Science & Education

, Volume 7, Issue 2, pp 173–201 | Cite as

Using History to Teach Invention and Design: The Case of the Telephone

  • Michael E. Gorman
  • J. Kirby Robinson


This paper shows how a historical case, the invention of the telephone, can be used to teach invention and design in a way that combines engineering, social sciences, and humanities. The historical problem of transmitting speech was turned into an active learning module, in which students sought to improve patents obtained by early telephone inventors like Alexander Graham Bell and Elisha Gray, using equipment similar to what was available at the time. The result was a collaborative learning environment in which students from a wide range of majors worked in teams, eventually producing a patent application. As part of the project, they were allowed to search historical materials like the Bell notebooks, which were made available on line. This experience gave them a better understanding of the invention and design process.


Social Science Design Process Learning Environment Active Learning Historical Case 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1880, The Telephone Suits: Bell Telephone Company Et Al. v. Peter A. Dowd, Part II: Exhibits of Complainants and Defendant., Alfred Judge & Son, Law Printers, Boston.Google Scholar
  2. Albano, A.M.: 1990. 'Morse and the Beginnings of Telegraphy'. in David P. Billington and Alphonse M. Albano (eds.), Episodes in American Invention: The Steamboat and the Telegraph. J. Wayman Williams Associates, Basking Ridge, NJ.Google Scholar
  3. Baldwin, N.: 1995, Edison: Inventing the Century, Hyperion, New York.Google Scholar
  4. Basalla, G.: 1988, The Evolution of Technology, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, MA.Google Scholar
  5. Bell, A.G.: 1876b, 'Experiments Made by A. Graham Bell', (Vol. I,): Bell Family Papers, Library of Congress.Google Scholar
  6. Bell, A.G.: 1908, The Bell Telephone: Deposition of Alexander Graham Bell, American Bell Telephone Co., Boston.Google Scholar
  7. Bruce, R.V.: 1973, Bell: Alexander Graham Bell and the Conquest of Solitude, Little Brown, Boston.Google Scholar
  8. Bruner, J., Goodnow, J., & Austin, G.: 1956, A Study of Thinking, John Wiley, New York.Google Scholar
  9. Cantor, G., Gooding, D., & Jamcs, F.A.J.L.: 1996, Michael Faraday, Humanities Press, Atlantic Highlands, NJ.Google Scholar
  10. Carlson, W.B., & Gorman, M.E.: 1992, 'A Cognitive Framework to Understand Technological Creativity: Bell, Edison, and the Telephone', in R.J.P. Weber, D. N. (ed.), Inventive Minds: Creativity in Technology, Oxford University Press, pp. pp. 48–79.Google Scholar
  11. Carlson, W.B., & Gorman, M.E: 1989, 'Thinking and Doing at Menio Park: Edison's Development of the Telephone, 1876–1878S, in W. Pretzer (ed.), Thomas Edison's Menlo Park Laboratory, Wayne State University Press.Google Scholar
  12. Chou, D.-L., & Calkins, D.E. (eds.): 1994, ECSEL: Introduction to Design Engineering Active Learning Modules: A Catalogue, Department of Mechanical Engineering, University of Washington Copy Services, Scattle.Google Scholar
  13. Clancy, M.J., & Linn, M.C.: 1996, Designing Pascal Solutions: Case-Studies Using Data Structures, Computer Science Press, New York.Google Scholar
  14. Collins, H.M.: 1985, Changing Order: Replication and Induction in Scientific Practice, Sage Publications, London.Google Scholar
  15. Collins, H.M.: 1990, Artificial Experts, MIT Press, Cambridge.Google Scholar
  16. Crouch, T.: 1992, 'Why Wilbur and Orville'?, in R.J. Weber & D.N. Perkins (eds.), Inventive Minds, Oxford University Press, pp. 80–92.Google Scholar
  17. Ericsson, K.A., & Simon, H.A.: 1984, Protocol Analysis: Verbal Reports as Data, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.Google Scholar
  18. Ferguson, E.S.: 1992, Engineering and the Mind's Eye, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.Google Scholar
  19. Fitzgerald, N.: March 1995, 'Teaching with Cases', ASEE Prism, 16–20.Google Scholar
  20. Gardner, H.: 1983, Frames of Mind: The Theory of Multiple Intelligences, Basic Books, New York.Google Scholar
  21. Gill, G.K.: March 28, 1991, 'Bell and Edison (A)', in S.C. Wheelwright (ed.), Harvard Business School, Boston.Google Scholar
  22. Gooding, D.: 1990, Experiment and the Making of Meaning: Human Agency in Scientific Observation and Experiment, Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht.Google Scholar
  23. Gooding, D., & Addis, T.: 1990, Towards a Dynamical Representation of Experimental Procedures, Paper presented at the Rediscovering Skill in Science, Technology and Medicine Conference, Bath, UK.Google Scholar
  24. Gooding, D.C., & Addis, T.R.: 1993, Modelling Faraday's Experiments with Visual Functional Programming 1: Models, Methods and Examples, Joint Research Councils' Initiative on Cognitive Science & Human Computer Interaction Special Project Grant #9107137.Google Scholar
  25. Gorman, M.E.: 1986, 'Falsification in Experimental and Classroom Simulations', School Science and Mathematics 86(4), 306–321.Google Scholar
  26. Gorman, M.E., & Carlson, W. B.: 1990, 'Interpreting Invention as a Cognitive Process: The Case of Alexander Graham Bell, Thomas Edison and the Telephone', Science, Technology and Human Values, 15, 131–164.Google Scholar
  27. Gorman, M.E.: 1992, Simulating Science: Heuristics, Mental Models and Technoscientific Thinking, Indiana University Press, Bloomington.Google Scholar
  28. Gorman, M.E.: In Press, 'Mind in the World: Cognition and Practice in the Invention of the Telephone', Social Studies of Science.Google Scholar
  29. Gorman, M.E., Mehalik, M.M., Carlson, W.B., & Oblon, M.: 1993, 'Alexander Graham Bell, Elisha Gray and the Speaking Telegraph: A Cognitive Comparison', History of Technology 15, 1–56.Google Scholar
  30. Gorman, M.E., Plucker, J.A., & Callahan, C.M.: In Press, 'Turning Students into Inventors: Active Learning Modules for Secondary Students', Phi Delta Kappan.Google Scholar
  31. Gorman, M.E., Richards, L.G., Scherer, W.T., & Kagiwada, J.K.: 1995, 'Teaching Invention and Design: Multi-Disciplinary Learning Modules', The Journal of Engineering Education 84(2), 175–186.Google Scholar
  32. Ihde, D.: 1991, Instrumental Realism: The Interface Between Philosophy of Science and Philosophy of Technology, Indiana University Press, Bloomington.Google Scholar
  33. Janis, I.L.: 1982, Groupthink: Psychological Studies of Policy Decisions and Fiascoes, (2nd ed.), Houghton Mifflin Co., Boston.Google Scholar
  34. Kevles, D.J.: 1977, The Physicists: The History of a Scientific Community in Modern America, Alfred A. Knopf, New York.Google Scholar
  35. Klayman, J., & Ha, Y.-W.: 1987, 'Confirmation, Disconfirmation and Information in Hypothesis Testing, Psychological Review 94, 211–228.Google Scholar
  36. Klein, G.A.: 1989, 'Recognition-Primed Decisions', in W.B. Rouse (ed.), Advances in Man-machine Systems Research (Vol. 5), JAI Press, pp. 47–92.Google Scholar
  37. Kolodner, J.L.: 1991, 'Improving human Decision Making through Case-Based Decision Aiding', AI Magazine (Summer), pp. 52–68.Google Scholar
  38. Kroes, P.: 1995, Technology and Science-Based Heuristics, in J.C. Pitt (ed.), New Directions in the Philosophy of Technology, Kluwer Academic Publishers, 1995, pp. 17–39.Google Scholar
  39. Lakatos, I.: 1978, The Methodology of Scientific Research Programmes, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.Google Scholar
  40. Mackenzie, D., & Spinardi, G.: 1995, 'Tacit Knowledge, Weapons Design, and the Uninvention of Nuclear Weapons', 101(1), 44–99.Google Scholar
  41. Matthews, M.R.: 1994, Science Teaching: The Role of History and Philosophy of Science,: Routledge, London.Google Scholar
  42. Maxwell, J.C.: 1890, The Scientific Papers of James Clerk Maxwell, Dover Publications, Inc., New York.Google Scholar
  43. Norman, D.A.: 1993, Things That Make Us Smart: Defending Human Attributes in the Age of the Machine, Addison Wesley, New York.Google Scholar
  44. Petroski, H.: 1994, Design Paradigms: Case Histories of Error and Judgment in engineering: Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.Google Scholar
  45. Rhodes, R.: 1986, The Making of the Atomic Bomb, Simon & Schuster, New York.Google Scholar
  46. Roth, W.-M., McGinn, M.K., & Bowen, G.M.: 1996, 'Technology studies: Effecting Change in Science Education', Science, Technology and Human Values 21(4), 454–484.Google Scholar
  47. Schauble, L., Klopfer, L.E., & Raghavan, K.: 1991, 'Student's Transition from an Engineering Model to a Science Model of Experimentation, Journal of Research in Science Teaching 28(9), 859–882.Google Scholar
  48. Simon, H.A.: 1981, The Sciences of the Artificial, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.Google Scholar
  49. Steiner, I.D.: 1972, Group Process and Productivity, Academic Press, New York.Google Scholar
  50. Wason, P.C.: 1960, 'On the Failure to Eliminate Hypotheses in a Conceptual task, Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology 12, 129–140.Google Scholar
  51. Weber, R.J., & Perkins, D.N.: 1989, 'How to Invent Artifacts and Ideas', New Ideas in Psychology 7, 49–72.Google Scholar
  52. Weber, R.J.: 1992, Forks, Phonographs, and Hot Air Balloons: A Field Guide to Inventive Thinking, Oxford University Press, Oxford.Google Scholar
  53. Wiener, N.: 1993, Invention: The Care and Feeding of Ideas, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 1998

Authors and Affiliations

  • Michael E. Gorman
    • 1
  • J. Kirby Robinson
    • 2
  1. 1.Technology, Culture & Communications, School of Engineering and Applied ScienceUniversity of VirginiaCharlottesvilleU.S.A.
  2. 2.Cognitive Science, College of Arts & SciencesUniversity of VirginiaCharlottesvilleU.S.A.

Personalised recommendations