’, 1–4. 85Rudolph, ‘Portraying Epistemology’, 67. 86Worster, Nature’s Economy, ch. 10–13. Cf. Peter J. Bowler, The Earth Encompassed: A History of the Environmental Sciences (New York and London: Norton, 1992), 518–37. 87Julian Huxley, Evolution: the Modern Synthesis (London: G. Allen & Unwin, 1942); Uddenberg, Idéer om livet, 100–29. 88Urban Dahllöf, ‘Timplaner för folkskola och grundskola’, in Från folkskola till grundskola, ed. Erik Wallin (Uppsala: Pedagogiska institutionen, Uppsala University, 1992), 66–74. 89Jenkins, From Armstrong to Nuffield, ch. 4; Hays Lynning, ‘Portraying Science as Humanism’, 479–81, 502–3; Gary McCulloch, Edgar Jenkins and David Layton, Technological Revolution? The Politics of School Science and Technology in England and Wales Since 1945 (London: Falmer Press, 1985), 1–8. 90SOU 1961:30, 199. The Commission prioritised basic skills such as calculating, reading and writing, which is also why mathematics, Swedish and other languages gained ground. 91SOU 1961:30, 197; SOU 1963:42, 334–5; Hård and Jamison, Hubris and Hybrids, 85–8; Lövheim, Att inteckna framtiden, 149–54; Dahllöf, ‘Timplaner för folkskola och grundskola’, 74. 92Bruno Latour, Science in Action: How to Follow Scientists and Engineers through Society (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1987), 259. See also Bruno Latour, Pandora’s Hope: Essays on the Reality of Science Studies (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1999). 93RA, BF A1:2, minutes of the Southern section, May 14, 1962; Government Bill No. 54, in Bihang till riksdagens protokoll 1962, 1 saml., C9, February 23, 1962, 163–4; Government Bill No. 171, in Bihang till riksdagens protokoll 1964, 1 saml., C32, October 16, 1964, 243–6; Lövheim, Att inteckna framtiden, 165–9. 94Gieryn, Cultural Boundaries of Science, 62–4. Cf. Wiebe E. Bijker, ‘The Social Construction of Fluorescent Lighting, Or How an Artifact Was Invented in Its Diffusion Stage’, in Shaping Technology/Building Society: Studies in Sociotechnical Change, ed. W.E. Bijker and J. Law (London and Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1992), 75–6; Bijker, Of Bicycles, Bakelites, and Bulbs, 73–7.