How would your life be different without electric lighting? A Review of IEEE REACH’s Inquiry
CoT Announcements
Next Monthly Tech Talk this Tuesday, 11/07/23. Join our monthly tech talks to discuss current events, articles, books, podcast, or whatever we choose related to technology and education. There is no agenda or schedule. Our next Tech Talk will be this Tuesday, November 7th, 2023 at 8-9pm EST/7-8pm CST/6-7pm MST/5-6pm PST. Learn more on our Events page and register to participate.
Next Book Club on Tuesday, 12/17/23: We are discu\ssing Blood in the Machine The Origins of the Rebellion Against Big Tech by Brian Merchant led by Dan Krutka. Register for this book club event if you’d like to participate.
Critical Tech Study Participation: If you self-identify as critical of technology, please consider participating in our study. We are seeking participants who self-identify as holding critical views toward technology to share their stories by answering the following questions: To you, what does it mean to take a critical perspective toward technology? How have you come to take on that critical perspective? Please consider participating in our study via OUR SURVEY. You are welcome to share with others. Thank you!
by Dan Krutka
I have recently been teaching lessons about electric lights in social studies classes. I will share my resources and lessons in a forthcoming blog post. However, in doing so, it spurred me to revisit the inquiry curriculum at IEEE REACH. IEEE is short for the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, and REACH is short for Raising Engineering Awareness through the Conduit of History. Here’s how the describe their work:
Understanding that technology and history are not mutually exclusive subjects, IEEE REACH provides pre-university teachers with free, open educational resources that situate science, technology, and engineering in their social and humanistic contexts. The program is interdisciplinary, and while designed for Social Studies teachers and meeting the C3 Framework standards, it also meets the Next Generation Science Standards, and the Standards for Technology and Engineering Literacy as defined by the International Technology and Engineering Educators Association (ITEEA).
Their website includes thoughtful and well-sourced Inquiry Design Model (IDM) units, which have been popularized by the National Council for the Social Studies (NCSS). IDMs include debatable compelling questions, 2-4 supporting questions usually with primary sources and a formative assessment, and a summative activity (often a “debate”) and taking action conclusion. Generally, social studies educators aren’t well prepared to teach about technologies, especially the technical aspects of them. State standards also don’t provide much guidance (Krutka et al., 2022). So, I appreciate that “REACH offers a one-stop shop of resources that bring to life the history of technology and engineering in the classroom.” I’ll be reviewing different lessons on their site from the perspectives we employ at Civics of Tech.
Electric Lights Inquiry
The electric lights IDM is built around the compelling question, how would your life be different without electric lighting? I’ve asked this question to students and their answers are playful, imaginative, and some combination of apocalyptic and insightful. It’s also a question Jacob Pleasants delved into on our site in his review of Paul Bogard’s 2014 book, The end of night: Searching for natural darkness in an age of artificial light. I like this compelling question, and it aligns pretty well with our 5th critical question, why is it difficult to imagine our world without the technology?
The 17-page “Teacher Background” sheet provides historical background about light sources from torches to gas lighting to electric lighting from the arc lamp to incandescent bulb, and also addresses the disproportionate access to electric lighting between people living in cities and rural areas. It also addresses the “current wars” between Edison’s direct current (DC) generators and the alternating current (AC) of Nikola Tesla and George Westinghouse. The inquiry also discusses the Carbide lighting used in areas not immediately served by electrification until the Tennessee Valley Authority was established in the New Deal. Finally, the narrative details electricity access today with a a focus on somewhat recent increase in access in “Africa, the Middle East, and South and Southeast Asia.”
The Teacher Background writing is detailed, technical, and straightforward. The story is one of technological progress and inventors, namely Thomas Edison. It also includes the story of Lewis Latimer, a Black American inventor and patent draftsman, but it’s not exactly clear why his story is included. There are many good reasons to include Latimer (one note: the inquiry uses the term “slave” as noun instead of the now generally preferred “enslaved” verb that emphasizes the choice of enslavers to carry out and benefit from the institution), and I will share those in a forthcoming blog post sharing the lesson I wrote that centers him.
You can find a blueprint of the IDM here. Students who experience the inquiry will answer the following supporting questions:
What was life like before electric lighting? Students will review two photographs of pre-electric lighting, one recent newspaper article about the maintenance of London street lamps, and two broken links (link rot is a common problem in hyperlinked lessons). The formative assessment asks students to “Imagine that you are living in the 1800s before electric lighting. Write a letter to your future self, describing your daily routine. Be sure to include specific details from the documents below.” I’m not sure whether the three sources would be sufficient for students to answer this question accurately, but the teacher could help correct any misconceptions.
What inventions and innovations contributed to the development of the incandescent light? Students will answer this question by reviewing gas light advertisements and two secondary sources on Charles Brush. Again, there are two broken links—one on Brush another on Edison. Students might struggle to complete the assessment on a “family history” (really a human history) on lighting just using the sources.
What were the challenges associated with the mass delivery of electric lighting? Students will answer this question by reviewing some primary sources and several longer secondary sources. Teachers may have to choose excerpts. There was one broken link in these sources. The formative assessment asks students to “Prepare an opening argument for a debate between proponents of gas and electric lighting in the late 19th century.”
How has electric lighting been used to change the world we live in? Students will answer this question by reviewing a mix of primary and secondary sources. A 2017 article focused on the loss of power in Puerto Rico after Hurricane Maria, and illustrated the number of other technologies dependent on electricity that affected people’s lives. All links worked!
The lesson concludes with students writing an essay answering the compelling question, debating “whether electric lights have actually made life better,” and researching an alternative energy source and sharing articles on social media. I like the middle question, but don’t think the sources in the inquiry really would help students see anything but benefits of electric lighting.
In the end, this is a thoughtful and well-curated inquiry. It delves more into technological histories than most social studies teachers will be used to, which is the point. While it asks students to imagine life with electric lights, I think students will still struggle to do so based on the sources. The overall narrative is largely one of technological progress, which is understandable. No one I know makes the choice to live without, or significantly reduce their use of, electric lights. This inquiry will help students learn about the story of how electric lights were invented and spread.
A Technoskeptical Perspective
From a Civics of Tech perspective, I think there are other stories that we might share with students that disrupt stories of technological progress. On the society side, there is little inclusion of women or people of color. I wonder if their stories might be different. To be fair, aside from primary sources, there aren’t many stories in the inquiry about everyday folks. This isn’t “A People’s History of Electric Lighting.” On the technological side, I think there’s more to examine about downsides of electric lighting. Not because we need to reject the technology outright, but because we might modify our relationships with it. Our 5 critical questions could help. Having said that, it’s not the job of IEEE REACH to write the lesson I want to write. They authored an informative and thoughtful lesson. I’ll share the more technoskeptical lesson I wrote in the coming months.
In the meantime, I hope you’ll ponder, how would your life be different without electric lighting? It’s a question worth inquiring into.
Reference
Krutka, D. G., Metzger, S. A., & Seitz, R. Z. (2022). “Technology inevitably involves trade-offs”: The framing of technology in social studies standards. Theory & Research in Social Education, 50(2), 226-254.