May2014

TEACHING ARCHAEOLOGY IN THE 21ST CENTURYuse of simulation, scenarios, laboratory activities, or projects.Published examples include paper-based problems, such asthose in the classic Archaeology Workbook and the NextArchaeology Workbook (Daniels and David 1982; David andDriver 1989; see also Patterson 1994), and hands-on laboratory-basedactivities (e.g., Banning 2000; Rice 1998). Generallyspeaking, paper-based activities present the context of anarchaeological excavation and associated data that studentsare asked to interpret. These activities involve problem solvingbecause prior knowledge is brought to bear upon a set ofdata, and they engage with the real world in the sense thatthere are no perfect solutions and students are required todocument and provide justification for their interpretations.However, the business, logistical, ethical, and politicalaspects of archaeology are rarely addressed.Hands-on activities (or labs) can involve greater real-worldengagement because students must improvise in the face ofactual artifacts that imperfectly match academic definitions.However, the value of these activities lies less in the fact thatthey promote problem-solving skills than in the fact that theyallow students to gain a hands-on understanding of materials,types of artifacts, and analysis procedures while experiencingthe thrill of engagement with ancient technologies.My students are never quite as happy as when they are makingstone tools or clay pots. Hands-on activities are more relevantto teaching Basic Archaeological Skills, but they can befashioned to encourage students to face real-world issues.Recently, Burke and Smith (2007) produced an edited volumecontaining a wide variety of activities, including “roleplay, simulations, games, hands-on learning, narrative, creativeconstruction, performance, and critical reflection”(Burke and Smith 2007:17). The contribution of this volume,however, lies less in the well-designed and diverse activities,but in the promotion of a different kind of classroom, onethat is more like the “real world.” The real world of archaeologyis about social interactions between and within groups ofpeople— archaeologists, interested communities, governmentofficials, and businesspeople (Perry 2004). Burke andSmith’s (2007) promotion of cooperative learning, collaborativelearning, problem-based learning and guided discoverygets to the heart of real-world archaeology by developing andnurturing social skills such as “the ability to lead, developtrusting relationships, make decisions, resolve conflicts, andcommunicate effectively” (Burke and Smith 2007:12). Duringcooperative learning students interact with each other todevelop a solution to a problem. Collaborative learning placesthe students on an equal level with the instructor, giving studentsgreater responsibility in their own educational experience.Problem-based learning is similar to the paper-basedactivities discussed above in that they are complex, openendedproblems with no clear single answer. Guided discoveryfocuses upon the student’s role as a discoverer who gainsunderstanding through the messy cumulative process ofresearch through a wide variety of materials, including, butnot limited to, historic documents, artifacts, ecofacts, excavationnotes, ethnographic interviews, and secondary sources.These methods focus upon the process of learning, whichapproximates social learning in the real world, not the content.This does not mean that content is lost. As studentsbecome more engaged and take responsibility for their owneducation, they learn both content and how to apply it in thereal world.Bringing Students to the Real WorldEven considering the potential options for teaching realworldproblem solving within the academic environment,having students participate directly in archaeologicalresearch is a better option- because it is the real world.Though there are a number of ways for students to engagein archaeological practice, such as volunteering, internships,or independent studies (e.g., Schuldenrein and Altschul2000), archaeological field schools are our most importanttool for teaching real-world problem solving skills, whiletraining future archaeologists in essential methods. “Thepractice of doing archaeology in this context is one ofauthentic, collaborative learning and scientific apprenticeship”(Perry 2004:249).Field schools tend to be one of the critical events in nearlyevery archaeologist’s life; they are a veritable rite of passageinto archaeology and are required for nearly any archaeologygraduate program or job. It is with great surprise, therefore,that one searches for discussion of field schools and theirpedagogical value in Teaching Archaeology in the Twenty-FirstCentury (Bender and Smith 2000) to find nothing (Baxter2009:17, 29). Yet, this lack of discussion appears to be thecontinuation of a long term pattern in archaeology; we generallydo not talk about field school pedagogy or even logistics,but instead simply reminisce about our best, and worst,field school moments (Perry 2004:236). This means thatthere is little guidance for archaeologists teaching their firstfield school (Baxter 2009:18). Thankfully, a number ofarchaeologists have recently expanded upon an extant, butlimited, conversation about teaching field schools (see Baxter2009; Mytum 2012; Perry 2004 and citations therein).Archaeological field schools are the ideal theater in which toteach real-world problem solving to all of our students. Fieldschools are not just for students intending to be archaeologists;they also attract students who want an adventure in anexotic or unusual locale. Our ability to teach real-world problemsolving skills to all students is particularly important;few of them will need to know how to trowel correctly, but allof them will need real-world problem solving skills. I suggestthat archaeological field schools are not only one of our most20 The SAA Archaeological Record • May 2014