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
The creation of the Economic and monetary union seemed to be a success until the outbreak of the severe Eurozone crisis in 2008. The Treaty of Maastricht did not foresee a possible outbreak of the...Show moreThe creation of the Economic and monetary union seemed to be a success until the outbreak of the severe Eurozone crisis in 2008. The Treaty of Maastricht did not foresee a possible outbreak of the this type of crisis: a financial crisis, a sovereign debt crisis and a severe economic crisis – all in one. The design of the Treaty of Maastricht contained four big design failures. Firstly, the Treaty proved to be too intergovernmental. Secondly, the Treaty did not contain a banking union, and left supervision of the financial system to the national surveillance bodies. In addition, the drafters did not take into account macro-economic imbalances and mainly focused on deficit spending of the Member States. And last but not least, the Treaty lacked crisis management and tools in order to ‘rescue’ the common currency, in case thing would go wrong. This thesis is about the question to what extent the Dutch government could know of foresee these problems in the period between Single European Act and the Maastricht Treaty, 1985-1991. The research elaborates on three questions. First: were the design failures already part of academic literature and discussion at the time of the Treaty of Maastricht? The second parts elaborates on the advisory boards of the government: what did these boards advice regarding the design failure issues? The last part is about the statements of the Dutch government. The overall conclusion is that the Dutch government did ignore most of the warnings of the academic literature and the advises of the advisory boards. But in fact, it seemed that the Dutch government could not predict the outbreak of the Eurozone crisis.Show less
