ublished almost forty years earlier (the 1st volume was dated 1751) and which is rich in illustrations.  Our presentation will include a chronological analysis of drawings that have accompanied the texts of patents over more than 200 years. We have found that these drawings reveal an evolutionary portrait of what patentees were trying to achieve in terms of economic competition but they also reflect the evolution of artistic style, particularly in the light of inventions, such as photography, that changed the way inventors, along with everyone else, 'saw' the world.   Patent drawings also reflect changes in the iconography of art history. At first glance they are simple demonstrations of mathematical and verbal ideas that have traditionally been associated with clarity, economy, and utility. By examining them we can see shifts in form that echo styles such as naturalism and symbolism. Science and art historians have independently noted parallel transformations over the course of time in the imagery of art and science, leading in some ways towards non-representational art in the 20 th century. We have found these tendencies in patent drawings as well.  Patent drawings involve issues of representational styles, artistic conventions, media, the relationship of image and text, and interpretation. We propose to analyze selected patent images on a range of subjects, including mechanical automatons, robots, and prostheses and compare these images with images from 18th century influential texts. We will embody our interpretation with slides of Levy's artistic work in which she transforms patent images into genealogies of invention.

Breeding, Ownership, and Agriculture:
Nineteenth-Century Origins of Intellectual Property in Animals and Plants

Daniel Kevles

Patent protection has been granted to animals in the United States, Europe, and other countries only in the last twenty years, but at least since the late eighteenth century, a nimal breeders managed to devise alternative arrangements to protect the intellectual property (IP) in their living products. Fulfilling the requirements for such protection - for example, being able to specify the product -- depended on biological knowledge of the animal. The arrangements also had to take the natural reproductivity of the animals into account. The long history of IP in animals is thus a story of the interplay between the development of biological knowledge and methods of breeding on the one side and of the arrangements at any given time that this body of knowledge and skills permitted. Ultimately, the patentability of animals was enabled by the exquisite specificity and reproducibility provided by the identification of DNA as the hereditary material and the ability to manipulate it with recombinant techniques.

Inspiration and Innovation
Roberta Kwall

© 2006 Roberta Rosenthal Kwall

Copyright's provision of economic incentives is completely consistent with its underlying utilitarian philosophy. A perspective grounded in economic and conventionally understood utilitarian rationales for legal protection emphasizes the commodification and dissemination of intellectual works.   This perspective fails to take into account that human enterprise also embodies inspirational or spiritual motivations for creativity. This failure creates turmoil for many authors because it fosters a dominant market exchange reality that ignores the importance of non-economically based motivations for innovation.  

This Article demonstrates that narratives illuminating spiritual or inspirational motivations for innovation are integral to understanding more fully the artistic soul, and challenges the dialogue on authors' rights in this country to consider the implications of such narratives. The intrinsic dimension of creativity developed herein is one characterized by spiritual or inspirational motivations that are inherent in the creative task itself as opposed to motivation resulting from the possibility of economic reward.  

Inspirational motivations for artistic creation can be understood better through an examination of a variety of narratives illuminating the intrinsic dimension of innovation. This Article examines both theologically based and secular narratives about creativity drawn from a variety of sources.   The analysis demonstrates how deeply inspirational motivations are embedded in Western civilization's perceptions about creativity and illustrates how the insights derived from these narratives featuring inspirational motivations for creativity can inform the discourse about the law of authors' rights.

Subsequently, the discussion demonstrates that the American legal system historically has ignored the insights derived from these narratives as fundamental sources of human sensibilities regarding artistic creation, resulting in a legal system manifesting an incomplete view of artistic creativity.   It probes how the United States' law governing authors' rights has been shaped in response to a largely different perspective, one that focuses on economic as opposed to inspirational motivations.   The analysis also demonstrates that the insights derived from this perspective can facilitate the development of appropriately tailored moral rights laws that would promote the policies underlying authors' rights in this country.   Finally, the discussion tackles how the United States' law should be changed so that it can be more responsive to all authorship interests rather than just those that are economically motivated.   It proposes a viable framework for stronger moral rights protection consistent with our existing legal system.

Networks of Innovation: The Emergence and Diffusion of DNA Microarray Technology
Tim Lenoir and Eric Giannella

Since the work of Hughes, Saxenian, von Hippel and others, economists and historians of technology have abandoned the linear model of innovation which pictured a direct flow of innovation leading from scientific discovery, to product development, and ending with market introduction of new products. The linear model has been replaced with a model of "open innovation" that stresses the role of linkage, feedback, and co-evolution among the various stages of the innovation process from discovery through development to commercialization, and features interdependencies and dynamic learning across the various stages of the innovation process.

The open model of innovation posits relatively porous boundaries between firms and academic research programs as one key element of an innovative region and suggests a bi-directional flow of input between university and industry innovation, in the form of licenses on inventions, personnel, and tacit knowledge, as well as a flow from industry to the universities of new technologies and research directions. While parts of this model have been thoroughly studied and documented, the phenomenon of the stimulation of university research through the absorption of new directions emanating from industry has yet to be investigated in much detail. Our study addresses this issue through the examination of microarray technologies, particularly DNA chips. The GeneChip originated beyond the walls of the academy, but we demonstrate that within a decade it made significant inroads into reshaping the research environments of university programs as well as launching a spectrum of competitive industrial firms in several industrial sectors within the Silicon Valley and other innovation regions.

Consideration of the networked infrastructure of innovation leads to a re-examination of the notions of "invention" and "inventor" in contemporary technoscience. The lone, independent inventor, an Edisonian figure whose fertile mind was the source of inventions that shaped entire industries or even technological revolutions was a notion that well-suited the linear model of innovation. But the networked, co-evolutionary model of innovation in evidence in our study suggests a shift from single inventors to inventor collectives as a more appropriate unit of analysis of invention within the open systems of innovation characteristic of contemporary technoscience. The case of microarray technology richly illustrates this new mode of invention.

Margins of Invention: Re-dedicating Women's Prints in Early Modern Italy
Evelyn Lincoln

Early modern   printers and publishers of pictorial prints developed a framework in which they could claim authorship for and protect their inventions while distributing responsibility among as many different people as possible.   This was beneficial for those who wanted to escape scrutiny by papal inquisitors, and for women who could sign their work without unintentionally taking credit for un-virtuous behaviors. Conventions of early modern print culture included noting on the face of the print the division of labor involved in its making: inventor, draughtsman, engraver, publisher and sometimes a separate financial investor were named in the margins of most prints.   At least one of these agents was entitled to add a dedication to a patron as well, under whose name the print would be "sent forth." I look at the work of two women who produced prints in Rome between 1575-1625.   Some of their prints were republished after their deaths by a man who specialized in giving new life to the old printing matrices the women left behind.    Looking closely at the dedications crafted by the people who first claimed authorship of the prints (if not always of the images that the prints published)   in comparison to the re-dedications of the re-published works, I try to articulate an explanation of who was entitled to claim the rights that we commonly assume accrue to the authors of images. The margins of these early modern prints show that authorial responsibility could be shifted among what today are termed patron, author and publisher.

Co-inventors and Co-authors: A Quantitative Analysis of Patent-Publication Pairs
Francesco Lissoni and Fabio Montobbio

Runaway Bride: Self-Possession and the Conditions of Intellectual Property
Joe Loewenstein

It is Locke's position, notoriously, that property rights elaborate an axiomatic individual self-possession.   Having worked on some of the micro-histories that condition the assertion of a superficially coherent authorial property in the eighteenth-century, I feel the need to retrace my steps to account form -- or assist in accounting for -- the broadly-diffused recognition of self-possession.   This paper will investigate the contribution of early seventeenth-century satire to the experience of outraged self-possession.   A survey of new forms of publicity and, thence, new forms of celebrity and new practices of shaming will begin with reflections, not on His Girl Friday and Runaway Bride, but on Jonson's The Staple of News and Chapman's (lost) The Old Joiner of Aldgate.

Heroes of the Industrial Revolution, Defenders of the Pax Britannica:
Constructing Inventors in Victorian Britain

Christine MacLeod

The second half of the nineteenth century witnessed a brief interlude in British history when inventors enjoyed widespread popular recognition and approval. A representative few joined James Watt in the national pantheon (where uniquely he had represented the mechanical arts since the 1820s); their achievements were written into the grand narrative of the industrial revolution, and their names thereby entered the historical record and laid claim to posthumous fame.   It is principally these men who, at the start of the twenty-first century, continue to form the British people's idea of 'the inventor'--who he is, how he works, what he achieves, and that he is indeed a 'he'.   Consequently, it is important to understand how this image was born.

My paper takes its cue from the popular engraving, Men of Science Living in the Years 1807-8 , published by William Walker and George Zobel in 1862.   Pace its title, this carefully composed group portrait is comprised principally of men famous for their inventions and engineering innovations, not their scientific discoveries.   We will notice some surprising omissions, but the presence or absence of individuals is ultimately of less interest than the nature and timing of the project.   Why was it published in 1862? Why was it set half a century earlier?   I shall argue that Walker and Zobel's celebration of British inventive talent should be situated within the context of a provincial culture that promoted the claim of manufacturing employers and their workers to have made Great Britain 'great'.   Against the bellicosity of aristocratic culture, the industrial middle and working classes preached a gospel of peaceful conquest through international trade and communication, one of whose principal heroes was the inventor. During the 1850s and 60s, this heroic version of British industrialization and expansion found expression in numerous histories and biographies (both collective and individual), in public art, and in exhibitions of machinery and iconic artefacts.      


Advertising Cadavers in the Republic of Letters
Daniel Margocsy

In this essay, I sketch how late seventeenth-century Dutch scientific practitioners marketed their scientific products and inventions to an international clientèle. I focus on anatomists Frederik Ruysch (1638-1732) and Lodewijk de Bils (1624-1669), inventors of two separate anatomical preparation methods that could ensure that cadavers and body parts could be preserved in a lifelike state for decades or centuries. My paper investigates what concerns shaped the publications of such early modern anatomists. It claims that Ruysch's and de Bils' publications served as advertisements for commercially available prepared cadavers, coveted luxury objects in early modern Europe. These advertisements showed how aesthetically pleasing and scientifically important the cadavers were, but failed to disclose the trade secrets behing preparing the bodies. Concerns for secrecy and a desire for publicity explain together why and how these anatomical inventors entered the sphere of printed publications.

Copy-Write:   Eighteenth-Century Educational Technologies of Imitation and Invention
Lisa Maruca

This paper examines what might be called the "anti-invention" practices of early modern and eighteenth-century English student literacy, analyzing the changing relationship between pedagogical   reading and writing across the period.   Writing--in the context of the education of young men of means, though extending to other groups as well--was seen as a physical skill based in the act and art of copying others' text, starting with individual letters in copy books, moving towards brief moral aphorisms, and ending with the reproduction of   entire pieces, often from the classical rhetorical tradition.   This copying worked through a set of specific somatic techniques and technologies to literally internalize cultural norms and ideals within the student body.   In this context, reading was a process meant to set off other processes, such as the oral production of knowledge through recitation or the hand's role in the collection and reinscribing of text within student commonplace books.  

The paper examines the change in methods of literacy training that, I argue, emerged in the eighteenth century England not only from education theorists but from a print trade eager to cerate a demand for educational books.   Because of the growing acceptance of a specifically print literacy, the student reader began to be imagined as the subordinate member of an hierarchal relationship, poised to absorb the superior mind of the literary or scholarly author.   The technology of the book suppressed the student hand and voice and disaggregated reading and   writing.   The paper will discuss examples of this process ranging from early childhood to adult literacy.  

  An examination of the student subject of writing provides insight into the eighteenth-century construction of print literacy, especially in relation to the overlapping regimes of oral and hand production that persisted throughout the century.   However, it also complicates implicit beliefs that currently inform understandings about technology and student learning across the disciplines.


Originality and the Law: The Case of W.H. Ireland's Shakespeare Forgeries
Robert Miles

W. H. Ireland's Shakespeare manuscripts were arguably the most sensational case of literary forgery in the 18 th century. The case has been closely examined with regards to the 'critique of authorship', literary forgery and plagiarism, but the close interpenetration of the language of the law, and language of criticism, that permeates the creation and reception of the forgery has escaped critical attention. W. H. Ireland was articled to the law, and produced his forgeries in his chambers. The Irelands' greatest antagonist was Edmond Malone, himself a trained lawyer. More to the point, the question of the papers' authenticity was fought through legal discourse. Such language fundamentally conditioned Malone's arguments, spilling over into the papers' reception when George Chalmers (a prominent 'believer') became embroiled with T.J. Mathias (a cynical observer) over definitions of seditious libel. One may posit that this interpenetration was owing to the absence of a fixed disciplinary language for deciding issues of literary property, identity and rights. Such a disciplinary language did eventually emerge, and has since been naturalized, as 'English', or institutionalized literary criticism. The Ireland affair witnessed a decisive shift in the emergence of this critical language, but with unexpected results. The affair consolidated the position adopted by Malone: literary identity was a matter of national importance that ought to be left to legally trained experts, as opposed to a democratic 'republic of letters'. In other words, this highly public affair witnessed a drastic curtailment of the literary public sphere.

Novelty, Decorum, and the Commodification of Invention in the Renaissance
Carolyn Miller

Francis Bacon's familiar claim that "Invention is of two kinds much differing: the one of arts and sciences, and the other of speech and arguments," coupled with his further claim that the invention of speech and arguments "is not properly an invention," indicates a turning point in the history of rhetoric. Invention in the arts and sciences, or technical invention, "discover[s] that [which] we know not," while invention of speech and arguments "recover[s] or resummon[s] that which we already know." Technical invention, which creates novelty, comes to be valued and powerful as property, while rhetorical invention remains a concern for decorum. This paper will explore the sources of this division and revaluation in Renaissance culture and their effects in subsequent rhetorical theory. It will support the claim that the virtue of decorum was eclipsed in the late Renaissance and early modernist period by novelty and that the changed balance between these two competing virtues helped to create the two very different understandings of invention that Bacon described and which still operate today. Renaissance conceptions of rhetoric accommodated novelty in the canon of style, but it was within the poetic tradition that novelty came to be valued. Any vigorous notion of invention in rhetoric was expelled from the art, on the continent by first Ramist and then Cartesian method and in Britain by empiricism. As invention became increasingly associated with commodified novelty--in both technics and poetics--it became increasingly dissociated from rhetoric. Rhetorical invention remains underdeveloped because decorum is still not balanced by a useful conception of rhetorical novelty.

From Homeric Epic to Open-Source Software:
Towards a Network Model of Invention

Dorothy Noyes

Recent studies of the open-source software movement (e.g. Steven Weber 2004) analyze the social base of this field's inventiveness in competitive networks rather than hierarchical organizations. Although this research has important implications for current debates over the future of intellectual property law, its critical potential would be strengthened by the recognition that the open-source process is not new. Rather, as the work of the SCE has demonstrated, individual invention is the historical special case. In this paper I compare analyses of contemporary technological invention with folkloristic work on oral tradition. I illustrate commonalities of process in three settings: Homeric epic, traditional festival in modern societies, and open-source software. Each case exhibits parallel distributed innovation, that is, the simultanous reworking of the central "product" by multiple actors in an open social network under conditions of publicity. Reciprocal observation, imitation, and criticism maintain the unity of the product;   more institutional mechanisms are developed as the product grows in complexity. Competition, regulated by community norms, stimulates engagement and invention.

Extrapolating from these three cases, I trace the history of this network-based invention process, formalized in the early stages of modernization, gradually marginalized by it, and finally superseding it. Properly understood, this history should bolster the critique of the current intellectual property regime, based in modern conceptions not just of creativity but of incentive. Both are more social than this regime acknowledges. Creativity, as a growing number of critics observe, is cumulative, dependent on public access to prior innovations. The incentive to create, as we learn from rhapsodes, software developers, and the Carnival artists who spend far more building a float than they can ever hope to earn in prize money, is rarely a matter of direct financial gain. The recognition of one's peer creators provides a much stronger motivation (and often, in the long run, higher profits).

At the same time, this history provides a vital corrective to current intergovernmental organizations' efforts to protect local tradition, based in a naïve notion of collective ownership by undifferentiated groups to which change comes only through outside interference. Against the complementary reifications of both individual invention and communal tradition, I show that competitive creative networks inhabit both the traditional and the cutting edges of modernity.

The Penguin's Paradox:
The Political Economy of International Intellectual Property and the Paradox of Open Source

David W. Opderbeck

Recent efforts to construct a political economy of intellectual property have focused on the power relationships between intellectual property producers and consumers.   The standard narrative is that large corporate interests such as pharmaceutical companies and the entertainment industry have been able to capture the lawmaking process such that the law has increasingly come to favor stronger intellectual property protection.   This narrative has been extended to the international intellectual property framework with the observation that industrialized developed countries, which are home to most of these large corporate interests, have been able to dominate the trade negotiation process so that intellectual property treaties now largely reflect the interests of the developing countries.

This account of how intellectual property law and treaties have developed has significant empirical support.   However, it overlooks some important aspects of how technology and scientific work is created, how ideas are spread, and how the development and dissemination of technology and scientific work is financed.   In particular, none of the existing political economies of intellectual property account for the influence and role of open source production.   This paper will fill that hole in the literature by examining how open source production fits or could fit into a political economy of intellectual property.   The paper builds on my prior work on open source biotechnology and utilizes the game theoretic model I developed for analyzing imbalances in international intellectual property protection.

Inventive Artefacts: The Legal Agency of Plants
Alain Pottage and Brad Sherman

Bureaucracy at a Glance: Visual Evidence in U.S. Patents, 1790-2005
Bill Rankin

In the early 1870s the US Patent Office abandoned the use of small models and hand-colored drawings in favor of mass-reproduced black-and-white drawings. The prescription of standard conventions of light, shade, viewpoint, and labeling in these new drawings allowed them to be legible "at a glance," thus fostering the expansion of the patent system from a central archive in Washington DC to a dispersed network of depository libraries located throughout the country. But rather than see this legibility as a self-evident quality of modern engineering drafting, this paper argues that it was a specific historical construction, and that the stabilization of patent drawings went hand-in-hand with a stabilization of the idealized reader of patents, the "person skilled in the art." By defining this person circularly through her or his ability to read patent drawings, the successful combination of machinist, lawyer, inventor, examiner, and lay citizen rested as much on a mix of existing drafting conventions as on professional identity. In turn these legible patent drawings certified an innovation as inherently reproducible and sealed a potential gap in the legal theory of patent disclosure. Stable for over a century, patent drawing conventions were eventually un-constructed in a similar way: when in the early 1980s patent law increasingly became the purview of specialized lawyers and the new Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, the number of patent drawings using the standards of "at-a-glance" legibility declined drastically, as their changing conventions mirrored changes in their fictional reader.

"Ours and For Us":
Invention and Working Class Power in the British Useful Knowledge Movement

Michael Rectenwald

This paper examines the importance of invention for working class economic and political power in the Mechanic's Magazine and other works of its co-editor, Thomas Hodgkin, including Labour Defended Against the Claims of Capital (1824).   Following a lineage of periodicals devoted to the publication new patents granted for mechanical inventions, the Mechanic's Magazine appropriated the format for radical purposes. The Mechanic's Magazine was the first periodical in Britain that had the explicit aim of targeting plebeian readers with useful knowledge. Rhetorically akin to the plebeian educational radicalism of Richard Carlile and the Zetetic movement he inspired, the history of the Mechanic's Magazine belies the conventional notion that the 'knowledge industry' in Great Britain was solely a matter of middle-class "control" of the working classes. Rather, with its radical educational program promoting the study and use of science and technology for gaining social, material and political power, The Mechanic's Magazine and its co-editor's subsequent texts encourage the working classes to gain control of knowledge to rid the nation of capitalists.

Having been perhaps the first popular political economists to unravel the implications of the labor theory of value for working class politics, Hodgkin went on to redefine labor in terms of the accumulated knowledge of skilled laborers, making the working classes the primary 'authors' of scientific and technical invention. This chapter in the history of invention as intellectual property thus suggests that the notion can serve a positive political role for subaltern publics.

Technology and Invention:
Communication Systems and the Problem of Technodeterminism

Clifford Siskin and William Warner

In the terms posed by this conference, how can and should we understand the relationship between technology and invention?   We will argue that our understanding of this problem has been muted intellectually by the comforting but now outdated binaries of the technodeterminism debates.   To engage those debates--through Latour and Chandler, Williams and McLuhan--without reinscribing the binary is a very difficult task.   We take it as an exercise in transposing features of binaries in order to collapse them--and of valuing intention without sacralizing it as necessarily causal.   We will proceed, in part, by constructing new etymological and social histories of "technology" and of "communication."

By grounding both inquiries in histories of specific social and technological forms--clubs, conferences, committees--we will try to historicize "invention" itself.   And, just as the Society for Critical Exchange's earlier work helped us to grasp the importance of reconceiving the "Author" as the "Author-function," so our reworking of the technodeterminism binary may give us a newly-enabling take on the "human": as something not to preserve or to pass beyond (i.e. "posthuman") but as a historically-specific way of rendering technological and social change as a "Human-function."

Authoring an Invention: Nineteenth-Century American Law and Patent Authorship
Kara Swanson

In the 18 th century, the best known inventor of the American colonies, Benjamin Franklin, refused to consider seeking a patent for his new stove.   Instead, Franklin authored, printed, and sold a pamphlet which described his invention and the scientific principles behind it, a document which thus served triple-duty as a marketable commodity, a set of instructions for constructing the stove, and a building block in the creation of Franklin's scientific reputation.   By the late 19 th century, premier inventor Thomas Edison enthusiastically engaged in the publication of his ideas as patents, documents, which, like Franklin's pamphlet, were commodities, included instructions, and enhanced his reputation.   But unlike Franklin, after generating his inventive ideas, Edison used other people to describe the ideas in words, and to publish the verbal form of the ideas.   Edison relied upon ghostwriters to author his inventions.

My paper traces the 19 th century separation of inventors from the authorship of their inventions, through the development of the patent system.   This separation was actively sought by the government employees in the developing patent office, by legal practitioners, and by members of a new profession, that of patent agent, who all struggled to encourage inventors to consider patents as a taken-for-granted step in the commercialization of invention, and to train inventors to author patents by hiring patent practitioners as ghostwriters.   By an examination of the advice given to inventors by each of these participants in patent authorship, I consider the development of a new form of ghostwritten authorship of invention.

Patenting the Bomb: Nuclear Weapons and/as Intellectual Property
Alex Wellerstein

Practices of patenting and practices of secrecy have traditionally been invoked as polar opposites in literature on intellectual property; the former a practice of openness, the latter, concealment. But during the Second World War, this truism was turned on its head in the patent practices of the Manhattan Project, when an army of government patent agents worked to secure secret patent applications for the atomic bomb and its methods of production. When the aggressive wartime patenting program became publicly known after the war, it provoked one Senator to confront its chief administrator pointedly, "What is the necessity for covering the bomb itself by applications for patents?" The reply offered--so that the government would have first-to-file status, which helps with interference lawsuits--not only did not answer the question, it begged it.

In my paper I will examine three interconnected wartime patent practices: the vigorous pursuit of title-taking patent policies against contractors and project scientists by Vannevar Bush; the production of thousands of patent applications, in 493 different subject classes, covering everything "from the raw ore as mined to the atomic bomb," many of which have neither been released nor ever will be; and the wartime censorship of the patent applications filed by private inventors. The ultimate goal is to seek a satisfactory answer to the central riddle: Why patent the bomb? Why have the motivations for a patent program, spoken of as vitally important by head Manhattan Project officials, become utterly incomprehensible today? The answer to, borne out of careful scrutiny of a history which has been almost completely ignored until now, lies in a re-examination of two standard assumption: the openness of patents, and the secrecy of nuclear weapons.

©®EA TM :   Intellectual Property Education Contest and Resource Guides for Grades 2-12
Brenda Wojnowski

Downloadable versions of the resource guides and contest entry information are available at www.invent.org/contest .The United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) and the National Inventors Hall of Fame Foundation, Inc. (NIHFF) are launching a national competition and accompanying resource guides aimed at increasing students' confidence in their abilities to explore, discover and create, while teaching them the importance of patents, trademarks and copyrights in America's history and future.

©®EA TM is a student challenge and classroom supplement for students in grades 2-12 based on invention and problem solving. The goal of the program is to reach out to a broad base of students and get them excited about their futures, thereby nurturing the creative potential of students and ensuring future generations of inventors.

The ©®EA TM Contest and Resource Guides serve three grade divisions: elementary grades 2 - 5, middle grades 6 - 8 and high school grades 9 - 12. The challenge has a different theme each year and is supported by an on-line submission process.

The theme for the 2007 ©®EA TM Contest is Alternative Energy - Transportation. Teachers are encouraged to have their students invent, create or design solutions to this challenge and submit their ideas to the national competition. Solutions are entered through an on-line submission process at www.invent.org/contest .  

The ©®EA TM Resource Guides have been aligned with national standards in science, mathematics, language arts, social studies and fine arts. The activities can easily fit into your classroom pacing without changing normal scope and sequence.

Brenda Shumate Wojnowski, Ed.D., President, Inventive Education, Inc., NIHFF


Of Monks, Medieval Scribes, and Middlemen
Peter Yu



return to top