Statement of Teaching Philosophy

WSU Archaeological Field School
Birch Creek Archaeological Project
Anthropology 300/500, Summer 2002

In this course students are introduced to several concepts that tie field training to larger issues of the ethical and social responsibilities of archaeologists. First, through daily hands-on work and lectures and discussions, field school students will come to understand why training in archaeological field methods, although an important educational activity, cannot be an end in itself. Rather, such training must be conducted as part of an archaeological research project designed to produce significant new knowledge about the past. The in situ archaeological record is a nonrenewable resource, and our excavations and surface collecting will irrevocably change the archaeological contexts that make up this resource. Therefore, our fieldwork must be part of a larger project explicitly designed to produce high-quality collections and field records that can support further analysis and eventual publication of research results. Generating new knowledge based on sound research is what justifies archaeologists' intrusions on the archaeological record. Training students in field methods is by itself an insufficient justification for intruding on the archaeological record. In fact, training students to do field research in a context where staff and the sponsoring institution are not committed to following through with analysis and reporting is an ethical and educational non sequitur. The two objectives of an archaeological field school—training students in field methods and doing productive research—are in fact interdependent.

Second, through lectures, informal discussions, readings, and practical experience, students will learn more about archaeology's relationship to its larger social context. Our primary excavation site is on public lands assigned to the Bureau of Land Management (BLM), an agency of the U.S. Department of the Interior. The BLM manages this and a multitude of other "cultural resource" sites on behalf of the American public. Students will gain an understanding of the multiple interests and issues that the BLM must take into consideration when it makes decisions about cultural resource sites, including those of the Birch Creek area. Topics of discussion will also include the multiple perspectives on archaeological research and cultural resources held by various segments of American society, especially Native Americans, but including other groups as well. Archaeologists' ethical obligations to engage in public outreach and to promote good stewardship of archaeological sites and materials will also be a theme for discussions during the field school.

The physical and pedagogical contexts for archaeological field schools are usually very different than for traditional academic courses in archaeology, and the WSU Birch Creek field school is no exception. Our field school is conducted as an intensive six-week program based in a remote camp setting with no electricity or running water, where students and instructors share the same work and living arrangements 24 hours a day, with a work day that begins at 5:00 a.m. and ends at 7:00 p.m. and a schedule that includes not only field and laboratory exercises, but camp duties as well.

The primary teaching method for our archaeological field class is learning by "hands-on" experience. Formal lectures are used as an initial introduction to field and laboratory methods, as well as to the regional archaeology, theoretical background for the research, cultural resource law, and other topics. However, lectures are only considered a brief introduction, and all students get continuous first-hand practical experience in these topics while in the field or laboratory. For instance, even though students get an initial lecture on operating the total station (electronic transit), each student receives one-on-one instruction by a staff member during the summer every time a station shot is required on one of the artifacts or features in their excavation unit. The same is true of making plan maps, digital camera operation, use of the global positioning system, or triangulating a square. Students are given one-on-one instruction or assistance until they are competent in the task. The same is true of regional culture history and natural contexts of the area: every time a diagnostic artifact is recovered or a certain type of plant or animal remain is encountered, the student is briefed on the cultural or natural context of the site and/or component and has a chance to pose questions or make her or his own inferences.

This pedagogical approach is made possible by a high staff-to-student ratio. In years past we have always had a minimum of four to five field school instructors for twelve to fifteen students. This summer is no exception, as we will have thirteen students with four full-time and two part-time instructors. The staff consists of two faculty members and four graduate assistants, the majority of whom have previous experience at Birch Creek. The frequent interactions between students and staff mean that excavation is much slower (at least at the beginning) than in typical archaeological field projects where most work is done by experienced field technicians. However, as students become more confident in various techniques their excavation and laboratory work pace increases. We also find that individual students interact to help one another learn to record and interpret sediments and artifact distributions, as well as to operate field and lab instruments, relate site-specific and regional contexts, and recognize stewardship issues. Although the work goes slowly until students "learn the ropes," we emphasize the need for students to keep improving their ability to work efficiently and effectively. As in any research project, the participants in the Birch Creek excavations must attempt to get as much work done as time, funding, and skill levels permit, consistent with maintaining a high level of data quality.

We do not have formal reading assignments for each lecture topic, because such requirements are not practical in our field setting. Reading materials are provided as reference sources in our camp library so students can gain more detailed information about any aspect of the class as their time permits. In lectures, students are given leads for further reading and are encouraged to follow up by exploring the literature on their own. For example, culture history is reviewed in lectures, but it is pointed out that many aspects of regional culture history have not yet been synthesized. Students who have questions about particular topics—e.g., the date of introduction of bow-and-arrow technology—may investigate further by reading articles and site reports about research in the surrounding region. Lectures do not cover artifact analysis in great detail, but students who are interested in specific kinds of faunal or lithic analysis can learn more from readings in our reference library. The same is true of reference manuals for the technical equipment we use in the field. Our reference library also has a series of methodological and theoretical papers addressing all aspects of our field school curriculum.

Throughout the class, it is stressed that professionals in any field take responsibility for continually building their base of knowledge and skills by independent reading and by asking knowledgeable colleagues for information. The residential character of the field school facilitates the development of a "community of scholars" comprised of students and staff. Even though many of the students in a typical field school class will not go on to become professional archaeologists, it is pedagogically appropriate to encourage all students to adopt a professional attitude toward their work. This follows from the dual responsibility that field school students have: each student is not only furthering his or her own education, but is a member of a research team that must produce field records, collections, and specimens meeting professional research standards.