Archaeology Rolls into the Public Sphere

Permanent Link:

Material Information

Title: Archaeology Rolls into the Public Sphere An Introduction to Florida Public Archaeology Network's Archaeocart
Physical Description: Book
Language: English
Creator: Crews, Rozalyn E.
Publisher: New College of Florida
Place of Publication: Sarasota, Fla.
Creation Date: 2012
Publication Date: 2012


Subjects / Keywords: Archaeology
Florida Public Archeology Network
Public Archeology
Genre: bibliography   ( marcgt )
theses   ( marcgt )
government publication (state, provincial, terriorial, dependent)   ( marcgt )
born-digital   ( sobekcm )
Electronic Thesis or Dissertation


Abstract: Nearly every professional archaeologist in North America is funded directly or indirectly by public monies, and thus, all archaeologists should share their information and exciting discoveries in a public friendly format. Unfortunately, this responsibility is not always acknowledged by professionals, and the ways by which an archaeologist should uphold their public duties is not exactly clear. In partial fulfillment of this role, I argue that archaeologists should be working towards a proficient understanding of how to teach archaeology to children and the general public. This thesis focuses on ArchaeoCart, a mobile education tool designed to bring archaeology to classrooms across Florida. The cart is equipped with a series of activities that focus on teaching students to think critically while the computer programming installed within the cart walks students through the history and archaeology of Florida. This type of tool is meant to bring resources to the public and engage its participants with valuable information that can increase community involvement in archaeology.
Statement of Responsibility: by Rozalyn E. Crews
Thesis: Thesis (B.A.) -- New College of Florida, 2012
Bibliography: Includes bibliographical references.
Source of Description: This bibliographic record is available under the Creative Commons CC0 public domain dedication. The New College of Florida, as creator of this bibliographic record, has waived all rights to it worldwide under copyright law, including all related and neighboring rights, to the extent allowed by law.
Local: Faculty Sponsor: Baram, Uzi

Record Information

Source Institution: New College of Florida
Holding Location: New College of Florida
Rights Management: Applicable rights reserved.
Classification: local - S.T. 2012 C9
System ID: NCFE004565:00001

Permanent Link:

Material Information

Title: Archaeology Rolls into the Public Sphere An Introduction to Florida Public Archaeology Network's Archaeocart
Physical Description: Book
Language: English
Creator: Crews, Rozalyn E.
Publisher: New College of Florida
Place of Publication: Sarasota, Fla.
Creation Date: 2012
Publication Date: 2012


Subjects / Keywords: Archaeology
Florida Public Archeology Network
Public Archeology
Genre: bibliography   ( marcgt )
theses   ( marcgt )
government publication (state, provincial, terriorial, dependent)   ( marcgt )
born-digital   ( sobekcm )
Electronic Thesis or Dissertation


Abstract: Nearly every professional archaeologist in North America is funded directly or indirectly by public monies, and thus, all archaeologists should share their information and exciting discoveries in a public friendly format. Unfortunately, this responsibility is not always acknowledged by professionals, and the ways by which an archaeologist should uphold their public duties is not exactly clear. In partial fulfillment of this role, I argue that archaeologists should be working towards a proficient understanding of how to teach archaeology to children and the general public. This thesis focuses on ArchaeoCart, a mobile education tool designed to bring archaeology to classrooms across Florida. The cart is equipped with a series of activities that focus on teaching students to think critically while the computer programming installed within the cart walks students through the history and archaeology of Florida. This type of tool is meant to bring resources to the public and engage its participants with valuable information that can increase community involvement in archaeology.
Statement of Responsibility: by Rozalyn E. Crews
Thesis: Thesis (B.A.) -- New College of Florida, 2012
Bibliography: Includes bibliographical references.
Source of Description: This bibliographic record is available under the Creative Commons CC0 public domain dedication. The New College of Florida, as creator of this bibliographic record, has waived all rights to it worldwide under copyright law, including all related and neighboring rights, to the extent allowed by law.
Local: Faculty Sponsor: Baram, Uzi

Record Information

Source Institution: New College of Florida
Holding Location: New College of Florida
Rights Management: Applicable rights reserved.
Classification: local - S.T. 2012 C9
System ID: NCFE004565:00001

This item is only available as the following downloads:

Full Text


1 Chapter 1: Introduction to Public Archaeology and P articipatory Education Nearly every professional archaeologist in North A merica is funded directly or indirectly by public monies, and thus, all archaeol ogists should share their information and exciting discoveries in a public friendly forma t. Unfortunately, this responsibility is not always acknowledged by professionals, and the w ays by which an archaeologist should uphold their public duties is not exactly cl ear. In partial fulfillment of this role, I argue that archaeologists should be working towards a proficient understanding of how to teach archaeology to children and the general publi c. Without the support of the public, salaries and grants will disappear, and anthropolog ical archaeology will undoubtedly become an antiquated activity reserved for upper cl ass citizens who have the luxury of participating in non-critical archaeology (Smith an d Smardz 2000). Throughout this thesis, I challenge the anonymous professional arch aeologist who said the following words to me at the 2011 South Eastern Archaeology C onference, “If you want to change the world, you should consider a different professi on” (personal communication, November, 2011). In opposition to this quote, I believe that archae ologists are well-equipped for changing the world, particularly through civic enga gement with the public. My understanding of public archaeology is informed by professionals using critical theory in archaeology to understand and deconstruct inequalit ies. Public archaeology can be a tool for social justice and activism (Baram and Austin 2 011; Leone et. al. 1987, 2005; Little 2002, 2007a, 2007b, 2009; Little and Shackel 2007; Malloy 2011; McDavid 2007; McGuire 1992, 2008; Meskell 2002; Mullins 1999; Pra etzellis and Van Bueren 2007; Shackel 2003; Shackel and Chambers 2004; Weik 1997) The following description from


2 Mark Leone et. al (1987:1) explains the theoretical backing for a series of excavations and interpretive programs in Annapolis, Maryland, Critical theory, essentially an effort to explore a nd add to Marx's insights into the nature of knowledge of human society, is i ncreasingly being applied to the human sciences. Archaeologists are i nvited to consider critical theory by evidence that archaeology in som e environments is used to serve political ends and by the growing controve rsy over the ownership and control of remains and interpretations of the p ast. The claim of a critical archaeology is that seeing the interrelati onship between archaeology and politics will allow archaeologists to achieve less contingent knowledge. The way in which critical the ory can be applied to archaeology is here illustrated by an analysis of d ata from a citywide project conducted in Annapolis, Maryland-a project aimed at demystifying the way a past is constructed. The ideas of political action and demystification explored in Leone’s paper have been influential in my conception of why archaeolog y is important. Scholars such as Saitta (2007); Leone et. al (2005); Blakey (1997); Shackel (2003); Little (2007, 2002); Little and Shackel (2007); McGuire (1992, 2008); an d Meskell (2002) provide important insights and methods for making archaeology a publi c endeavor that can be used as an avenue for leading social change. I believe that ar chaeology education should be founded in the principles of critical archaeology. To creat e thoughtful, engaged and active citizens through archaeology and public education is a goal that should be considered a tool for achieving social justice. Barbara Little (2009) sup ports this argument, As archaeologists, we know that there are many scho lars who could use archaeology to do a better job in their own researc h and that there are many people who could use archaeology to make their lives richer. One example contributing to research impacts outside of archaeology is useful data for ecologists and environmental researchers w ho need a longer-term view than is often available on the ecological effe cts of industry and globalization. And, for enriching lives, for example, we want tea chers and students to learn archaeology, not only so that they’ll support it, and not only so that they see the world is diverse in peoples and c ultures, but also to learn about how one might make sense of a process deeply imbued with


3 ambiguity, complexity, and uncertainty and to gain the insight that those characteristics apply to life in general no less th an to the messy business of archaeology. In addition, we want communities and a rchaeologists to engage with each other and to use the process and r esults of archaeology to make sense of their community histories and to m ake stronger communities. As we are more intentional about making archaeolog y useful and relevant, it would probably be a good idea to bring the somewhat polarized scientific and humanist aspects of archae ology together, as well as the insights of various archaeologies, including anthropological, classical, Biblical and indigenous. I use this quote from Barbara Little in conjunctio n with Mark Leone’s work in Annapolis to frame my research because these two sc holars raise the primary concerns I hope to address through public archaeology, outreac h and education: 1. Archaeology can help children and the general pu blic explore their curiosities and encourage people to ask questions, 2. Archaeology can enrich the lives of community me mbers where excavations take place by involving them in the pro cess, 3. Archaeology can be a critical tool for demystify ing the ideology of inequalities, 4. Archaeology can help build communities. In this thesis I refer to archaeology education as a type of educational programming that teaches about cultural resources, stewardship and heritage. I believe that these educational goals can contribute to each of the fou r objectives stated above. Archaeology educators must be aware of the sensiti ve nature of cultural heritage and the archaeological record when they are in the classroom, and it is important to have a clear conception of who the audience is. Karolyn Smardz and Shelley J. Smith, authors of The Archaeology Education Handbook: Sharing the Pas t with Kids (2000: 32) explain


4 how educators and archaeologists might go about cra fting and conveying their messages to the public, An archaeology educator must have a clearly defined set of goals and objectives for every program and every lesson. Know ing what you are trying to teach and how to teach it most effectivel y to a given audience are keys to ensuring that the message is actually trans mitted. Most people try to convey more information than their audience can assimilate at one time. With this in mind, we need to ask ourselves severa l questions: What do educated Americans need to know about archaeolog y? What is the best way to ensure that they will know it? How does an a rchaeology educator distill years of information acquired through schoo l and research into a fundamental catechism? What is the students’ level of understanding? Archaeologists must examine both explicit and impli cit communications. We need to be sure that we are choosing the most im portant messages and that we are transmitting them successfully. A serious aspect of public archaeology is the pote ntial to be misunderstood: That is, the message that you’re try ing to teach is not the one that your audience is receiving. This may seem somewhat silly; we all speak the same language, don’t we? But in today’s d iverse global village, the answer is “no,” we don’t. Ensuring congruity be tween the message, the medium, and the audience’s perception of each requi res deliberate attention and feedback. For example, there is consi derable debate about the implicit message sent by student excavation exp eriences. Most people think of archaeology as a dig, so students expect t o “get down and dirty” when they are told that they are going to learn abo ut archaeology. The potential for creating a generation of pothunters b y unwittingly transmitting the archaeology-is-fun-let’s-all-set-u p-a-dig-in-our-backyard idea to teachers and students cannot be overemphasi zed. Yet, experiential learning is emphasized throughout this book, and it is a basic tenet of modern educational theory. Resolving the conflict b etween what archaeologists want to teach about archaeology and what teachers want their students to learn requires that great care be taken in crafting our messages. Smardz and Smith evoke two important points. First they emphasize the importance of having a plan and setting goals befor e implementing an education program. Without proper planning, the archaeologist ’s messages may be unclear to students. Second, they discuss how this type of mis communication can lead to dangerous misunderstandings that might cause students to beco me pothunters or looters. Without proper explanation and discussion during a lesson o r a mock dig, students might be led to


5 believe that archaeology requires no discipline or academic training. Within archaeology education, there is much debate about whether stude nts should participate in mock digs or simulated digs; because the central example in this thesis does not provide any kind of dig experience, I will not explore the issue. For a more in-depth look at this issue and other controversial issues in teaching archaeology see Connolly (2000), Nancy Hawkins (2000), and Smardz (2000). Of most importance, it i s necessary for archaeology educators to determine what they hope the students will take away from their programming, well crafted messages and itemized out comes are integral to the production of a successful program. In the following chapters, I discuss the use and p urpose of ArchaeoCart, a project that I have been involved in from May 2011-January 2012 with Jeff Moates, Rae Harper and Becky O’Sullivan at the West Central office of the Florida Public Archaeology Network in Tampa, Florida. ArchaeoCart is a mobile learning tool available for educators and museum specialists in Florida. The cart acts as supplemental programming for teaching archaeology and history of Florida, archae ological concepts and critical thinking skills. In chapter 2, “ Participatory Education, Outreach, and Assessment” I use Nina Simon’s The Participatory Museum (2010) to frame my explanation of the importance of participatory education. I explain object-based, so cial learning theories and the educational theory used by the creators of Understanding by Design (McTighe and Wiggins 2004; Wiggins and McTighe 2005). I address some of the logistic concerns of teaching children, and finally, I discuss the impor tance of assessment for archaeology education programs.


6 In chapter 3, “American Archaeology Education in K -12 Classrooms, Museums and Outreach,” I discuss three different ways archaeological infor mation can be disseminated to the public: 1) Site-specific educat ional programming, 2) Educational institutions that distribute materials, and 3) Trav eling exhibits and programming. I explain the following programs in relation to the g oals presented in The Archaeology Education Handbook: Sharing the Past with Kids (Smardz and Smith 2000): Crow Canyon Archaeological Center, Chicago History Museu m: History la Cart, Education on Wheels: Calusa Carts as a Mobile Mound House, Pr oject Archaeology, and ArchaeoBus created by the Society for Georgia Archa eology (SGA). In chapter 4, “Florida Public Archaeology Network and ArchaeoCart” I present my research and primary case study. I describe the str ucture and goals of Florida Public Archaeology Network (FPAN) which was established in 2004. The network was inspired by people with the goals of public archaeology outr each and education. This chapter explains how ArchaeoCart’s computer program is used and it references an appendix with lesson plans for the eight activities included in the cart’s drawers (see figure 4.5 on page 68 for a drawing of the cart). I present resea rch from my own fieldwork that discusses how ArchaeoCart operates at an outreach e vent where I spoke about the purpose and functions of the cart. I also explore t he role of social networking media in archaeology and outline potential assessment tools that could be used for evaluating the program. This thesis should make a valid argument for why p ublic archaeology and archaeology education is important and how it can b e achieved in classrooms, museum settings and outreach events.


7 Chapter 2: Participatory Education and Outreach Introduction to Participatory Education The purpose of this chapter is to present a range o f tools that archaeologists are using to get their messages across to public audien ces and to explore the concept of participatory education. This chapter should famili arize the reader with a few key approaches used in archaeology education and emphas ize participatory education as an important feature of ArchaeoCart, the primary case study. In recent years, museums have become more aware of the need for participatory educational activities that appeal to children and school groups (McRainey 2009; Simon


8 2010). Participatory programs are meant to engage t he public by inviting them to participate in exhibits and have hands-on learning experiences. The ways participation works in practice can range from small monetary con tributions to major project involvement that requires visitors to participate i n the analysis of data (Simon 2010:187). The purpose of these types of engagement is to help visitors feel involved and comfortable in the museum space. Many cultural inst itutions embrace various types of public participation (Simon 2010), but this thesis and ArchaeoCart conceives of participatory education as a form of education that requires students to engage with the material by participating in specific activities. Figure 2.1 Changing the Museums’ Image, photo court esy of Of+Rights-Frank+and+ErnestComic-Strips-13.php Nina Simon (2010: iii) proposes that this type of visitor involvement should replace traditional cultural venues and practices a s represented in the Frank and Ernest comic strip (see figure 2.1). In 2010, Simon published The Participatory Museum where she outlines the ways


9 civic engagement has become increasingly important in the changing world of museum culture. She provides case studies that can help mu seum curators maximize audience involvement in museum exhibitions and learning proc esses. She uses the term participatory cultural institution to describe museum programs that create an atmosphe re of interaction between visitors and the museum’s in stitutional goals (2010:ii-iii, original italics): I define a participatory cultural institution as a place where visitors can create, share, and connect with each other around c ontent. Create means that visitors contribute their own ideas, objects, and creative expression to the institution and to each other. Share means that people discuss, take home, remix, and redistribute both what they see an d what they make during their visit. Connect means that visitors socialize with other people—staff and visitors—who share their particula r interests. Around content means that visitors’ conversations and creations f ocus on the evidence, objects, and ideas most important to the institution in question. Simon contextualizes abstract concepts of particip ation and collaboration by providing concrete examples of cultural institution s that are actively trying to give the audience an opportunity to be involved with the con tent on display. This type of project often requires that an institution puts the goals o f communities who are interacting with the displays ahead of their own goals. ArchaeoCart is designed to be an interactive component of a participatory cultural institution o r classroom. ArchaeoCart’s program and its creators are dedicated to understanding and meeting the goals of its participants while maintaining clarity of their messages. Archaeology Education This section shifts gears slightly from a focus on museum education to K-12 classroom education, but both settings are applicab le to ArchaeoCart’s programming.


10 There are many approaches to teaching archaeology i n the classroom or a museum setting (McManamon 1994; McNamanon 2002; McNutt 1991; Metca lf 2002; Smardz and Smith 2000), but the most cost and time efficient approac hes allow for educators to attain the resources and training necessary to teach the mater ial on their own time. The material should require student participation and group lear ning opportunities. It is important that this approach be handled with care because without the proper training, educators may propagate misconceptions and ethical concerns assoc iated with archaeology due to a lack of awareness about the topic (See SAA Misconception s, each/CurriculumLinks/Archaeolo gyintheClassroom/MythsandMisconceptions/tabid/209/D efault.aspx ). There are also many different objectives to be con sidered when teaching archaeology in the classroom. This thesis considers the approaches of Florida Public Archaeology Network (FPAN) which is a network compo sed of archaeologists and educators dedicated to sharing archaeology and Flor ida history with the public. A more extensive introduction to FPAN comes in Chapter 4. FPAN aligns its educational goals with those of the SAA, closely following Principle No. 4, Public Education and Outreach ( aeologicalEthics/tabid/203/Defaul t.aspx ), Archaeologists should reach out to, and participate in cooperative efforts with others interested in the archaeological record with the aim of improving the preservation, protection, and interpr etation of the record. In particular, archaeologists should undertake to: 1) enlist public support for the stewardship of the archaeological record; 2) ex plain and promote the use of archaeological methods and techniques in und erstanding human behavior and culture; and 3) communicate archaeolog ical interpretations of the past. Many publics exist for archaeology inc luding students and teachers; Native Americans and other ethnic, religi ous, and cultural groups who find in the archaeological record important asp ects of their cultural


11 heritage; lawmakers and government officials; repor ters, journalists, and others involved in the media; and the general publi c. Archaeologists who are unable to undertake public education and outrea ch directly should encourage and support the efforts of others in thes e activities. Many public audiences, but especially children, ha ve limited exposure to anthropological archaeology. The public is most wel l acquainted with the Hollywood version of archaeology presented in films like Indi ana Jones and Laura Croft. In the late 1980s, Larry Zimmerman et. al (1994) began a progra m that intended to debunk romanticized visions of archaeology and provide chi ldren with participatory programming that would involve them in the processe s of archaeological research. The program that he and his colleagues created grew out of a typical “Archaeology Day”: a day when archaeologists reach out to the public to offer a glimpse of their work and the complexities of the profession. This particular tea m of archaeologists brought archaeology into a sixth grade classroom in South D akota. Initially, the teachers were enthralled by the program, and they requested that it be expanded into an archaeology week. Once the program was expanded, teachers lost interest, and the program lost steam over the next couple of years. It digressed back in to a two day program implemented by archaeologists who visited the schools. Zimmerman n otes several important problems that affected interest levels in the program: 1. Teachers felt the programming was too long and took up too much time in the curriculum. 2. Teachers expressed wanting to be more involved as instructors instead of depending on the archaeologists to teach the mat erial.


12 3. The researchers discovered that the agenda of archa eologists for archaeological education is not necessarily the sam e as the agenda of teachers for it. ArchaeoCart is designed to address each of these p roblems. The most salient of these issues is Number 3, the differences between t he objectives of the archaeologists and the objectives of the teachers. Archaeologists have become so focused on teaching archaeological stewardship that many have lost sigh t of the educational objectives of archaeology education. This is problematic when arc haeologists do not have a consistent form of communication with precollege educators or museum specialists. Maintaining open lines of communication between teachers and ar chaeologists can help to remind archaeologists that the goals of archaeology educat ion extend beyond stewardship to encompass critical thinking skills, environmental a nd historical knowledge and the ability to observe. Zimmerman (et al. 1994) points out that the concer ns of teachers when teaching archaeology are vast and varying. Their goals range from entertaining students to teaching critical thinking skills and mathematics, and it is necessary that archaeologists do not lose sight of the bigger picture enveloping archaeology education. Zimmerman requests that archaeologists engaged in archaeology education reflect on the following questions, Certainly we teach teachers how to teach stratigrap hy, lithic technology, and settlement pattern analysis, but do we teach th em how these aspects of archaeology can help them achieve their own educati onal goals in the classroom? Certainly we teach them the importance o f site preservation, but do we give teachers a rationale for conveying t his idea to students in a framework that is suitable to their own classroom a gendas?


13 FPAN engages with this set of issues through a ser ies of teacher training workshop initiatives beyond the scope of ArchaeoCar t, but the cart, too, is designed to encourage teachers to engage with the archaeologica l and historical materials in the drawers and computer program before they begin less ons with their students. It is important that before leaving ArchaeoCart with a te acher, an FPAN staff member is able to converse with the teacher about his or her goals in borrowing the cart. This gives the staff member an opportunity to direct the teacher t owards specific components of the cart that will be most useful in their context. Cognitive Development and Education The most successful archaeology education programs are thoroughly embedded in educational theories and emphasize the importance o f group learning and participation (Zimmerman et. al. 1994). Some archaeologists belie ve theories of education and teaching techniques should be taught regularly in u ndergraduate archaeology programs (White and Williams 1994). Victor W. Geraci (2000) addresses the notion that everybody has different learning styles and abilities. This is an idea comm only overlooked by archaeologists when they are designing a curriculum without a back ground in education. Geraci makes a simple yet invaluable point, “expressing concepts t oo complex for the learner or using language that is in advance of a child’s developmen tal level will inevitably result in a bored, confused student and a frustrated teacher-ar chaeologist” (Geraci 2000:91). In order to understand what Geraci means by the ph rase “a child’s developmental


14 level,” Emily Johnson (2000) provides a brief outli ne of three basic cognitivedevelopmental theories taken from Jean Piaget, Lev Vygotsky, and an Information Processing approach. Each theorist provides relevan t insights into how children might best learn archaeological concepts. Piaget’s Active Learners Theory (Johnson 2000:72) suggests that children learn through actively engaging with their environment. I n order for a child to learn from a situation or activity, they must be able to make th eir own meaning and relate to the project through hands on interaction. This hands-on interaction is what allows the child to advance cognitively. This approach would suggest th at children might learn about archaeology best from an activity that requires the ir participation with artifacts or lab analysis. Vygotsky builds on Piaget’s theory by suggesting t he Sociocultural Theory (Johnson 2000:74-75) in which children participate in an active meaning making process to advance cognitively, but for this information to stick and develop, it is important that the child interacts with others during this process The child and the social environment work together to influence the conceptual reasoning of children, and cognitive development is part of a social system shared among people. In a group learning situation, children help one another to understand the material being presented to them. In an archaeological context, this theory might sugges t that children need to analyze artifacts in a group rather than individually to un derstand complex concepts such as classification or attributes. The last theoretical approach discussed by Johnson (2000:76-77) is the Information Processing Approach which considers how children store information and


15 suggests that children require practice and experie nce to develop their memory and ability to solve complex problems. New information must be introduced in steps that build upon one another for a child to gain a clear understanding of a concept like archaeology. This allows the working memory to be f reed up for new information. The working memory is used to absorb information as it comes, thus it is necessary for a child to learn concepts in order of their simplicity and broadness. The following example of the Information-Processing Approach to cognitive development is particularly useful when thinking ab out how to begin the process of teaching archaeology to children (Johnson 2000:76-7 7), A child in kindergarten who is first introduced to the word “archaeology” and “archaeologist,” and who is asked to compare th e work of an archaeologist with that of a paleontologist may nev er come to understand this distinction. This child’s working memory may b e taken up with the fascination of these new sounding words and with le arning how to pronounce “archaeologist” and “paleontologist.” How ever, once a child has heard these words frequently, the pronunciation of these words becomes automatic and working memory is now “free” to consider the distinction between these two fields of study. This holds true of any individual when confronted with new and complex information. If an individual’s working mem ory is occupied with the basic understanding of new skills or informatio n, he or she will not immediately be able to process the more abstract or complex aspects of the task. The more familiar and practiced we are with c oncepts and skills, the more readily we can engage and succeed in more comp lex tasks. Emily Johnson’s outline of cognitive development a nd educational processes presented in The Archaeology Handbook are relevant to the archaeologist because the theories help to explain how people absorb informat ion most efficiently. These insights can help the archaeologist who is untrained in educ ational theory begin to develop a program that will be useful and successful in its g oals.


16 Understanding By Design and SEEC Object-Based Learn ing Two primary educational models, both embedded in th eories of cognitive development, are essential in FPAN’s approach to ed ucation. The first model, Understanding by Design, is provided by Grant Wiggi ns and Jay McTighe (2005). This model emphasizes the importance of preplanning and lesson design in producing education programs. Wiggins and McTighe suggest tha t children should, from an educational program, gain the ability to understand concepts, think in terms of big ideas and transfer their knowledge and skills to other ar enas of life outside of the classroom. This model considers at length what it means to understand and how it is possible to assess a student’s understanding of a subject (Wigg ins and McTighe 2005:82-104.) The Understanding by Design Professional Workbook (McTighe and Wiggins 2004) provides several templates for establishing an assessment pl an for educational programming. One of the most useful subsections of these templates i s the “Stage 3 Learning Plan” (see figure 2.2) which employs the acronym WHERETO to help teachers remember to plan for their programs:


17 Stage 3 Learning Plan Learning Activities What learning experiences and instruction will enab le students to achieve the desired results? How will the design:W = Help the students know W here the unit is going and W hat is expected? Help the teacher know W here the students are coming from (prior knowledge, inte rests)?H = H ook all students and H old their interest?E = E quip students, help them E xperience the key ideas and E xplore the issues?R = Provide opportunities to R ethink and R evise their understandings and work?E = Allow students to E valuate their work and its implications?T = Be T ailored (personalized) to the different needs, inte rests and abilities?O = Be O rganized to maximize initial and sustained engageme nt as well as effective learning? Figure 2.2 Stage 3 Learning Plan WHERETO McTighe an d Wiggins 2004:213-225 While some of the objectives proposed by this plan may be difficult to achieve during the short spans of time archaeologist educat ors are given to interact with the children they plan to teach, it is important that a ll of these objectives be considered during the development of programming. The final model of education that will be addresse d in this thesis is one that is common and familiar to all museum learning initiati ves and used frequently among archaeologists. Object-based learning gives student s the opportunity to foster their critical thinking skills by engaging with familiar, everyday objects. Perhaps the most notable and large scale implementation of this type of learning in America is practiced by the Smithsonian Institution at the Smithsonian Early En richment Center (SEEC). For a little over 20 years, this preschool and kindergarten has been encouraging young people to develop a passion for learning through experiential and object-based learning programs.


18 Using the collections from various Smithsonian muse ums, children have the opportunity to explore a variety of topics and subjects through material culture. The program’s mission statement, SEEC’s educational philosophy encourages respect fo r the child and recognizes the unique nature of the individual. Han ds-on exploration and discovery, both in the classroom and the museum, of fer a chance to construct knowledge from personal experience. Throu gh the comprehensive collections housed in the Washington community, children develop an understanding of the diversity of the wo rld. The SEEC philosophy is based upon five key ide as: Child-oriented learning, real-world integrated learning, cultural diversity, critical thinking skills, and aesthetic awareness. [ ] The program benefits from being closely associated with and having access to the Smithsonian Institution’s collections and staff, Children learn by building upon past knowledge and experience, making meaningful connections between objects that are fam iliar and unknown objects. In a visit to the Sackler Gallery during a study of clothing, SEEC children see padukahs, sandals worn by clerics in a ncient India. The padukahs, an unfamiliar museum artifact, become fam iliar when compared to shoes that children wear. The museums are an int egral part of the SEEC program. ( ) Teachers who use object-based learning strategies s uggest that a child’s experiences outside of the classroom contribute a l ot to their knowledge base. Many nonclassroom learning experiences happen within social groups, thus it is “socially situated learning” (Lave and Wenger 1991). The members of ou r social groups help us to understand how to walk, talk, eat, dress, cook, etc This type of learning is associated with museums and other similar exhibit based progra ms that encourage small group interactions with objects and other visual elements (Boron 2002). Object-based learning is championed by educators b ecause it allows people to have social interactions that help them focus and e ngage with visual or kinesthetic


19 objects. Having a fascinating experience with an ob ject or artifact while in a group allows the group members to form a bond over the experienc e, thus reinforcing their memory with personal experiences related to that object. B y forming this type of connection to an object or artifact, students are more likely to be interested in learning more about the subject in the future (Boron 2002:247). In the case of museums, parents, peers or teachers can be useful resources for students who may not be at the appropriate developmental level to gain new knowledge about the presented mat erial. The next section provides a bit of information about how parents and teachers can f acilitate an educational environment that keeps children comfortable enough to absorb in formation. Practical and Logistical Considerations in Educatio n Besides relating to children’s personal interests when teaching about history and archaeology, FPAN staff members realize that there are several important practical and logistical considerations to take into account when teaching children. The authors of Stronger Together: A Manual on the Principles and P ractices of Civic Engagement (Tuxil et. al 2009:50) provide a list of “important considerations in working with the youth:” In working with youth, it is important on a persona l level that you: • Listen to them, clearly demonstrate respect, and avoid lecturing or “parenting”; • Meet youth where they are--physically, mentally, emotionally, and experientially; • Take nothing for granted, and avoid the assumptio n that they already care about National Park Service (NPS) resources or the environment; help them build their care; • Model a process that allows each individual to pa rticipate; • Understand that older youth have greater social n eeds; • Continually seek to learn from the students you w ork with;


20 • Understand how your programs can transform partic ipants’ lives and make use of this information in engaging other yout h. Logistically in working with youth, it can be helpf ul to: • Always have food on hand; • Include games, icebreakers, and fun in regular me etings; • Test incentives such as a free iPod or stipends ( if appropriate) to attract participation; • Offer side enrichment opportunities, such as a hi king trip or a behindthe-scenes visit to another park; • Consider supervision and safety issues; • Provide adequate program staff and training, and be prepared to coach them. These guidelines are written specifically for park service educators and other park employees, but they are salient in archaeology educ ation that deals with children. Particularly, it is important that the educator is aware of their audience and is capable of tailoring the material they are teaching to the chi ldren. It is also very important that educators working in archaeology are passionate abo ut their topics so that the children can gain an authentic understanding of what it mean s to care about the protection of cultural resources; this goes hand in hand with con tinually learning from your students because this can provide the student with a feeling of agency in the learning process. The logistic concerns provided by the NPS may be less r elevant to the topics in this thesis, however, it is important to consider the age of the student participants in the program to gauge the amount of time that should be spent with a specific subject. Archaeology Education Assessment The final discussion of this chapter concerns a ve ry important aspect of public archaeology: assessment. In the field of public arc haeology, much of the discussion revolves around practices of evaluation and assessm ent of the success of programs like ArchaeoCart. Archaeology education is a growing nic he in America today, but one of the


21 biggest problems for these programs is the battle f or funding. Because archaeology is not considered part of the Science, Technology, Enginee ring, and Mathematics (STEM) education program designed to encourage students to be prepar ed for the job market, it has become very difficult to receive non-private fu nding (personal communication, Sherry Svekis, October 2011). In order to receive f ederal or state funding, programs are required to provide some type of evaluation after t he program has been put into action or after completion. In 1995, the Public Education Committee (PEC) of t he Society for American Archaeology (SAA) published Archaeology in the Clas sroom: Guidelines for Evaluation of Archaeology Education Materials to help educator s understand how they should be evaluating the success of their programs. The docum ent included four primary sections that emphasize the importance of archaeology and th e messages that should be included in educational programming ( each/CurriculumLinks/Archaeol ogyintheClassroom/tabid/208/Default.aspx ), • Myths and Misconceptions, • Essential Concepts, • Elements of Archaeological Method & Theory, • Additional Resources. These sections are meant to help educators and arc haeologists determine what the most important elements of their programs should be and what they should expect children to gain from the lessons. In the same vein as the PEC, FPAN created a plan o f evaluation for their network


22 in 2010. The evaluation plan is expected to be carr ied out within the following decade. A general evaluation rubric was created that should b e used as a guideline for evaluating individual programs after they have reached a stage of completion, What to Evaluate Why Evaluate This? How to Evaluate • What are the program’s goals and objectives? What activities were undertaken to meet those goals and objectives? • What has gone well with the program? What is the most successful aspect of the program? • What do changes in the identified performance measures tell you about program successes or failures? • How has the program changed from what was originally proposed and what were those changes? Why did those changes affect the program outcomes? • Where did the program run into difficulties, and how did you handle those challenges? • What would you do differently in the program next time? • What needs to be done right now to improve or bolster the program? To determine program progress, whether the program is meeting goals and objectives, and where program improvements can be made. Establish a template for quarterly reports to guide report content so staff are able to sufficiently and succinctly provide information on how the program is doing. Ensure regular (3-4 times per year) face-to-face communication between RC staff to track progress towards achieving goals and objectives of the strategic plan. Once per year, review progress on achievement of strategic plan and modify as necessary. Maintain a focus on identified performance measures and track changes. Figure 2.3 Evaluation from FPAN 2010 Strategic Plan 2010:26 FPAN comments on the purpose for using evaluation s trategies, “The feedback that will be most useful will inform program improv ement decisions, budget decisions, future program design choices, and long term policy directions” (FPAN 2010 Strategic Plan 2010:24),


23 Evaluation of the objectives of this plan will help FPAN in the following ways. • Improve program design, implementation, and effect iveness – With evaluation, you can say with confidence that the pr oposed program changes are based on an unbiased evaluation of actu al results and outcomes. • Demonstrate how each program supports FPAN’s missi on – Carefully crafted evaluation methods will allow a clear under standing of mission achievement. • Justify the costs of each program – Thorough evaluation of each program will assist with defending each program’s value and can be used to challenge budget cuts. • Determine program strengths and weaknesses – Evaluation results will show how well each program is meeting its objective s and the areas that need improvement so that modifications can be made to cause improvements. • Reveal program successes to supporters, funders, and stakeholders – Evaluation will generate the evidence needed to gai n additional support for programs. The extensive evaluation goals presented by FPAN i n the 2010 strategic plan (2010:24) are to be put into practice using the fol lowing schema, Figure 2.4 Evaluation from FPAN 2010 Strategic Pla n 2010:24


24 The information presented in this section provided a brief review of the types of educational theory and assessment being used by arc haeologists engaged in public outreach, and the next chapter gives a series of ex amples that show how this information is put into practice.


25 Chapter 3: American Archaeology Education and Outre ach in K-12 Classrooms and Museums Introduction to Public Archaeology The previous chapter outlines the various component s necessary for a successful education model in public archaeology. This chapter provides five case studies that show the ways archaeologists across the country are usin g the tools presented in Chapter 2 to educate a variety of public audiences. Each example illustrates a unique perspective on how archaeology education can be enacted in the pub lic sphere. The examples presented in this chapter can be attri buted to a 1990 initiative by the Society for American Archaeology (SAA) to help moti vate American archaeologists to educate precollege students; the Public Education C ommittee (PEC) of the SAA was instituted. The basic premise behind this initiativ e was to create a generation of students interested in the stewardship of cultural resources The following descriptions of public archaeology c ome from Maureen Malloy who has worked in many museums and outreach positio ns throughout her career and is currently the Chesapeake Region Project Archaeology Coordinator. She suggests that there has been an expansion of the goals of public archaeology to include a general interest in heritage and past lifeways (Malloy 2011 ), Thirty years ago public archaeology—for me, and man y of my colleagues was pretty much limited to classroom visits, site t ours, working with volunteers in the field and lab, creating brochures or interpretive panels, organizing the first Archaeology Month celebrations in our states. Important activities, to be sure—emphasis on the wo rd activities. And our primary reason for climbing out of our caves, excav ation units, and labs, into the glare of the public spotlight? As a profes sion we were driven primarily by our concern over the looting and destr uction of archaeological sites. Our professional societies in cluding SAA issued ethical mandates for doing and supporting public ou treach and education,


26 which was seen as, if not the answer, then an important part of the solution to archaeology’s most intractable problem. Changes in the field of public archaeology over th e past two decades have created opportunities for working with the public in deeper and more meaningful ways. These new approaches can help us create the kinds of alliances we need to preserve archaeologic al and historic sites. Perhaps the most important change in the discipline is that communities now play a much bigger role in archaeology. Rather than simply the recipients of what professional archaeologists have learned, or the labor in our labs and excavation units, communities are acti vely engaging in all aspects of some archaeological projects. Projects m ay now be initiated and led by communities themselves, who invite us in to help. Public archaeology is now less of a one-way street designe d by and for archaeologists to meet the needs of our discipline, and more of a shared endeavor to meet common goals. Although I find this an exciting and welcome change, I can’t say that all of my colleagu es share this this view! Malloy (2011) comments on the changes that have oc curred over the past few decades in the way archaeologists approach their wo rk. I support Malloy’s approval of the shift towards a community-based public archaeol ogy. Archaeologists have the honor and the challenge of making it possible for people from the past to speak to those of the present. Their job is to uncover and analyze materi al remains such as broken ceramic sherds, shell tools, and post molds among other thi ngs. To reach the hearts and minds of the public, archaeologists are responsible for weav ing these artifacts into a narrative that relates the past to the present. Public archaeology and archaeology education h ave become a focus in the field of archaeology for two main purposes. First, to hel p inform the public about the importance of preserving cultural resources, and se cond, to teach people about their heritage and the heritage of those around them thro ugh the archaeological record. Archaeologists engaged with the public must be capa ble of relaying the big picture, the narrative of the past, based on individual artifact s. In many cases, it can be difficult to create a coherent and intriguing story from so few artifactual clues, but the ambiguities of


27 the past should always be included to emphasize the complexity of the human condition throughout history. As storyteller and educator, th e archaeologist is responsible for linking individual artifacts and specific sites to people and their places. The effort to make archaeology an important compon ent of public education has become a prominent goal of archaeologists in the la st few decades (McManamon 2000:17), and it has been a topic of interest among archaeologists and historians for more than a century. I use the following discussion to s ituate ArchaeoCart within a larger context of archaeology education in America. Starti ng with section three of the Antiquities Act of 1906, the federal government has been cognizant of the need to share archaeological and cultural resources with the publ ic ( ), Provided, that the examinations, excavations, and g atherings are undertaken for the benefit of reputable museums, un iversities, colleges, or other recognized scientific or educational institut ions, with a view to increasing the knowledge of such objects, and that the gatherings shall be made for permanent preservation in public museums. The idea to make archaeological inquiries and arti facts available to the public is a widespread phenomena that reaches all parts of the globe (see Stone and Planel 1999). However, I focus on recent American examples becaus e FPAN is located in the United States. The following quote from Karolyn Smardz and Shelle y J. Smith sums up the atmosphere within which the movement towards a stro nger presence of archaeology in primary education has developed during the past two decades, This all started with a challenge. During lunch at the 1996 Society for American Archaeology meetings in New Orleans, Louis iana, Brian Fagan and Karolyn Smardz were lamenting that practitioner s of archaeology education were without guidance to help them provid e quality programs


28 and avoid making the same mistakes that pioneers in the field had. They attributed a large portion of the problem to the de arth of literature in the field. Fagan laid out the gauntlet: “Well, write a book! Don’t complain about a problem if you’re not going to step up and try to fix it.” Smardz answered Fagan’s request by writing The Archaeology Education Handbook: Sharing the Past with Kids with her colleague Shelley J. Smith The handbook provides an outline of the benefits, risks and strategies involved in teaching archaeology to public audiences. The book is divide d into the following sections with several essays in each section. Each essay is writt en by a professional in the field, PART I: The Culture of Teaching: The Educational Sy stem and Educational Theory PART II: The Interface: Archaeologists Working with Educators PART III: The Danger Zones: Issues in Teaching Arch aeology PART IV: The Provenience: Archaeology Education in the Real World PART V: Conclusions and Perspectives This volume has become a cornerstone of the moveme nt to “Save the Past for the Future” (Smardz 2000:13) which was the title of the SAA conference in 1989. Twenty of the thirty-four authors who contributed to the volu me have been or currently are members of the Society for American Archaeology’s Public Ed ucation Committee (PEC) (see Friedman 2000:13 for a concise history of the PEC a nd its future goals). The essential goal of this movement towards the increased use of archaeological material in K-12 education is to “develop a strategy to combat the r ampant vandalism that was [ is ] destroying the nation’s archaeological resources” ( Smardz 2000:13). According to Malloy (2011) and others, this goal has expanded in the past decade to include issues of community involvement and an understanding of the c omplexities of cultural heritage.


29 Archaeology education can be approached from three ways: 1) a site-specific educational program or series of programs, 2) bring ing artifacts and information to students and the public, and 3) creating an educati onal institution that distributes materials. Following this typology, I will discuss five archaeology education programs in America that have followed the guidelines presented in The Archaeology Education Handbook I will describe how each program addresses the go als, expectations and concerns of archaeology education by answering the following questions: • How does the program work? • How does it incorporate educational theory and ob ject-based learning into its curricula? • How does the program link the goals of educators with the goals of archaeologists? • How does the program fit into the public education system? Strategies that Work: Examples of Archaeology Educa tion Programs I recognize that there are many other fascinating and similar projects around the country that I omit from this discussion, but I hav e chosen the following examples based on their prominence in the field and their similari ties to FPAN and ArchaeoCart. I deliberately do not address “archaeology trunks” or “portable exhibits” which are a common feature of many museums and education center s because I do not think they are comparable to ArchaeoCart’s program (see Montana's archaeology trunks and footlockers for an example: duresourcecatalog.pdf). Site-Specific Educational Programs Crow Canyon Archaeological Center


30 The Crow Canyon Archaeological Center is an exampl e of an archaeology education program that has flourished in America du ring the past three decades. The program is founded on principles of object-based an d experiential learning, and students are immersed in the environment where the archaeolo gical materials they study came from. Margaret A. Heath (2000:65) comments on Crow Canyon’s influence on school teachers, Although anthropology and archaeology are rarely fo und in school curriculum guides, creative teachers, either alone or as members of teams, are discovering that the study of an archaeology-re lated subject can knit an entire array of topics into a cohesive unity. Crow Canyon Center is located in south west Colora do four miles from the town of Cortez and 14 miles from the entrance of Mesa Ve rde National Park. The center was established in 1983 as part of the Center for Ameri can Archaeology based in Kampsville, Illinois. In 1985, Crow Canyon became an independen t, not-for profit center designated as an organization for research. The center hoped t o broaden and refine the role of archaeology education in America (Struever 2000). In an increasingly multicultural society, Stuart S truever and others realize that archaeology can be an excellent tool for incorporat ing a multicultural perspective into public education. He also notes that teachers are a t the head of this curve, realizing the limitations of public education in the classroom an d seeking outside resources by which to broaden the horizons of their students. The staff at Crow Canyon has developed a range of educational activities, daylong field trips and overnight camps for children a nd adults. Much of their programming revolves around research projects and excavation,


31 The Center’s research and education programs reache d maturity through a decade-long study of the archaeology of the Sand Ca nyon locality, the development of computerized databases, and the crea tion of a publications division. Research findings were incorporated into an innovative, culturally sensitive curriculum, and the research a nd education departments were expanded to accommodate the increa sed interest in public archaeology programs. In the mid-1980s, Crow Canyon began offering educational travel programs that provided the public with additional opportunities to learn about the diverse cultures of indigenous peoples around the world, with a special focus on t he American southwest. [ ] According to Struever and Margaret Heath (2000), th e center contributes much of its success to “experiential education.” Richard J. Kraft says, “Experiential education includes all those environments in which the learne r is actively involved in his or her own learning, and is not just a passive recipient of th e knowledge of the teacher” (Kraft and Sakofs 1997:15). The staff at Crow Canyon is separa ted into research and education departments to best meet the goals of experiential education. This departmental divide allows the center to have the best of both worlds: trained archaeologists and certified teachers. With the inclusion of certified teachers, Crow Canyon can provide curricula rooted in educational theory, and the trained archa eologists help the students gain a sense of the methodological aspects of archaeology. Crow Canyon is well suited as an experiential lear ning center because of its location and camp programming. Students are immerse d in the environment that they are studying, allowing them to engage all of their sens es in the process. The educational programmers at Crow Canyon are aware of the strict national education standards in the United States; these standards require teachers to stick closely to a regimented curriculum to help their students reach maximum scores on stan dardized tests. Crow Canyon staff has created a table that outlines the correlations between national standards and each of


32 their educational programs. This type of informatio n shows teachers that they can incorporate archaeology into their curricula as par t of the requirements for standardized assessments. Crow Canyon requires people to travel to the locat ion and pay for the programming (80% of Crow Canyon’s funds come from t uition). This makes the programming inaccessible to a large population of s tudents and adults. Crow Canyon Center offers few resources for use outside of thei r campus. Their website offers a workbook, Archaeologists Use Maps a book written by Crow Canyon educators, Windows into the Past and two “community history trunks” that contain r eplicas of historic objects representing Navajo and Euro-Ameri can groups ( es.asp ). Unfortunately, none of these resources come free of charge; however, the c enter does provide three free study guides with lesson plans designated for teacher use on their website ( sson_plans.asp ). Chicago History Museum: History la Cart The Chicago History Museum (CHM) began working on History la Cart in 2005. History la Cart was created during a time w hen the museum staff started to seriously consider the following question, “How do we teach history?” (McRainy 2009.) The staff formed a school planning committee to exp lore new ideas for engaging youth on field trips. The team hoped to create a program to be used during field trips that would encompass the following criteria and satisfy the K12 teachers (Bariso 2010), Field trips should include collaboration and small group activities that relate back to the exhibitions. Hands-on experienti al elements were


33 important. Discussion, role-play, use of imaginatio n, putting oneself in the past, and making connections [between the past and the present] were all important components. The product that ensued after months of planning w as one that has served each of these criterion dutifully in recent years. Marne Ba riso, volunteer and intern coordinator at CHM, with the help of her team developed seven Hist ory la Cart stations that would be appropriate for students in grades 3-12 (Bariso 201 0). Each station is equipped with age appropriate activities that illuminate various aspe cts of Chicago's history (The Great Chicago Fire, Prairie Landscape, Skyscrapers, Artif acts, Neighborhood, Bridges, and Maps). The activities were created to be completed in twenty minutes and they range in style from acting out the first all-African America n basketball team’s state finals experience to bridge construction ( useumvisit ). For the creators of History la Cart, it is important that each visito r who stops in the gallery to experience the cart has an active role in the experience. Bari so expresses her dissatisfaction with a dull episode at the gallery, “Sometimes, I remind w ell-meaning volunteer interpreter trainees, ‘They are activity carts--not sitting and listening carts’” (Bariso 2010:29). Even though the program at CHM is outfitted to tea ch history and not archaeology it uses artifacts and principles of obj ect-based learning to rely the historical information. The following description comes from t he program’s website ( useumvisit ) and explains the goals of a unit called Artifacts “Discover objects through touch and discussion, t hen bring an adjective into the gallery and choose an artifact t hat matches it. Draw and write about your object, then share your opinion and find out w hat others think.” When the History


34 la Cart team set out to define the principles that would lead the project, they came up with six principles to consider when thinking about teac hing history at the museum; diverse stories, the city as artifact, personal connections the interplay between the past, present, and future, audience accessibility, and civic engag ement (McRainy 2009). The authors of the principles cite Kieran Egan of the Imaginative Education Resource Group (IERG) as someone who “encourages educators to utilize storie s for their potential to engage students (and learners of all ages) both cognitivel y and emotionally” (McRainey 2009:241). IERG is based in Canada, and they work t owards the following change that they hope to see in contemporary and future educati on, The change we want to bring about may be broadly su mmarized as a transition from an industrial age school system to a post-industrial system: from a system that attempts to squeeze people and t houghts into standardized boxes, often to the detriment of origi nality and adaptability, to a system that enables the unusual and effective to flourish wherever possible. ( ) Similarly minded educators exist around the countr y. For example, archaeologists and historians came together in October 2011 at the Manatee Village Historic Park in Bradenton, Florida to reach out to their community and tell stories based on the lives of the first settlers in the area. The event is known as “Spirit Voices of Old Manatee ,” and it takes place in a historic cemetery near a relocated village from the nineteenth century. During the event, staff from the historic park and members of a local thespian group provided a theatrical explanation of nineteenth cen tury life from the perspective of people who are buried at the historic cemetery. The actors dressed for their parts, read from letters or stories and stood next to their characte r’s presumed grave marker. FPAN staff came to the event to share their knowledge about Gr ound Penetrating Radar (GPR) which is a technology that archaeologists use to find thi ngs like buried bodies or post-molds


35 from historic homes. This program allowed the publi c to experience a range of approaches to understanding and studying the past b y explaining a scientific method for studying the past in conjunction with a narrative-b ased approach. Through this type of storytelling, archaeologists, like historians, can foster relationships between their audience and the past. Education on Wheels: Calusa Carts as a Mobile Mound House Jeff Moates cites the Calusa Carts developed by Th eresa Schober as his inspiration for ArchaeoCart (personal communication October 2011). Theresa Schober is currently the Cultural Resources Director of Mound House in Fort Myers Beach, Florida. Formally known as “Calusa Carts: A Mobile Mound Hou se,” the stationary Mound House released the program at a town council meetin g in Fort Myers on August 10, 2009, (“Calusa Carts Unveiled at Town Meeting”). Accordin g to an article published on August 12, 2009, in the Fort Myers Beach Bulletin : The Calusa Carts mobile exhibits will enhance Mound House educational and interpretive programs on and off site that have been provided to the public and local schools since 2000. The Calusa Carts are based on key features of futu re permanent exhibits at Mound House a three-acre archaeological and historical site owned by the Town of Fort Myers Beach. One cart res embles an archaeological excavation unit that interprets moun d construction and a second cart provides a regional overview of the Cal usa Indians combining graphics, text, and interactive audio-visual compon ents. The Mound House is similar in function to Crow Cany on’s facilities because it is situated within a specific context and landscape wh ich is integral to its educational programming. The mobile off-shoots of the museum de scribed in the following section


36 are very similar to ArchaeoCart in their mobility a nd the educational goals underlying their creation. Much of the information in this section comes from conversations between the author and Theresa Schober. The Calusa Carts grew o ut of Theresa Schober’s desire to give children an opportunity to interact in a hands -on way with the content presented at Mound House in Ft. Myers, Florida. Mound House open ed for programming in 1999, and it began to engage regularly with K-12 schools in 2 002. Currently, the property boasts an underground exhibit that explains stratigraphy and the process of excavation, a three acre archaeological site with interpretive panels explai ning the cultural landscape and many native plant species as well as a full fledged muse um on top of the archaeological mound. Schober imagines Mound House as a place where child ren and the public can gain an understanding of the world around them, imagine how natural resources functioned in the daily lives of Native Americans and foster an appre ciation for the complexities of Native American life. The primary messages of the program are 1) sustainability, gaining an understanding of how individual choices affect the natural world and 2) stewardship. Mound House’s educational programming includes an a ctivity where children gather cabbage palm fibers to use for making rope to show children how people can creatively solve problems with the resources that are availabl e to you. This type of activity aims to show children how to connect culture and the enviro nment. The underground exhibit which opened in April 2011 is the basis for the Calusa Carts. The exhibit allows visitors to walk into an underground presentation of the stratigraphic layers of a Native Florida mound. The exhibit provides an audiovisual experience during which visitors are shown a video about the Calusa and their activities,


37 and they can see how artifacts are embedded in the landscape by looking at the surrounding walls that become illuminated after the video plays. To bolster this underground experience, the two carts are placed in the beginning of the exhibition to provide an interactive component, but the carts hav e also been used at locations such as an airport to serve as a marketing tool. The first cart is a profile of a test unit that is one standing meter squared. Visitors can pull out drawers that teach about soil layers a nd stratigraphy (see Figure 3.1). Figure 3.1 Stratigraphy Calusa Cart, photo courtesy of Theresa Schober The second cart contains information about the reg ion and the Calusa (see Figure 3.2). On the top of the waist-high cart, there is a map which contains one hundred archaeological sites represented by tiny lights tha t mark the location of the site within the


38 map. Figure 3.2 Calusa Information Cart, photo courtesy of Theresa Schober This map and the four interpretive panels on the s ides of the cart explain how the Calusa are connected to the rest of Florida, and th ere are four drawers containing artifacts and information. There is a push button on one side of the cart that triggers audio information about sites and causes the correspondin g to light up on the map. In the future Schober hopes to integrate the carts and the underg round exhibit further by creating a scavenger hunt during which students will use flash lights to locate specific artifacts from the carts within the stratigraphic layers of the ex hibit. Ideally, a trip to The Mound House will leave the visitor feeling a sense of how Native Florida people collected and used their natu ral resources without having inspired the visitor to become a looter. By not focusing on objects directly, but rather on


39 methodology and professionalism, the museum hopes t o promote cultural and natural stewardship. Educational Institutions That Distribute Materials Project Archaeology The next example is important because it is one of the primary models for FPAN’s educational programming. In the summer of 20 11, I attended a Project Archaeology Facilitator Training workshop with FPAN ’s Outreach Coordinators, two elementary school teachers, and a two National Park Service employees. At the workshop we were trained to teach Project Archaeology’s Inve stigating Shelter curriculum. The workshop served as an opportunity for the FPAN arch aeologists to share ideas with the school teachers and vice-versa. Each FPAN staff mem ber who attended the workshop becomes responsible for holding at least one “Inves tigating Shelter” Teacher Workshop during the 2011-2012 year. This type of outreach re lates directly to Goal 2 from FPAN’s strategic plan, Goal 2: Increase the exposure of Florida’s school c hildren to archaeology by training teachers to use archaeological curricul a. Objective 1: Implement trainings for teachers in e ach FPAN region using existing archaeological curricula and provide ongoing support to those teachers with the use of the curricula. Objective 2: Assess the results of implementing Ob jective 1 and continue to expand and improve teacher training pro grams based upon the results of the assessment.


40 Jeanne M. Moe, national director of Project Archae ology, is dedicated to the unification of archaeology’s goal to protect cultur al resources and public education’s purpose of teaching the youth to be good citizens ( Moe 2002; Moe et al. 2011). As one of the model archaeology education programs in the cou ntry, Project Archaeology has been expanding readily as a heritage education program f or people interested in teaching archaeology, historical preservation, and appreciat ion of other cultures since 1992 (Moe, Alegria, Heath and Kane 2011). Originally developed in 1990 as a response to wide spread vandalism and looting in the state of Utah, the Bureau of Land Management (BLM), the U.S. Forest Service, the National Park Service and the state of Utah decided that education was the best way to combat vandalism. The program was originally launch ed under the title Intrigue of the Past, but in 1992 when it started to be used in cla ssrooms, it became Project Archaeology (Letts and Moe 2009). The program is now run by sev en regular “team members” with an enormous advisory board consisting of many prominen t archaeologists and educators from around the country including Nancy Hawkins, Ba rbara Little, Bonnie Christensen and Linda Derry. Now based out of Bozeman, Montana, it is a joint p roject of the U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management and Mont ana State University. The program has the following mission, “Project Archaeology use s archaeological inquiry to foster understanding of past and present cultures; improve social studies and science education; and enhance citizenship education to help preserve our archaeological legacy” ( ). Central to its mission are “enduring understandings” which can be considered the pillars or principles guiding the program:


41 1. Understanding the human past is essential for un derstanding the present and shaping the future. 2. Learning about cultures past and present is esse ntial for living in a pluralistic society and world. 3. Archaeology is a way to learn about past culture s. 4. Stewardship of archaeological resources is every one’s responsibility. These “guiding principles” are prevalent throughou t much of archaeology education literature, but it is valuable to see the m written succinctly to reiterate their importance. The program is unique in that it doesn’ t rely on direct interaction with students, but rather, the emphasis lies in providin g teachers with the resources to give students accurate and meaningful information about archaeology through engaging activities and programs which is the primary goal o f ArchaeoCart, Project Archaeology includes publications, professi onal development for educators, networking opportunities, and continuing support for participants. Using an innovative hands-on approac h to history, Project Archaeology teaches scientific inquiry, citizenship personal ethics and character, and cultural understanding. ( ) The project has two curricula that are currently b eing taught in 27 states. The curricula can be tailored to the state where it is being taught for the purpose of making the information more relatable to students. I prese nt the following summaries of these two curricula which have been endorsed by the Natio nal Council for Social Studies (NCSS) (Letts and Moe 2009) to provide a context fo r ArchaeoCart’s lesson plans and activities, Intrigue of the Past: A Teacher’s Activity Guide fo r Fourth Through Seventh Grades


42 Twenty-eight classroom tested lessons use archaeolo gy to teach science, math, history, social studies, art, language arts, and higher level thinking skills such as problem solving, synthesis, and eval uation. The guide is divided into three sections: 1) Fundamental Concept s a series of lessons covering the basic concepts of archaeology, 2) The Processes of Archaeology explains how archaeologists do their work and interpret their results, and 3) Issues in Archaeology relat es archaeology to personal ethics, stewardship of our heritage resour ces, citizenship, and cultural understanding. Project Archaeology: Investigating Shelter Built on the Understanding by Design curriculum mod el, Project Archaeology: Investigating Shelter is a complete archaeological investigation of a shelter site through nine lesson s and a final performance of understanding. Students learn the fundamentals o f archaeological inquiry and conduct their own investigation of an a rchaeological site through maps, artifact drawings, oral histories, an d historic photographs. Assessments are built into instruction. An online d atabase of regional investigations allows teachers to download locally relevant materials at [ ] ArchaeoCart use these curricula from Project Archa eology to integrate two education models that focus on helping the student understand the “big ideas” rather than isolated facts (Letts and Moe 2009). The use of “en during understandings” or “big ideas” as the guiding force behind the lesson plans comes from two sources: Understanding by Design by Grant Wiggins and Jay McTighe (2004) and a mode l known as “concept based [curriculum] design” by H. Lynn Erickson. Both educ ational models rely on essential questions to guide the student through the material The lessons also rely on a “learning cycle” which culminates in the teacher’s ability to assess whether the students are grasping the “essential questions” and “enduring un derstandings.”


43 Figure 3.3 Project Archaeology: Investigating Shelt er Learning Cycle, Letts and Moe 2009 One of the most common critiques of this program i s its insistence on teaching the curriculum in its entirety and its emphasis on keep ing the sequence of the lessons. While the program is most effective and least likely to e ncourage misconceptions of archaeology when taught in its entirety, it is very difficult to find teachers who are willing to spend 2-3 days (15 hours) at a teacher workshop and even more difficult to find teachers who have approximately 2-3 weeks to dedica te to using the program in the classroom. Typically teachers are interested in programs that can be easily adapted to current projects or lessons that are easy to extract from l arger curriculums. The writers of Project


44 Archaeology realize the limitations of the program and they encourage users to present their ideas about adapting the lessons to the staff via their website (Letts and Moe 2011). Traveling Exhibits and Programming ArchaeoBus created by the Society for Georgia Archa eology The next example can be considered the most similar to ArchaeoCart. ArchaeoBus is a mobile exhibit about Georgia histor y and archaeology. The bus is driven around the state of Georgia and beyond to visit stu dents and the public. The exhibit hopes to share the work of archaeologists in the state, s pecific sites and findings as well as skills associated with the profession of archaeology ( 4.shtml ). ArchaeoBus uses social media outreach in the form of a blog-style diary wr itten from the point of view of Abby the bus. This approach is relevant to a later discu ssion regarding ArchaeoCart’s mascot, Tommy the Tortoise, Junior Archaeologist. ArchaeoBu s uses artifacts and activities to explain the cultural and natural history of Georgia The bus is a traveling resource center that provides the information and methods necessary for teaching the archaeology of


45 specific sites around Georgia. Figure 3.4 ArchaeoBus with Becky O’Sullivan, Rita E lliot, and Rozalyn Crews, photograph courtesy of Jeff Moates ArchaeoBus was originally a book mobile, but due to budget cuts the Clarke County library was forced to sell it. Bought by the Society for Georgia Archaeology (SGA) for $900, it was revamped as a tiny exhibit h all (Blackburn 2009). In May 2009, Thomas Gresham, archaeologist and member of the SGA introduced ArchaeoBus as a traveling exhibit which was later affectionately ni cknamed Abby by its creator.


46 Figure 3.5 Rita Elliot talking with visitors inside ArchaeoBus, photograph courtesy of author The bus travels around Georgia to schools, festiva ls, malls, library parking lots and other events where SGA archaeologists give pres entations based on artifacts and history from Georgia sites. Some of the presentatio ns and activities used within the bus concentrate on teaching skills such as mapping, see d analysis and soil testing ( 4.shtml ). Rita Elliot is ArchaeoBus’ resident archaeologist. Elliot drives the bus from place to place and spends weeks at a time on the road. Sh e describes the SGA’s mission for the bus, “If we develop a couple of field archaeologist s along the way, that's great, but really we're just trying to educate Georgians and specific ally younger generations to be voters and have a good understanding about preservation an d what it is all about” ( 4.shtml ). Since its early days, the bus has traveled to many events and classrooms including


47 Girl Scout camp ( rl-scout-camp/ ), Junior Ranger programs, and the Georgia National Fa ir. The exhibits and programs within the bus change and are updated by profession al staff from the SGA. Figure 2.5 shows one of the exhibits that was inside the bus d uring the Fall of 2011. This exhibit explains the lives of Native Americans in Georgia a nd discusses the objectives of historical archaeology. The exhibits are based arou nd artifacts and use material culture to highlight events from the past. The exhibit on the right-hand side of Figure 2.5 is titled “Historical Archaeology Tells the Stories of Those Who Are Silent,” and it explores the lives of slaves through artifactual remains. Figure 3.6 Becky O’Sullivan reads about Georgia his tory, photograph courtesy of author One of the most interesting aspects of the SGA’s A rchaeoBus is the way the bus has been anthropomorphized by an online diary writt en from the perspective of Abby. The full diary can be found at The following is an excerpt from the diary describing the initial phase s of re-outfitting the bus,


48 Meanwhile, at the spa, I got a tonic for my insides They cleared out all my library shelves and built exciting archaeology e xhibits. Here’s a pic of the fabricator, JR, building my exhibits. (They do say beauty comes from within, right?) One of my handlers, Veronica, did t he exhibit designs. She’s a bit of a nut, but I like her pretty well. S he always tries to think of hands-on archaeology activities that people can do with me and new things I can show off. Sometimes, though, I think s he drives the other handlers crazy (especially Real Dan) with her schem es! The most thorough descriptions of the bus and its initiatives are documented from the point of view of Abby. The diary is a travel bl og that logs the travels of the bus and its teachers. The diary provides estimates of the n umbers of visitors at the cart, ranging from 50 to 7500 at a single event. It also provides pictures from all the events and action shots of the public engaging with the exhibits. Thi s type of outreach allows followers of the blog to engage with a non-human character that has a distinctive yet relatable personality. Because the personality is not one of an identifiable, real person, visitors are able to fill in the blanks with their own visions o f who the character is. This makes the voice of Abby more flexible and thus relatable to t he individual reader who is engaging with the blog. The following diary entry from Novem ber 26, 2011 describes Abby’s trip to Jacksonville where she “met” Tommy the Tortoise, “Veronica” refers to Rita Elliot, In this entry, I simply must tell you about my trip to Florida in early November and about meeting Tommy! It’s the first ti me that I ever traveled out of the state of Georgia! And not only did I get to go to Florida, but I got to go to a big regional archaeol ogy conference called SEAC, which stands for the Southeastern Archaeology Conference. It was in downtown Jacksonville this year. Well, Diary, it was quite exciting as I was highlighted on a flyer in the program packets a nd this guy who was heading up the conference (I think I heard his name was Kenny Sassyman) even mentioned my name at the conference business m eeting! While I didn’t actually attend the conference (I mean, I un derstand the basic concepts of site seriation and the ritualism of hoe s as well as the next bus), I was one of the presenters at the conference’s Pub lic Archaeology Day. But Diary, I simply MUST tell you about Tommy. He is so c-o-oo-o–l! I first heard about Tommy when Veronica came back outside. She went in the museum to check out all the different w ays the FPAN folks


49 and others in Florida have been doing public archae ology outreach. Veronica was telling Ashcroft all about Tommy the T ortoise. Apparently he is an incredibly handsome ArchaeoCar t. And, Diary, we have SO MUCH in common…he has a shipwreck ; he goes to schools and events; he has hands-on activities…just like me! Diary, I think we were made for each other. And Tommy has other en dearing characteristics. He has an entire set of drawers fu ll of activities and he even has a TOUCH SCREEN! And, Diary, his title is “ Junior Archaeologist”! I am so impressed. Ever since I lef t Jacksonville, I can’t help but think of Tommy all the time. I hope I get to work with him again. I do hope I get to see him again… Veronica said he talked about me on his blog I wonder what he said. I wonder if he likes me. I just have to thank my new FPAN friends for bring ing Tommy and I together! Thank you Rae, Roz, Becky, Amber, J eff, and Sarah!!!! I’ll never forget the day I first met Tommy. Abby’s diary is an example of the range of possibi lities that the internet can provide for public outreach in archaeology. While S GA engages in Facebook as a social media networking opportunity, ArchaeoBus itself doe s not have a Facebook page. Similar to this type of programming, Becky O’Sulliv an and myself chose to further the role of ArchaeoCart’s lead character, Tommy the Tor toise, Junior Archaeologist by giving him a voice through Facebook. The Tommy the Tortoise programming will be discussed further in the Social Networking section of Chapter 4: Florida Public Archaeology Network and ArchaeoCart. The programs discussed in this chapter are useful examples of archaeology education and outreach techniques. The case studies represent the wide range of approaches used in archaeology education. This chap ter outlines the ways each of these programs operates on an individual level, but it ca n be noted that there is no formula for teaching archaeology to public audiences. Each grou p has taken it upon themselves to develop a unique plan and set of lessons that will help them reach their education goals. The purpose of this chapter is to provide examples of educational theory and the concept of participatory education (Simon 2010) in practice The next chapter achieves similar


50 ends with more depth regarding my own fieldwork and experience working with FPAN’s educational outreach tool, ArchaeoCart. Chapter 4: Florida Public Archaeology Network and A rchaeoCart This chapter presents a case study of archaeology e ducation and a specific project developed by myself and a team of archaeologists fr om Florida Public Archaeology Network. The chapter begins by explaining the netwo rk that I interned with during my research and it describes ArchaeoCart as a tool for public archaeology. This project is still in its first stages of pilot testing and ther e may be issues of representation or other


51 problems regarding the content within the cart. The primary purpose of this chapter is to present the premise of the cart and its features, h owever, in the future, I plan to delve more deeply into potential issues of representation that may exist with the program. Florida Public Archaeology Network Origins Inspired by the success of public engagement during her work in Pensacola and eager to get archaeology into pre-college classroom s, Dr. Judith Bense of the University of West Florida started the Florida Public Archaeol ogy Network (FPAN) as a statewide program that would help in the preservation of arch aeological sites. In 2003, nearly 15 years after the SAA created the PEC, the network be came the first of its kind in the USA, and it was set in motion as part of the Florida His torical Resources Act of 2004 ( ). Structure FPAN is well represented across the state of Flori da by eight strategically located regional centers North West, North Central, North East, Central, West Central, East Central, South West, and South East.


52 Figure 4.1 Regions of Florida Covered by FPAN, grap hic courtesy of Becky O’Sullivan Except for one center, the North Central region in Tallahassee which is operated by one individual, each office is staffed with a di rector and an outreach coordinator. The following excerpt comes from FPAN’s most recent Mem orandum of Agreement (2011:11) signed between Florida Division of Histor ical Resources (DHR) and University of West Florida Board of Trustees on Aug ust 18, 2010, Each Regional Center shall have at least one profes sional public archaeologist to serve as Regional Director, who ma y be an employee of the Host Institution. Selection criteria for the Re gional Director position include successful completion of a graduate degree in Anthropology, specializing in Archaeology, or an equivalent degre e in a related field; at least two years experience in field and laboratory archaeology; at least two years experience in supervision and administration of archaeological projects or programs; and experience in public arch aeology, including working with volunteers. Each Regional Center shall also have one professio nal to serve as Outreach Coordinator, who may be an employee of the Host Institution. The Outreach Coordinator shall assist the Regional Director in delivery of the regional FPAN program. Minimum qualifications f or this position


53 shall be a bachelors degree, experience in archaeol ogy, and welldeveloped communication abilities. A degree in Arch aeology is preferred. Many of the centers have help from interns, volunt eers and graduate students. The network of centers across the state are led by the “coordinating center” at the University of West Florida in Pensacola. At the coordinating c enter, there are four regular staff members including Dr. William B. Lees, RPA, Executi ve Director, Cheryl Phelps, Office and Contracts Manager, Jason Kent, Web Architect, a nd Mike Thomin, Manager of Destination Archaeology. Figure 4.2 FPAN Organizational Chart, graphic court esy of FPAN Goals


54 Despite the diverse range of interests represented by the directors and staff of each center, they are all dedicated to the same mis sion: “to promote and facilitate the stewardship, public appreciation, and value of Flor ida’s archaeological heritage through regional centers, partnerships and community engage ment.” Within their mission, FPAN focuses on three primary goals, 1) public outreach, 2) assistance to local governments and 3) assistance to the Florida Division of Historic R esources (DHR) in its archaeological responsibilities. To meet these goals, FPAN initiat es and participates in many forms of public archaeology, often times in collaboration wi th schools, museums, small-scale historic societies or projects, individual members of the public, and universities. Through these partnerships, FPAN employees build rapport wi th individuals statewide. These relationships allow FPAN to gain important insight into the interests of the public that they serve. By knowing their audience well, employe es are able to direct projects and emphasize cultural resources that are relevant to t he communities in which they work. Through this type of civic engagement, archaeologis ts provide relevant information to an interested public which can result in archaeology b ecoming a mainstay in the lives of educators and their pre-college students (Moe 2002, 2002; Metcalf 2002; Friedman 2000; Smith and Smardz 2000). The individual centers of FPAN function within a w ider web of archaeology in Florida (Bender 2000; Bense 2001; Davidson 2008; De agan and Landers 1999; Marquardt 1992a, 1992b, 1994; Milanich 1993, 1999; Sassaman 2006; White and Williams 1994) which has, in keeping with many infl uences from outside the state, experienced a strong push towards public engagement and outreach during the past couple of decades (Shackel 2003; Little 2002, 2007, 2009; Leone et. al 1987, 2005; Saitta


55 2007; Gallivan and Moretti-Langholtz 2007; McDavid 2007; Blakey 1997; Weik 1997, Mullins 1999; Praetzellis, Praetzellis and Van Buer en 2007). As part of this ongoing and widely spread movement, FPAN uses its resources and capable staff to achieve a series of complex goals. Each regional office participates in a variety of different projects, excavations and classroom trips with the hopes of e nticing the public to help in the goal of preserving cultural resources across the country Since the wider context of public archaeology as c ivic engagement is addressed extensively elsewhere (Little 2002, 2007; Little an d Shackel 2007), it is not the focus of this thesis to describe the many avenues and audien ces for civic engagement in the field. The following excerpt from the 2010 Memorandum of A greement provides a skeletal outline of the ways FPAN centers are expected to re ach the public, The Regional Centers will develop visible public ou treach and educational programs by promoting archaeological/heritage touri sm; by establishing partnerships with Florida Anthropological Society c hapters and other regional heritage organizations; by disseminating a rchaeological information to the public; by promoting existing re gional heritage events and programs; and by promoting archaeological volun teer opportunities. (Memorandum of Agreement, 3) The focus here is to understand how FPAN’s new pro gram, ArchaeoCart, satisfies the network’s goal of public outreach. More specifi cally, this research should highlight how FPAN is using object based activities and educa tion to convey archaeological ideas and material to pre-college students in Florida. Community Engagement State-Wide Type of Activity Numbers of Events/Presentations/Activitie s Number of Attendees


56 Community Engagement State-Wide Public Presentations 274 11997 Public Events 149 40277 Professional Presentations 24 760 Professional Event (Conference Attendance) 46 1060 Adult Training/Workshops 66 1048 School/Youth Programs/Workshops 386 21037 Radio/TV Presentations/Interviews 12 n/a Volunteer Programs 55 726 Meetings AttendedGovernment, Schools, Administrations, etc. 590 3954 Printed Articles-Magazine, Newspaper, Journal 38 n/a Printed Media-Brochures, Booklets, Guides 13 n/a Major Publications-Book, Chapter, Journal Article 4 n/a TOTAL 1654 80839 Figure 4.3 Community Engagement Statewide, graphic courtesy of FPAN’s 2010-2011 Annual Report 2011:10 Vision for 2020 In the spring of 2010, the FPAN Board of Directors met to create a “strategic plan” that would outline the current mission, visio n, and goals and objectives of the network as a whole. The document provides the follo wing vision for FPAN’s future, In 2020 FPAN is the leading advocate for Florida’s archaeological stewardship and the premier example of how public a rchaeology is done well. FPAN has a fully funded center in each region with support from a diverse group of sources. Archaeological resources are viewed as


57 community assets of value that contribute to a “sen se of place” for Florida’s residents and are a destination for visit ors. State laws as well as local policies, regulations, programs, and incentiv es are in place to protect archaeological resources and provide local governme nts and law enforcement agencies with the tools and resources n eeded to ensure protection. Archaeology is integrated into state ed ucational standards and archaeological based lessons are widespread in the state’s schools at all grade levels. In this thesis I am concerned with the contribution s that the West Central regional office is making towards the final statement from t his vision, “Archaeology is integrated into state educational standards and archaeological based lessons are widespread in the state’s schools at all grade levels.” This componen t of the vision statement is directly addressed further in the document as “Goal 2” of 11 goals that are intended to help move the network forward towards their vision (FPAN Annu al Report 2010-2011 2011:31), Goal 2: Increase the exposure of Florida’s school c hildren to archaeology by training teachers to use archaeological curricul a Objective 1: Implement trainings for teachers in ea ch FPAN region using existing archaeological curricula and provide ongoing support to those teachers with the use of the curricula. Objective 2: Assess the results of implementing Ob jective 1 and continue to expand and improve teacher training pro grams based upon the results of the assessment. The FPAN outreach coordinators set this goal with t he following method and results in mind, “We can utilize the ‘trickle-down’ method of increasing exposure to archaeology by providing teachers with curricula an d training opportunities to get archaeology-based lessons into the classroom” (FPAN Annual Report 2010-2011 2011:31). According to the 2010-2011 annual report, Rae Harper from the West Central


58 region and Sarah Miller from the North East region held a meeting in the spring of 2011 to discuss the future of teacher training programs and standardization of resources for teachers across the state. During the summer of 201 1, a meeting of the outreach coordinators determined a preliminary plan for a st atewide educational advisory board that would consist of K-12 teachers who would be re sponsible for providing feedback on the educational programs implemented by FPAN. Becau se archaeologists, even outreach archaeologists, rarely get the opportunity to get t o know their young audience on a personal level, it is important that they form stro ng relationships with the educators who are familiar with the children’s learning styles, k nowledge base and interests (Johnson 2000). According to Emily Johnson (2000), the lack of time available for archaeologists to be in the classroom is one of the biggest issues in archaeology education and ArchaeoCart program aims to reconcile this problem by providing teachers with the proper training and Sunshine State Standard appeasi ng resources. This will allow the teachers the flexibility to incorporate the archaeo logical materials into their social science curriculums on their own time. There is an emphasiz ed focus on using the cart’s materials and resources to meet Florida’s Social Science Suns hine State Standards, in hopes that teachers will be more willing to incorporate the ma terial if they recognize that it satiates part of their requirements for the Florida curricul um. FPAN and Schools As stated previously, FPAN provides a wide range of public outreach programs across the state including teacher in-service works hops, ranger workshops, Heritage Awareness Diving Seminar (HADS), Submerged Sites Ed ucation and Archaeological


59 Stewardship (SSEAS), Forest Resources Environmental Policy Special Sites Workshop, Boy Scout Archaeology Merit Badge Clinic, Historica l & Archaeological Resources Training (HART), cemetery workshops, and a Human Re mains and the Law course, this thesis will only discuss the tip of the iceberg by focusing on archaeology education in the classrooms of museums and K-12 schools. This catego ry is the second largest community engagement sector of FPAN’s work. Type of Activity Number of Events/Presentations/Activitie s Number of Attendees School/Youth Programs/Workshops 386 21037 Figure 4.4 School/Youth Programs/Workshops Statisti cs from Community Engagement Statewide Chart, graphic courtesy of FPAN’s 2010-20 11 Annual Report 2011:10 The discussion is built around a case-study, Archa eoCart, the program developed by the West Central regional director, Jeff Moates and outreach coordinator, Rae Harper with the help of University of South Florida gradua te student Rebecca O’Sullivan. I worked closely with the cart, its program and its c reators as the intern assigned to the development of the project in the summer of 2011. While ArchaeoCart hopes to provide a cohesive prog ram about the archaeological sites in Florida, its creators are very aware of th e time limits that are so prevalent in outreach situations (field trips, class periods, at tention spans, etc.), and for this reason, they selected a group of activities that can be use d together or separately depending on the amount of time an educator or student has to sp end with the cart. FPAN’s ArchaeoCart was created to provide teachers and museum educators with


60 engaging, hands-on archaeology education materials that would not require a timeintensive commitment from the educators. As a free and portable device, the educators have an opportunity to engage with the material at their leisure and with optimal relevance to their own curriculum. ArchaeoCart Figure 4.5 Components of ArchaeoCart, drawing court esy of the author Jeff Moates and Rae Harper started in 2008 to deve lop a portable “cart” for archaeology education that would meet the following FPAN goals: • Goal 2: Increase the exposure of Florida’s school children to archaeology by training teachers to use archaeological curricula.


61 • Goal 9: Increase public volunteerism in the prote ction and stewardship of Florida archaeology. The program that was born out of this development became known as ArchaeoCart, a portable public archaeology classroo m that delivers engaging educational programs and archaeology outreach to students and p eople from many different age groups across the state. ArchaeoCart is intended for use in classrooms, med ia-centers, museums, libraries or at special educational events. The cart was as a way for students and visitors to tour virtual displays of archaeology sites across Florid a, uncover prehistoric and historic timelines, learn from archaeology related activitie s, and discover what it takes to think like an archaeologist. Unique and integral to the p rogram is the support options that FPAN staff provides to educators with the borrowing of the cart: 1) training workshop, 2) borrower’s guide, 3) educational and programming gu ide and 4) troubleshooting. In October 2011, when the development of the carts was winding up, Jeff Moates made it clear that he hoped to see the carts used as a supp lementary exhibit for museums or media centers that may not have sufficient resources to p rovide this type of information on a regular basis (personal communication, October 2011 ). Because the carts are free to rent for up to 90 days, small museums or education cente rs will hopefully be able to use the cart’s resources to increase visitation at the site while FPAN inches closer to meeting their goals and objectives. Despite the benefits of the symbiotic relationship ArchaeoCart facilitates between museum or education institution s and FPAN, the carts are not intended to be a promotional unit for FPAN. There a re several resources within the cart such as lesson plans and activity guides meant to b e used by the educators after the initial


62 borrowing period. ArchaeoCart’s program tells a story of the lives o f Florida Natives from the time of saber tooth tigers to today. By using images and the story-line of Tommy the Tortoise, the cart aims to engage its audience in a trek thro ugh time that is both relatable and fun. Interested in expanding the scope of possibilities provided by The Mound House’s Calusa Carts, Moates hoped to create a mobi le learning unit that would allow visitors to explore a range of archaeological sites across Florida through hands-on activities and interactive computer programs. Rae H arper, outreach coordinator, sees the cart as an opportunity to teach not only archaeolog ical facts about Florida, but also, as a way to teach critical thinking skills associated wi th the profession of archaeology such as classification, observation, and inference. When it came time for Moates and Harper to choose the information that would be presented in ArchaeoCart, they initially hoped t o have two carts with different content; one cart would highlight sites from across the stat e while the other one would be dedicated to displaying information about the sites in FPAN’s west central region. The carts were designed with this notion in mind, and f or this reason, they have exterior graphics that differ slightly from one another. Dur ing July 2011, we made the decision to combine the content of the carts into one computer program that would cover material from around the state with an emphasis on sites fro m the West Central region. This decision meant that we would concentrate on buildin g one program synthesized from the two initially separate programs. It was decided tha t the hands-on activities and resources within the cart’s drawers would use statewide archa eology to highlight archaeological concepts based on materials from Project Archaeolog y, Intrigue of the Past and the


63 principles of “Object Based Learning” from Smithson ian’s Early Enrichment Center programs. The activities and resources used in the cart will be described fully in subsequent sections of this thesis. The Computer Program The computer program is designed to be used with a n interactive touch screen monitor that people can navigate at their own pace and in groups. There is an accompanying scavenger hunt worksheet that can faci litate visitors in their exploration of the program. The next section will outline the comp onents of the Shipwreck ArchaeoCart which has a few slight differences from the Mystery Cemetery ArchaeoCart. Instead of the Option 4: Shipwrecks, the Mystery Cemetery cart has instructions for playing Mystery Cemetery. The front page of the program provides four modes for exploring the cart: 1) Maritime, 2) Region, 3) State, and 4) Shipwrecks.


64 Figure 4.6 Front Page of ArchaeoCart Computer progr am, page design courtesy of Nick Trobiano Clicking on a button will highlight different conte nt from the program as the visitor maneuvers through the pages. Option 1: Maritime “Option 1” allows the visitor to explore underwate r archaeology. The visitor is prompted by questions like, “What is underwater arc haeology?” on the first page and, “How are land sites different from underwater sites ?” on the second page.


65 Figure 4.7 What is Underwater Archaeology?, page de sign courtesy of Nick Trobriano Figure 4.8 How Are Land Sites Different From Underw ater Sites?, page design courtesy of Nick Trobriano After exploring the basics of underwater archaeolo gy, visitors are given the option to explore the topic in more depth. They are given the option to click the following


66 buttons, Investigating Underwater Archaeology, Drow ned Sites, Florida Maritime History, Boats Used in Florida, Ethics and Treasure -Hunting and Shipwrecks. Figure 4.9 What Do You Want To Explore Next?, page design courtesy of Nick Trobriano The authors of ArchaeoCart’s computer program mate rial tried to be mindful of the ethical concerns associated with teaching archa eology by providing pages that explain the importance of cultural resource management and stewardship.


67 Figure 4.10 Ethics, page design courtesy of Nick Tr obriano Option 2: Region Explore Archaeological Sites fro m West Central Florida “Option 2” allows the visitor to choose whether to explore the West Central region on their own or follow Tommy the Tortoise th rough an underground tunnel timeline. Figure 4.11 Regional Map and Tommy Timeline, page d esign courtesy of Nick Trobriano


68 Figure 4.12 West Central Regional Map, page design courtesy of Nick Trobriano Choosing to explore the sites on their own allows the visitor to investigate fourteen different sites from the West Central regi on. By clicking on a star, the visitor opens up a site. The program provides information r egarding subsistence, lifestyle and material culture from each site. If the visitor chooses to follow Tommy through the timeline option, she will get to learn about the different time-periods of Florida a rchaeology. The timeline option separates the sites based on the period they repres ent.


69 Figure 4.13 Tommy and the Timeline, page design cou rtesy of Nick Trobriano The timeline option provides information about the tools, food, pottery, and structures in Florida from each period. Option 3: State Explore Archaeological Sites Acro ss Florida “Option 3” allows the visitor to choose whether th ey want to explore sites from around the state or discover how archaeologists lea rn about the past.


70 Figure 4.14 State Map and FPAN Logo, page design co urtesy of Nick Trobriano If the visitor chooses to explore the state’s site s, she can click on a highlighted region to explore the sites from that region. Click ing on the FPAN logo will take the visitor to a page where they can explore different aspects of an archaeologist’s work. Figure 4.15 Understanding the Jobs of an Archaeolog ist, page design courtesy of Nick Trobriano Option 4: Shipwrecks “Option 4” teaches the visitor about underwater ar chaeology by explaining the history and archaeology of the Emanuel Point shipwr eck.


71 Figure 4.16 Artifacts from Emanuel Point Shipwreck, page courtesy of Rich Estabrook Figure 4.17 Food Remains from Emanuel Point Shipwre ck, page courtesy of Rich Estabrook During the creation of ArchaeoCart and the handboo k that accompanies it, Discovering ArchaeoCart: A handbook for using the c art to it’s full potential (see Appendix A), we incorporated the SAA essential conc epts, myths and misconceptions into the text


72 ( each/CurriculumLinks/Archaeol ogyintheClassroom/EssentialConcepts/tabid/210/Defau lt.aspx ). These concepts and misconceptions are central to FPAN’s educational go als and they provide a context within which the reader can understand ArchaeoCart’ s educational materials. Based on the SAA Essential Concepts, there are two primary goals for the cart and its materials, 1. The cart should help users realize that archaeology is a technically rigorous science based in the scientific method, 2. The cart should emphasize stewardship as the main g oal of FPAN’s archaeological education outreach programs. These goals are met through relatable examples, fu n-to-read text and intriguing images and graphics. Even though there are many hol es in the archaeological record, it is important that children are able to see the past as a story that can be read and understood through material culture. The ArchaeoCart’s program is designed so that its content can be easily adjusted to fit the environment or conditions that it is statio ned within. Because museums are sometimes criticized for being static and presentin g outdated information (Bograd and Singleton 1997), the goal of ArchaeoCart is to prov ide an up-to-date and entertaining traveling exhibit station that will allow students to engage with the past in a meaningful way. Peter Stone (1994:15) remarks on the usefulnes s of archaeology in creating relatable narratives about the past, “Students learn the valu e of unrecorded information absent from textbooks and discover how archaeology can fil l important gaps and even provide corrections to historical records and accounts.”


73 The flexible nature of ArchaeoCart authorized by i ts mobility and easily edited or updated resources allows the docents of i ts program to emphasize the idea that, “Conclusions about ‘truths’ in history a re only temporary, subject to reinterpretation, and never complete” (Stone and Mo lyneaux 1994:15). By teaching children that even history can be subject to change and reinterpretation, we give them a powerful lesson to live by. A child’ s encounter with ArchaeoCart could be the first time that her eyes are opened to accepting social, cultural or historical differences. ArchaeoCart presents archae ology as a method for understanding the past and present in ways that the public might be surprised by. The Activities With the participatory education models from Chapt er 2 in mind, Rae Harper (2011) compiled Beyond Artifacts a volume of lesson plans and activities that are informed by educational requirements and theories a nd explore a broad scope of the skills associated with archaeology. The volume has been di stributed across the country, and all the FPAN outreach coordinators actively incorporate the lessons into their programming. Many of the activities used in ArchaeoCart come fr om Beyond Artifacts The purpose of the activities used in the cart’s educat ional program is to outline the fundamental concepts of archaeology and social scie nce in Florida: 1) why is the past important? 2) how can we see culture everywhere? 3) how do we observe and infer? 4) why is context important? 5) what is chronology and why is it important? 6) how and why do we classify artifacts? 7) what is the scient ific method? and 8) what can we learn


74 from material culture? The following is a list of t he activities included in ArchaeoCart (for lesson plans and explanations of activities se e appendix): • Buttons: Classification • Florida Unearthed: Timeline, Stratigraphy • Fun with Artifacts • Garbology: Interpretation • Puzzling Passages: Primary Documents • Shipwreck on a Table: Emanuel Point • Castillo de San Marcos Board Game • Holding History in Your Hands Each of these activities was designed after engagi ng with the principles presented in Understanding by Design and the material presented within the activities ad dresses the questions of archaeology processes presented above. In practice, each of these hands-on activities reflects the educational theories from J ean Piaget and Lev Vygotsky that emphasize group learning and social interaction as a means for cognitive development. ArchaeoCart at an Outreach Event As it has been described above, ArchaeoCart was des igned to fulfill two primary purposes: first as a supplementary resource for mus eums and outreach events, and second as a resource for classroom educators. Since its c reation, the cart has only spent a minimal amount of time at a school, and for this re ason, I will discuss the cart’s active role at a museum outreach event. At this particular event, my primary job was to introduce the cart’s content, activities and educat ional programming to visitors through informal conversation and a formal presentation. I was accompanied by FPAN staff and the creators of ArchaeoCart including Jeff Moates, Rae Harper, and Becky O’Sullivan. In November 2011, the shipwreck cart spent three d ays at the Ah-Tah-Thi-Ki Museum on the Big Cyprus Seminole Indian Reservatio n. After a day at the museum, the


75 same cart traveled north to the Museum of Science a nd History (MOSH) in Jacksonville, Florida. From 10AM until 2PM on November 5, 2011, t he MOSH in Jacksonville hosted the South Eastern Archaeology Conference’s “Public Day” where ArchaeoCart was a main attraction. Figure 4.18 Children exploring the cart’s content a t MOSH, photo courtesy of author Several institutions dedicated to the public disse mination of archaeological knowledge from across the southeastern United State s set up tables and various demonstrations for over 200 visitors. ArchaeoBus, “ Abby,” was present at the public day along with its primary creator and driver, Rita Ell iot. The bus was the only feature of the event that was outdoors. Unfortunately, the bus was also the only component of the event that was free of charge. The museum typically charg es $8-12 per person for entry, but for this event, they allowed for a special rate of $5.0 0 per person. As visitors entered into the museum, they were gre eted by museum staff, FPAN staff and ArchaeoCart. ArchaeoCart was situated in the front room of the museum, and it


76 greeted visitors with a friendly “front page” featu ring Tommy the Tortoise on its computer screen. During the event we spoke with people of all ages about the cart, and we demonstrated several activities with children over the course of the morning. Activity demonstrations included Shipwreck on a Table: Emanu el Point, Florida Unearthed: Timeline, Stratigraphy, and Holding History in Your Hands. This experience can be considered participatory education because the prog ramming required students to actively engage with the archaeological material by physical ly organizing artifacts by function on the ship or by time period on a layered stratigraph y quilt and explaining their analytic process in determining a glass shard to be part of an old bottle. This type of education requires both the teacher and the student to be act ive listeners who are able to respond to questions and answers. Figure 4.19 Author at MOSH, photo courtesy of Becky O’Sullivan


77 An hour into the event, I gave a presentation abou t the use of ArchaeoCart as a public archaeology outreach tool. There were approx imately 15-20 audience members including several small children, parents, educator s and an elderly man who had read about the event in the newspaper. Prepared to give a formal, power-point presentation when I walked into the room, I quickly switched gea rs and tailored the talk to the audience who was present. I realized that I would n eed entertain a group that included 10 children who were already wiggling in their chairs. With the cart at arms length, I began the presentation by explaining the components of th e cart, the computer program’s content and the educational activities. I quickly b egan involving the children in the presentation by inviting them to answer several arc haeology related questions, all the students were engaged and rose to the occasion with enthusiastic hand raising and little squeals of excitement. Considering their answers to my questions, I learned that many of the children conceived of archaeology as the study of very ancient objects and cultures that were nearly if not totally irrelevant to their lives. Throughout the rest of the presentation, I made it my goal to make archaeology relevant to the lives of these little individuals. I did this through an explanation of a common teaching activity known as “Garbology.” This activity requires that students e xplore the contents of their own trash cans to realize the many things you can learn about people based on what they dispose of, even in the contemporary world! Because there was a girl-scout convention at the museum during our event, we spent quite a bit of ti me discussing how different types of girl-scout cookie boxes can tell us about people’s preferences. The children realized that we all had something in common: our common love of Thin Mint cookies; a connection that allowed them to see the importance of studying disposable material culture.


78 In many ways, the children’s participation in my p resentation was integral to both the content and the educational value of it. The ch ildren were helping one another understand the ideas that I tried to convey. As dis cussed above in the literature on grouplearning, one older child took the lead as a peer i nterpreter of my discussion as she described the content within a context that the you nger children could understand. Considering the children’s guiding interests, we we nt through sections of the computer program together. They engaged with the material by asking questions and relating archaeological sites and artifacts to their own exp eriences. As a final presentation of content, I asked the children to separate themselve s into pairs and we played a game called “Fun with Artifacts” (see Appendix B). Throu ghout the program, the adults watched the presentation as if it were a spectacle produced for their own educational understanding of what “public archaeology” can mean and how it can be done. I brought the presentation full-circle by re-asking some of m y original questions and emphasizing a few enduring points that I wanted to convey to the children. For the adults, I concluded the presentation by describing other ways or situat ions where the cart might be useful or educational. The presentation lasted about 35 minut es. After my presentation, ArchaeoCart was wheeled bac k into the front room where we interacted with more visitors. One of the childr en who was very enthusiastic during the presentation approached Becky and I at the cart About seven years old, he wondered if he could be an archaeologist one day. Excited by his interest, I asked if he had been acquainted with archaeology before today’s activiti es. He told us that he had never heard of archaeology before, but he felt a natural connec tion to the field because his pet turtle resembled Tommy (the cart’s mascot). He ventured fu rther into the discussion by


79 describing all the things that he had learned today and he told us that one day he hoped he could know as much about archaeology as we did. As a student with a dedication to teaching and a passion for archaeology, this was th e highest compliment I could have received, and this young child gave me the approval I needed to feel justified in saying that the event was indeed a success. After the event in Jacksonville, the Shipwreck car t was sent to the St. Augustine Lighthouse and Museum in Old St. Augustine, Florida and the Mystery Cemetery cart was sent to the Tampa Bay History Center. Both cart s will be in use at these locations until February 2012. The FPAN staff’s experiences working with the cart in different institutions has shown us that each location has a different set of institutional goals and interests as well as varying visitor demographics. People have expres sed an interest in presenting their own institution’s information in the cart’s compute r program. Because FPAN is able to change the content of the computer program on the c art very easily and quickly, we are now considering whether we should fulfill these req uests. On one hand, it is very exciting to be able to present such a variety of different t ypes of content, however, one of the primary goals of the cart is to expose visitors to information that is not already available at the host institution. ArchaeoCart’s team will ne ed to experiment with varying content displays in the future. The second plan for ArchaeoCart is to have it ava ilable for classroom teachers who may not typically have access to interactive ar chaeology resources. Because the program is new, we have not had the opportunity to present the materials of ArchaeoCart to classroom educators, and thus, we have not had a strong demand for the cart from K-


80 12 teachers. Ideally, the teachers will get the opp ortunity to keep the cart within a school for approximately two weeks, giving teachers from a ll grade levels the opportunity to incorporate the programming into their curriculum. For convenience purposes, ArchaeoCart’s programming is designed to integrate easily into Florida history lessons, science lessons and social studies lessons. Social Networking, Archaeology and Tommy The Tortoi se The authors of Stronger Together: A Manual on the Principles and P ractices of Civic Engagement (Tuxil et. al 2009) suggests the use of social med ia networking techniques as a positive way to build programming f or youth. These modes of communication can help your audience feel a closer connection to your programs and your mission, the NPS publication elaborates, With the explosion of digital technology that facil itates interaction and sharing of information online, a new set of civic e ngagement tools is beginning to emerge that can supplement the more tr aditional forms of interpretation and education. Whatever the name app lied—social media, social networking, Web 2.0—these applications offer two-way communication that can greatly increase the number of participants in a dialogue. Using such tools provides an opportunity, with issues of national scope, to engage a national audience. As these tool s increasingly become part of our lives, they will come to play an integr al role in how we interact with others in many settings. [Tuxil et. al 2009:46 ] Mentioned and pictured above, Tommy the Tortoise h as become the face of ArchaeoCart, and this character has become an impor tant part of the program’s public image.


81 Figure 4.20 The Many Faces of Tommy, graphic courte sy of Becky O’Sullivan Tommy gives a face to an otherwise inanimate teach ing object. This allows students, teachers and other members of the public to relate to a friendly cartoon character as their tour guide through ArchaeoCart p rograms. Becky O’Sullivan and I created a Facebook page for Tommy that serves to de velop Tommy’s character and reach people around the country who might have an interes t in Florida archaeology. The tortoise’s personality has developed through a fict ional biography: Hi! I’m Tommy, a tortoise who loves to learn about archaeology. I like to read about archaeology, watch movies about archaeol ogy, do cool archaeology activities with my friends at FPAN and eat flowers. I was born at the University of South Florida in T ampa, but I travel all around the state to check out archaeological si tes! If you want, I can take you with me to learn about archaeology in Flor ida. I travel through a timeline tunnel to visit sites from all the cultura l time periods Paleoindian, Archaic, Woodland, Mississippian, and Historic.


82 I prefer to travel with ArchaeoCart. ArchaeoCart i s a selfcontained educational display cart designed by my f riends at FPAN. It is a neatly constructed box on wheels and is equipped wi th drawers that contain educational activities and resource materia ls. An interactive touch screen monitor is also included to view educational programs and videos. Conceptually, ArchaeoCart is an archaeology educati on and outreach device that allows teachers and their students to e xperience archaeology without the dirt! We have been able to reach more than 50 people on Facebook. With this type of positive response, O’Sullivan began logging Tommy’s travels to different museums and archaeological sites around Florida at our blog, The blog posts are written from the point of view of Tommy to make the information more accessible. One of the posts discusses Tommy’s trip to Mission San Luis in Talla hassee, Florida. Tommy discusses archaeological material found at the site in a publ ic-friendly tone with images and colloquial diction. The images and principles behin d the blog are very similar to the literacy project started in 1995, Flat Stanley ( ), The basic principle of The Flat Stanley Project is to connect your child, student or classroom with other children or classro oms participating in the Project by sending out "flat" visitors, created by the children, through the mail or digitally with The Flat Stanley application Kids then talk about, track, and write about their flat character's journ ey and adventures. Figure 4.21 Celebrities or Famous Sites with Flat S tanley, image courtesy of That project aims to connect children around the w orld with a familiar and relatable character named Flat Stanley. Children ar e able to learn about various cultures and improve their writing by connecting to other ch ildren from different countries


83 through letters and photographs. The photos contain ing Stanley tend to evoke questions from the students about his whereabouts, the people he is around and the activities he might have been participating while he was visiting another place. The goals of the Tommy project are similar to those of Flat Stanley, but Tommy has a focus on archaeological sites and artifacts; we hope to prov ide children with a recognizable character who has an easy to follow trajectory by w ay of the web. Figure 4.22 Tommy at Mission San Luis’s Replica Cou ncil House, image courtesy of Becky O’Sullivan Several of the children I spoke to at the MOSH pre sentation were very excited about Tommy’s participation in the preservation of archaeology. They expressed an ability to relate to the tortoise and his mission.


84 One of the other marketing tools we have created b ased around Tommy is a series of Tommy the Tortoise archaeology magnets which hav e a Facebook logo in the corner to inspire people to visit Tommy’s page. The magnet s are meant to serve as a reminder of Tommy, archaeology and the sites that he visits. Th e hope is such that when a child sees her magnet on the fridge at home, she will remember the lessons she learned from her experience with ArchaeoCart’s educational programmi ng. Figure 4.23 Tommy the Tortoise and ArchaeoCart magn ets, photo courtesy of Becky O’Sullivan The Facebook travel log for ArchaeoCart meets Obje ctive 2 of Goal 3 from FPAN’s strategic plan, Goal 3: Effectively engage new audiences and partne rs using new outreach strategies and media.


85 Objective 2: Effectively use social networking med ia (e.g., Facebook and Twitter) to connect with the public with a focus on teens an d young adults. This type of social media has become quite popular in archaeology with the rise in teenage internet use. Most similar to ArchaeoCart, The Archaeo Bus “Abby,” has a personal diary blog written from the perspective of the bus. The National Postal Museum boasts the postal dog “Owney” as their mascot. Owne y can be seen in a variety of the museum’s lesson plans and activities ( .html ). The NPS also provides a wealth of programs for younger students and teens o n their website, for example, their Webrangers program where kids can explore the Natio nal Parks virtually and earn points and badges based on their online experiences; Natio nal Park Service Webrangers program! htm# Logic Models for Program Assessment Using the guidelines provided by FPAN in the 2010 s trategic plan, I have created a logic model to be used specifically for ArchaeoCa rt’s program. A logic model should define how a program is supposed to work. According to the Harvard Family Research Project from the Harvard Graduate School of Educati on ( ur-publications/learning-fromlogic-models-an-example-of-a-family-school-partners hip-program) A logic model provides the basic framework for an e valuation. It is a graphic that describes a program or organization in evaluation terms. It illustrates a program’s theory of change showing how day-to-day activities connect to the results or outcomes the p rogram is trying to achieve. Developing a logic model should be one of the firs t steps in an


86 evaluation. Once the model is completed, the evalua tion can be designed to determine whether the program is working as show n in the logic model. The logic model can also become a tool for learning when evaluation data are applied directly to the model. A typical logic model includes the following eleme nts: inputs, activities, shortterm outcomes and long-term outcomes. For the Archa eoCart logic model, I have included inputs, outputs (activities and participat ion), short-term outcomes, medium-term outcomes, long-term outcomes as well as assumptions and external factors to provide a context for ArchaeoCart’s program. ArchaeoCart Logic Model The cart has three main inputs: Time Commitments, Financial Commitments and Educational Commitments. After the initial startup actions required to get ArchaeoCart running, the time commitments from FPAN staff will include pick up and drop off of the cart, teacher training for how to use the cart and social networking responsibilities like writing Tommy’s blog and updating the Facebook page The financial commitments are fairly straightforward including staff salary, cont ractor fees, and hardware and software costs. A less straightforward input is the commitme nt of ArchaeoCart’s staff to learning about and practicing experiential and object-based learning. I have divided the cart’s outputs into activities and participation to differentiate between the venues where the cart can be used (acti vities) and how the cart is used in those different venues (participation). Each of the se outputs will have the same shortterm and long-term outcomes:


87 Classrooms, Museums and Outreach Events Short-term outcomes • diversity of Florida archaeology will be acknowle dged • an understanding of what archaeology is by the pu blic Long-term outcomes • educators will be inspired to continue archaeolog y education in their programs • all students will know what it means to “think li ke an archaeologist” • participants will express a desire to visit an ar chaeological site from the cart’s program • the program will inspire a new generation of cult ural resource stewards Figure 4.24 Classrooms, Museums and Outreach Events Long and Short Term Outcomes, courtesy of author However, the classroom visitations will have diffe rent medium-term goals from the museum and outreach events: Classrooms Museums and Outreach Events Medium-term outcomes • teachers will develop a level of comfort in teaching archaeological materials in the future • students will gain an understanding of what cultural resources are • students will be able to display the ability to express their understanding of cultural resources and archaeology through participation in cart activities • educators and museum specialists will appreciate the support FPAN can provide • program participants will gain an understanding of what cultural resources are •participants in the computer program and activities will be able to reproduce factual information about Florida archaeology Figure 4.25 Medium Term Outcomes, courtesy of autho r Below is a copy of the ArchaeoCart program’s logic model.


88 Figure 4.26 ArchaeoCart Logic Model 2011, courtesy of author The preceding sections work together to provide an in-depth example of archaeology education in practice. Both the network that developed the program and ArchaeoCart itself are described in detail to illum inate all the facets of a program that represents an innovative and constructive platform for archaeology education. The logic model presented at the end of this chapter should b e acknowledged as the first attempt to formulate a plan for assessing the success of the p rogram. Conclusion: Why is Archaeology Education Important? This chapter summarizes the reasons why archaeology education and programs like ArchaeoCart are essential for the youth of Ame rica. The examples focus on


89 education in Florida because the primary case study is situated within Florida, but they are relevant to situations across the country and i n many other places around the world. This thesis addressed the following positive attrib utes of archaeology education: 1. Archaeology can help children and the general pu blic explore their curiosities and encourage people to ask questions: It enables students to discover how and why there is such eno rmous diversity in humankind. As instantaneous communications and global economics draw the world ever-closer together, ant hropological training is increasingly important for understand ing cultural differences, 2. Archaeology can enrich the lives of community me mbers where excavations take place by involving them in the pr ocess: Interacting with ArchaeoCart’s computer program ca n give children the opportunity to engage with archaeolog ical sites and places in Florida that they may have never had th e chance to experience with their family or school group. This opportunity could let a little girl realize that history exist s everywhere, literally, in her own back yard. This type of real ization can lead to an unequaled measure of appreciation. When the pas t seems tangible or relevant to the present, children want to be involved, 3. Archaeology can be a critical tool for demystify ing the ideology of inequalities: If archaeologists can use archaeolog y to show children the possibilities of change that have exi sted in history, we move closer to inspiring people in the present to reject the inequalities that have followed us through time, 4. Archaeology can help build communities: Archaeol ogy can teach students to be citizens of their country and embr ace the past as a map for the future. These goals are made difficult to achieve when ther e is little support from the government and public funding. In October 2011, the Governor of Florida, Rick Scott, remarked on the frivolity of anthropology during an interview with Zac Anderson from the Sarasota Herald-Tribune, Scott said Monday that he hopes to shift more fundi ng to science, technology, engineering and math departments, the s o-called “STEM” disciplines. The big losers: Programs like psycholo gy and anthropology and potentially schools like New College in Sarasot a that emphasize a liberal arts curriculum.


90 “Is it a vital interest of the state to have more anthropologists? I don’t think so.” Said Scott. The governor casts the issue as an economic impera tive, particularly the notion of tailoring university pro grams to the job market. [ o-shift-universityfunding-away-from-some-majors/ ] While some of the concerns mentioned in Anderson’s article might seem to overreach the scope of this thesis, it is important to consider the current climate regarding the potential funding and government assistance for programs like ArchaeoCart in the state of Florida. Universities across the country a nd the world are experiencing a “tailoring of programs to the job market.” K-12 pro gramming is being affected equally if not more by this push. In the days following the Herald-Tribune publicati on, several articles were published regarding Scott’s comments. The following quote comes from Anthony Carnevale, director of the Georgetown University Ce nter on Education and the Workforce, "Education is more than providing foot soldiers for American capitalism," he said. "We need anthropologists. We need English teachers If you turn this simply into an economic calculation, he (Scott) has a point. But obviously most people, including the people going to school, have interests other than simply making money." ( ter-gov-scott-on-jar-271170/ ) Carnevale brings to light the fact that many stude nts across the nation have the luxury of being able to study their passions whethe r their pursuits are lucrative or not. William F. Limp, Ph.D., president of SAA responded to Scott’s address with a well crafted letter. His letter provides a succinct explanation of archaeology within the context of anthropology, and he addresses many of S cott’s concerns,

PAGE 100

91 Anthropology is the study of the entire human exper ience—the evolution of our biology and cultures, the development of rel ationships between cultures, and the effect of human civilizations on the natural environment. ...Archaeology is a key part of anthropology, helpi ng us understanding the history of peoples over time and space. Together, t hey represent one of the few avenues of higher education that provides stude nts with crossdisciplinary training and experience in areas such as biology and history, geology and languages. It enables students to disco ver how and why there is such enormous diversity in humankind. As instant aneous communications and global economics draw the world ever-closer together, anthropological training is increasingly important. As with much university research and training, the investigations undertaken in anthropology and archaeology have pro found real-world benefits, and make a substantial economic impact. F or example, anthropologists and archaeologists assist authoriti es in investigating physical evidence of crimes, such as mass graves in Bosnia and Iraq. You should also be aware that most archaeologists in th e U.S. today work for private-sector cultural resource management (CRM) f irms. CRM is a billion dollar a year industry employing many thous ands of people trained in anthropology. According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics’ Occupational Outlook Handbook for 2011, employment for anthropologists and archaeologists “is expected to grow by 28 percent, driven by growth in the management, scientific, and technical consulting services industry. Anthropologists who work as cons ultants will be needed to apply their analytical skills and knowledge to p roblems ranging from economic development to forensics.” Anthropologists and archaeologists, in addition to helping preserve and protect our sha red cultural heritage, are in the forefront of the growing heritage tourism bu siness, one of the few bright spots in these troubled economic times, and an important contributor to Florida’s tourism sector. [ GOVERNOR. SCOTT.pdf ] Dr. Limp’s letter is useful because he highlights the importance of anthropology and archaeology, and he situates the role of anthro pology within the current state of economic decline. William B. Lees, PhD, RPA, Executive Director of F lorida Public Archaeology Network reports on the excellence of anthropology a nd archaeology departments within Florida’s university system,

PAGE 101

92 Florida universities have a very long and distingui shed legacy of excellence in the field of Anthropology. Archaeolo gy faculty in Florida universities have been and continue to be leaders i n the archaeological profession nationally and internationally, and stud ents trained in archaeology programs in Florida are consistently co nsidered to be among the best prepared in the nation. The quality of the se programs, and the demand for trained archaeologists, has caused incre ased enrollments in Florida Anthropology programs in recent years. Depa rtments of Anthropology in Florida attract not only residents interested in careers in archaeology but also some of the best students from other states and nations. ( /, FPAN Statement on Anthropology in State Universities, accessed Octobe r 17, 2011) One of the primary ways to support the university system in Florida is by maintaining and expanding outreach programs like th ose that FPAN provides to the K-12 public school system in Florida. Resources like Arc haeoCart can inspire the youth of America to develop the critical thinking and analyt ical skills that are invaluable in an increasingly impenetrable job market. Paul Stroller from the Huffington Post, author of “The Limited Good of Rick Scott’s Anthropology,” comments on anthropology and education, If we eliminate the liberal arts and humanities fro m public university curricula, we will produce a generation of uncritic al technocrats who will have lost their sense of wonder, their feeling of i ntellectual passion and their capacity to dream about life beyond the bound aries of the limited good. In such a passionless and unimaginative space we will lose our capacity to think, grow and reconfigure a rapidly c hanging world. [ ted-good-of-rick_b_1012356.html] Stroller’s point is one that I hope resonates. Arc haeology allows people to explore the past and present through material culture. Inte racting with ArchaeoCart’s computer program can give children the opportunity to engage with archaeological sites and places in Florida that they may never have the chance to v isit with their family or school group. This opportunity could help people realize that his tory exists everywhere, literally, on

PAGE 102

93 their own street. This type of realization has the power to inspire heartfelt appreciation for people from all times and places. When the past seems tangible or relevant to the present, children want to be involved, and archaeol ogy can help do this, Fay Metcalf, a distinguished American educator expe rienced and familiar with issues at the local, state, and national level s, recognizes the excitement and intrigue that archaeological approac hes and information can bring to formal education. Using material cultu re, its spatial context, and archaeological methodology promotes complex thi nking skills involving the evaluation of data, the construction of inferences and the flexibility of interpretations (Metcalf 1992). [McN ammon 2000:21] It is important to use archaeological material in education to inspire an appreciation that will lead to preservation of reso urces; more simply, it is important for the future of humanity. By passing forward the skil ls and knowledge that come along with ArchaeoCart, FPAN hopes to expand the horizons of young students across the state. The topics and skills taught through the act ivities in the cart can open doors in unimaginable ways, leading children in new or unfam iliar directions and teaching them to think holistically (Smith et. al 1996). Because the cart is a free resource available for lowincome school districts, ArchaeoCart can serve as a n invaluable asset for teachers and students. The cart can provide information that may otherwise remain undiscovered by students or at least unfunded by the public school system. Archaeology can be used to teach personal characte r and ethics (Letts and Moe 2009; Moe 2002; Goodlad 1994). Archaeologists and a nthropologists constantly wrestle with ethical concerns; “issues including the needs of living descendants whose ancestors are the subject of research, the handling and dispo sition of human remains encountered during excavations, and the relevant laws when deci ding the fate of archaeological resources on land slated for development” (Letts an d Moe 2009:4). Keith Barton and

PAGE 103

94 Linda Levstik (2004:36-40) suggest that teaching st udents history allows them to participate in “a pluralistic democracy” because an understanding of the past can 1) promote reasoned judgement, 2) promote an expanded view of humanity and 3) involve deliberation about the common good. Material cultur e can make the learning of history easier for children to grasp (Moe 2002:177). By loo king at everyday objects in an archaeological context, children have the chance to “recognize the historical significance of ordinary objects” (Moe 2002:177), and ideally, t hey are able to gain an appreciation for personal histories beyond their own. If childre n have the opportunity to embrace their curiosities about other people’s history, they will form their own questions about their peers and their environment. Consequently, “Student s can apply archaeological knowledge and use problem-solving skills to propose solutions for real conservation problems in their own communities” (Moe 2002:177). By using the archaeological record to show childre n the types of change that have existed in history, it is possible to inspire peopl e in the present to reject the inequalities that have occurred throughout time; “archaeology ha s an educational role in that it is a subject that requires students to work critically a nd carefully, without accepting any single ‘true’ version of the past” (Stone 1994:17). ArchaeoCart has the flexibility to move across the state with ease, to be updated with new, different or more relevant information an d to reach children from a variety of economic and ethnic backgrounds. It has the opportu nity to extend a pluralistic understanding of Florida history to all of its resi dents, thus participating in the larger discussion of the value of the past as an element o f public heritage (Lowenthal 1985). Bibliography

PAGE 104

95 Andersen, Zac 2011 “Rick Scott wants to shift university funding away from some degrees,” last modified on October, 10, 2011, Bain, Robert and Kirsten M. Ellenbogen 2002 “Placing Objects WithIn Disciplinary Perspecti ves: Examples from History and Science.” In Perspectives on Object-Centered Learning In Museums Scott G. Paris (ed.) Psychology Press. Baram, Uzi and Robert Austin 2011 "Neighborhood Archaeology: Exploring the S ignificance of Volunteers, Communities, and Local Politics for Contemporary A rchaeology" Senior author with Robert Austin. Present Pasts 3(1):9-11. Available at: http:// 68. Bariso, Marne 2010 “Hands-On Activity Carts: Opportunities for Ga llery Interpreters, Trainers, and Visitors at the Chicago History Museum.” In Legacy Magazine March/April 2010. 28-31. Barton, Keith C. and Linda S. Levstik 2004 Teaching History for the Common Good Mahway, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Bender, Susan J. and George S. Smith (eds.) 2000 Teaching Archaeology In the Twenty-First Century. Washington, D.C.: Society for American Archaeology. Bense, Judith A. 2000 “Archaeopolitics: The Political Context of Arc haeology.” In Susan J. Bender and George S. Smith (eds.), Teaching Archaeology In the Twenty-First Century Washington, D.C.: Society for American Archaeology Blackburn, Ryan 2009 “All aboard the ArchaeoBus at Athens-Clarke Li brary,” last modified July 28, 2009, 4.shtml Blakey, Michael L. 1997 “Seizing Intellectual Power: The Dialogue at t he New York African Burial Ground.” Historical Archaeology. 31(3):84-106. Blanchard, C. 1991 “Education and/or Entertainment: Archaeology a nd Prehistory in the Public Schools.” In Archaeology and Public Education 2, 1-3. Bogard, Mark D. and Theresa A. Singleton 1997 “The Interpretation of Slavery: Mount Vernon, Monticello, and Colonial Williamsburg.” In John H. Jameson, Presenting Archaeology to the Public: Digging for Truths 193-204. Walnut Creek, CA: Altamira Press. Boron, Minda 2002 “Object-based Learning and Family Groups.” In Scott G. Paris (ed.), Perspectives on Object-Centered Learning In Museums. Psychology Press. Brunswig Jr., Robert H. 2000 “Including Archaeology In K-12 Teacher Educati on.” In Karolyn Smardz and Shelley J. Smith (eds.) The Archaeology Education Handbook: Sharing the P ast

PAGE 105

96 with Kids 142-150. Walnut Creek, CA: Altamira Press. Chicago History Museum. “History A La Cart,” last m odified 2011, http:// sit Childs, S. Terry 2002 “The Web of Archaeology.” In Public Benefits of Archaeology edited by Barbara J. Little. 228-238. Gainesville, FL: University Pr ess of Florida. Christensen, Bonnie 2000 “Archaeology Education Programs: A Long-Term R egional Approach.” In Karolyn Smardz and Shelley J. Smith (eds.) The Archaeology Education Handbook: Sharing the Past with Kids 352-370. Walnut Creek, CA: Altamira Press. Coffman, Julia 1999 “Learning From Logic Models: An Example of a F amily/School Partnership Program,” accessed December 11, 2011, ogic-models-anexample-of-afamily-schoolpartnership-program. Davis, M. Elaine 2000 “Governmental Education Standards and K-12 Arc haeology Programs.” In Karolyn Smardz and Shelley J. Smith (eds.) The Archaeology Education Handbook: Sharing the Past with Kids 54-71. Walnut Creek, CA: Altamira Press. Deagan, Kathleen A. and Landers, Jane 1999 “Fort Mose: Earliest Free African-American Tow n In the United States.” In T.A. Singleton (ed.), “ I, too, am America”: Archaeological Studies of Afri can American Life. p. 261-282. Charlottesville: University Press of Vi rginia. Devine, H. 1994 “Archaeology, Preshistory and the Native Learn ing Resources Project: Alberta, Canada.” In Peter G. Stone and Brian L. Molyneaux (eds.), The Presented Past: Heritage, Museums and Education 478-492. London and New York: Routledge. Dickens, Roy S. Jr. and James L. McKinley 1979 Frontiers in the Soil: The Archaeology of Georgia Athens, GA: Carl Vinson Institute of Government. 1980 A Teaching Handbook for Frontiers in the Soil: The Archaeology of Georgia Athens, GA: Carl Vinson Institute of Government. Dierking, Lynn 2002 “The Role of Context In Children’s Learning fr om Objects and Experiences.” In Scott G. Paris (ed.), Perspectives on Object-Centered Learning In Museums Psychology Press. Ellick, Carol J. 2007 “Audience, Situation, Style: Strategies for Fo rmal and Informal Archaeological Outreach Programs.” In John H. Jameson and Sherene Baugher (eds.), Past Meets Present: Archaeologists Partnering with Museum Cur ators, Teachers and Community Groups Springer. Elliott, Rita Folse (ed.) 1992 Archaeology in the Classroom By Teachers for T eachers. Early Georgia 20(1). Fagan, Brian 2002 “Epilogue.” In Barbara J. Little Public Benefits of Archaeology 254-260.

PAGE 106

97 Gainesville, FL: University Press of Florida. 2006 Writing Archaeology Walnut Creek, CA: Left Coast Press, Inc. Florida Public Archaeology Network 2010a “Florida Public Archaeology Strategic Plan.” Pensacola, Florida: FPAN University of West Florida. Florida Public Archaeology Network 2010b “Memorandum of Agreement Between Florida Divi sion of Historical Resources and University of West Florida Board of Trustees for Florida Public Archaeology Network.” Florida Public Archaeology N etwork. Friedman, Ed 2000 “Preface.” In Karolyn Smardz and Shelley J. Sm ith (eds.) The Archaeology Education Handbook: Sharing the Past with Kids Walnut Creek, CA: Altamira Press. Frost, Norman R. 2000 “Environmental Education: Perspectives for Arc haeology.” In Karolyn Smardz and Shelley J. Smith (eds.) The The Archaeology Education Handbook: Sharing t he Past with Kids 377-393. Walnut Creek, CA: Altamira Press. Frost, C. Olivia 2002 “When the Object is Digital: Properties of Dig ital Surrogate Objects and Implications for Learning.” In Scott G. Paris (ed .), Perspectives on ObjectCentered Learning In Museums. Psychology Press. Geraci, Victor 2000 “Learning and Teaching Styles: Reaching All St udents.” In Karolyn Smardz and Shelley J. Smith (eds.) The The Archaeology Education Handbook: Sharing t he Past with Kids Walnut Creek, CA: Altamira Press. Harper, Cassandra R. (Ed.) 2007 Beyond Artifacts: Teaching Archaeology in the Class room, Summer 2007. Florida Public Archaeology Network. 2008 Beyond Artifacts: Teaching Archaeology in the Class room Summer 2008. Florida Public Archaeology Network. Hawkins, Nancy 1991 “Classroom Archaeology: Including Archaeology In Existing Curricula, An Example from Louisiana..” In G.S. Smith and J.E. E hrenhard (eds) Protecting the Past, 149-56. Boca Raton, Florida: CRC Press. 1999 Precollegiate Excavations: Archaeologists Make the Difference. SAA Bulletin 17(1). Heath, Margaret A. 1997 “Successfully Integrating the Public into Rese arch: Crow Canyon Archaeological Center.” In John H. Jameson, Presenting Archaeology to the Public: Digging for Truths Walnut Creek, CA: Altamira Press. Imaginative Education Research Group. “About the Im aginative Education Research Group,” last modified 2008, Jameson, John H. 1997a “Introduction.” In John H. Jameson, Presenting Archaeology to the Public: Digging for Truths Walnut Creek: CA: Altamira Press. 1997b Presenting Archaeology to the Public: Digging for T ruths Walnut Creek, CA:

PAGE 107

98 Altamira Press. Jameson, John H. and Sherene Baugher (eds.) 2007 Past Meets Present: Archaeologists Partnering with Museum Curators, Teachers and Community Groups Springer. Jeppson, Patrice L. and George Brauer 2007 “Archaeology for Education Needs: An Archaeolo gist and an Educator Discuss Archaeology In Baltimore County Public Schools.” I n John H. Jameson and Sherene Baugher (eds.), Past Meets Present: Archaeologists Partnering with Museum Curators, Teachers and Community Groups Springer. Johnson, Emily 2000 “Cognitive and Moral Development of Children: Implications for Archaeology Education.” In Karolyn Smardz and Shelley J. Smith (eds.) Archaeology Education Handbook: Sharing the Past with Kids Walnut Creek, CA: Altamira Press. Kraft, R., and Sakofs, M. (Eds.) 1991 The Theory of Experiential Education Boulder, CO: Association for Experiential Education. Krass, Dorothy 2000 “National Geographic and Time Magazine as Text books: How Teachers Learn About Archaeology.” In Karolyn Smardz and Shelley J. Smith (eds.) Archaeology Education Handbook: Sharing the Past with Kids Walnut Creek, CA: Altamira Press. Lave, J. and E. Wenger 1991 Situated learning: Legitimate Peripheral Participat ion New York, NY: Cambridge University Press. Leinhardt, Gaea and Kevin Crowley 2002 “Objects of Learning, Objects of Talk: Changin g Minds In Museums.” In Scott G. Paris (ed.), Perspectives on Object-Centered Learning In Museums Psychology Press. Leone, Mark P., P.B. Potter, P.A. Shackel, and M.L. Blakey 1987 “Toward a Critical Archaeology.” Current Anthr opology, 28(3):283. Leone, Mark P., Cheryl Janifer LaRoche and Jennifer J. Babiarz 2005 “The Archaeology of Black Americans In Recent Times.” Annual Review of Anthropology. Vol. 34: 575-598. Lees, William B. 2011 “Annual Report for Fiscal Year 2010-2011.” Pen sacola, Florida: University of West Florida Florida Public Archaeology Network. Letts, Cali A. and Jeanne M. Moe 2009 Project Archaeology: Investigating Shelter. Bozeman, Montana: Bureau of Land Management and Montana State University. Little, Barbara J. 2002 Public Benefits of Archaeology Gainesville, FL: University Press of Florida. 2007a “Archaeology and Civic Engagement.” In Barbar a J. Little and Paul A. Shackel (eds.), Archaeology as a Tool of Civic Engagement Altamira Press. 2007b “Education and Outreach.” In Barbara J. Littl e, Historical Archaeology 144. Left Coast Press.

PAGE 108

99 2009 “What Can Archaeology do for Justice, Peace, C ommunity, and the Earth?” Historical Archaeology, 43(4). Little, Barbara J. and Paul A. Shackel (eds.) 2007 Archaeology as a Tool of Civic Engagement Altamira Press. Lowenthal, David 1985 The Heritage Crusade and the Spoils of History Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Macdonald, Cathy and Paula Burtness 2000 “Accessing Educational Systems In Canada and t he United States.” In Karolyn Smardz and Shelley J. Smith (eds.) The The Archaeology Education Handbook: Sharing the Past with Kids 42-53. Walnut Creek, CA: Altamira Press. Malloy, Maureen 2011 “Beyond Activities: The Roles of Public Archae ology In the 21st Century.” Blog entry from Project Archaeology Journal: Discover the Past, Sha pe the Future. Published by ( / 2011/12/09/beyond-activities-the-roles-of-public-a rchaeology-in-the-21stcentury/#comment-19) Masson, P. and H. Guillot 1994 “Archaeofiction With Upper Primary-School Chil dren.” In Peter G. Stone and Brian L. Molyneaux (eds.), The Presented Past: Heritage, Museums and Education 375-382. London and New York: Routledge. McDavid, Carol 2007 “Beyond Strategy and Good Intentions: Archaeol ogy, Race and White Privilege.” In Barbara J. Little and Paul A. Shackel (eds.), Archaeology as a Tool of Civic Engagement Altamira Press. McGuire, R.H. 1992 A Marxist Archaeology Knoxville: University of Tennessee Press. 2008 Archaeology as Political Action University of California Press. McManamon, Francis P. 1994 “Presenting Archaeology to the Public In the U SA.” In Peter G. Stone and Brian L. Molyneaux (eds.), The Presented Past: Heritage, Museums and Education 61-77. London and New York: Routledge. 2000 “Forward: Public Education: A Part of Archaeol ogical Professionalism.” In Karolyn Smardz and Shelley J. Smith (eds.) The Archaeology Education Handbook: Sharing the Past with Kids 17-24. Walnut Creek, CA: Altamira Press. 2002 “Heritage, History, and Archaeological Editors .” In Barbara J. Little Public Benefits of Archaeology 31-45. Gainesville, FL: University Press of Flori da. McNutt, Nan 1991 “Archaeology for the Classroom Project Archaeo logy: Saving Traditions..” In George S. Smith and John E. Ehrenhard (eds.), Protecting the Past 143-148. Boca Raton, Florida: CRC Press. 2000 “Assessing Archaeology Education: Five Guiding Questions.” In Karolyn Smardz and Shelley J. Smith (eds.) The Archaeology Education Handbook: Sharing the Past with Kids 192-204. Walnut Creek, CA: Altamira Press. McRainy, Lynn and Heidi Moisan

PAGE 109

100 2009 “Artifacts as Inspiration: Building Connection s Between Museum Educators and Classroom Teachers..” In Rachel G. Ragland, The Teaching American History project:Lessons for History Educators and Historia ns. Google eBook: 240-264. McTighe, Jay and Grant Wiggins 2004 Understanding by Design 1st ed. Alexandria, Virginia: Association for Sup ervision and Curriculum Development. Metcalf, Fay 2002 “Myths, Lies and Videotapes: Information as An tidote to Social Studies Classrooms and Pop Culture.” In Barbara J. Little Public Benefits of Archaeology 167-175. Gainesville, FL: University Press of Flo rida. Meskell, Lynn 2002 “The Intersections of Identity and Politics In Archaeology.” Annual review of anthropology. 31(1):279-301. Moe, Jeanne M. 2000 “Archaeology and Values: Respect and Responsib ility for Our Heritage.” In Karolyn Smardz and Shelley J. Smith (eds.) The Archaeology Education Handbook: Sharing the Past with Kids 249-266. Walnut Creek, CA: Altamira Press. 2002 “Project Archaeology: Putting the Intrigue of the Past in Public Education.” In Barbara J. Little (ed.) Public Benefits of Archaeology 176-186. Gainesville, FL: University Press of Florida. Moe, Jeanne M., Crystal B. Alegria, Margaret A. Hea th and Stephanie A. Kane 2011 “Project Archaeology Workshop Facilitator Hand book.” Montana State University. Molyneaux, Brian L. 1994 “Introduction: The Represented Past.” In Peter G. Stone and Brian L. Molyneaux (eds.), The Presented Past: Heritage, Museums and Education 1-13. London and New York: Routledge. Moyer, Teresa S. 2007 “Learning Through Visitors: Exhibits as a Tool for Encouraging Civic Engagement Through Archaeology.” In Barbara J. Lit tle and Paul A. Shackel (eds.), Archaeology as a Tool of Civic Engagement Walnut Creek, CA: Altamira Press. Mullins, Paul 1999 Race and Affluence: An Archaeology of African Ameri ca and Consumer Culture. Springer. Paris, Scott G. (ed.) 2002 Perspectives on Object-Centered Learning In Museums Psychology Press. Praetzellis, Mary, Adrian Praetzellis and T. Van Bu eren 2007 “Remaking Connections: Archaeology and Communi ty After the Loma Prieta Earthquake.” In Barbara J. Little and Paul A. Shac kel (eds.), Archaeology as a Tool of Civic Engagement Walnut, CA: Altamira Press. Project Archaeology. “About Us: Overview,” accessed January 12, 2012, http:// Pyburn, Anne K. 2000 “Gatekeeping, Housekeeping, Peacekeeping: Goal s for Teaching Archaeology In

PAGE 110

101 the Public Schools.” In Karolyn Smardz and Shelley J. Smith (eds.) Archaeology Education Handbook: Sharing the Past with Kids Walnut Creek, CA: Altamira Press. Saitta, Dean 2007 Archaeology of Collective Action Gainesville, FL: University Press of Florida. Sassaman, Kenneth. 2006 Peoples of the Shoals. Gainesville, FL: University Press of Florida. Selig, R. 1991 “Teacher training programs In archaeology: the multiplier effect In the classroom.” In Archaeology and Education: the classroom and beyond Smith, K. & F. McManamon (eds.), 3-7. Archaeological Assista nce Study no. 2. Washington: National Park Service, Archaeological Assistance Division. Shackel, Paul 2003 Memory In Black and White: Race, Commemoration, and the Post-Bellum Landscape. Rowman Altamira. Shackel, Paul and Erve J. Chambers 2004 Places in Mind: Public Archaeology as Applied Anthr opology New York and London: Routledge. Shanks, Michael and Randall H. McGuire 1996 “The Craft of Archaeology.” American Antiquity 61:75-88. Simon, Nina 2010 The Participatory Museum Santa Cruz, CA: Museum 2.0. Smith, Shelley J., Jeanne M. Moe, Kelly A. Letts, a nd Danielle M. Paterson 1996 Intrigue of the Past: A Teacher's Activity Guide fo r Fourth through Seventh Grades. Bureau of Land Management,US Department of the Int erior. Smardz, Karolyn and Shelley J. Smith (eds.) 2000 The Archaeology Education Handbook: Sharing the Pas t with Kids. Walnut Creek, CA: Altamira Press. Smith, Shelley J. and Karolyn Smardz 2000 “Introduction.” In Karolyn Smardz and Shelley J. Smith (eds.) Archaeology Education Handbook: Sharing the Past with Kids Walnut Creek, CA: Altamira Press. Society for American Archaeology. “Essential Concep ts,” accessed December 12, 2011, each/ CurriculumLinks/ArchaeologyintheClassroom/Essentia lConcepts/tabid/ 210/ Default.aspx. Society for American Archaeology. “Myths and Miscon ceptions,” accessed December 12, 2011, each/ CurriculumLinks/ArchaeologyintheClassroom/Mythsand Misconceptions/ tabid/ 209/Default.aspx. Society for Georgia Archaeology. “Abby’s Diary: The First Person Journal of SGA’s archaeoBUS,” last modified on November 26, 2011, / 2011/11/november-26-2011/. Stone, Peter G. 1994 “Introduction: a framework for discussion In T he Presented Past.” In Peter G. Stone and Brian L. Molyneaux (eds.), The Presented Past: Heritage, Museums

PAGE 111

102 and Education 14-25. London and New York: Routledge. 1997 “Presenting the Past: A Framework for Discussi on.” In John H. Jameson, Presenting Archaeology to the Public: Digging for T ruths Walnut Creek, CA: Altamira Press. 2000 “Applying the Message to the Medium.” In Karol yn Smardz and Shelley J. Smith (eds.) The Archaeology Education Handbook: Sharing the P ast with Kids 280-287. Walnut Creek, CA: Altamira Press. Stone, Peter G. and Brian L. Molyneaux (eds.) 1994 The Presented Past: Heritage, Museums and Education London and New York: Routledge. Stone, Peter G. and Philippe G. Planel (eds.) 1999 The Constructed Past: Experimental Archaeology, Edu cation and the Past. London and New York: Routledge. Struever, Stuart 2000 “Crow Canyon Archaeological Center: Why an Ind ependent, Nonprofit Center Makes Sense.” In Karolyn Smardz and Shelley J. Sm ith (eds.) Archaeology Education Handbook: Sharing the Past with Kids Walnut Creek, CA: Altamira Press. The Associated Press. “Anthropologists fire back at put down from Gov. Scott,” last modified October, 11, 2011, 2011/ oct/11/4/anthropologists-prepared-to-counter-gov-s cott-on-jar-271170/. Tuxil, Jacquelyn L., Nora J. Mitchell and Delia Cla rk 2009 Stronger Together: A Manual on the Principles and P ractices of Civic Engagement Woodstock, VT: Conservation Study Institute. Weik, Terry 1997 “The Archaeology of Maroon Societies In the Am ericas: resistance, cultural continuity, and transformation In the African Dias pora.” Historical Archaeology, 31(2). White, Nancy 2000 “Teaching Archaeologists to Teach Archaeology. ” In Karolyn Smardz and Shelley J. Smith (eds.) The Archaeology Education Handbook: Sharing the P ast with Kids 328-339. Walnut Creek, CA: Altamira Press. White, Nancy and J. Williams 1994 “Public Education and Archaeology In Florida, USA: An Overview and Case Study.” In Peter G. Stone and Brian L. Molyneaux ( eds.), The Presented Past: Heritage, Museums and Education 82-93. London and New York:Routledge. Wiggins, Grant and Jay McTighe 2005 Understanding by Design 2nd ed. Alexandria, Virginia: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development. Williams, Martha 2000 “Retrospective: Personal Thoughts on the Matur ation of Archaeological Education.” In Karolyn Smardz and Shelley J. Smith (eds.) The Archaeology Education Handbook: Sharing the Past with Kids 394-398. Walnut Creek, CA: Altamira Press. Zimmerman, Larry 2003 Presenting the Past. Walnut Creek, CA: AltaMira Press.

PAGE 112

103 Zimmerman, Larry J., S. Dasovich, M. Engstrom and L .E. Bradley 1994 “Listening to the Teachers: Warnings About the Use of Archaeological Agendas In Classrooms In the United States.” In Peter G. S tone and Brian L. Molyneaux (eds.), The Presented Past: Heritage, Museums and Education London and New York: Routledge.

PAGE 113

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

PAGE 114

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

PAGE 115

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

PAGE 116

! "# !"#I:+$>#.123 45#2.16# 2'CJ'$;$%:# # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # 29&%#.**;::'&+;:# <+)$%#&(*60)$,/2%0*8$.*&($=>?:@>;A1)/91(B$C$DE;A'*C$0)+9(1B$C$@F;A'*C$3/,(1$ 5)4#!('&&):1!.+9$8[! I$=';+.&$!('&&):1!.+9$! I$=';+.&$!4'B!9$/4)':!#$+*$(!794'($*!.$#):*!*(+5$(9!5#$:!:'4!):!-9$!'(!):! 4(+:9B'(48! "5'!($=';+.&$!9)*$!*)9B&+2!4(+29!794'($*!+4!.'44'=!'
PAGE 117

! # 2)&&;$%! H &)/6 ':$!'+'$9<#M7;:%#2;$%&9<#1;>+'$O # Q9&+%+C;#,<'&+(9 # 4C9$);<#-'+$%#P 7)89'!:*;)<.%&'*:?'@ @K# ;R8+=+%#@+$>#(+:J<9?O # Q?:%;&?#2;C;%;&?# ;()*9%+'$9<#9*%+N+%?# M @K# ;R8+=+%#@+$>#(+:J<9?O # # # # # # # #

PAGE 118

! #" A*;;*=/;%&'":/#-&'*;()&;:D# _'(('5$(9!+($!($A-)($*!4'!<)&&!'-4!+:*!9-.=)4!4#$!+BB('B()+4$!.'(('5$(! <'(=9!):/&-*$*! 5)4#!4#$!#+:*.''6 >! %'(=9!):/&-*$ ^!_'(('5$(!+1($$=$:4!<'(=`!5$+(!+:*!4$+(!($B'(4`!+//) *$:4! ($B'(4!<'(=!7) 6&9+$+$>D# JB':!*$&);$(2!' # P;*)&+%?D# _'(('5$(9!+($!($A-)($*!4'!#'-9$! .123 45#2.16# ):!+!9$/-($!&'/+4)':!<'(! +:!+1($$*!-B':!&$:14#!'!F-(+4)':! =+2!.$! 9-.S$/4!4'!+;+)&+.)&)42> G;(+*9%;(#-'@;&#P)JJ! P9H;%?D# _'(('5$(9!+($!$VB$/4$*!4'!B(';)*$!+!9+<$!+:*!9$/-($!&'/+4)':!<'(! .123 45#2.16# +:*!+:!$<<$/4);$!&$+(:):1!$:;)(':=$:4!<'(!B+(4)/)B+:49>! #

PAGE 119

! #"" !"#$%&'";*0)&/'*C',D88*;# # # ,)<! # G;<+N;&?#9$(#-+*A#IJD# %,03!94+<! 6&9+$+$>#9$(#6&')=<;:8''%+$>D# %,03!94+<! %,03!94+<! %,03!94+<!79-.S$/4!4'!9/#$*-&):1!+:*!+;+)&+.)&)428! !$:)&9$*;D# .123.45#2.16 @!+9!+!B('1(+=!'!"#$!+-*)'a ;)9-+&!$A-)B=$:4!)9!):9-($*!-:*$(!'<< X /+=B-9!$A-)B=$:4! B('/$ *-($9>

PAGE 120

!"#$%&'#&($)*$+,-#./01#.$2.3"0#)4)56$7"1189::///;&.<;#-&:(&0= >; ?"))'#$),#$)*$1"#$'<@$0.1<*031'$1)$ 0,046A#; $ B; C#5<,$1)$0,'/#.$1"#$D&#'1<),'$),$1"#$ (013"<,5$30.-'; $ EF'#.G01<),'$0.#$0$G#.6$<(8).10,1$80.1$)*$0,046'<';$ C#5<,$F6$10H<,5$0$()(#,1$1)$.#0446$4))H$01$6)&.$ 0.1<*031$F#*).#$103H4<,5$1"#$D&#'1<),'; $ $ !.6$1)$<(05<,#$6)&$0.#$'0<4<,5$03.)''$1"#$/01#.$<,$ 1"#$401#$>IJJK'$$/"#,$6)&$0.#$0,'/#.<,5$1"#$ D&#'1<),'$0F)&1$8#)84#$0,-$0.1<*031$&'#; $ 2.3"0#)4)5<'1$-),K1$L&'1$-#'3.
PAGE 121

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

PAGE 122

!"#$%!&'()*%(#"+,-.*+%/-0+-"1%2.".,%3455-"1%64"-7+#" 89 :-.;%<=45;40>%+,-%/.*+455#%+#%5-."0%.?#=+%,#@% +,-%A#"+%@.*%?=45+%.0;%*#$-%#A%4+*%,4*+#"B9 % C9 D.E-%#=+%+,-%>.$-%?#.";1%F4-7-*1%.0;%;4-9 % G9 D.E-%+="0*%"#5540>%+,-%;4-%+#%$#H-%."#=0;%+,-% ?#.";9 % I9 !4"*+%#0-%+#%+,-%-0;1%@40*J % D"B%0#+%+#%5.0;%40%K.45J%L+%+.E-*%.0%-H-0%0=$?-"%"#55% +#%>-+%#=+9 % '"7,.-#5#>4*+%*F-0;%.%5#+%#A%+4$-%5-."040>%+,-% ,4*+#"B%#A%+,-4"%*4+-9%D,4*%4*%.0%4$F#"+.0+%A4"*+% *+-F%+#%."7,.-#5#>47.5%"-*-."7,9%M-%0--;%+#% E0#@%@,.+%,.*%?--0%+,-"-%?-A#"-%*#%@-%7.0% F5.0%+,-%?-*+%F5.7-*%+#%-N7.H.+-%.0;%=0;-"*+.0;% @,.+%7#$-*%#=+%#A%+,-%>"#=0;9 % % :-$-$?-"%."7,.-#5#>B%4*%.%;-*+"=7+4H-%*74-07-9% M-%0--;%+#%?-%H-"B%7."-A=5%?-A#"-1%;="40>1%.0;% .A+-"%-N7.H.+4#0*%?-7.=*-%+,-"-%."-%0#%O;# P #H-"* 9Q %

PAGE 123

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

PAGE 124

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

PAGE 126

adapted from Johnson's Island Prisoner of War Depot Educator's Resource Guide, Dr. David R. Bush and Dr. Marcia George !"#$%&#'%()*%$+,,%#-)*$%,./+%.'%01.#%.'%3456%/1)7%$".8%,+$$+1% 91:%;+<,#'28%<1)$+%$)%".8%2#*="$+1>%01+%#'(%)/%$"+%<)128%"+% *8+2%')$%1+#,,(%*8+2%$)2#(>%?)<%&#'%()*%$+,,%<"#$%$"+(%7+#'$> % % @'8&1#7-,+%$"+%<)128%/1)7%#%,+$$+1%<1.$$+'%-(%ABC% ;+<,#'28D%#%8&.+'$.8$%/1)7%B'=,#'2%$"#$%<)1E+2%.'%$"+% 8*=#1%1+/.'+1(%.'2*8$1(%<")%F.8.$+2%01.#%0G1.,D%HD%3456:% %

PAGE 127

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