The relation between archaeology and education contains a paradox. Where archaeologists have advocated the importance of education for archaeology, this advocation has not been adapted by policy...Show moreThe relation between archaeology and education contains a paradox. Where archaeologists have advocated the importance of education for archaeology, this advocation has not been adapted by policy stakeholders, in order to develop archaeology education programs. Three studies in Canada, the United States and United Kingdom have entailed that the relation between archaeology and education has poorly been investigated. This research builds upon the results on the other three studies to start the investigation on the state of affairs on the inclusion of archaeology into primary education in the Netherlands by investigating policy stakeholders perspectives. These values are investigated by interviews among representa- tives of the Ministry of Education, Culture and Science, provincial heritage institutes and museums, and placed into broader perspective by analyzing the results of monitor surveys on three history and culture education programs, and two legislative restrictions. Then, the combination of interviews and document analysis results in a synthesis where an alternative approach for archaeology education is presented for archaeologists, policy stakeholders and Primary school teachers in the Netherlands . The study ends with the request for further research that is built upon the results presented here.Show less
Archaeology on television has been a widely debated subject amongst academic archaeologists. Perhaps the dilemma that archaeologists face is that archaeology – its practice, its interpretations and...Show moreArchaeology on television has been a widely debated subject amongst academic archaeologists. Perhaps the dilemma that archaeologists face is that archaeology – its practice, its interpretations and the archaeological record it studies – is much like television, in that they both require high degrees of involvement to give them meaning. Thus concerns arise over the validity and ambiguity of the television programme’s information, and the archaeologist’s authority in discerning the past. However, should archaeologists be concerned about portrayal of archaeology in television documentaries? To provide answers to this question, the presentation of archaeological research, sites, objects and researchers in nine documentaries on the National Geographic Channel in the Netherlands in 2013, that were produced in 2012 and 2013, were analysed through ethnographic content analysis. The documentaries mainly focused on the practice of research, including the scientist’s fascination with research. Sometimes research methods were repeated before the camera after it initially had taken place, or they were shown ‘live’ and its results were analysed first-hand. However, the appearance and discussion of the research processes varied per type, possibly due to the structure of the method. In particular, archaeological fieldwork is a difficult process to capture on film, but the process of archaeological interpretation was often embedded in the entire storyline. Amongst other researchers, archaeologists appeared few in number. However, the archaeologists had a specific authoritative role as guides in understanding the past, and they would appear several times in a documentary to provide context or to interpret research results. It was found that certain narrative styles enabled, or disabled, involvement in the research and interpretation processes. There were many cases in which archaeology was presented in an open, yet informative way, while regarding the archaeologists (and researchers in other fields) as authorities. However, research can also be faked or appear unauthentic and authority can be abused. Therefore in communicating archaeology to the public a high degree of transparency is key.Show less
The purpose of this research is to identify the threats to archaeological monuments on privately owned land in Ireland, i.e. why and how monuments are being damaged or destroyed, and to find...Show moreThe purpose of this research is to identify the threats to archaeological monuments on privately owned land in Ireland, i.e. why and how monuments are being damaged or destroyed, and to find solutions to this problem that will satisfy the needs of both archaeologists and landowners alike. The methods used to address these issues include a remote survey of archaeological monuments in a research area in Co. Clare, qualitative interviews with landowners, IFA representatives and an archaeologist and a review of similar surveys on the preservation of monuments in Ireland, England and Northern Ireland. The results of all of the methods used in this research identified earthwork monuments, and especially ringforts, as the monuments that have been damaged the most on privately owned land in Ireland. To effectively prevent future damage from being caused to monuments on privately owned land, several solutions will need to be implemented so that they can be made to work in cooperation with each other. Updating the information on the levels of preservation of all monuments and continued monitoring of monuments will give a clear picture of what the current situation is today and any changes to the situation in the future. The issue needs to be fully publicised using all media to reach a maximum number of people. Education initiatives also need to be fully publicised to reach a maximum number of landowners. Moreover, solutions need not only to encourage farmers to preserve archaeological monuments, but to also make it worth their while and to respect their position as a major stakeholder in the Irish landscape.Show less
