xml version 1.0 encoding UTF-8 standalone no
record xmlns http:www.loc.govMARC21slim xmlns:xsi http:www.w3.org2001XMLSchema-instance xsi:schemaLocation http:www.loc.govstandardsmarcxmlschemaMARC21slim.xsd
leader nam Ka
controlfield tag 001 001681108
007 cr mnu|||uuuuu
008 060104s2005 flu sbm s000 0 eng d
datafield ind1 8 ind2 024
subfield code a E14-SFE0001006
Bennett, Kory McNeil.
Developing an anthropology curriculum for high school
h [electronic resource] :
b a case study from Durant High School, Hillsborough County, Florida /
by Kory McNeil Bennett.
[Tampa, Fla.] :
University of South Florida,
Thesis (M.A.)--University of South Florida, 2005.
Includes bibliographical references.
Text (Electronic thesis) in PDF format.
System requirements: World Wide Web browser and PDF reader.
Mode of access: World Wide Web.
Title from PDF of title page.
Document formatted into pages; contains 147 pages.
ABSTRACT: It has become increasingly apparent that anthropology has much to offer when it comes to educating our youth. This is true for all grade levels, kindergarten through senior level studies in high school. Here, this idea will be explored further by focusing on the students of Durant High School (DHS) of Plant City, Florida.This project was designed to explore the idea of combining widely accepted pedagogical theories (Gardner 1983, 1993, 1999; Geraci 2000; Silver, Strong and Perini 1997) with anthropological theory and methods in order to devise effective curricula for high school archaeology and other anthropology courses. More essentially, teachers must combine four approaches when designing curricula: multiple intelligences (MI), learning styles(LS), modes of presentation, and the use of ethnographic field methods. Through a combination of MI, LS, available modes of presentation, and ethnographic methods three major goals were accomplished.
Adviser: Brent Weisman.
x Applied Anthropology
t USF Electronic Theses and Dissertations.
Developing an Anthropology Curriculum for High School: A Case Study from Durant High School, Hillsborough County, Florida by Kory Mcneil Bennett A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts in Applied Anthropology Department of Anthropology College of Arts and Science University of South Florida Major Professor: Brent Weisman, Ph.D. Nancy White, Ph.D. Elizabeth Bird, Ph.D. Date of Approval: January 15, 2005 Keywords: education, archaeology, multiple intelligences, teaching styles, ethnography, mock excavation Copyright 2005, Kory Mcneil Bennett
Dedication I dedicate this to my wife Jennifer and my daughter Eve. Theyre always there for me when I stumble, making sure that I never fall. Without them by my side there would be no purpose. This is also for Georgia and Kent, my loving parents, who have always supported me unconditionally. I will always be indebted to these people for the love they have given me throughout my life, but I will never stop trying to repay them.
Acknowledgments First and foremost I would like to thank Ms. Sheila Cohen for her support and friendship. Sincere thanks to Dr. Brent Weisman for his guidance and wisdom throughout this project. Thanks also to Dr. Robert Tykot, Dr. Christian Wells, Dr. Karla Davis-Salazar, Dr. Nancy White, Dr. Elizabeth Bird, for their assistance, time and patience. I would also like to thank the student speakers, Chris Smith, April Buffington, Cassandra Harper, and the entire USF anthropology department for their help with the 2003 DHS fieldtrip to USF. Great thanks to all of the students who participated in the 2003-2004 DHS anthropology program; you gave this project meaning. Thanks to my friends and colleagues, particularly Nelson Rodriguez and Matthew OBrien; the value of their help is incalculable. Also, my gratitude goes to Georgia and Kent for their unfailing love. Finally, I thank my wife Jennifer and my daughter Eve for being by my side and making the seemingly impossible seem possibleI love you both more than I can ever express.
i Table of Contents List of Figures iv Abstract v Chapter I Introduction 1 The Ethnographic Setting 2 The Anthropological Perspective 5 The Anthropological Persp ective in the Classroom 7 Multidisciplinary Approach 7 Cultural Sensitivity 8 Towards the Establishment of Anthropology in the School System 8 Student Benefits 9 Instructor Benefits 10 Adhering to Standards 11 Chapter II Multiple Intelligences and Learning Styles 15 Jerome S. Bruner 15 Man: A Course of Nature 15 Howard Gardner 17 Multiple Intelligences 18 How to Interpret MI 21 Concluding MI 21 Learning Styles 23 Modes of Presentation 25 Modes of Presentation, Multiple Intelligences and Learning Styles 25 Using MI, LS and MP w ith Ethnographic Methods 26 The Cognitive Map 28 Conclusion 31 Chapter III Anthropology at Durant High School 35 Cohens Curriculum 36 Modes of Presentation and Classroom Tools 39 The Additions 41 Excuse Me Ms. Cohen; Is There Anything I can do? 43 My Role 44 Adding to the General Anthropology Curriculum 45 Speaking Engagement Program 45 Chapter IV The Ethnographic Research Project 48 The Diverse Spectrum of Ethnography 50 Here Are Our Ethnographies Ms. Cohen 51
ii The Ethnographic Product 52 What to Do With Ethnographies Like These 56 Assessing Student Group Performance 56 In Hindsight 58 Conclusion and Final Asse ssment of the Project 58 Chapter V Their Assessment: the voice of the students 60 Methods as an Ethnographer 60 The Voice of the Students 61 Students Worldviews 62 Summary of Students Assessment 65 Observations and Conclusions 66 Chapter VI Archaeology at Durant High School 67 Cohens Archaeology Curriculum 67 Additions 71 Speakers 72 A Trip to USF 74 Trying to be an Asset 76 Brainstormer 78 Chapter VII Campus Excavation 80 A Simulated Site 80 Cohens Retreat 81 Understanding the Site 82 The Plan 84 Getting It Together 85 Methods at 8HI0000 86 Tradition with a Touch of Reflexive 92 Reflexive Components 93 Alternate Ways to Take Notes 95 Summary and Stories 96 Findings at 8HI0000 98 Chapter VIII Their Assessment: the Voice of the Students on Archaeology at DHS 101 The Voice of the Students 101 Adjusting and Assessing at All Times 103 The Elusive Student Additional Comment 104 Discussion and Conclusions 105 Chapter XI Discussions, C onclusions, Reflections 107 Improvements to be Made 107 Conclusion 109 Final Reflections 111
iii A Final Suggestion 112 References 114 Appendices 124 Appendix A: SSS Curriculum Anthropology Honors 124 Appendix B: Gardners Intelligences 128 Appendix C: Ms. Cohens Sources 129 Appendix D: Worksheet to Formulate Ethnography Project 130 Appendix E: Archaeology Questionnaire 133 Appendix F: Internet Exercise 134 Appendix G: Schedule for Fieldtrip 135 Appendix H: Ethnography Comparison Worksheet 138 Appendix I: Ethnographic Project Worksheet 139
iv List of Figures Figure 2.1 Inventory List 36 Figure 7.1 Cohens Retreat 88 Figure 7.2 The teams were assigned a unit the first day 91 Figure 7.3 Students often worked in teams of three or four 91 Figure 7.4 The spring quarter archaeology class 2004 97 Figure 7.5 Students communi cating at the site 97
v Developing an Anthropology Curriculum fo r High School: A Case Study from Durant High School, Hillsborough County, Florida Kory Mcneil Bennett ABSTRACT It has become increasingly apparent th at anthropology has much to offer when it comes to educating our youth. This is true for all grade levels, kindergarten through senior level studies in high school. Here, this idea will be explored further by focusing on the students of Durant High School (DHS) of Plant City, Florida. This project was designed to explore the idea of combining widely accepted pedagogical theories (Gardner 1983, 1993, 1999; Geraci 2000; Silver, Strong and Perini 1997) with anthropological theory and methods in order to de vise effective curricula for high school archaeology and othe r anthropology courses. More essentially, teachers must combine four approaches when designing curr icula: multiple intelligences (MI), learning styles(LS), modes of pres entation, and the use of ethnographic field methods. Through a combination of MI, LS, av ailable modes of presentation, and ethnographic methods three major goals were accomplished. One, the anthropology and archaeology classes of the DHS program were improved and strengthened. Two, data were generated that will aid in improving future education programs of all types. Three, a new technique for public archaeology students to apply their work and experience practically, toward a bettering of our co mmunity through education, was developed; thereby illustrating another reason that public archaeology is a subdi scipline of applied anthropology.
1 Chapter I Introduction The anthropological perspective is a comprehensive, unique point-of-view. However, this perspective has long been hidde n away within universities, failing to reach out to the entire public. It ha s become increasingly apparent that anthropology has much to offer when it comes to educating our yout h. This is true for all grade levels, kindergarten through senior level studies in high school. Here, this idea will be explored further by focusing on the students of Durant High School in Plant City, Florida. The central question of this thesis is wh at does it take to develop an anthropology curriculum at the high school level? Specifical ly, can pedagogical th eories of learning (Gardner 1983, 1993, 1999; Geraci 2000; Silver Strong and Perini 1997) be combined with educational and anthropological theo ry (Fetterman 1998, 1984; Hodder 1999, 1997; Kottak 1982; Lassiter 2003; Wo lcott 1997, Wulf 2002, Spindler 2000) to devise effective curricula for high school archaeology and other anthropology courses? I experimented with combining four a pproaches when designing curricula: multiple intelligences, learning styles, modes of presentation and the use of ethnographic field methods. Moreover, this was an oppor tunity for me, a public archaeology student, to utilize my training toward an ap plied anthropology educational pursuit. In 2001, an anthropology program was star ted at Durant High School by Sheila Cohen. There are two classes offered to the students at the present time, anthropology and archaeology. In 2003, the Anthropology Department of the University of South
2 Florida (USF) took steps toward forging a relationship with the DHS anthropology program. In pursuit of this goal, I designed pr ojects in order to enhance the curriculum. I observed the classes titled Genera l Anthropology and Archaeology, and aided in developing them further. Ms. Cohen, a teacher of the social sciences department at Durant, has developed the fundamental lesson plans for both of these courses. Luckily, the classes were designed to be dynamic and accepting of changes. I was able to evaluate, alter, and augment the curriculum in order to ensure the teaching of up-to-date anthropological subject matter, and make explicit the underlying unity within anthropology. The Ethnographic Setting I was acting as an ethnogra pher (participant-observer) observing the classroom in order to better tailor the subject matter, and understand the cl ass as a component of high school culture. Much of the ethnographic por tion of the study was directed toward assessing the anthropology programs (for examples of ethnography as educational evaluation see Fetterman 1984). Durant High School lies in Hillsborough County, Florida, 13.7 miles southeast of USF, 14.3 miles southeast of Tampa, 9.04 mile s southwest of Plant City, and 5.75 miles northwest of Lithia. Durant High School receives students from the surrounding communities of Dover, Pinecrest, Keysville, Lithia, Plant City, Durant, Valrico, and Eastern Brandon. The school is in a rural part of the county, surrounded with working orange groves and pasture land. Driving to the school, I passed the occas ional produce stand and boiled peanuts vender. At the main intersection in Durant the post office and grocery store share the
3 eastern building while the west side contains the local filling station. Just a bit further south there is Durant High School, which opened in 1995; the building still has the look of a brand new facility. The agriculture department at DHS tends much of the surrounding land, taking care of cattle and othe r livestock. The bordering houses are sparsely situated, and are proba bly thirty to fifty years old. Much of the outer lying areas from the school showed signs of strip-mining, with clay domes protruding from the ground, and exhausted quarries pepperi ng the landscape. The Alafia River lies just southwest of DHS and acts as a boundary for their outdoor laboratory area. In sum, DH S lies in an area that is the modern equivalent of the middle of nowhere. On the other hand, the schools address re flects a central location in order to receive students from differing, thriving communities in surrounding locations. Ms. Cohen provided me with this demographi c breakdown of the DHS student population (stats kept by the high school administration) which is as follows: 3% of the students are Asian/Pacific Islander, .8% Native American, 17% are Hispanic, 8 % of the students are African American, 3% are classified as Mult icultural, and 68.2% of the students at DHS are White. The anthropology classes were a fair reflection of the preceding distribution. It would be extremely difficult to infer any sort of economic distribution pertaining to the students, part icularly when taking into consideration the finicky fashion sense of the modern teenager. In other wo rds looks do not have any direct connection with more fundamental parts of the students lives (even a member of the Fellowship of Christian Athletes may wear an Ozzy Osbourne t-shirt to sch ool). In the end, I obtained only a brief look into the immediate family lives of the students I spoke to.
4 In class, students were encouraged to talk about their cultural background, and share any facet of that background they w ould like. More than one discussion was sparked in class when students shared info rmation about their heritage. This project could not be placed in just any country one chooses in the world and be expected to translate for the students in that population. However, this undertaking was fit to the culture most prevalent in the United States; one of ethnic and cultu ral co-existence. That is not to say that these varied communities are the picture of America that every American possesses. It is, on the other hand, a reality. It was the interactions of the students within the class, and their interacti on through the American high school system that helped me understand the students in dividually, as a class, and as a part of a larger community. Each class will produce a quickly emerging s ub-culture that is a reflection of each students recollection of how one should act in a classroom situation as learned through their other experiences with High School Culture. Fina lly, what remains are nested scales: the class is a sub-culture of the High School, the High School is a sub-culture of the culture at large. Classroom activities, a nd indeed a curriculum can be tailored to a class, but that is usually when consid ering the class as a culture per se. I suggest that this is a good route to take, since a class of students, and the interactions between students will encompa ss each individuals cultural knowledge and background. This can only be accomplished when an instructor makes sure that every student takes part in class (of course even a student who sleeps through every classperiod is a component of that clas ss culture and a reflec tion of the culture at large).
5 The entirety of the project will encompa ss topics such as multiple intelligences, learning styles, modes of presentation, anthropology and archaeology functioning at Durant High School, anthropology easing social tension, the observation of anthropology/archaeology classes, and the reflexive method as an educational vehicle. Further, this study will explor e the benefits of a continuing link between University of South Florida and the public. Three particul ar modules of this project will act as cornerstones to the supplementing of the curriculum: The Ethnographic Research Project (ERP), simulated archaeological excavatio ns, and the Speaking Engagement Program (SEP). There are many questions that lie at the core of this project. How can anthropology be applied to education in or der to convey both traditional and progressive subject matter? In what forms should anth ropology be presented to ensure the most effective learning experience? How can we gauge the effectiveness of the forms of presentation that are selected? What can th e educational system ga in from investing in the teaching of the anthropol ogical perspective? What is the benefit of having a relationship between the school system and th e university? Perhaps, most important, what place does the anthropological perspective have in secondary school? All of these questions carry concomitant ones th at are equal in complexity. The Anthropological Perspective The culture concept is th e core of anthropology. Mi chael Angrosino (2004:6) states that culture is a system of learned and shared material productions, interpersonal relations, and ideas about what those productions and relations mean. The system of culture is studied through the four subfields of the disc ipline, biological anthropology,
6 cultural anthropology, anthropological linguistics, and archaeology. The anthropological perspective is holistic and focuse s on every aspect of humanity. The anthropological perspective is compar ative, and used to reveal differences and similarities cross-culturally. In order to attempt to be as objective as possible, the anthropological perspective rests on the principl e of cultural relativity, which states that activities within a culture have meaning relative to that population and therefore must be understood in the terms of that particular culture. DHS students were taught not to use their own culture as a yardstick to measure other cultures. Perhaps the most important aspect of the anthropological perspective is the goal to understand the worl d through the eyes of others, or the emic perspective. This particular component of anthropology will assist students develop understanding and sensitivity for the many cultures they are bound to encounter. Using this perspective students begin to realize their own biases, and are able to deal with them directly. The anthropologica l perspective cannot elim inate the biases of an investigator, but there is opportunity to identify and discuss them. The students are living in a multicultural world which will call on them to function fluently with people of various cultural backgrounds. The anthropolog ical perspective, w ith its tenets named above, allows a student to see the worlds cu ltural parts, while attempting to understand the whole. In summary, when I state that th e students learned the anthropological perspective, I mean that each student learne d that culture is the unifying concept in anthropology. Students unders tood the holistic approach of anthropology by exploring the four subfields and areas of study within them. Students were able to compare cultures
7 across time and space, recognizing differences and similarities. Finally, the students were called upon to employ cultur al relativity with their comp arisons of the world around them. The Anthropological Perspective in the Classroom Educators are beginning to realize the merit of of fering archaeology and other anthropology courses in high school (Macdonald and Burtness 2000: 42). A facet of the DHS program is the desire to move beyond simply teaching rote tasks and promoting memorization skills that have been staples in education for some time. Engaging the student with differing teaching styles, pract ical activities, and higher level thinking exercises will provide them with a well-rounded e ducational experience. Multidisciplinary Approach Perhaps the most valuable attribute of the anthropological perspective is its multidisciplinary nature, which corresponds nice ly to the structure of high school. At a high school, the departments are more accessi ble to each other th an those of the university. Therefore, multidisciplinary invo lvement can flourish in this favorable environment. This well-rounded approach will help the students to realize the practical application of the subjects they have been seeking to learn. Another good reason to accentuate the multidisciplinary approach in the classroom is to remind students that there is always more than one point of view, more than one interpretation. Future involvement with a multidisciplinary program will assist the student in understanding the diverse nature of the di scipline of anthropology and the world. Students can begin to look at their universe in a ne w way when provided with anthropological principles such as cultural relativity and comparative observation. This
8 is also a challenging of worldvi ews that can be linked directly to the intrinsic ability of anthropology to foster cultural sensitivity. Cultural Sensitivity For all of us to work together in harm ony and live in this varied society, we must all adopt some degree of cultural sensitivity, which means being able to view humankind from the standpoint of a cu lture other than one's own (Zhang 2001: 299). Anthropology teaches students to recognize and challenge th eir own ethnocentrism. This in turn helps the student understa nd the common link thr oughout all of humanity, as well as the importance of acceptance, tolerance and having well-informed perceptions of the world. The ethnographic project that will be discu ssed later is an exercise that provided the opportunity for students to observe their surroundings as anthropologists, viewing the world through the anthropological lens as they came to understand it. Still, there can be other exercises attempted that would act as practical experience in both critical thinking and cultural sensitivity. Even as late as the senior year in high school is a good time to teach cultural sensitivity. In the future, we can hope that the idea will not be new to high school students. Toward the Establishment of Anth ropology in the School System This project hinges upon the collaborative relationship between high school and university. For there to be successful high school anthropology programs, the university must lend its support and in some cases resources. An excellent example of such a relationship can be seen in the project head ed up by Luke Eric Lassiter at Ball State, known as Placing Anthropology in Local Schools (PALS).
9 Anthropology students work with teachers from the surrounding community to bring anthropological knowledge to classr oom instruction. In these schools teachers requested help in teaching subject areas su ch as evolution, cross-cultural understanding, multiculturalism, human geography, material culture, race and ethnicity (see http://www.bsu.edu/csh/anthro/P ALS/history.html; Lassiter 2002). Throughout the duration of the University of South Florida Durant High School project (USF-DHS), teachers from other schools in Hillsborough County began to express their interest in st arting anthropology programs. Th ere is a growing demand for anthropology to be taught in high school. The University of S outh Florida Anthropology Department could easily begin a program such as Ball States PALS. USF students and faculty will be in a position to help put an thropology courses for high school students into place. In this way anthropology can become understood as a discipline by the students, supplementing its role as illustrator for other subjects. Student Benefits The two groups of students that were unde r consideration for my project were the high school students and the uni versity anthropology students (i n this study DHS students and USF undergrad/grad student s). It is certain that a relationship between these two institutions was mutually be neficial. High School students had the opportunity to hear college students and professors speak about their own anthropological research. USF anthropology students presented thei r work to the DHS students. The USF students were rewarded with valuable teachi ng experience, the opportunity to speak about their research, and with an unthreatening situation in which to gain public speaking experience. As well they had the chance to practice explaining their research to
10 laypersons. DHS students heard from advanced students not only practicing anthropology but still in the process of formally l earning anthropology. These talks demonstrated how anthropology is applied in th e real world. DHS st udents were able to go further than superficial knowle dge and they began to think critically (practically) as they were presented with a projectbased curriculum (Davis 2000: 60). Instructor Benefits The instructors are the U SF professors and the DHS teachers (as well as other teachers who may become involved with the program). Professors have a place to provide their students with the experien ces mentioned above. High school teachers receive aid from the specialists of the subfield s of anthropology in or der to best represent the anthropological perspective to their students. Instructors taking part in this type of project can find both personal and professi onal benefits from the experience. High school teachers can also increase their cultural sensitivity through the research they must do to prepare for teach ing anthropology. This in the end will aid teachers to adapt their teaching methods to meet the demands of diverse student bodies (see Moore-Hart 2002, Zhang 2001). Professors on the other hand will be able to talk about particular points of interest they belie ve the general public, pa rticularly high school students, should be informed about. In the case of archaeology, professors can promote the preservation of cultural resources. Other researchers can speak on evolution, race, and other controversial subject s in hopes of correctly informing the public. The connection between the institutions must consist of all of these benefits for instructors and students. It is the symbiotic relationship (both parties mutually benefit) between the high school and university anth ropology department that acts as the
11 backbone of a project such as this. An anthropology department is often looking for ways in which their students can become involved with the community, learn about anthropology through real world experiences, and provide students with the chance to gain experience in disseminating anthropological research. The relationships in which the departments students interact with local schools fulfill all of these criteria. Adhering to Standards The following chapters will cover many as pects that I took into consideration when attempting to augment the curriculum fo r the anthropology class. A good start was to look at the Sunshine State Standards ( SSS), which are expectations for students achievement through all grade levels put into place by the Florida State Board of Education in 1996. There are standards for anthropology and archaeol ogy classes (course numbers 2101310 and 212071A respectively). These state standards revolve around three areas as described by M. Elaine Davis (2000: 60, 61): content depth and breadth, the co ntext of learning, and critical thinking. The Florida SSS list the following as major conc epts to be covered by an anthropology honors class: (1) human and biological or igins, (2) adaptati on to the physical environment, (3) diversity of human behavi or, (4) evolution of social and cultural institutions, (5) patterns of language development, (6) fam ily and kinship relationships, and (7) the effects of change on cultu ral institutions (FLDOE 1998: 212071A). There are twenty-three benchmarks (grade level expectations) that are covered within this anthropology secti on alone. Benchmarks were taken into consideration when designing the curriculum for both classes. For instance, benchmark SS.B.2.4.1of the Anthropology Honors Class states that students must unde rstand how social, cultural,
12 economic, and environmental factors contribut e to the dynamic nature of regions (see Appendix A). With that said, many of the benchmarks seemed to be forced into the standards for the classes. The benchmarks were appropr iately placed under the rubric of anthropology (Appendix A). Nonetheless, using these points of reference to construct a class would have been like stitching a patchwork quilt wit hout thread rather than weaving a tapestry with direction and continu ity. Although the knowledge ba se is represented by the benchmarks, classes founded on these standard s would be more successful if designed with the surrounding community in mind. Stude nts would be able to relate with the subject matter on a more intimate level, and th ey will have the opportunity to learn about the heritage of their community. For example, benchmark SS.A.2.4.6 stat es: understand features of the theological and cultural conflict between th e Muslim world and Christendom and the resulting religious, political, and economic co mpetition in the Mediterranean region. When considering current events, there is a great deal of merit in addressing this benchmark. It is also, however, the job of the teacher to make connections between such a broad topic (only one of the twenty-three) a nd paralleling events in their area. For students to understand what is happening at the world scale, they must first be able to understand how their local scale is functioning. With such a wide range of topics and benchmarks that anthropology can cover, one must be cautious not to fragment the cu rriculum. There is the danger that complex topics will be presented as a co llection of facts, rather than as processes of investigation and understanding (Davis 2000: 64; TI MSS 1999, 2003; Valverde 2000).
13 Standards have been written to counteract this sort of fragmented learning (Davis 2000:64). To the contrary, many of these to pics that are mandated achievements lend themselves directly to a disjointed approach. It is up to the instru ctor to construct the class curriculum properly to avoid presenting a fragmented, superficial, memorizationbased presentation of the subject matter. This can be accomplished by choosing centr al questions that the students are to investigate together. These questions can fall under one theme (a place, people). For instance, a class may look at the high sc hool culture, and use the anthropological perspective to shed light on the subcultures each of them belong to. All of the branches of anthropology can be employed. In this case, archaeology studies can focus on the refuse of the school to understand better th e behaviors with which this archaeological record is linked. With an anthropological linguistics appr oach, one can study the different jargon being used in school (throughout time); with biological anthropology, one can look at the physical makeup of a population of students a nd resulting implica tions. By utilizing cultural anthropology, one can investigate the co mmunity as it is presently. Additionally, hypotheses concerning how and why high sc hool culture functions as it does can be addressed. In doing this, vari ous subjects are covered from Math to English. Perhaps more important, students are given the opportuni ty to think introspe ctively, helping them understand themselves in the contex t of their culture and society. Education is one of the most important elements of society, being a central way culture is transmitted. This thesis is a pres entation of how an anthropology program can be designed to be an effective learning experi ence. However, as is the case with many of
14 the theories that will be cove red throughout this manuscript, this is simply a template with which one can begin their work. It is up to the individual to build onto and transform these concepts into the instrument that will best convey the intended message to the target audience. Anthropology has the amazing potential to educate our youth. It is the job of the anthropologist to make sure that this is understood by the education community as well as the general public. Anthropology adds color to the picture, flesh to the skeleton, and vitality to the story. All subj ects can be brought to life and depicted through practical applications using anthropology. This w ill be a step toward strengthening both anthropology and education in the twenty-first century.
15 Chapter II Multiple Intelligences, Learning Styles, Modes of Presentation and Ethnographic Methods Jerome S. Bruner Jerome S. Bruner recently wrote in his publication The Culture of Education : Education is not simply a tec hnical business of well-managed information processing, not even simp ly a matter of applying learning theories to the classroom or usi ng the results of subject-centered achievement testing. It is a complex pursuit of fitting a culture to the needs of its members, and its members and their ways of knowing to the needs of the culture. (Bruner 1996:43). The combination of learning theories (Multiple Intelligences and learning styles in this project) with anthropological methods, particularly those of ethnography, will lead an educator beyond the technical business men tioned by Bruner, toward the ultimate goal of matching the students way s of knowing to the needs of their culture. Bruner has been acknowledged as not only an educational thinker but also and inspired learner and teacher (Gardner 2001: 90). One of his mo st influential contributions to pedagogy was the designing and implementation of Man: A Course of Study (MACOS) in 1966. Man: A Course of Study Man: A Course of Study (MACOS), despite its flaws and limitations, was a social studies curriculum program that was extraord inarily progressive for its time. Bruners
16 intention was for MACOS to aid the student in understa nding human nature and the forces that shape humanity (Bruner 1966:74). Three questions recurred throughout the curriculum: (1) what is human about human beings? (2) how did th ey get that way, and (3) How can they be made more so? This curriculum was directly in fluenced by Bruners previous text The Process of Education (1966). This work directly impacted educational policy in the United States. Bruner, along with other promin ent researchers of the time, declared that there should be a shift in focus from the delivering of fact s, to the structure of learning (Bruner 1966:1732). According to Bruner, To understand some thing as a specific instance of a more general case is to have learned not only a specific thing but also models for understanding other things like it that one may encounter. (Bruner 1966:25) Recently, Bruner has become critical of the cognitive revolution in which he was once a strong proponent. The works mentioned above including MACOS were directly influenced by Bruners focus on c ognition. Bruner has made strides toward developing a cultural psychology which takes into consideration the historical and social context of the individuals being studied. Bruners influence can easily be seen t oday in modern educational theory. His appeal to educational anthropology as well as this particular proj ect is echoed in his current work where Bruner states that culture shapes the mind it provides us with the toolkit by which we construct not only our worl ds but our very conception of our selves and our powers, (Bruner 1996: x). Bruners influence can be detected throughout these pages, however, MACOS only demonstrated an attempt at applying the fundamentals
17 developed by Bruner and others at that time. At present, much of this work reflects an antiquated view of anthropology, and how it shou ld be taught in the school system. While many of the tenets that were a result of Bruners forward thinking have been adopted into mainstream teaching mode ls (such as a focus on structure as opposed to fact memorization), it was not his work that I used as a starting point for this project. Rather, one of Bruners student s from Harvard, who assisted with educational projects such as MACOS, provided me with a basic foundation on which to build a curriculum. Howard Gardners theories were not formul ated with education in mind; however, his influence on education has perh aps eclipsed even his mentors. Howard Gardner In 1983 Howard Gardner introduced the worl d to his definition of intelligence. No longer were the preoccupations of the western world on verbal and mathematical skills considered the only type of intellect. His theory ha s been molded and adapted to fit many different educational scen arios over the last twenty-one years. For the purpose of this project Multiple Intelligences (MI) theo ry was used as a template that directs teaching toward differing modalities. This allows for the instructor or curriculum designer to formulate a program that addresses different intelligences. Being informed of the differing intelligences will aid teachers in exploring these intellectual realms and reacting to them in their lesson plans. I selected MI theory for this study due to the sound foundati on it provides for a teacher to build on, and the lengthy and estab lished research involving the use of MI in education. Later, MI is tie d directly to the idea of learning styles and how the two approaches function best in concer t with one another is explored.
18 Although in the following there is a conc ise sketch of the basic underpinnings of Gardners theory of Multiple In telligences, it is not the intention here to support or reject the theory. Instead the eight (perhaps ni ne, see Gardner 1999: 47-67) intelligences are used to remind the teacher that there are va rious modes in which to present the subject matter. Although it is not impera tive for the instructor to und erstand the complexities of MI theory in order to employ it as a teachi ng tool, an instructor should understand the basic aspects of the theory. Despite the neurobiological claims of the MI theory (Gardner 1983: 36-56) dealing with both evolution and the advent of modules of the brain, the theory is strong when considered as a pedagogica l tool. For instance the theo ry may remind the instructor to introduce music, spatial exercises, language games, or various othe r activities into a classroom discussion. Certainly, ideas such as that may be carried out without the aid of the MI theory (Klein 2003: 61). Still, MI, with the advantage of enduring over time, has been developed in many ways that are extrem ely effective within the venue of education. Multiple Intelligences The eight most widely accepted inte lligences are as follows: Linguistic Intelligence, Logical-Mathematical Intelligence Spatial Intelligence, Bodily-Kinesthetic Intelligence, Musical Intelligence, Interpersona l Intelligence, Intrapersonal Intelligence, and Naturalist Intelligence, (Gardner 1983, 1993, 1999). It is this list that teachers should remember when writing their lesson plans (Appe ndix B). Each type of intelligence may be utilized in curriculum wr iting, but it is important not to force these categories into every lesson. Instead each will tend to fit naturally with differing subjects.
19 Gardner (1983: 60-61) hypothesized that an intelligence entails a set of skills for problem solving, a capacity of a person to solve real problems that he/she might encounter. Moreover, new problems can also be devised from this same competence in order to generate acquisition of new knowle dge. The following are the criteria Gardner posits as the definition of an intelligence: A. Potential isolation by brain damage B. The existence of idiot savants, prodig ies, and other exceptional individuals C. An identifiable core opera tion or set of operations D. A distinctive developmental history E. An evolutionary history and evolutionary plausibility F. Support from experiment al psychological tasks G. Support from psycho metric findings H. Susceptibility to encoding in a symbol system (Gardner 1983:60-66) A deals with the autonomy of an intelligence within the brain. If brain damage can cause one to lose a capacity (e.g. to spea k, think logically, etc) then this leads to the inference that such capacity (intelligence) is independent of other intelligences. This is a potential weakness of the theory as it pr omotes the idea of finite and predictable modalities for learning. B is directly tied to the above explan ation. Some persons are able to perform with a high aptitude in one area while not being able to function at all in another. C is involved in the triggering of genetically pr ogrammed computational systems in the brain. However, this has only been supported strongl y by computer simulations (Gardner 1999). Perhaps information can not be effectively delivered to humans if thei r brains are thought
20 of as computers, since the data intake of the mind is far mo re diversified and sophisticated. This is a simplification that seems to be symptom of the scientific approach of the theory. D is involved with a cross-cultural approach to intelligence. This states if an intelligence is not invoked in a particular situation it will most likely not arise within an individual. The situations, or cultural variables, must be examined to understand the development of intelligence and ultimately th e intelligence in and of itself (Gardner 1983: 64). Gardner (1983: 65) also st ates that this analysis should be of the utmost importance to educational practitioners. The classroom, as it is in this study, is the perfect place to make such examinations work, and the ethnogr aphic (anthropological) perspective is an excellent means to reach this goal. Criterion E presents Gardners idea th at other organisms (e.g. birds having the capacity to sing) share particular capacities with humans (Gardner al so speaks of primate social organization as an example 1983:65). F states that experimental psychological tests can show that some tasks interfere or do not interfere with others. Criterion G presents that both psychome tric tests and standardized tests can support the plurality of intelligences. For exam ple the SAT test is s upport that verbal and mathematic abilities are independent from othe r modes of intelligence. Because a student may excel in music, athletics, or art do es not assure them a good grade on a verbalmathematical test (and vice versa). Finally, criterion H explains th at an intelligence must be susceptible to enc oding in a symbol system. Some examples are language, picturing and mathematic symbol systems (Gardner 1983: 66).
21 How to interpret MI? From what perspective shall one interpre t MI? For instance, one could look with a neurological view and concen trate on the finite modules of the brain. Another person could view MI from the position of a parent seeking alternate ways for their children to explore their intelligence. A person with c oncerns in pedagogy should search for the ways that MI can aid educators in tailoring their teaching styles to the individuals who make up their class. James Mbuva (2003) has described the effect that each of the eight intelligences have on teaching. In most cases the noticeable effect is directed upon the teaching style. For example, if a teacher has a l ogical-mathematical teaching style, MI reminds them that it is acceptable for students to be artistic and able to make intuitive l eaps (Mbuva 2003: 7). MI theory can be utilized for many purposes beyond its specific in tention. This is typified in the statement made by Mbuva that all veteran teachers had students who did not fit in, and Gardner gave these educator s the opportunity to begin learning how to understand those students (Mbuva 2003: 5). MI theory is not a treatment for educa tion and it was not devised with education in mind (Gardner 1995: 5). Moreover, Gardne r (1995) is the first to say that the educators are in the best position to use the MI theory for educational purposes. In that case it is up to the teacher/instructor to use th e merits of the MI theory that are germane to education. Concluding MI At Durant, one of the goals behind presen ting the subject matter was to engage as many of the senses as possible. Here a helpful analogy can be found in the ethnographic
22 method. When anthropologists wish to learn as much about a culture as possible, every characteristic, from many perspectives, they im merse themselves within that culture. It is their belief, in consequence of many years of development, that the more sensory laden the experience the higher quality of understanding is gleane d. This is likewise for presentation in the classroom. The sensory approach is clearly illustrated in Sensory Anthropology: A Sense-ible Approach to Teaching Anthropology written by Ann Frankowski (2000). Frankowskis work reminds one of the ways that all of th e senses can be engaged for the purposes of teaching. It is possible to engage each of th e senses when presenting a topic. Frankowski (2000: 179-181) offers ways that a class can involve the senses in subject matter. A sensory approach will help students to learn and understand rather than memorize facts for a test. Sitting in the anthropology classes thi nking about multiple intelligences reminded me that scientists are always dividing, di ssecting, drawing lines, and forming categories with complex concepts. This is how people best deal with thes e conceptions of the abstract. The MI theory implicitly suggests th at ways of learning and teaching are few. This is not necessarily the case. There is the possibility that the brai ns structure is not as tidy as suggested by Gardner (Klein 2003). The mind is complex and beyond being bounded; imagination, creativity, and other forms of expression and higher thinking cannot be equated to the working parts of a car, or a computer. Still, Gardner gives a s ound outline from which to proceed. Teachers should be reminded that they can expand upon th ese ideas and that MI is a catalyst to consider. Teachers should also find their modes of expression and cr eativity so they can
23 make the learning experience a more tangibl e one. The overall purpose of using MI theory in this study is as a starting ground, and an outline to be followed. The above is an overview of Multiple In telligences theory. I used MI as a foundation on which to build upon with learning styles and modes of presentation. I was able to formulate curriculum ideas based on th e different intelligences. Furthermore, in the following section I will provide reasons why both multiple intelligence theory and learning style theory are strengthened when used together. Learning Styles The learning style is a concept that has often been confused with MI theory. A style has been described by Gardner (1995: 2) as an all-purpose approach that an individual can apply regularly to every conc eivable matter, while an intelligence is a capacity, which is geared to a sp ecific content in the world. Geraci (2000: 91) states that students of any age receive and assimilate in formation in different ways, and these are called learning styles. Succinctly stated by Silver, Strong and Perini (1997: 22), learningstyle theory is more concerned with the diffe rences in the process of learning while MI theory addresses the content a nd products of learning (for a statistical approach to the same idea see Snyder 1999). It is well known that individuals have different ways of l earning. One may find watching a video on a subject much more ed ifying than hearing a lecture on the same topic. On the other hand, you may like to ta ke diligent notes and later rewrite them as a review of the material. This is why learning styles should be tied to multiple intelligences and vice versa. Silver, Strong a nd Perini (1997:25) writ e: In conjunction, both multiple intelligences and learning styles can work together to form a powerful and
24 integrated model of human intelligence and le arninga model that re spects and celebrates diversity and provides us with the tools to meet high standards. It would be difficult to address every learning style that any class may hold, but with the major domains demarcated by MI, one may more easily develop exercises to fulfill these areas. Silver, Stone and Perini (1997:23) believe that without multiple intelligence theory, learning style is rather abstract, and undervalues context; while multiple intelligence, without learning style theory, is unable to describe different processes of thought and feeling. Victor W. Geraci (2000) has put forward a convincing argument for the use of learning styles with MI theory. However, his study (Gerac i 2000: 94) equates learning styles with the categories of multiple intelligence s. Still, this is an easy way of using the MI theory as a guideline to follow. Geraci (2000: 97) developed a table that describes a few teaching activities that would work to e ngage various learning styles or in his case the eight intelligences. The equating of lear ning style with MI appears to be the only failing in his approach: Ironically, this adds to its value for curriculum developers, since it demonstrates problems that must be worked through. If learning styles are equated with Mu ltiple Intelligences, the variability of learning styles diminishes. Th ere are eight intelligences as of now, but learning styles are much more numerous. That is to say, learni ng styles are too numer ous to be addressed with broad categories such as the intelligen ces. A learning style is much more closely related to the teaching activities offered by Geraci (2000:97) than an intelligence. Gardner (1995:3) states that the relation between his concept of intelligence and the various conceptions of style needs to be worked out empirically, on a style-by-style basis.
25 Considering Gardners argument, this is in all probability a corre ct notion, considering that learning styles can be just as vari ous as the individuals who possess them. Modes of Presentation A mode of presentation is not simply th e use of a video, power point presentation, or music to illustrate a topic. A mode of presentation can be considered the sum of techniques utilized for a presentation at any given time. For example if a teacher shows a video about the New York African Bu rial Ground, and provides a power point presentation and lecture to accompany, th ese techniques comprise the mode of presentation that the teacher chose to presen t the material. Making alterations, and using different combinations of techniques cha nges the overall mode of presentation. Modes of Presentation, Multiple In telligences and Learning Styles Intelligence has already been described above with Gardners (1983) list of criteria. The following is a recent definition of an intelligence given by Gardner (1995:5): A biological and psychological poten tial; that potential is capable of being realized to a greater or lesse r extent as a consequence of the experiential, cultural, and motivational factors that affect a person. An intelligence is distinguishable from a mode of presentation, which is the manner by which one delivers knowledge. But the two are linked clos ely, since the mode of presentation should begin with the MI theory at the core, and multiple intelligences are directly affected by differing modes of presentation. Modes of presentations (MP) are the direct consequence of differing learning styles (LS). Therefore the modes of presenta tions must attempt to be as variable as suggested above. This is where the combinati ons of techniques come in handy to create a
26 whole host of modes. Before going any furt her, remember a cautionary note given by Gardner (1995) that all of the intelligences do not have to be addressed with every topic that is being presented. Accordingly, not every mode of pr esentation must be utilized, nor every learning styl e addressed. Using MI, LS and MP with Ethnographic Methods LS, MI and MP used either in combinati on or separately, are made more effective when ethnographic methods are applied to obser ve a class. If these methods described above are to work successfull y, they must be guided by what could be considered a cognitive map of the classroom population. This map can be constructed relatively quickly using ethnographic methods, and can he lp teachers adjust as the class changes over time (one may use a layout of the classr oom using the kids names as landmarks, with MI and LS information recorded in respect to the students). Before ever having a class, an instruct or can start with a list of the eight intelligences. An example of this can be found in Student Assessment That Works: A Practical Approach (Weber 1998). This checklist poses questions to teachers that provoke them to think about the presentation construction from different perspectives. The next list may incorporate le arning styles that ha ve been discernible in the classroom. A teacher can find a good start with the list compiled by Silv er, Stone and Perini (1997) in their attempts to combine MI with LS. With the DHS classes, I kept a list of th e intelligences and a few learning styles that served as a reminder of the divers e styles which can be found within most classrooms of students. As time went on I ma de notes that mentioned students by first names and comments pertaining to my interaction with them and their interaction with
27 the class. Most of the time interviewing the kids about their extracurricular activities helped me to determine multiple intelligences ( it is important to note that here the most prevalent intelligence is discerned, every stude nt has the potential to be adept in each intelligence simultaneously). Observing and pa rticipating in class helped me discern learning styles more clearly. This partic ular type of note taking was one of the inspirations for the cogni tive map of the class. Some would recommend teaching the class about the multiple intelligences and have them determine their own strengths a nd weaknesses (Weber 1999). This can prove to be limiting to the students as well, perh aps convincing them that they cannot excel in other intelligences except the one s they are best in at that moment. Instead, it may be a good idea to start the course off on the fi rst day or some day the first week, by administering a questionnaire to the students. Answers to the questionnaire will aid the teacher in determining learning styles of the students to some extent. Another good list to have on hand is of the technological modes of presentation that are available. New items may be added to this list (e .g. artifacts, presentation boards, supplies). Keeping the topics to be covered at the core, at this point the teacher will have the ingredients needed to design a presentati on. These ingredients can be added to over time, and used to design presentations for th at class throughout the quarter or semester. An example of the three lists can be seen in Figure 2.3. With the DHS classes, video and inte rnet were the two multimedia modes of presentation available. In th is case movies and internet ex ercises were sometimes chosen to accompany class periods. Using et hnographic methods (interview, observation, questionnaires, quizzes) I determined that the anthropology and arch aeology classes were
28 learning a great deal of information from these types of exercises. Multimedia presentations may prove to be the most eff ective teaching devices at this grade level. There have been suggestions (G ardner 1999: 31-32, 171-172; Sarouphim 1999) that assessment of the multiple intelligences of students should be conducted at a young age. Further studies should be conducted to determine particular methods to make these assessments adaptable for use in the high sc hool classroom and writing the questionnaire mentioned above (Sarouphim 1999). Again one should be warned of limiting their students abilities. A principl e of MI is that most individu als posses potentia l in each of the intelligences (Gardner 1999:31). Finally, it should be remembered that these are only the bare essentials for presenting subject matter. Besides creativit y and imagination teachers must always be thinking of ways to reach their students. Th ere is not a monolithic list that can ever handle the dynamic task of teaching. Moreove r, none of the lists should ever limit teachers in their presentation (exceptions may have to be made on logistical terms for modes of presentation). No person knows students in a particular cla ss better than the teacher of that class. In that case teachers must remind themselv es of the multi-dimensional nature of presenting their subject-matter. The Cognitive Map The ethnographic portion of this project was conducted in orde r to evaluate the efficacy of classroom exercises (Fetterman 1984). From particular methods such as interviews and participant observation, I rea lized that I had recorded the students differing intelligences and learni ng styles within the class. This led to the idea of using
29 ethnographic methods to draft a cognitive map of the classroom. Unfortunately this is an idea that came to full form after the fieldw ork was completed. However, I do believe it an important method to discuss and develop further, for future use and use by other educators. At the outset I wished to understand the abilities of the student s in relation to the Multiple Intelligences and Learning Style Theori es. However, it was at the completion of the project I realized the inform al map of the classroom in my head could be used more efficiently if formalized and drafted in a writ ten or other appropriate form. A visual map of the classroom would certainly be a help ful aid to both the an thropologist and the instructor. This can be considered in the same vein as an ethnographer mapping a village, or town (Fetterman 1998:101-102). In this situation the ethnographer must concentrate more on the multiple intelligences and learning styles than actual physical layout when drafting the map. As mentioned above a cognitive map can be a simple layout of the classroom, with the students names and the pertinent in formation dealing with MI and LS listed. For example, I used Ms. Cohens seating charts (each student was assigned a desk they sat in for the duration of the course). Here I wrote about the student s interests and goals (for the class and life). I then wrote the appropriate MI and LS next to the students information. The format and efficiency of a map would be enhanced if digitized. As a hypothetical example, I would write a students name, for our purposes here well call her Nicole, in the appropriate spot on the seating chart. In my informal interview with Nicole, I would ask her about he r extra-curricular interests, what she was planning to do after high school was over, why she is taki ng an anthropology class and
30 other general questions pertaining to her interests. I would also ask Nicole to tell me how she thinks she learns most effectively, and wh at sorts of methods in her experience have aided her learning. For the next two days, while observing th e students in class, I would use the seating chart to write about each students interview and their actions in classroom situations. For instance, if Nicole told me that she was in the DHS Orchestra, on the swim team, and enjoyed dance, particularly ballet, I would wr ite next to Nicoles name: shows a strong indication of highly deve loped musical and bodily-kinesthetic intelligences. Then Nicole might have mentioned to me that she learns best when a professor provides an outline to the class, which she can use to guide her note taking. Next to her name I would write: graphic organizer for me morization. There are a series of things written next to each students name, and th ey were not all of a uniform nature. Intelligences and learning styles were always recorded, but supplemental information was diverse. I believe that it would behoove a cl ass ethnographer to more rigidly format the information recorded on the cognitive ma p. The final result will provide the ethnographer and instructor with an inventory of the students interests and methods they believe help them learn best. In future studies, I recommend that investigators draft a cognitive map of the classroom within the first th ree weeks of observation. Wh en generating the Ethnographic Project and simulated dig exercises to augm ent the curriculum, I was able to use my knowledge of the varying learning styles and intelligences contained within the class in order to more precisely target my audience. It was the combination of the pedagogical
31 theories named above and ethnographic methods that aided me in augmenting the DHS anthropology curriculum. Conclusion Multiple intelligences, modes of presenta tion, and learning styles in some ways seem almost like common sense when it comes to teaching. However, there is more to these concepts than merely thinking about them, or throwing them into a situation without thought to context. It is both an artistic and scientif ic craft to use these theories in collaboration for the constr uction of curricula a nd presentations. In my experience, it is the use of ethnographic methods that bring the theories together and give them life. There are two major educational goals re ached with this particular approach. First, due to the diverse nature of the popul ation of schools, and such diverse learning styles, this approach helps to reach e ach student (Gardner 1999, Sarouphim 1999, Nolen 2003, Goodnough 2001, Snyder 2000) individually by usi ng various styles of presenting. This method takes into consideration the cult ural background of the st udent, the fact that individual students have a unique way of learning, and those me thods that are best to use in the particular situation. The second goal met was aiding the student with improving in areas that he or she may be less adept in than others. This attri bute of the MI theory is suggested by Gardner (1999:30) and carried out in a sense by Sharon S. Sweet (1998). Sweet (1998:2) tells the tale of two students who not only excel in their own intelligences through variable teaching styles, but they also improve in thos e areas they are deficient in. This is an excellent way to promote whole brain lear ning so that students receive a balanced education in contrast to the usual western occupation with Logical-Mathematical and
32 verbal intelligences (Gardner 1983, 1999). Students must not be pinned into an intelligence. Instead it is important to explor e the students potential for all of Gardners intelligences. I used the methods presented above to augment the curriculum of the anthropology program at DHS. I asked Sheila Cohen, head of the program at DHS and instructor of both general anthropology and archaeology, to describe her method of lesson-plan formation for both classes. Her t echniques will be presented in the following chapters along with augmentations and cha nges that I made. There was a distinct advantage in being a participan t-observer in a classroom of st udents, helping me to assess different learning styles, how to apply MI perspectives and determining modes of presentation that were most effective. I propose that this par ticipant-observer experience is at the core of the relationship between anthropology and edu cation. Not only should anthropology be taught to high school students, but its methods should also be introduced to teachers in general. In relatively little time teacher s can gain a firm understanding of the diverse forms of learning in a new class of students. The next chapter tells of the General Anthropology Class taught at Durant High School; many of th e concepts here will be identified within. The lesson here is to make the classr oom a place of diverse approaches. In weightlifting experts suggest that for maximum muscle growth one must vary the workout routine. This same sort of notion must be kept in mind when educating. There may be modes of presentation that become sta ndard, but that does not mean there is not room to alter it now and again. Also, the targ et audience must always be kept in mind.
33 Simply using multimedia for the sake of using multimedia, or cramming in an intelligence or learning style for no reason will lead a teacher to confuse and ultimately overload the students. All the parts must be considered at once as a whole for the presentations to have a profound affect.
34 Figure 2.1 Inventory List Modes of Presentation Video/DVD Computer generated Powerpoint Neobooks Websites Research Virtual tours Virtual Museums Visuals Photographs Maps Artifacts Practical exercises Books Articles Experience Fieldtrips Work study Simulated excavation Guest Lecturers Foods Language Art Multiple Intelligences Musical Bodily-Kinesthetic Logical Mathematical Linguistic Spatial Interpersonal Intrapersonal Naturalist Existential Learnin g St y les Tactile Kinesthetic Auditory Visual CombinationsFull Sensory
35 Chapter III Anthropology at Durant High School The curriculum for the General Anthropology Class was created by Sheila Cohen. Ms. Cohen received her first degree, a BS in Finance, in 1970. After having a twentyyear career in banking she star ted over again at the University of South Florida where in 1995 she received a BA in History and Anthr opology and in 2000 an MA in History. Her qualifications provided an advantage when it came to designing an anthropology course for high school students. The class as of now is offered as an honors course for seniors, and this class had 45 students. In this chapter three goals are considered. One goal is to present the general anth ropology lesson plan devised so expertly by Ms. Cohen. The second is to present the additions that were generated by my collaboration with the DHS program. The third is to present the eff ectiveness of methods utilized to teach the subject matter. The following is the schedule fo r the General Anthropology class: Week 1 Overview of Anthropology Methods Used to Study the Past Biology and Evolution Week 2 Fossil Primates Earliest Hominids Week 3 Hunting and Gathering Archaic Homo sapiens Upper and Lower Paleolithic Mesolithic and Neolithic Periods Week 4 The Rise of Civilization/Archaeology Fieldwork Ethnography Project Outline Due Nature of Culture/Archaeology Fieldwork
36 Week 5 Family and Kinship Language, Music and Culture Week 7 Religion and the Supernatural Ethnography Project Due Week 8 Social Organizations/Culture Change Week 9 Exam Review Cohens Curriculum Ms. Cohen, while possessing a basic curriculum written for anthropology (Sunshine State Standards), repo rted that she basically had to start from scratch when thinking about how to presen t anthropology to a group of high school students. By design, the anthropology course has the advantag e of being an electiv e course. In this case, subjects such as evolution are not protes ted against since student s have the option of not selecting the class (Sheila Cohen, personal communication, December 2003). In a sense, Ms. Cohen had control in teaching he r students anthropology. She simply had to make known what the class entailed so st udents would understand th e choice they were making. Class descriptions were published in th e course catalog for the students (DHS Course Catalog 2003). Much of the recrui ting for this class was done by Ms. Cohen herself. She was able to visit different classes to talk with the students about the opportunity to learn anthropology. This allowe d Ms. Cohen to speak to each student who was applying for the General Anthropology Honors Class, and during this contact the contents of the course curriculum, particul arly that of evolution, were discussed with
37 the student. In the end students knew what the class contained and the points that would be discussed, before they registered. The class was based on cooperative group lear ning (student interaction) as well as an understanding of basic aspects of anthr opology. One class is only nine weeks long and even with class five days a week for an hour and 45 minutes a da y, the class is still rushed. Ms. Cohen had to design a curriculu m that would express core ideologies of anthropology in a fairly condensed amount of time. Only rarely did classes consist purely of lecture. Instead, the ideas of an thropology were put to work in higher thinking exercises. Ms. Cohen often introduced a class with a particular exercise referred to as Culture Shock. This task called for the students to break into groups of four or five. Each group devised their own mini-culture. First a name was decided on by the group. Then they created their own language with a five word minimum, a nd finally the students issued two taboos for their cu lture. Two ambassadors were named from each group to go from one group to another. The students we re instructed not to use English, only their language they composed. In some cases, the ambassadors would be offended at witnessing a member of another group breaking a taboo of their cu lture. On occasion the ambassadors would politely leave, other times the ambassador w ould be visibly offende d and storm off from the table. Once all of the groups had been vi sited they discussed their culture with the rest of the class. The students were surprised to find out the meaning of their interactions from the perspective of a visiting group, since in some cases it differed from their own.
38 They may have thought an interaction to be pl easant, but all the while they were breaking a taboo of the visiting group. This one introductory exercise touched upon many aspects of anthropology. Students realized the diversity of the worlds cultures and at the same time witnessed the challenges that anthropologists face. Perhaps more implicitly, this exercise demonstrated to the students the importance of language, to both anthropology and culture in general. Students produced posters about their cultu re. On these posters the language was defined, a map of the area was sometimes drawn, general taboos were listed, and background information was offered about the cultures. When asked why she wanted to teach an anthropology class, Ms. Cohen responded first and foremost I wanted to teach anthropology because I am so passionate about it. Her philosophy behind designing the anthropology course sums up her major objectives. These include fostering an unde rstanding of how culture operates, why it functions the way it does, w hy there are differences between and among people, what factors are instrumental in thes e differences. Ms. Cohen wanted to offer her students the opportunity not only to accept differences but see similarities between other cultures and their own. Cultural relativity, or in this case sensitiv ity (the preferred term here, due to the anthropological debate on relativism and anti-re lativism, see Geertz 2000: 42-67 for a discussion on the debate) is an important fact or to take into cons ideration when forming any anthropological course. In this world of ever-closing gaps, se nsitivity to difference and awareness of similarities should be promoted in education. Ms. Cohen reports that those students who learn to function multiculturally will be most successful; she views
39 this as having the potential of being one of the most useful skills she can give her students. Modes of Presentation and Classroom Tools In each of the anthropology courses Ms. Cohen required that her students keep an interactive notebook, a tool that is widely used by the social science department at DHS. The students used this method to keep track of their assignments, in an orderly and useful form. All the assignments were kept in portfol io-style notebooks, with a table of contents and journal entries. The notebooks helped k eep the students on task and organized. As long as the students made a moderate effort at keeping up with their notebooks they knew where the class was in reference to subject matter and exercises be ing completed. Ms. Cohen used many exercises that she found on both the internet and from published anthropological litera ture (a list of her sources can be found in Appendix C). The method of note taking in class was a ssisted by graphic organizers handed out by Ms. Cohen. These were usually raw outlin es, but gave key terms that caught the attention of the student note takers. In ev ery instance where lecture was the priority, the graphic organizers were one of the few stabilizers of the kids attention. However, after twenty minutes the students would simply pay attention when the key terms were mentioned, and during the presentation of supplemental information th eir interest tended to wander. Therefore, the graphic organize r has both the advantage of keeping attention, and the disadvantage of providing a crutch for the uninterested student. When I asked Ms. Cohen to share her philosophy of teaching, she provided me with a concise answer that described her teaching style and the guiding principles behind it:
40 After reviewing all of my methods and ideas, I believe I am somewhat of a constructivist in that I do base some of my techniques on the theories of Bartlett and the philoso phy of Dewey. These methods focus on the active role of the learner in build ing understanding. My group activities and student led discussions attempt to engage the students in being active learners, taking ownershi p of the material and teasing out the knowledge on their own Within the context of anthropology and archaeology, my philosophy is that by exposing my students to the way in which cultures shapes their own lives and belief systems they can better understand and appreciate other cultures. I try to use these classes to teach not only tolerance of othe rs, but a greater appreciation of diversity. (Shelia Cohen Pers onal Communication December 2003). Ms. Cohen also told me that as far as methodology goes she certainly ascribes to multiple intelligences, and she attempts to shape her lesson plans to appeal to all of those learners. Ms. Cohen uses strategic reading and focused studies to encourage students to develop metacognitive abilities. Ms. Cohen made an effort to change the mode of presentation as much as reasonably possible. This included some work on the internet and the most useful tool a ppeared to be that of the anthropological film. This demonstrated to me that as professional anth ropologists we not only need to have a broad understanding of the anthropol ogical literature, but also of anthropological film. This section can be concluded nice ly with a final quote from Ms. Cohen pertaining to the initial question on her philosophy of teaching:
41 The realities we face in the classroom cannot be reduced to theories. I use more applied anthropology in a day than any of the professors in academia. My students are from abusive, broken homes; they are faced with peer pressure, exposure to drugs, sexual harassment, violence, discrimination and humiliation at the hands of their peers. I am not just a teacher. Im also a sociologist, psychologist, counselor, friend, and sometimes the only safe haven for some of them. They dont have teaching philosophies for that in academia. (Shelia Cohen, personal communication, December 2003). The Additions It was a daunting task to supplement a curriculum filled with large amounts of subject matter. When I first asked Ms. Cohen for her notes and outline for the course, she gave me 10 three-ringed binders. Ms. Cohe n did not take the task of devising an anthropology course for high school light ly. She put a large amount of time and resources into creating a class chock full of anthropological information and practical exercises. As a result, at the outset there were no criticisms for the curriculum as it was, but that didnt mean improvements could not be made. The trick is in knowing when and which adaptations to make. In supplementing the curriculum four areas were taken into consideration: 1) Presentations to the class 2) Exercises applying anthropology 3) Computer and internet involvement 4) Implementing the anth ropological perspective
42 The exercises in applying anthropology wa s the entry way I chose to integrate MI theory, learning style theory, and varying mode s of presentation into the additions I was attempting to make. Internet involvement al ong with varying presen tations to the class aided in diversifying the modes of presentation, therefore engaging the various intelligences and learning styles within th e class. For instance, the Ethnographic Research Project (ERP) was designed to appeal to each of the intelligences. Any aspect of the high school culture was up for interp retation and the students were allowed to choose their own topics. The ethnographic produ ct was also presented in the students chosen mode of presentation. The intention of the ERP was to allow students to utilize their strengths (most developed intelligen ces) and strengthen their weaknesses (less developed intelligences). The latter is best accomplished when th e topic being investigated appeals to the intelligence of the student, even if the inte lligences being engaged do not include that particular intelligence. Ideally, interest in th e material to be learned is the best stimulus to learning, rather than such external goals as grades or later competitive advantage, (Bruner 1960:14) In other words, if Chri stopher is observing, r ecording and conducting interviews with the football team he may not directly engage his well developed BodilyKinesthetic, Intrapersonal, or Existential Intell igences. Instead, it is far more likely that Christopher will utilize his Linguistic, Logical Mathematical, Interpersonal and Naturalistic Intelligences. For the reason that the topic directly ties to his well developed intelligences it acts as incentive to engage his less developed intelligences. I use this particular example because the Bodily-Kinesthetic Intelligence is the most difficult intelligence to engage directly with classroom exercises that have specific topics and
43 ideas to convey. Conversely, the simulated excavation conducted by the archaeology class, which will be discussed later, doe s call for Bodily-Kinesthetic and Spatial Intelligences to be engaged. Finally, I suggest that th e various leaning styles w ithin the class were fully addressed with the ERP and the simulated excavations. The exercise is based on active learning, which has the potential to engage all the intelligences as well as appeal to differing learning styles. In essence, the e xperience is what the student makes it; the student will logically and naturally utilize th eir strengths and personal learning style to complete the project. Success in teaching depends upon making it possible for children to have a sense of their interaction, (Bruner 1966:76). It is the res ponsibility of the instructor(s) to facilitate the progression of the projec t by supplying points of departure, topic discussions, question and answer sessions, and personal contac t with the students in order to ensure an effective learni ng experience for each individual. Excuse Me Ms. Cohen is There Anything I Can Do? My primary function while participating in the class was to be an asset, by offering my academic and field experiences In addition, I employed ethnographic methods that helped evaluate the success of the class components. Perhaps most important was the task of serving as a lia ison between the USF Anthropology Department and this fledgling high school anthropology program. The students at DHS were to have access to USF resources, both material and intellectual. The Speaking Engagement Program will be discussed throughout.
44 When I entered Ms. Cohens classroom I felt uncomfortable, just as an ethnographer feels entering into a new cu lture. This was a personally humbling experience. It seemed my graduation fr om high school was not all that long ago and fitting in would be easy. Id be the cool visiting anthropology graduate student. It took thirty seconds or so to show me just how wrong that notion was. The kids really had no problem with my being there, but an effort to get to know them during our time together was a priority. To make the students more comfortable with my presence a sort of unspoken role was granted to me. My Role The role of teacher was already taken, and there was also no chance of being accepted as a fellow student. Walking down Hallway 200 the first day was when the first confrontation with this realit y of a role-less existence ca ught my attention. A young lady asked me with a disbelief in her voice are you a student here? N o I replied to her, Im not. Oh then are you a teacher? N o, I replied, Im not. Then what are you? Standing there perplexed by this unexpec ted question I realized I did not fit into any set roles in the high school culture. Creating a unique role within the classroom and school as a whole was the only option. I obs erve classes. Oh you watch us, youre a watcher? Yeah sort of and the young lady, satisfied with that explanation, continued on her way. My role in the class was defined by th e students. During the first group session I went from group to group trying to meet pe ople individually. It was essential to know what the students were really concentrating their time on, what their aspirations were, and if they had any questions to ask me. With the information collected the MI theory would
45 be put into practice more effectively, and le arning styles could be surveyed generally with the information. The answering of their questions is what molded my role in the class. Some were personal questions, others were about intere sts (talking about arch aeology for example), and others were about being observed. The ki ds were excited about my being there; Ms. Cohen told me that being part of the study made the students feel special. If the classroom instruction were co mpared to an average general anthropology textbook, my role would be of the green a nd blue FYI boxes-adding information where possible or when it was asked for. Relati vely speaking, acceptan ce into the class was gained quickly. In all cases, it was possible to maintain a rapport that placed me into what would be considered a grown-up status, bu t they called me by my first name and in a lot of cases realized our similarities as student s. All that really mattered is they trusted me and respected my expertise in the subject of anthropology. That point was extremely important when asking the students to complete new assignments. Adding to the General Anthropology Curriculum There needed to be a project that would last the entire quarter, teach fundamentals of anthropology, and present an opportunity for the students to experience how anthropologists work, engage MI and learning style theories and finally give the students the opportunity to choose the mode of presenta tion for their final project. With these criteria in mind, I designed the Ethnographic Research Project (ERP). But before discussing the ERP, an explanation of th e speaking engagement program and how it applied to this class wi ll be presented.
46 Speaking Engagement Program At the outset it was proposed to bring as many anthropology department members to the school as possible. This program is exactly what the name implies. The design was for one USF professor and one graduate st udent to speak to the DHS students. That was achieved in this particular class. The speaking engagement program introduced varying modes of presentation to the students. It was my hope that experi encing anthropology thr ough the primary source of an active researcher would create an ex citement about the subject matter at hand. although a classroom of high school kids may become bored and distracted while listening to their regular inst ructors, a guest speaker ofte n sparks attentiveness and rejuvenated interest in the topic. While observing the class during guests lectures, I noticed that each of the students, no matter the learning style they have most relied upon in the past, would adjust to fit the mode of presentation of the speaker. For instance, if a student disliked slides and lecture, and lost interest during such presentations, th e student remained engaged by the guest speaker. This is likely due to bot h the idea of a new pers on being in class and the expert status of the guest. Also, st udents are generally conditioned throughout their school-lives (indeed their personal lives as well ) to be on their best behavior when guests are visiting. Professor Robert Tykot provided an overview of European paleoanthropology and archaeology along with presenting some of his research to the students. Cassandra Harper, a USF graduate student, spoke to the students about the biological and cultural perceptions of gender. Both of these talks were highly enga ging to the students and were
47 enhanced by a slide show and lecture. Many students commented by saying the talks were the best part of the class, and possi bly the way they most enjoyed learning about anthropology. This program ran in all of the classes and will be discussed further in later chapters; it is important to realize that this is a major component of the overall project. This is in essence applied an thropology; in the case of the archaeology class it can be considered public archaeology. Having professo rs and students visit is the best kind of resource sharing a university department can offer.
48 Chapter IV The Ethnographic Research Project In the three classes, I obse rved all of the intelligences defined by Gardner in the student population. I used th is idea as my starting point, since I wanted to create a project that would engage all of the intelligences giving each student an opportunity to both use their natural abilities and help them to improve on those, in which they may be deficient. I wanted the experience to be full-sensory as well as appealing to various learning styles. Lastly, I wa nted the final product of the project to be open to many modes of presentation, and to leave this c hoice to the students. Luckily, anthropology has a methodology that meets all of these criteria. The very nature of a high school makes for an environment conducive for ethnographic study. The anthropology students of Durant High School worked toward constructing an ethnographic sketch of a chosen constituent of school life. This aided in teaching the four field approach in anthr opology. For example, if a student were to choose the basketball team to sketch, they woul d be well prepared for a holistic approach. The physical characteristics of the players may be recorded to find biological ties between the sport of basketball and player. The material remains of the team (e.g. garbage, damaged equipment, old uniforms, places they practice and play) can be investigated to draw links with the players behavior. The overall observation of the team, in practice, during a game and even off the court can provide for an excellent culture description. The different signals
49 and jargon of the basketball team can be studied to understand communication of the players and the cultural associ ations. Ethnographic practice is not just valued for its research product alone, but it is also valued for the aggregation of skill training and personal development that complement other ar eas of learning and social development. (Mienczakowski 1999:148) Many groups, teams and organizations were discussed before the final ones were chosen. It was preferred that the students practice participan t observation, however, observation alone was accepted. The student s were given this assignment at the beginning of the quarter, and they had until th e end of class to complete it. The group members did not have to choose a particular sub-culture; some possible substitutions could have been made with projects such as the observation of cafeteria eating habits, detention etiquette, classroom dynamics, library behavior, an d many others that can be observed during the school day and are essential parts of the Dura nt High School Culture. A second component of this project cons idered forms of presentation. Students produced written forms of their research. Howe ver, it was encouraged that other forms of presentation be explored. Ex amples of these include an ethnographic film, a poster presentation, or a display case. The overall goal of the project was to provide the student with an opportunity to apply the methods a nd topics that were being covered in the classroom. Before exploring the results of the Ethnography Project, the exercises used to introduce ethnography to the students will be discussed.
50 The Diverse Spectrum of Ethnography The best possible way to introduce a subject is through a correlation between the subject matter and something familiar to the class (Saturno 1997:6). The first thing that came to mind was using pop-culture television (programs such as The Real World, Road Rules, Survivor, Family Bonds) to illustrate some basic premises of ethnography. These shows have become advertisement monsters, and even though their purpose at the outset may have moderately reflected an anthr opological method, that is certainly no longer true. The question then was how ethnography s hould be introduced in a way the kids would understand it best. In addition to lecture and discus sion, it was decided that the most important quality of the exercise would be illustrating the dive rsity of ethnography. Explaining the different ways it can be presented, interpre ted, and how it can be both artful and scientific (Fetterman 1996), ai ded in creating a hook to get the students interested. The more they re alized that the interpretations would be all their own, the more interested they were. There were two brief eth nographic sketches handed out to the students. They were chosen for two reasons, one because it showed the drastic differences in form that ethnography can take, and also to supply intere sting samples to catch the attention of the students. The two ethnographies that were compared were, Where the Heart Is (Angrosino 1998a ) a chapter from Michael Angrosinos Opportunity House: Ethnographic Stories of Mental Retardation (1998) and High School Peer Group Classification Systems by Lynne S. Robins (1982). Robins reflects a traditional approach to ethnographic method with her writing styl e (Fetterman 1996, Kottak 1982). Angrosino
51 on the other hand, demonstrated an unorthodox method of delivering ethnographic data. Robins wrote in an objective reporting style. Angrosinos work was fictitious emic portrayal of the life of a mentally handi capped person. After the students read the sketches they were eager to have a discussion. I was concerned about confusing matter s even worse. How can these two different stories be ethnography ? We discussed the differe nces and some clarifications were met using the worksheet seen in appe ndix H. Using these questions and discussion points the class slowly gained a reas onable understanding of ethnography both methodologically and theoretically. This can best be seen in their final results. Here Are Our Ethnographies, Ms. Cohen First, the students received another worksheet designed to aid them in formulating their research (Appendix D). It was the understanding between the class and me that even though their methods should all be similar their modes of presentation could differ gr eatly. There was also the understanding that all of the groups had to produce a written form of th eir research. In all there were seven groups, each with a different sub-culture of the high school culture in which they were all a part. The handout featured in Appendix I was di stributed to the class when introducing the Ethnographic Project. These groups of four to five students most often picked an activity that one of the members actually participated in alre ady. This was a perfect gateway into talking about the emic and etic views that anthropologist s explore. Also, those participants tended to boost enthusiasm of the other group members. The underlying
52 goal of this entire project was to give th e students the opportun ity to both examine their surroundings and their selves. This is not only promoting higher and critical thinking but it also gives the students the opportunity to know themselves a bit better. As Ms. Cohen so eloquently expressed, If I can get them [students] to que stion just one preconceived bias, then that might open them up to questioning others th ey have, (Sheila Cohen, personal e-mail communication, February 2004). The seven subcultures were as follow s: the Drama Club, the Volleyball Team, the Band, the Freaks, African Americans, the Orchestra, and the Swim Team. It would be far too cumbersome to present the fi nal product of each group, not to mention impossible in this format, but the following is a brief account of what the groups created including their supplemental project. The Ethnographic Product The Drama Club group presented an excellent poster-board, which had pictures of Drama Club members in action as well as behind the scenes. The groups all formed a hypothesis they could test in the field. The premise of the drama club group was that most kids in the drama club are extroverted. This was the question that they geared their application of ethnographic methods toward. On the other hand the group that studied th e Volleyball Team ha d quite a different hypothesis they wished to test. It wa s their contention th at communication and cooperation contributes to the team having a winning record. In the end, this group concluded that it was the strong bond between the girls on the team that contributed to their being able to act as a whole. Here is another example of a group doing an excellent
53 job with their poster-board pres entations. Pictures were di splayed along side quotes from the girls on the team gathered in the field. The group examining the DHS Band presen ted a power point presentation to the class. There was a series of questions they wished to ask and some misconceptions they wanted to clear up. For instance, the group stated that it is a common misconception that students of lesser intellect take band to avoid harder classes. They countered this with two forms of data; documentation they researched as well as verbal standards conveyed to them explaining that the band students mu st adhere to a strict academic standard. An interesting study was done on the popul ation of students called the Freaks. The fact that the term has withstood the test of time in the high school culture was fascinating in its own right. The term still applies to a group of students who are described as anti-social, not caring of what th e rest of society thinks of them, but are now dressing in the gothic style. This ethnographer group im mediately assumed that the reason these people dressed as they did was beca use of their religion. It seemed from the oral reporting of the group, that they had realized that th e students seldom seriously linked their look to religion at all. This is an instance where a group had to face their biases from the outset. Another group that actually left me a bit puzzled reported on the AfricanAmerican population at DHS. This was su rprising because their project topic was supposed to be courtyard behavior. Still th e project was accepted, but without welcome or high marks from Ms. Cohen. This group pr esented a poster-board presentation, titled African Americans in a watermelon-colore d font. In the groups own way they were seeking to disprove misconceptions.
54 They over-generalized what we were l ooking for by searching for an easy target. For instance, many of the quest ions that are commonly untrue stereotypes were addressed such as: do all African Americans like frie d chicken, or do all Af rican Americans sit on their porches in the afternoon? It should be noted that this topic was not approved (approval for topics was the de signed protocol) before it wa s completed; it was merely accepted for grading. Ms. Cohen made the de cision to accept their pr oject. Ultimately I think this was a wise choice because there were two statements in their written ethnography that somewhat redeemed this attempt: In our ethnography on African Americans we realized that in some of our statements we might be biased even though we consciously tried not to be. We also realize that some of our observations may not be accurate because of an inadequate number of interviews, obser vations and visual images. Overall we have learned a very im portant lesson. African Americans, although their culture is very different, they are just like you and I. They are just trying to get by in life, in whatever way th ey can and still have fun and faith while doing it. This lesson is true to all cultures and will help us in the future to have an open mind towards other people. (Excerpt from DHS African Americans Group Ethnography Project written report) In that case, at least, th e students did begin to face th eir biases, and we hope this will carry on in their futures. Perhaps this is one of the most important skills these students could receive. The Orchestra group as well as the Sw im Team group presented poster-board displays, which were full of pictures and captions. Both of these groups were similar
55 because the main writers were both part of the respective ensemble. The swim team group was able to display a good amount of insi ght into the team, as well as the main writers role on the team. The Orchestra group accomplished the same task. The last group chose a population of stude nts that play the card game Magic: The Gathering (apparently a game that is not Dungeon and Dragons, and one should never call it that). They presente d an ethnographic film about their subjects; playing popular music and using voiceover to explain terms such as etic and emic and participant observation. This group was able to explain the rules of the game and described that they all played the game once or twice. The film was brief but their effort reflected well and they produced the finest supplemental project. This should be the ultimate goal of the supplemental presentation in the future, an ethnographic film. This is the final statement made by this group investigating the Magic players: Classifying this particular subculture has proven itself almost as arbitrary as the classification of races (for a lack of a better analogy). There are so many defining characteristics of the students w ho are a part of the Magic posse that classifying them as the Magic Posse ignores many other equally relevant characteristics which defined each member completely differently. However, being a part of the Magic Posse is indefinitely a defining characteristic of each one of its people. (Ethnography Project: Magic, the Gathering DHS General Anthropology 2003) It was statements like that and others that allowed for a better understanding of the students perspectiv e of their world. Even more, it is encouraging to see the use of
56 the metaphor on race, showing that they were beginning to consider the anthropological perspective. Without exception the st udents not only understood ethnography beyond its basic premises, but also obtained a substa ntial understanding a nd strong base in anthropology. What to Do With Ethnographies Like These The written portions of the ethnographies can be used to better understand how the student views their place in their environment. Perhap s an examination of many of these sorts of studies could lead to learning more about the 21 st century teenager; it has seemed that this generation of secondary school students is facing harsher times than those of the past. Moreover, this sort of fi nal project can help the instructor gauge their own success in conveying the subject-matter to the students. Consequently, the fact that group performance can be used as a measured assessment is the major use for the ethnographies. Assessing Student Group Performance The major focus of this particular assessment was to give the students the opportunity to not only express their ethnography through writing but to also utilize other forms of presentation (Sweet 1998). When designing the ethnographic project the ideas of the multiple intelligences theory, learning styles and modes of presentation were taken into consideration as described above. It seemed only logical to have the final product reflect those theories as well, by providing an outlet for e xpressing all forms of thought. In essence, the final project was, at least in part, formed by the students and their choices of varied modes of presentation (Sweet 1998).
57 It also seems that this takes a step towa rd creating an assessment style that may be more adaptable cross-cultur ally (Gardner1993: 170-171). Of course, the term crosscultural in this context is referring to the myriad of cultures that make up American or Western culture. That is to say this form of assessment may not work in an Ethiopian or Brazilian High School. However, the methods could be adapted to create a culturally based assessment, if someone from or extremely familiar with the culture designs the curriculum. One may say that schools do not change from place to place as long as you are in the USA, but if that were tr ue one could easily draw genera lities from the observance of these few instances. Gardner (1993: 178) believ es it to be extremel y valuable that the assessment take place in the context of the students working on problems, projects, or products that genuinely engage them, that ho ld their interest a nd motivate them to do well. The Ethnographic Research Project was designed to reach this goal. The written forms and static suppl ements were accompanied by speaking presentation of student groups with the rest of the class. This was va luable in that it gave each student an opportunity to talk about anthropology the way they understood it. Moreover, it gave the students the opportunity to c onfront their biases (prejudices) with the aid of the input from the rest of the class. Overall, this project acted as a varied form of assignment that was flexible enough to be nd with the students, but also defined enough to produce valid products that could be asse ssed by Ms. Cohen. While the project was a success, I will now address changes that shoul d be made to the project in the future.
58 In Hindsight With the next anthropology course it is recommended that the students be given the choice of what sort of study they would like to complete. For instance perhaps the student would like to complete a biological an thropology study. In that case the student would research the proper methods to follow and write an appropriate report as well as supplemental project. An archaeological project could be comple ted either with the students cooperation with USF anthropology laboratories or any t ype of experimental archaeology project would be open for completion. While it is the point of the ethnogra phy to be four-field, that does not promise equal billing to each s ubfield. If the students were to choose alternate methods, and lines of investigation the entire class would have examples of the broad ranging nature of anthropology. It is of the utmost importance that the holistic approach be utilized no matter the st rategy of investigation selected. Finally, perhaps an overall problem can be presented to the class. This would give the students the opportunity to experience methods in all of the sub disciplines and understand how those concepts are articu lated within anthr opological research. Conclusion and Final Assessment of the Project The intention here was to create one part icular long-term exercise for the general anthropology class. This project illustrated general anthropologica l methods, gave the kids the opportunity to practice those methods urged the student to face their own biases, challenged worldviews, met th e standards of diversifying techniques thro ugh the use of MI, LS, and modes of presentation, gave th e student the opportunity to present their ideals in a way they felt most comfortable wit h, promoted cultural se nsitivity, illustrated
59 general anthropological ideals, gave the kids the chance to develop the anthropological perspective for themselves, and most importa ntly presented a challenging exercise that encourage both higher and critical thinking. As a final point, the exercise designed by John Caughey (2000: 149-156) illustrating How to Teach Self Ethnography is a great individual exercise for the members of each group to complete. Perhaps, however, the focus would be on their experience. This could be presented as a series of journal entries, or in a brief narrative by the student. A self ethnography is a form of reflexivity after all. Here, once again, even more insight will be gained into the life of the student and their functioning within the hi gh school culture. As well, Caughey (2000: 149) states in his introduction, ethnographic entry points are not only entry into the Other; they are also the moments that raise our consciousne ss of our own cultural conditioning.
60 Chapter V Their Assessment: the Voice of the Student Methods as an Ethnographer The goals of an ethnographer have been succinctly and eloquently stated by Roger C. Owen: the primary task of an ethnographer is to attempt intellectually to enter behind the eyes and into the minds of their hosts and thus look out with them and share their vision of the universe (Owen 1986:142). Wollcott (2002:45) believes that there are very few (if any) situations today in educational research that demand or even allow the kind of firsthand knowledge we expect from an ethnographer. This is my attempt to understand how different forms of presentation fared in an anthropology classroom setting. Additionally, it was to capture what the students thought of the experience. Conveying the voice of the students is markedly different than entering behind their eyes intellectually to tell you what I think they thought. In the same vein, I didnt observe or pa rticipate in the class long enough to warrant the ethnography label (Wolcott 2002). Below, I attempt to accurately convey what the students and instructor said and wrote to me. Within the time constraints of this project one general an thropology course was observed. Ethnographic methods were empl oyed including partic ipant observation, informal interviews, field notes (journal), pho tographs and questionnaires. I was present for 20 class sessions during the 2003 first fa ll quarter at DHS (A ugust 11, 2003October 9, 2003). The following describes how both Ms. Cohen and the students view their experience in the General Anthropology Class. While a questionnaire was used, a great
61 deal of the following information comes from informal interviews with students during class time. The Voice of the Students The most obvious question posed to the students was also broad-What do you think about anthropology now th at youve learned more about it? That was also the first question on the questionnaire (see Appendix E for archaeology questionnaire). The most common written response was a brief anthropology is much more interesting than I had thought, or anthropology is much more comp lex than I could have ever imagined. When speaking to a student in class they had this to say, I like the class a lot. I dont really believe in all of it, but I still like to know what idea s other people have. Another student wrote I think that anthropology is helpful in unders tanding cultures other than and including my own, while al so helping me to understand the theory of evolution. It did seem, by the end of the class, that all of the students were involved with the class proceedings, and genuinely interested about learning more a bout anthropology. It was fascinating how the students viewed their opportunity to write their own ethnography. One student remarked yes (it was advantageous) we had to go through all the steps and refer to other et hnographiesthis was great for hands-on learners. Another student wrote that the ethnography experience helped her learn anthropology because I didnt only take notes, I got to do fieldwork and find my own answers. Some students told me that the ethnography program did not really help them understand anthropology any better. One student stat ed, We didnt get to really explore outside of our own culture. Another student remarked The ethnography project didn t help me understand anthropology anymore, but it helped me unde rstand more of what anthropologists do.
62 Overall approximately 90 percent of the respon ses I received were positive. The general consensus of the students was that the et hnography project helped them to understand certain components of anthropology, and gave them a sense of what it is that an anthropologist does. The opinions of the students have been offered above and are peppered throughout this thesis. The next secti on explores how anthropology acted upon the students worldviews, and preconceived notions. Only they were going to be able to give me answers to questions such as these. Fo rtunately, the students did not hesitate when talking about their worldviews and the occasional challenge that anthropology poses to them. Students Worldviews This question was posed to the students: Did you find that the anthropological perspective conflicted with your own beliefs, morals, values etc? Please explain your answer. Fifteen of the responses out of the 33 received explained th at evolution posed a problem for them due to conflicting religious beliefs. This was surprising because in informal discussion with th e students they seldom e xpressed these feelings. Often times their answer took the form of I dont believe in evolution but I learned it to pass the class. Another intere sting aspect was that the other 18 students reported there was no conflict, but gave the reas on that they believe in evolution or that they were not very religious. That means all of these students equated this question directly with religion; they see this as an anthropological concept dealing with morals, beliefs and values. The same could be observed when the students often expressed disapproval for alternate forms of marriage and social rela tions other than monogamy.
63 Yes the anthropological perspective did c onflict with my beliefs because it began to contradict the Bible and its teachings. Yes because I do not believe in evolu tion and it got tiring after a while. I understood that its just another theory but it was so pounded in it got frustrating. I dont believe that we came from monkeys but I learned to d eal with it to pass the class. The above answers were not chosen to provide an example of negative remarks toward evolution. Instead these questions are only three of many that revealed something about the class and how it can be improved. For instance the first statement, here the student believes that the theory of evoluti on conflicts with the Bi ble, perhaps it can be described more clearly in the future. Th e teacher can elaborate on the separation of religion from evolutionary theory (Gould 1997). It is a difficult situation for a high school teacher to explain creationism, or talk about the difference between a metaphorical in terpretation of the bible versus a literal one. Ironically, the one tool that may help to focus the picture of evolution by contrast, is off-limits for high school teachers to speak about The second remark articulates that the theory of evolution was being continually reiterated. In my observations, this never seemed to be the case. However, Ms. C ohen and I have often spoken about condensing the biological anthropology portion of the cla ss since it now takes up approximately one third of the class time. The lengthened tim e talking about human origins, primatology and genetics may have led to the perception of being steep ed in evolutionary theory. The final remark by the students demonstrat es that not all of the students were reached with the information about evoluti on. For one, Ms. Cohen teaches that we are
64 not evolved from monkeys; she explains that we have a common ancestor. Ms. Cohen teaches evolution and human evolution using the most current anthropological information available. This one student mi ssed that. Unfortunately, two other students revealed to me they saw evolution in the same way. Perhaps students are simply tuning out the portion about evoluti on because many of them have already made up their minds on the outcome of this debate. One should approach the problem of teaching evolution by beginning with the answering of these questions and misconceptions. An encouraging collection of responses was to the question how did this class change your worldview? Three students told me that it did not ch ange their worldview at all. However, on the questionnaire as well as informal interviews, students consistently reported that it really opened their eyes to other cultures, and how those cultures are as valid as their own. Moreover, many of the students reported that this class has helped them confront their biases. Here are some examples: I think I will be able to look at ot her cultures and groups of people in a less biased way. I will not frown upon their differences, but embrace them with an open mind, accepting that they are different. It has altered my view b ecause Ive learned to make an effort to get around my biases and understand people. I really learned or realiz ed that our culture is not n ecessarily the right or correct way of doing things. I learne d to be more open-minded. These statements embody the classs at titude toward anth ropology changing their worldviews. Amazing at times was their en thusiasm toward learning new ideas about
65 cultures. While differences were often remarked upon, the similarities between cultures surprised them the most. Summary of the Students Assessment The students were asked what they would change about the cla ss if they could. They almost unanimously thought the biolog ical components of the class should be shortened. Their favorite aspect of the class was split evenly with cultural type stuff and archaeology. When the st udent would say culture type stuff it meant the opportunity to learn about diffe rent cultures, which is no t necessarily equated with cultural anthropology. The students most commonly suggested th e class take a fieldtrip to a location where they might be able to observe another culture. Others suggested a more in-depth look at many of the subjects; all four subfields were mentioned in these comments. This can be interpreted as the students wanting to continue study in these subfields, so much so in fact they would be persuaded to ta ke another elective c overing the specialty. Although the results are generated from a small sample size; most st udents expressed an interest in taking additiona l anthropology classes during their high school careers. It was expressed to the students that one day anthropology could possibly become a required class in high school such as history or math. Howe ver, they strongly disagreed, except for four students interviewe d. Many of them stat ed that the subject matter is already touched upon in other cla sses. Other people be lieved that since evolution is involved it should not be required. Some just said no, its a social science elective just like psychology or family and marri age. It is uncertain if my comment was in the right context. The students were to understand that anthropology could enhance
66 other subjects, and anthropology can also help both students and teachers make the most of their academic experience. Observations and Conclusions The students thoroughly enjoye d the opportunity to give me feed back on the class both face to face and in writing. It is warned that problems with questionnaire use and its methodological uncertainties, such as the distance between questioner and respondent, may weaken credibil ity of the source (Fetterman 1998: 55). However, these sorts of uncertainties can be controlled for if the questioner has an already in-place solid rapport with the respondent. For instance, the students were to ld that they could put their names on the questionnaire and only Ms. Cohen and I would see them. Many of the students elected to do so. Th is choice was given because then their faces and my understanding of them could be paired with their written sentiments. Additionally, further insight could be gaine d, and perhaps provide a deeper understanding of the answer to the questions by knowing who they were written by. Comparing that with the questions they asked in person and what is known of them gives a much firmer grasp on what they were conveying. This is similar to the method employed with Ms. Cohen. We corresponded by email. I asked her questions in informal langua ge. But due to the fact that she and I have known each other, worked with each other for over a year, she is able to interpret what is asked to a more precise extent than if we ha d never met. The same could be said for the answers received. Ms. Cohen is very gift ed at expressing her thoughts, but she knows as well that her language can be informal w ith me both in person and through e-mail.
67 Chapter VI Archaeology at Durant High School Just as with the general anthropology course, the archaeology class rests upon a strong curriculum foundation constructed by Shelia Cohen. The difference to be considered is that general anthropology pr ovides a base for continuing students. The archaeology class is building onto that, and exploring a par ticular realm of anthropology. This makes the archaeology classes open to furthering the knowledge of the student pertaining to not only anthropology, but the traditional subjects of the secondary school. A linguistics course, biological anthropology course, or a cu ltural anthropology course would equally be effective means of e xploring more deeply the discipline of anthropology. However, it is obvious that implementing all of these electives would be quite difficult logistically. Although archaeology was closely linked with anthropology throughout this course, the sub-discipline was i nvestigated as a whole. This includes global counterparts, European historical methods, art history, and the humanities. On the spectrum between humanities and science the class was positioned as centrally as possible. The goal was to produce a well-rounded perspectiv e of the discipline. Cohens Archaeology Curriculum The following is the curriculum guide that Ms. Cohen developed for her archaeology class:
68 ARCHAEOLOGYCurriculum Guide (S. Cohen) Introduction to Archaeology Key Terms : anthropology, archaeology, culture, cultural an thropologist, material culture, historical archaeology Unit IMechanics of Archaeology I History of Archaeology a. Beginnings of Modern Archaeology b. Classification and Consolidation c. Archaeology in America d. New Archaeology e. Interpretation vs. Processual Key Terms : three stage system, classificati on, cultural evolution, cultural ecology, processual archaeology, post-processual archaeology II What is Left Behind the Evidence a. Categories of Evidence b. Context and Formation c. Preservation of Organic Material Key Terms : artifacts, sites, features, cont ext (primary and secondary), matrix, uniformitarianism, experimental archaeology, pr ovenience, formation processes (cultural formation processes, natural formation processes). III Survey and Excavation of Sites a. Discovering a Site/Feature b. Excavation
69 Key Terms : research design, surface survey, remo te sensing, arbitrary sample unit, probabilistic sampling, systematic sampling, reconnaissance, stra tification, law of superposition, excavation, horiz ontal excavation, vertical excavation, in situ, typology, assemblages, IV Dating Methods a. Relative Dating b. Climate and Chronology c. Absolute Dating Key Terms : relative dating, absolute dating, strati graphy, association, seriation, historic chronology, dendrochronology, radiocarbon da ting, potassium-argon dating, uraniumseries dating, thermoluminescence dating, archaeomagnetic dating Unit II Meaning Behind the Artifacts V Social Archaeology How Were Societies Organized a. Techniques of Study for Various Societies b. Investigating Gender Key Terms : central place theory, analogy, oral tradition, culture group, ethnoarchaeology, segmentary societies, household unit, hierarchy, monumental (communal) architecture, cr aft specialization, gender VI Environmental and Subsistence Archaeology a. Reconstructing Past Environments b. Reconstructing Past Diets c. Diet and Human Remains
70 Key Terms : environmental archaeology, geom orphology, attritional age profile, palynology, flotation, diet, isot opic analysis, archaeozoology, seasonality, domestication, taphonomy, coprolites. VII Technology and Trade a. Tool Technology b. Production, Consumption, Distribution c. Exchange and Interaction Key Terms : oldowan, microliths, microwear analysis, pyrotechnology, ceramics, potsherd, industrial archaeology, sphere of ex change, reciprocity, re distribution, market exchange, world system III Culture and Change VIII The Archaeology of People a. Assessing Human Abilities b. Disease, Death, Nutrition, Population Studies Key Terms : physical anthropology, DNA, evolution, australopithecus, computed axial tomography (CAT), Homo habilis, Brai n endocasts, homo erectus, homo sapiens neandetalensis, homo sapiens, harris lines IX Archaeology and Culture Change a. Mitigationists and Diffusionists b. Postprocessual Approach Key Terms : migration, diffusion, ch ronological horizon, structur e of transformations X Public Archaeology Who Owns the Past? a. Archaeology of Identity/Uses of the Past
71 b. Conservation and Destruction c. Archaeology and the Public Key Terms : Native American Graves Protec tion and Repatriation Act (NAGPRA), cultural resource management (CRM), contract archaeology. Ms. Cohen constructed a solid plan for her Archaeology class. Her methods were as diverse as they were for the anthropology class. Multimedia is becoming more and more available to high school teachers. Fo r example, Ms. Cohen has one particular assignment to help the students both understa nd archaeology and learn how to surf the internet (Appendix F). With the availability of computers for indivi dual students, this is accomplished with ease most of the time. Additions First and foremost, the Speaking Engage ment Program had to meet the demands of a varied curriculum. Second, the fledg ling archaeological field methods component had to be transformed into a realistic opport unity for practical a pplication (see Chapter VII). In other words, I wanted to change the archaeology class field practice into a minifield school experience (this also include d the sharing of USF resources). The third goal was to begin a series of field trips that one or two high school classes can make to the USF Anthropology De partment each year, so to observe the facilities and researchers at work. The fourth goal was to give the class a more local perspective that could be compared to the wo rld perspective Ms. Cohen offers in class. The fifth goal was to observe the effectiven ess of the presentation. Finally, with my experience in the field of archaeology I would be able to add to the class in a fruitful and
72 beneficial way. It was importa nt to become an asset to Ms. Cohen, not only for obtaining resources from USF, but also for my help with and participation in the class. As a final note, the archaeology class was structured just as the anthropology class was described. There were the occasional lectures and vocabulary lessons, and there were many group projects. An additional co mponent of the arch aeology class was the use of the mock site which would allow the students 15-20 class sessions working in the field. It was our hope that the simulated site described in the next chapter, would provide a practical simulation, and be used to teach the students a bout archaeology. Ms. Cohen had used the land once before, but it wa s with our collaboration that the field studies component took shape. Before pr esenting more on that, the following is a discussion about the sharing of the inte llectual resources of USF with DHS. Speakers Dr. Christian Wells, Dr. Karla Davis-Sa lazar, April Buffington and Chris Smith all took part in the 2003 fall quarter DHS archaeology class component of the Speaking Engagement Program (SEP). This quarter was the most successful for the SEP; both graduate students and professors had the opportunity to present their work to the DHS class. Furthermore, the students had the chance to speak to active researchers in the field of archaeology, reaping the benefits of inte racting with those pe ople who practice the subject they were studying. Every speaker did a great job, and that sentiment was shared by the students. I was able to observe ev ery lecture except for the one by Dr. DavisSalazar.
73 The two USF students used casual forms of presentation that engaged the DHS students and put the class at ease. Each graduate student em ployed the use of a traditional lecture and slide show. The slides displayed forms and pictures that served to aid them in explaining their point. Ap ril Buffington spoke about her work in public archaeology, and explained some of the key poi nts of that topic for the students. Chris Smith gave an interesting lecture on zooarchaeology. He brought with him mixed assemblages of bone, and gave the students th e opportunity to sort through them. Dr. Wells began his talk with an exercise in context. He had brought with him a household item; its function not immediately recognizable. As he gave the students context clues they were able to figure out the function of his kitchen spoon holder. He also brought with him objects that had posed an archaeological probl em to him early in his career. The students handled the artifacts and made gue sses about their function. Wells explained the process he went through to determine the function of the artifacts, echoing the entire time the importance of cont ext. The way he used the Socratic Method toward deducing the uses of the objects with the students proved to be highly effective. Dr. Wells concluded with a brief talk on his research in Honduras. Both Smith and Wells brought it ems with them to class. This is a mainstay in the strategy book of public speaking. Archaeology lends itself quite well to the use of visual aids during educational presenta tions. However, one should always keep in mind that the artifacts should have a context for the stude nts to associate them with. If you simply bring in artifacts as if they were novelties that is exactly wh at the students will think they are.
74 In these two cases, Smith had the students sort bones that were associated with his research, and he provided background info rmation on the site and expressed the importance of the findings. Wells described co ntext to the students in a way that stuck with them for the remaining time in the archae ology class. He too was able to provide context for the items he brought along with him. Adding context greatly improves the effect of the learning theories that have been mentioned, and enhances teaching by appealing to more than one sense (Gardner 1999, Frankowski 2000, Classen 1999). A Trip to USF Fieldtrips have long been important when it came to illustrati ng subject-matter in its most vivid form-reality. The advent of the internet has certainly cut into the frequency that fieldtrips are taken. In the case of this par ticular class, because of the relationship that it had with the USF anthropolo gy department, we were able to design a fieldtrip that the studen ts thoroughly enjoyed. It would be difficult to name individually each person who assist ed in the fieldtrip for the archaeology class; a considerable portion of the USF department was involved. The idea behind this trip was to represent the four subfields of anthropology, since that is the chosen approach of our department. Ther e were six stations open to the students, as they were broken into groups of four or five They rotated from one station to the other for approximately 140 minutes. The stati ons were as follows: the Biological Anthropology lab directed by Dr. David Himm legreen, the archaeological sciences lab directed by Dr. Robert Tykot Dr. Weismans archaeology lab, the Anthropology Exhibit gallery, the graduate suite to hear a talk from USF graduate student Maria-Claudia Duque, and finally a brief visit to the USF library.
75 There is obviously a missing part to this rotation. That was the establishment of a linguistic station for the students to visit. Ou r department has been in transition for that field and therefore it was difficult to make plans for the station. This is obviously a regret and motivation to put together a more inclusiv e rotation for the students next visit. Of course, language is touched upon in the ar chaeology class, but not the methodology of anthropological linguistics. That is taught in the anthropology class. The entire department became involved in one form or another. Many of the lab areas were mainly run by graduate students w ho took time from their research to speak to the visitors; the same can be said of the par ticipating professors. Dr. Elizabeth Bird and Dr. Brent Weisman took a few moments to spea k to the students, which the students got a big kick out of when it was explained that Dr. Bird is the chair of our department and Dr. Weisman the graduate director, and professor I work for, as the students would say. The final point to this particular venture was that the department was able to pull together as one, when called upon to do so. From talking with the graduate student s who helped out and the DHS students, everyone seemed to think the trip was a su ccess. The students enjoyed themselves and had fun; what high school student wouldnt feel that way at a university? Once we returned from class, the students were able to explain concepts they had learned during the fieldtrip. At first, it seemed all the an swers would have to be elicited. After a few moments, each kid wanted to tell about their experience, what they learned, and ask questions they had. The kids had a great learning experience, and according to USF student feedback, the kids were a blast to work with. Finall y, the dividing of the DHS students into small
76 groups was a necessity to making this excursion a well executed educational trip. Many USF students expressed their willingness to participate in the next fieldtrip. It would be feasible to allot two or three days a ye ar when USF offers a similar program as mentioned above (see schedule Appe ndix G). A day of field trips, perhaps three or four schools a day, can go through the speaking stations we assemble. Stations then would be classrooms with multimedia hookups and more time for explanations. Trying to be an Asset On occasion a student would ask an off-th e-beaten path question, what exactly is loam anyway? Ms. Cohen knew what it wa s and she even described it, to the point where I was nodding my head yes agreeing with the description; but the student just shrugged and was unable to unde rstand. We even had pictur es at the time, still no response. What is it hed say? Weve told you wed reply, just tell me in words. Aha, loam is the equal distribution of grai n size, sand, clay, silt. Oh, why didnt you just say that? There was my primary function as a sort of a referen ce tool and an aid in explaining concepts. To be honest, at first I thought that my presence might make Ms. Cohen second guess herself, but she pus hed forward without faltering, always enthusiastic and confident. There were times that having a practicing student anthropologist came in handy in class. Once the subjects of world archaeology were talked about, the kids interest would ultimately lead to where they lived. Even tually the question boils down to so, what were they doing around here? Sometimes there would be a great answer such as the Paleo-Indians represent a group of people w ho once crossed the Bering land bridge in Alaska, and perhaps came in other waves of migration by differing routes. We do have
77 sites we consider to be Paleo-Indian in or igin, but a majority of them are under water because, during at the time of the Paleo-Indian, Florida was twice the size it is today said to gasps, awes and disbelief (well at least mild excitement). On the other hand, some answers were not as good. Today class Ms. Cohen begins. Well, he didnt know it but hes going to talk to you about ethics in research. Quickly my mind zipped through the ro lodex and picked out ethics. Think Kory come on think; just think on your way up to the front of the class. Yeah get a drink of waterstall good ok just remember you know more about this than them. Wait do you? Im not even sure actually. Were talking about et hos, etic? What, what did she say? E E something Ethnic! I thought with a silent cheer from the act as if crowd. No, no it was more like eth-ics. Yeah thats it, Et hics. What do you know? Quickly! Be good to the people you research, make them your primary obligation-Safety of the environment, come on throw in for all species. The best answer provided at that moment was this, I see it like this kids, Ethics are different than valuesone you have ins tilled in you since bi rth, the other is a constructed code of conduct that you accept or follow of your own freewill later in life. Then I sat down. Ms. Cohen wanted me to st ate the basic ethics of the AAA or SAA, talk about NAGPRA, and other such acts. In doing all this she was expecting a much longer presentation as well. In a reflexive nature, what is wrong with what I said? It should have started with and explanation that the anthropologists, mo st important, are obliged toward the people and places they are studying. After that a discussion of NAGPRA could have been started. Perhaps a few cases relating to the act could have been discussed. We could
78 have considered Kennewick man, or many other controversies, perhaps ending with an anecdote about rebuilding a looted site, or rescuing a site from development. Instead of all that happening at once, vi sits to them one at a time we re made, explaining my views on the matter, not that anyone asked me to, but the students needed to get to know me. At that moment it was even more desi rable to provide answers to the students considering as many perspectives as possible. In this case extra research is called for in order to supplement information within the clas s. From that point forward as well, when a student asked me a question it was explained with a reminder of differing perspectives (Unless I didnt know, in which case the correct response was I dont know). I realized how biases could affect these same proceedings just as the students themselves came to learn. Certainly saying that my being there was an asset seems too selfconfident. In this case, it simply meant there was no intention to take advantage of Ms. Cohens hospitality; observe the class and then run. My role was to be a part of the class, and a help to the class as well. Brainstormer Many of the changes to the archaeology cu rriculum were minor ones that adjusted writing assignments, papers and ways of pres enting the work. To be completely honest, many of the ideas came from brainstorming w ith Ms. Cohen about the class. This is mentioned because of her willingness to cha nge and try new things. For instance, she had the first Archaeology class write a pape r on a famous archaeologist. She received good papers but many repeated ones, and mostly simple biographical information. I then
79 suggested that she have students write a pape r about different archae ological sites. She liked the idea and put it into place. These changes took place pretty quickly sometimes just before class would begin or an assignment given. We would always adjust the assignment using each other as sounding boards. That is exactly the type of rapport that an anthropologist in my position must be able to cultivate w ith the instructor they are working with in a particular endeavor. When the two of you discuss the goals you have, you often find that they share a common aim.
80 Chapter VII Campus Excavation A Simulated Site The agricultural department of Durant High School generously provided a small piece of land that the students could use for practicing archaeological methods. This was a perfect opportunity to use this area as a si mulated site. The stude nts can learn just as much about the principles of archaeology by aiding in the construction of the site comparable with the excavation of it. For in stance, the section of land can be used as a laboratory for experimental arch eology. Projects can be held there such as firing pottery, flint knapping, making of ancient tools or othe r experiments the students or instructors may think of. This can help the students unde rstand site formation processes as well as how inferences are drawn when interpreting the archeological record. These sessions of experimental archaeology can also be translated into science projects that help the stud ent fully explore the scientif ic method through archaeology. The following offers a description of the fi eld methods that were demonstrated and conducted by the students on this simulated si te. To start, this is a concise list illustrating why a simulated excavation provide s the most opportunity for a meaningful learning experience as outlined by Beverley A. Chiarulli, a founding member of SAAs Public Education Comm ittee (2000: 217). 1. The simulated archaeological ex cavation is the perfect forum for interdisciplinary education. 2. It teaches students the effective use of primary source material.
81 3. Students learn to appreciate another culture. 4. Not only is the student introduced to techniques of excavation, but they are encouraged to apply deductive reasoni ng and other high-level thinking skills. 5. Students learn to cooperate and work as a team. 6. This provides an alternative assessment method. 7. Students gain the need and importance of preserving our cu ltural heritage. Cohens Retreat Luckily there are two quarter s with archaeology classes at Durant, one in the fall and spring. Ms. Cohen had not had much of a chance to develop the field portion of the program before my arrival. The archaeol ogy class has always drawn relatively high numbers of students (up to 45). If that does not seem like a lo t of students, try standing in a 28 foot by 28 foot square with 45 high school kids! It was nice to know, nevertheless, that I was receiving the opportuni ty to assist in developi ng the field program for the archaeology class. Karolyn Smardz (2000: 238) wrote lear ning about how people learn is probably the single most important thing an archaeol ogy educator can learn. The opportunity to observe the classes in the DHS anthropology program reinforced that exact insight. Smardz (2000:238) continues to say that good education entails the development of effective and germane curriculum materials, coordinated cohesive lesson plans, and a clear understanding of our own educational obj ectives in offering a particular program. However, Smardz (2000:238) believes that these are concepts far from what archaeologists usually think about when they set out to dig a site. The subject matter per se is different, but the methods of formula ting a research design are not so different
82 than the tasks mentioned by Smardz. When faced with a problem in the field an archaeologist certainly must assess the effective and connect ed methods that are to be used. Moreover, archaeologists must coordinate in order to make cohesive plans for investigating a site. Finally, archaeologist s must always understand objectives of the research he or she is conducting. Having a rapport with Ms. Cohen, a rela tionship built between USF and DHS, and having experience in archaeology, was my star ting point for the development of the field program. McNutt (2000: 202) suggests that there is a lack of information on what exactly it is that archaeology programs accomplish. Additionally, she believes that every archaeology program must star t out with a plan for assessment (McNutt 2000: 203). At the end of this chapter, a plan for assessment will be discussed. The following is a description of different actions that were taken in order to better shape the field portion of the DHS field school. Understanding the Site Staring blankly at the small patch of land Ms. Cohen had just pointed at and said There, there it is, th e land that the AG folks let me us e for field methods; the task seemed more daunting than I imagined. The nature of this particular simulated excavation must be considered. For this excavation, we had no idea what we were going to find. There were no fancy reconstructions, or planti ng of artifacts for the students to uncover. Instead it was realized that this was once an orange grove and then construction dump when the school was built, then construction site, then cleared, and then heavily worked by the agriculture department.
83 The land had been cultivated, dumped on, excavated, and plowed; for all intents and purposes the land was highly disturbed. The students were informed that this excavation was taking place under special circ umstances, and the area of investigation was deemed a modern construction debris dump. The students were told and they underst ood that they could not conduct such an investigation alone, and while we were excavating this simulated site for educational purposes, that alone would not be reason enough to excavate a real site. Many times we made reference to the idea that we were justifying our simulated excavation because the school had decided to extend construction. Instead of altering the site, which for th ese classes we did not have the time to do, we decided to excavate the site as is, and in terpret, and have the class interpret, the archaeological record of the land. That is when the plans for revamping the program were put into motion. Hawkins (2000:211) ma kes the cogent point that many mock sites are not archaeological at all; that these sites often give skewed representations of how archaeology actually is. In this case, artif acts are usually not collected and identified (Hawkins 2000:211). On the contrary, with this site, we did not run into any of these problems. This was a real site in the respect that it was up for interpretation of the cultural and natural phenomenon that had shaped that section of land. A simulated site, in the strictest sense, is one that ha s been constructed by a person for the intent of using it as a mock archaeology excavation. Teachers who wi sh to begin a program such as this should consult an archaeologist befo re doing anything in the field..
84 The Plan This site was classified 8HI0000 (this is a simple method of teaching the site inventory coding used in the US) and was na med Cohens Retreat. The only information known about the area under question was th at it was a construction dump and highly disturbed, not to mention we had access to it. The very first task accomplished was defining the goals of the field program. This is the list that was produced: 1) Students should gain a fundamental grasp of archaeological field methods. 2) A strong sense of stewardship and respect for cultural heritage (ones own or another) must be instilled in the student. If this was not accomplished the student would believe he or she were prepared to dig an archaeologi cal site without the ai d of a professional and be completely unaware of the moral implica tions of the situati on (Hawkins 2000: 210). 3) The site must be used to illustrate more abstract and theoretical topics discussed in class, but most importantly convey and illustrate the essentials of archaeology. 4) The dig must be put into context, so to illustra te that archaeology is not simply the task of excavating (Ellick 2000: 188) but a component of a larger scientific and humanistic approach to studying humanity. 5) All other components of the archaeological process must be experienced by the students to construct the context for both their ex cavation and knowledge w ithin archaeology. 6) There must be a continual adjustment in the re search plan of the site as it is excavated and reconstructed over time. 7) Organize the DHS archaeology fi eld portion, to most effectiv ely use the pedagogical tool of the simulated site.
85 8) Finally, to create an atmosphere of intera ctivity, cooperation, a nd interdepartmental relationships. Getting it Together The first aim was to gain resources from USF to make the excavation of the mock site logistically possible, considering we had thirty-five students, one shovel, one screen, and four trowels. The class was able to take part in deciding the tools we would need. However, the list was fully completed by Ms. Cohen and me. Having the proper equipment and enough equipment for the participants is a necessity for success. The next step was making sure that the context of the site was known by the students. In the second class, students were asked to research and provide a history of the particular piece of land that C ohens Retreat is on. Students were encouraged to collect oral histories as well as any other documentation they could find about the site. We approached the site, in both classes, as an abandoned dump. Attempting to discern what contributed to the formation of the site becam e the archaeological puzzle for both classes, and for all future classes. It is always of the utmost importance to remind the students of the connection the study of these material remains has with the study of humanity through the anthropological lens (Ellick 2000: 190). That is one of the top three most stre ssed sentiments expressed by people out at the site. Students inevitably ask Hey, can I take this stuff home? This provides the perfect opportunity for further illustrating the importance of cultural resources. This opens discussion about the la ws pertaining to tampering with cultural resources, and leads to fostering a respect for those res ources. There is something about giving the
86 lecture on these points around an ar chaeological unit, be it real or simulated; it makes the idea of looting and pot-hunting a more tangible phenomenon. There is a tactic known by many archaeol ogists of putting the idea about human remains in a personal perspective. Imagine if someone were digging up the remains of your great grandmother, one might say. However, it makes it seem like one should only respect ideas and beliefs one understands. Teaching sensitivity to other cultures and encouraging to at least attempt to understand and respect them on their terms are difficult but important tasks for the instructor. The site also provided the opportunity to illustrate certain points about archaeology that we talked a bout in the classroom. For example, the explanation of stratigraphy can be carried out with a simple depiction on an overhead. However, then the students do not have the oppor tunity to experience stratigraphy until they see it in the field. The stratigraphy was varied and odd fr om unit to unit at th e site, but it still illustrated the point of such things as the law of superposition, and site formation processes. Methods at 8HI0000 A grid was laid out over the site in 28 f eet by 28 feet square. It is important to gradually shift toward using the metric sy stem for this program (although the imperial system is used in historical archaeology). Ho wever, due to time constraints, the imperial system was used. Figure 7.1 is a site grid of 8HI0000. Since this was to be an educational experience, it did differ in some ways from real-life planning. Case in point, the unit placement was chosen to accommodate a large number of studentsfor instance
87 there were 12 units picked for excavation by t eams of three. However, the area is not very large and the goal is to ultimately have an area excavation of the bounded land. The students were instructed on how to be gin excavation of their own four by four feet unit. String, stakes, shovels to remove the vegetati on cap, and trowels were passed out to the students. It was cu rious that even before my suggesting doing so the students began to use the Pythagorean Theorem to configure the guidelines for their units. Perhaps it is due to their being recently en rolled in trigonometry or geometry, whatever the case; it was a refreshing sight to see.
Figure 7.1 DHS Mock Site 88 100N 100E 128N 124N = 1 = 4 N Assignments: 104N 116N 112N 108N 120N 104E 108E 112E 116E 120E 124E 128E =Units to be Excavated The SW corner (reference point) is indicated with a blac k dot. Group 1 100N, 100E Group 2 100N, 108E Group 3 100N, 116E Group 4 100N, 124E Group 5 112N, 100E Group 6 112N, 108E Group 7 112N, 116E Group 8 112N, 124E Group 9 124N, 100E Group 10 124N, 108E Group 11 124N, 116E Group 12 124N, 124E
89 Before going into the field the students received a review of the site and the known history of the site. The students are reminded that excavation strategy will vary from situation to situation. In addition, some of the key features of site location modeling are discussed (e.g. proximity to water, anth ropogenic soils, vegetation, and topography). Before entering the field, the students unde rstand that they are taking part in an archaeological investigation. Th ey realize the special condition of being a mock site, but they also understand that the in terpretation of the site, indeed the sites history can still be constructed more fully using their work. Each student was given a map of the site, and they were required to find their unit by identifying the southwest coordinates. This was accomplished by the students with ease in most cases. However, the challenging ta sk of controlled digging is a bit more of a problem at first. With a mighty swoop of th e shovel earth began to be moved in chunks. Luckily, this was a day that we had only one shovel, and both Ms. Cohen and I took the opportunity to explain and demonstrate the methods they were to employ. Here we touched upon the concepts of stratigraphy, natural a nd arbitrary levels, and the validity of digging slow ly in a controlled manner in or der to conserve the context for recording. Perhaps most importantly the students were taught how to take measurements in their unit, determine the provenience of finds, and to take accurate notes. Over time the students learned the met hods of field archaeologists. Nonetheless, it was my concern that the students be a part of the interpreting of the site. Consequently students began the practice of calling attention to their units when they had an interesting find. This was a grea t opportunity to have the student, sometime to their dismay, explain to their peers what they were looking at. The student excavator
90 should understand his or her unit more than anyo ne else. Frequently, the student did an excellent job of explaining what they had done to their unit, but was sometimes unable to associate certain levels with any other excav ation team. However, as the project moved along, students were beginning to understand the entire site from the talks they had with their classmates. After this went on a couple of times it be came a sort of practice we went through anytime someone found somethi ng interesting or different. However, do not let this be mistaken for the student bragging about th e awesome artifacts they bagged. No, instead, students more often called attention to the strange features or stratigraphy they were finding in their unit, they became interested in what they had uncovered, how far it extended, and how what they were doing wa s associated with the units around them. At the end of each session there were both formal and informal talks with the entire crew, and information was shared at that time. Interpretation of artifacts and their context were made in the field and noted; still the artifacts were bagged and labeled properly. Students found building materials, mostly screws, nails, concrete and metal fragments. When artifacts were first unc overed by the students they were generally excited. They found true interest in the artif acts when placing them within the context of the whole site. Every team started out digging in arbitrary levels of five inches, until they hit a stratum ubiquitous in the site of an apparent limestone and concrete mixtur e. At that point the students made the decision, after discussing it with me or Ms. Cohen, to begin excavating in natural levels.
91 Figure 7.3 Students often worked in teams of three or four Figure 7.2 The teams were assigned a unit the first day
92 The students must present the reasoni ng behind their request before getting approval. That is the site as it is today -a 28 by 28 feet square, highly disturbed, not inviting to dig in, is still a magnificent place to hold a methods program like this one. Unfortunately, DHS does not have an ar chaeology laboratory and the classroom (which is used by four other classes during the day) is not readily adaptable into lab space. This fact made it necessary to dete rmine a way that the students could learn to excavate but at the same time unde rstand the entire site so they were able to draw their own supported conclusions. This is where the idea of interpretation at the trowels edge became very intriguing (Farid 1999, Hodder 1999: 92). While investigating further it was realized that the Refl exive Method in archaeology o ffered many promising qualities that could be translated and used to better educate students Moreover, this theory had the potential to interact well with MI, LS, a nd most important, to allow each student to take part in the entire archaeological process. Tradition with a Touch of Reflexive Methodology The reflexive methodology as descri bed by Ian Hodder (see Hodder 1999, and 1999a) is an attempt at focusing particular traditional archaeological methods toward the ultimate goal of reflexivity. This methodol ogy has been tested in the field (Hodder 1999a), and the results seem to support the effectiveness of the theory for archaeological methods. Hodder has constructed a refl exive methodology utilizing traditional archaeology methods. Only seldom are new methods suggested, but it is the combination of methods that makes Hodders reflexive methodology. It was more the concern here to use those components of th e reflexive methodology that best suited the
93 educating of the DHS students. All of the components could be used for education but are not financially possible for a program with no funding. Reflexive Components Hodders (1999a) reflexive methodology is described most accurately in the monograph Towards Reflexive Methods in Archae ology: The Example at Catalhoyuk The various articles give exam ples of how the field method is actually implemented at the Neolithic site. As the name suggests this method is used to reflect back upon the methods that were carried out in or der to investigate bias and in general the generation of knowledge. Hodder (2000:10) suggests that at the core of the reflexive method is the idea of non-dichotomous thinking (represen ting the separation between laboratory and field practices in archaeology). Ultimately it is this attitude that defines the methodology used here as reflexive, rather than the met hods being used (which are almost exclusively traditional archaeological methods). The reflexive methodology holds emphasi s on developing methods sensitive to context and problem (Hodder 2000:3). Not only is reflexivity a theme of the method, it is also underpinned by multivocality, contexualit y, and interactivity (e xplained below). The reflexive aspect was fostered with diary writing. While traditi onal archaeology methods call for a strictly-formatted j ournal, these reflexive diarie s give the opportunity to the student to express their ideas perspectives and general t houghts about their square, the site, or the class. Students were also taught and asked to produce the rigid journal standards of traditional archaeological methods, which includes a more fact by fact description with limited interpretation, rendering of the days events. They were then encouraged to write
94 a more interpretive and commentary-based diar y entry that describes their perceptions of their work and the site. In th is case a fuller perspective of the site is depicted, and the information that may be overlooked with rigid formats is recorded as well. With contexuality in mind, the students were constantly being informed of artifacts that were interpreted, along with c ontexts in other squares. This gave the information to students that they ne eded to draw their own conclusions. Multivocality usually refers to the idea that various parties may have conflicting points of views on how something should be employed, in this case archaeology (Hodder 1999a: 9). This concept does come into play when considering the future involvement of various classes at Durant. The classes would be able to form thei r own interpretation of the site. Other parties interested in the site could address the class about their concerns and interpretations. Interactivity is the perfect tool to use fo r a classroom field exercise as long as the number of students is between 15 and 30. Th is concept can be used as the cohesive formula that holds together a field program in a class like this. Each student must participate in the archaeological process; fo r this to occur there must be a form of communication set up. In this case, two particular methods were employed that are underpinned by the idea of interactivity. Student groups took frequent tours of th e site in an orderly fashion, usually one group at a time. This helped the students gain an unders tanding of what was going on elsewhere on the site, and provided an opportunity to disc uss any observations that may be relevant. The students reported to the field chief at the end of each session.
95 They were to talk about th e context of the site as well as their own personal views of what we ought to do next. In the end each student was, or was becoming involved with all aspects of the site interpretation, and a final report will be produced by the 2005 DHS archaeology class entitled Cohens Retreat, an Archaeological Mystery Alternate Ways to Take Notes The diary is an excellent example of note taking that would get students interested in the meticulous task of translating a site in to note form. Traditional level forms were filled out and daily journal entries written on the back of the form. Then the students were to keep their own diar y of the excavation. They understood they could say what they wanted in their diaries, but still shoul d center on the site. There was the catch that the diaries could (during a practical excavation) be open to the public. Students were encouraged to create a rende ring of their site in the way they would like. The media selected were throu gh drawing, note taking, written report, and photographing. Students could have presented their work in the form of poetry, song, dance, or fictional writing as well. Nevert heless, no one chose t hose options this time around. These ideas were directly borrowed from the reflexive methods modes of representation. Luckily, this also articulates well with MI an d LS Theory. Students learn in different ways, think in different ways, and present th eir work in the mode of representation best suited for the individual (Sweet 1998). Finally, reflexivity is an efficien t tool for any educator (Hodder 1999a: 9, Sinacore et al 1999). For teac hers to provide a promising wa y for students to learn about themselves and their surroundings, students must be able to look back on a task and understand why it was carried out, they must be able to place the work in the overall
96 perspective, and they must also be able to challenge misconceptions on any level. During this project Ms. Cohen and I were pleased to observe these very phenomena with our students in the field. A reflexive approach to teaching can also be considered an appropriate way to carry out an archaeology fiel d program (for an example of reflexivity in teaching see Sinacore et al 1999). For instance, a teacher can reflect upon his/her teaching methods in the field in order to improve for the future. The more one scrutini zes the past, the more prepared one will be for the future. In summation, the reflexive methodologies are varied yet well structured examples are available (Hodder 1999, 1999a). A reflexive approach also addresses different learning styles and multiple inte lligences in a practical setting. Hodders reflexive methodology allows for traditional archeology techniques to be conveyed but at the same time breaks down boundaries making th e entire archaeological process available to each student. Summary and Stories Standardized methods were conveyed to the students and the importance of each technique was explained. It was our goal that each student know what was going on at the site all the time. Technical issues we re touched upon, such as datum point locating, measurements of a provenience of an in situ artifact, and the skill to draft a profile. Also, students had to understand the way in which a unit is to be excavated, through controlled digging, keeping both the vertical and horizon tal even and sharp. When the students
Figure 7.4 The spring quarter archaeology class 2004 Figure 7.5 Students communicating at the site 97
98 began to recognize that the levels in some units matched those of their own, it was then that they began to understand fully that they were working on a unit of a larger site. Every student was in a position to co mmunicate with the whole of the group, and each person understanding the site was becoming common. Students were no longer merely interested in the artifacts and features found in their unit, but also the artifacts and features found all around the si te. They questioned the associa tions within the site. Most important, the teams began thinking about th e human behaviors connected to the context and artifacts they were uncovering. In the end the students truly wanted to understand what had gone on there at the land no matter how banal it may have been. Findings at 8HI0000 There were numerous screws, nails, and other metal fixtur es recovered on the site. Also, concrete and crushed cinder block was often times detected in the stratigraphy. Three large metal artifacts we re recovered, a door knob, a large railroad spike and a metal object of undetermined function. The students were able to describe reasonable ways of why the site stratigraphy now has large amounts of limestone, cinder block and concrete. The interpretation of the site almo st always revolved around a crew of construction workers. These workers are the archaeological culture that created Cohens Retreat. Students were able to determin e the many uses of the land over time by looking at the stratigraphy of the site area along with the artifacts. The large unidentified metal artifact was determined to have come from agricultural equipment. The nails, screws, glass and concrete were determined to be a product of a dump used during the construction of the school and agriculture f acilities. On the site we discussed the
99 differences in the nail and screw sizes and the different functions they may have been suited for. This was a common identifica tion process of the artifacts recovered. From our in-field analyses, students were able to begin determining the organization of the construction, beginning with the workers use of specialized dumping areas. At the outset of the excavation we want ed to determine the nature of the site. Moreover, the students were to understand the implications of the material being recovered, and infer their link with human be havior. As a final interpretation before leaving the field for the school year, the stude nts determined that the area was also used to dump extra concrete. A concrete floor, of a lower quality rocky concrete, is found at 40 inches below the surface in most of the squares excavated. This led the students to state there was either a concrete spill or it was being dumped on purpose, which lead us to the concept of waste. We finally determined that the construction workers would dump excess concrete from one task to make a new batch for the next. As of now, these are the only interpretations we have been able to make of the data collected and the site overall. For the most part the techniques at the si te were traditional. Tools such as line levels, trowels, root cutters, buckets and screens were util ized. On the site there were always three sifting stations, and the sediment was being moved from units with buckets. Most units were excavated in arbitrary le vels. Two people at a time excavated with trowels and the other student(s) kept track of note taking and other matters of organization. Level forms were used to record measurements and drawings of each arbitrary level.
100 The students kept a reflexive diary of the excavation process, including an entry with their interpretations, narratives and pers pectives. This was in addition to their formal daily journal entries. As mentione d above the students also took tours around the site visiting with the crews of each square, and discussed critically their progress as well as methods being used on the site. These were the few components of Hodders reflexive methodology used at 8HI0000.
101 Chapter VIII Their Assessment: The Voice of th e Student on Archaeology at DHS It is my intention to capture the thoughts of the students about the Archaeology Class, field methods, the guest lecturing, and the field trip we took to the USF Anthropology Department. The students in th e two archeology classes tended to be much more open about their opinions in a personal informal interview than in the anthropology class. Perhaps, due to my archaeology trai ning, more comfort was found with the subject matter, and therefore put the students at ease. In the same vein, since these were my second and third classes, perhaps I was more at ease when talking to the students. The Voice of the Students As would be expected, the students we re often asked what they thought of archaeology while learning a bout it. Almost without ex ception, students would make remarks such as there is so much more to archaeology than I thought, or archaeologists have to know so much to do this work right, and the ever-present this is much harder than I thought, not just anyone can do this. These were always pleasant things to hear when reflecting on Hawkins s (2000:210) remark th at if archaeology is oversimplified students might get the idea th at they can do archaeology on their own. Even more importantly, the idea of protecti ng our (with an emphasis on our every time) cultural resources was consta ntly sounded on the site. I was curious about the sections the students enjoyed most about the archaeology class. I received both verbal and written feedback, and overa ll the fieldtrip to USF and
102 the guest lecturers could both be considered the favorite sections as well as the most enriching sections. A few statements were ma de to illustrate this subjective position. The trip to the anthropology department at USF helped me see how archaeology is used. The guest speakers were informative as well. I want to pursue a career in journalism with a minor in history. But when we went on our fieldtrip forensic anthr opology really sparked my attentionmaybe Ill have two minors. Of course, there were various other favorite portions of the class, just with a slight majority leaning toward the speakers and th e fieldtrip. Some students liked the public archaeology portions, some enj oyed the movies shown in class, some enjoyed working on the computers, and many of the students expr essed that they enjoyed working at the mock site. Students sometimes did not like the fiel d experience at first, but most of the students not only adapted but became skilled fieldworkers who enjoyed working on the site. This adaptation was seen in the an swers on the questionnaires; most students remarked that the field portion of the cla ss became interesting as time went on. Perhaps this can be attributed to both organizing the field porti on (more clearly defining the goals), and also the sense of understanding the purpose behind the process, making it more interesting.
103 Adjusting and Assessing At All Times What did you think about working on the site? It was pointless only because the site was obviously full of nothing, and point less projects make me crazy. The idea was good though. Clearly, that is not a statement one wants to hear from a student. However, it did point out a few deficiencies. For example, not all of the st udents were being reached with the context and background information of the site, and the purposes of our excavation. Moreover, not all students were being e ngaged by the site presentation of the archaeological perspective. Th is would be an important thing to always find out in the field. If a field chief visits each group of st udents, there should be more talked about than the methods they are using. Thats a nice square. Use the trowel more like this. Be sure to note that in your report, are all statements that should be accompanied with a questioning of the overall understanding of the site by the students. So, what do you guys think this site is all a bout after looking at your unit and speaking with your fellow students? What do you think we should do now? Why do you think that? What method do you think would be best to find out what we want to know? Those are all questions that one might as k a group of students at the site. The point is we do not want to produce a generation of pot hunters (Smardz 2000), and a good way to guard against that is informing the st udents as much as po ssible about the overall process of archaeology.
104 The Elusive Student Additional Comment The students are always give n the opportunity at the e nd of the questionnaire to add whatever comments they feel are useful However, as shocking as it may seemhigh school students usually do not take advantage of that opport unity to voice their opinion on anything about the class they want. Here are three of those rare jewels. The field trip was fun! Thanks for the effort you put in. You and Mrs. Cohen are definitely pertinent to the learning process and experience. I think that the Anthropology Department at US F should continue a relationship with Mrs. Cohens archaeology and anthropology classes. The only concern was that sometimes out on the site, we had nothing to do because we had a shortage of equipment. All of these comments to the questionnaire questions as well as informal interviews need to be examined closely. Students recognize the importance of maintaining a relationship between USF and DHS. Students also recognize financial problems, such as the shortage of equipm ent. When these rather obvious data are combined with answers to the questions If you had the chance to change the simulated site exercise, what would you change? and, how would you make th is class better for future students?One can see emerging pattern s that the students recognized as needing improvement or adjustment. The students believed that they needed more time to learn about archaeology. They also wished they could spend more tim e in the field because many of them found that to be an effective way of learning the information. Other students believed that field
105 conditions should be changed with the addition of a tented area for the students to rest in, or a larger quantity of water. Ultimately, most of the criticisms were constructive. Discussion and Conclusions Once again it must be stressed that the students are in an excellent position to provide feedback in order to help make the class more effective. The approach here differs from using a regular questionnaire in that, as mentioned above, I know the students who are writing to me. Many of the suggestions came from informal interviews, or just observing class. The voice of the student should never be underestimated, educators may believe they are in the position to decide if something was or was not a success. However, students may have different opinions. By talking to the students and getting to know them, an educator can begin to understand from the student perspective if a project was indeed a success. Using the answers to the questionnaires, informal interview, and participant observation, a few conclusions were reached using the voice of the student. One glaringly obvious problem is th at there seem to be a few st ray students that are not getting the chance to participate with the overall e xperience. Also, students really enjoy the use of ethnographic analogy. For example, student s would often explain things they saw in the archaeological record with things they had seen in their own lif e. One student was able to determine that a layer of limestone may have been fertilizer for orange groves because she had witnessed her family using the same thing. A third conclusion, is that a few ( approxi mately 10 percent) of the students did realize that archaeologists ar e not simply looking for artif acts, but are attempting to interpret the site through vari ous lines of investigation (s uch as the documentation and
106 oral history research they were asked to conduct). That is no t to say that students did not respect our cultural remains, but a few of th e students lost the cu ltural and behavioral connections between the artifacts. This is something warned against by Ellick (2000:190), Archaeologists study people, someth ing that can be forgotten in the piles of sherds, reams of computer printouts, and office cubicles. Archaeology is the study of people based on material remains Qualifiers frequent every paragraph of text in a technical report, but when presenting archaeology and cultural history to your audience, use the data to build pictures, create s cenes, and imagine the possibilities. You have to tell a story, a human story, one to which your audience can relate. A final conclusion reached viewing these answers was that the combination of the visit to USF, the work at the simulated site, and guest lectures im proved the context of the learning experience. The st udents often remarked that they understood concepts after they were demonstrated practically, from all three sources. The organization of the field method portion is a continuing process that must be maintained and improved. The strengthening of the relations hip between DHS and USF is the most practical strategy toward accomplishing such a task.
107 Chapter IX Discussions, Conclusions, Reflections Improvements to be Made White (2000:335) states that nearby indigenous peoples and other pertinent ethnic groups can be invited to give talks With all speakers being either students or professors at USF, the true meani ng of multivocality (Hodder 1999, 1999A) was not strictly adhered to in this thesis project. In the future, there must be members of different interested parties (e.g. native groups, c onstruction workers) involved in the archaeological process to speak to the students as well. This will make the program more well rounded and also offers a unique experience to the students. Shanks and McGuire (1996: 83) state, in popular imagination archaeology is far more than a neutral acquisition of knowledge; th e material presences of the past is an emotive field of cultural interest and political dispute. The archaeo logy class was taught in a more scientific and objective way than necessary. This was perhaps due to my attempts to avoid my own biases and procliv ity toward alternative methods. Instead the students were taught to be as objective as possible, and that archaeology is a highly scientific discipline. However, teaching and learning theory would be a beneficial combination with sensory learning (Frankowski 2000; Classen 199 9) by demonstrating the more aesthetic side of archaeology (Shanks 1996). Also, this combines well with th e idea of using the popular conceptions of archaeology (Sma rdz 2000:238) as a hook to get the public interested. If researchers wish to abandon the synonymous relationship of archaeology
108 and excavation in the popular imagination, a di fferent starting point must be chosensuch as misconceptions about archaeology. Another addition that should be made is th e use of a teacher journal such as used in the article Developing Lessons About Archaeol ogy: From a Teachers Journal by Pam Wheat (2000: 117). If a teacher has the opportunity to reflect formally upon their experience the teacher may then be able to make explicit suggestions toward improving the class. Through the review of this jour nal, other researchers may determine implicit ideas and bring them to the surface for ut ilization toward further development. Another substantial improvement that c ould be made in the future is for the anthropology class. While there should be e qual billing for the four subfields, evolution should be presented in a partic ular context. The students s hould be reminded that even though they may not believe evolution they mu st understand a theory in order to argue against it. This may seem like a trivial point, but students then may be tempted into learning about the concepts and not ignoring th em. Instead of the students thinking they had no use for the information because it conflict ed with their beliefs, this gives them an alternative reason for learning the information. Through the interdisciplinary nature of archaeology, an even greater goal can be reached. Both teachers and students from the departments of the school can become involved in the mock archaeological survey. A math teacher can illustrate geometry, algebra, and other forms of mathematical re asoning using archaeology as a vehicle. The Biology Department, Art Department, Eng lish Department, History Department, Chemistry Department, Audio Visual De partment, Mass Media programs and many
109 others can become involved with the excavation, and utilize the site as a place for the application of their specialties. Conclusion This project was designed to explore the idea of combining widely accepted pedagogical theories with anthr opological theory and method, in order to devise effective curricula for high school archaeology and anth ropology courses. Moreover, this was an opportunity for me, a public archaeology student to utilize, focus and transform my training toward an applied educational pursuit. Through a combination of Multiple Intelligences, Learning Styles, available modes of presentation, and ethnographic methods three major goals were accomplished. First, the anthropology and archaeology classes of the DHS program were strengthened. The archaeology class was lackin g a structured field component that would foster a clearer understanding of the concep ts being covered in class. The field experience naturally appealed to a wide-range of learning styles, and engaged the various intelligences found within the cl ass. The anthropology cla ss not only needed a project that would engage varying lear ning styles and intelligences, but it also needed a project that would help illustrate and unify the di verse concepts of anthropology. This goal was accomplished with the Ethnographic Field Project and various other classroom assignments. Second, empirical data were gathered and reported upon in this publication, which provides a template for one to begin curri culum designing for hi gh school anthropology courses. Logistical problems will vary from project to project. The same is true for the class members and thus the overall class dynamic. In that case, while this thesis can
110 provide templates and basic models, similar projects will have to be designed with respect to context. Third, a technique for public archae ology students to apply their work and experience practically, toward a betteri ng of our community through education, was developed. Coincidentally, this is an illustration of another reason why public archaeology is applied anthropology. In other words public archaeologi sts strive to better their surrounding community, eith er by enriching their lives w ith education or by giving a voice to peoples from various cultural backgrounds. The skills that public archaeologist acqui re through their training prepare them to interact with the community, including youths. Public archae ologists must be able to speak about archaeology or anthropology in general without resorting to academic ciphers. Perhaps more importantly, these app lied anthropologists are trained to design and implement educational programs. Public Archaeologists are also trained in the field of cultural resource management (CRM). This allows them to convey not only the importance of cultural resources but also the affect CRM archaeology has on laws, development, and ultimately the future. Researchers must get to know the pe ople they are studying. Moreover, strong rapports must be created in order to interpre t feedback correctly and effectively. In the same vein, the primary relationship that shoul d be cultivated is between the teacher and the anthropologist. This is where a majority of the educational c ontent is generated. Furthermore, teachers should realize that they will be more effective at presenting the subject matter if they foster a spirit of lifetime learning. As McNutt (2000:194) states truly excellent educators w ill embrace the role of researcher because they understand
111 that learning takes place in the minds of th e students and, unless student understandings are examined, the act of teaching is no mo re than a performance. Ms. Cohen is successful because she embraces this role. In order for anthropology to thrive, or fo r that matter survive in the twenty-first century, it must ignite interest throughout the mainstream public. In addition, it is important to recognize that anth ropology can serve to illuminate a wide range of subjects, be a learning aid, and help one become more enlightened. By revealing that anthropology can contribute to many facets of life through education, a symbiotic relationship is formed. The public are able to reap the benefits offered by the study of archaeology (e.g. the understa nding of themselves and hum anity), while anthropology gains public interest thereby k eeping the discipline alive. Final Reflections It was my attempt to conduct a project that was a sound example of public archaeology and ultimately applied anthropology. Traditionally, an archaeology student would choose a site to excavate, or an assembla ge of artifacts to analyze. However, I was influenced strongly by the environment of my graduate training. The USF anthropology department specializes in applying anthr opological data and t echniques to solving modern problems. Realizing that teachers were beginning to offe r archaeology in high school, a responsibility to aid in this development became glaringly obvious. This was a perfect opportunity for me to utilize the experience I have gained in archaeology and applied anthropology to teach high school kids a bout the discipline I have devoted my professional life to. Also, this experience gave me the opportunity to identify my weaknesses in theory, genera l anthropological know ledge and method in
112 anthropology. In doing so, a remedying of those weaknesses began. I learned more about archaeology and anthropology than expect ed by putting together these curriculum guidelines and projects. The amount one learns from constructing mock excavations, (site formation processes alone) is remarkable in and of itself. Finally, teachers who wish to start an anthropology program should contact their local university or community college for assistance. While there are massive amounts of educational material available, it helps fo r a person working in the field to frame the subject matter into a relatabl e context. Teachers should also take the time to work on archaeological excavations, and at tend anthropology workshops. Anthropology can be used to teach our youth about humanity. English, literature, history, mathematics, and other subjects have traditionally presented our society to students. Anthropology incorporates all of these and many other sources of information to provide a view of the whole that is our culture, our soci ety, and ultimately our selves. A Final Suggestion I suggest that USF begin a program in th e Anthropology Department that directly links to the anthropology courses being offered in high schools in the surrounding community. This could be accomplished in the form of internships for graduate students, or even thesis projects that maintain a symbiotic relationship with the participating school. Also, workshops can be held for teachers, as mentioned in PALS (http://www.bsu.edu/csh/anthro/PALS/history.html). At the very least, our department should make the effort to extend our expert ise to teachers in these subjects by both visiting the classrooms and presenting our work as well as being an information resource and sounding board for those teachers.
113 This project would also lead to a consolidation of the student body at the university. For instance, ther e is an unspoken divide within the USF department between those who are students of public archaeology and those of applied anthropology. This type of program would accentuate the similari ties and common goals of these students, so they can work together in a fr uitful applied manner. This ty pe of project also promotes interdisciplinary work, with the ultimate goal of educating. Perhaps more important, this type of project promotes two different but intertwined anthropological notions One, the idea of relativity toward other cultures is revealed through anthropology. Also, a resp ect for and understanding of the importance of cultural heritage is instilled in the student s. Ultimately, this will lead to a society of people that are able to look beyond the superficial. People who can empathize with the belie fs of other people, and can understand their differences and similarities will become more enlightened human beings. Just as Ms. Cohen stated above, students who are more capable of functioning in a multicultural environment are more likely to succeed in li fe. The university anthropology department has a responsibility to help prepare our youth for the twen ty-first century.
114 References Alexander, Bryant Keith 2003 (Re)Visioning the Ethnographic Site: Interpretive Ethnography as a Method of Pedagogical Reflexiv ity and Scholarly Production. Qualitative Inquiry, 9 (3):416-441. Allen, Katherine R. and Elizabeth B. Farnsworth 1993 Reflexivity in Teaching about Families. Family Relations 42(3):351356. Angrosino, Michael V. 1998 Opportunity House: Ethnographic Stories of Mental Retardation. Altamira Press, Walnut Creek, California. 1998a Where the Heart Is. In Opportunity House: Ethnogr aphic Stories of Mental Retardation, by Michael V. Angrosi no, pp. 105-114, Altamira Press, Walnut Creek, California. 2004 The Culture of the Sacred. Wavela nd Press, Inc., Prospect Heights Illinois. Angrosino, Michael V. (editor) 2002 Doing Cultural Anthropology Project s for Ethnographic Data Collection. Waveland Press, Inc., Prospect Heights. Barrett, Stanley R. 1996 Anthropology: A Students Guide to Theory and Method. University of Toronto Press, Toronto. Bender, Susan J. and George S. Smith (editors) 2000 Teaching Archaeology in the Twenty-Fir st Century. Society for American Archaeology, Washington. Bruner, Jerome S. 1960 The Process of Education. Harv ard University Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts. 1966 Toward a Theory of Instruction. The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts. 1996 The Culture of Education. Harvar d University Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts.
115 Calhoun, Craig J. and Francis A. J. Ianni (eds.) 1976 The Anthropological Study of Education. Mouton Publishers, The Hague, Paris. Caughey, John L. 2000 How to Teach Self Ethnography. In Strategies in Teaching Anthropology, Edited by Patricia Rice and Davi d McCurdy, pp.149-156. Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River, NJ. Chiarulli, Beverly A 2000 Simulated Excavations and Critical Thinking Skills. In The Archaeology Education Handbook: Sharing the Past With Kids, edited by Karolyn Smardz and Shelly J. Smith, pp. 91100. Altamira Press, Walnut Creek, Lanham, New York, Oxford. Classen, Constance 1999 Other Ways to Wisdom: Learning Through the Senses Across Cultures. International Review of Education, 45 (3/4):269280. Davis, Elaine M. 2000 Governmental Educational Sta ndards and K-12 Archaeology Program In The Archaeology Education Handbook: Sharing the Past with Kids, edited by Karolyn Smardz and Shelly J. Smith, pp. 54-71. Altamira Press, Walnut Creek, Lanha m, New York, Oxford. Desmarias, Lise et al. 1998 Evaluating Learning and Interactions in a Multim edia Environment. Computers and the Humanities 31:327. Dynneson, Thomas L. and Richard E. Gross 1999 Designing Effective Instruction for Secondary Social Studies. Merril, Upper Saddle River, NJ. Dynneson, Thomas L. 1986 Trends in Precollegiate Anthropology. In Social Studies and Social Sciences: A Fifty-Year Perspective, edited by Stanley P. Wronski and Donald H. Bragaw, pp.139-152. National Council for the Social Sciences, Bulletin No. 78. Duff, Patricia 2002 The Discursive Co-construction of Knowledge, Identity and Differnce: An Ethnography of Communication in the High School Mainstream. Applied Linguistics 23(3):289-322.
116 Ellick, Carol J. 2000 Against the Clock: Introducing Arch aeology in Time Limited Situations. In The Archaeology Education Handbook: Sharing the Past With Kids, edited by Karolyn Smardz and Shelly J. Smith, pp. 183-191. Altamira Press, Walnut Creek, Lanham, New York, Oxford. Ellison, Launa and Betty Rothenberger 1999 In Bangladesh: The Multiple Ways of Teaching and Learning. Educational Leadership 57 (1):54-57 Farid, Shahina 1999 The Excavation Process at Catalhoyu k. In Towards Reflexive Method in Archaeology: the Example of Catalhoyuk, edited by Ian Hodder, pp. 19 29. McDonald Institute Monographs, Cambridge. Frankowski, Ann Christine 2000 Sensory Anthropology: A Sensi-ble Way to Teach Anthropology. In Strategies in Teaching Anthropology Edited by Patricia Rice and David McCurdy, pp.178181. Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River, NJ Fetterman, David M. 1998 Ethnography: Step by Step. Second edition, SAGE publications, Thousand Oaks, London, New Delhi. 1984 Ethnography in Educational Evaluation. SAGE publications, Beverly Hills, London, New Delhi. Gardner, Howard 1983 Frames of Mind: The Theory of Multiple Intelligences. Basicbooks New York. 1995 Reflections on Multiple Intelligences Myths and Me ssages. Phi Delta Kappa v77:200-3+ 1993 Multiple Intelligences: The Theory in Practice. Basic Books, New York 1999 Intelligence Reframed: Multip le Intelligences for the 21 st Century. Basic Books, New York. 2001 Jerome S. Bruner 1915-. In Fifty Modern Thinkers on Education, edited by Joy A. Palmer, pp. 90-95. Routledge, London and New York.
117 Geertz, Clifford 2000 Available Light: Anthropological Re flections on Philosophical Topics. Princeton University Press, Princeton and Oxford. Geraci, Victor W. 2000 Learning and Teaching Styles Reaching All Students. In The Archaeology Education Handbook: Sharing the Past With Kids, edited by Karolyn Smardz and Shelly J. Smith, pp. 91100.Altamira Press, Walnut Creek, Lanham, New York, Oxford Goodnough, Karen 2001 Multiple Intelligences Theory: A Framework for Personalizing Science Curricula. School Science and Mathematics 101(4):180-193. Gould, Stephen J. 1997 Nonoverlapping Magisterial. Natural History, 106(2):16-26. Hawkins, Nancy 2000 Teaching Archeology Without the Dig: Whats Left? In The Archaeology Education Handbook: Sharing the Past With Kids, edited by Karolyn Smardz and Shelly J. Smith, pp. 209-216. Altamira Press, Walnut Creek, Lanham, New York, Oxford. Haviland, William A. 2003 Anthropology. Tenth Edition, Thompson/Wadsworth, Belmont. Hoerr, Thomas R. 2003 Its No Fad: Fifteen Y ears of Implementing Multiple Intelligences. Educational Horizons 81 (2):92-94. Hodder, Ian 1999 The Archaeological Process: An Introduction. Blackwell Publishers, Oxford, Malden. 1997 Always Momentary, Fluid and Flexible: Towards a Reflexive Excavation Methodology. Antiquity 71(273):691-701. Hodder, Ian (editor) 1999a Towards Reflexive Method in Archaeology: The Example of Catalhoyuk. McDonald Institute Monographs, Cambridge. Jones, Cheryl 2003 Are Students Learning Styles Discipline Specific? Community College Journal of Research and Practice, 27:363.
118 Keedy, John L. et al. 1998 Students as Meaning-makers a nd the Quest for the Common School: A Micro-ethnography of a US histor y Classroom. The Journal of curriculum studies, 30(6):619645. Klein, Perry D. 2003 Rethinking the Multiplicity of Cognitive Resources and Curricular Representations: Alternatives to Learning Styl es and Multiple Intelligences. Journal of Curriculum Studies 35(1):45-81. Kottak, Conrad P (ed.) 1982 A Guide for Student Anthropologists: Researching American Culture. The University of Michigan Press, Ann Arbor. Landers, Diane et al. 1997 Archaeology Lesson Plan. U.S. Army Corp of Engineers, Baltimore. Lassiter, Eric 2002 Invitation to Anthropology. Alta Mira/Rowman & Littlefield Press. 2003 Placing Anthropology in Public Sc hools (PALS). Electronic document http://www.bsu.edu/csh/anthro/PALS/history.html, vi sited December 2003. Levinson, Bradley A.U., Sandra L. Cade, Ana Padawer, and Ana Patricia Elvir (eds.) 2002 Ethnography and the Education Policy Across America. Praeger, Westport, London. Macdonald, Cathy and Paula Burtness 2000 Accessing Educational Systems in Canada and the United States. In The Archaeology Education Handbook: Sharing the Past With Kids, edited by Karolyn Smardz and Shelly J. Smith, pp. 42-53. Altamira Press, Walnut Creek, Lanham, New York, Oxford. Mbuva, James 2003 Implementation of the Multiple Intelligences Theory in the 21 st Century Teaching environments: A New Tool for E ffective Teaching and Learning at all Levels. US Department of Education, ERIC publication (141). Mcnutt, Nan 2000 Assessing Archaeology Educatio n: Five Guiding Questions. In The Archaeology Education Handbook: Sharing the Past With Kids, edited by Karolyn Smardz and Shelly J. Smith, pp. 192-204. Altamira Press, Walnut Creek, Lanham, New York, Oxford. Mettetal, Gwendolyn, Cheryl Jo rdan and Sheryl Harper
119 1997 Attitudes Toward a Multiple Inte lligences Curriculum. Journal of Educational Research, 91 (20):115-122. Mienczakowski, Jim 1999 Ethnography in the Hands of Participants. In Studies in Educational Anthropology, edited by Alexander Massey and Geoffrey Walford Volume 2, pp. 145-161. JAI Press, Stanford, Connecticut. Moore-Hart, Margaret 2002 Creating a Pathway to Multicultu ral Education. Reading Horizons 42(3):139-173. Newbold, Claire 1999 Multiple Intelligences and the Ar tistic Imagination: A Case Study of Einstein and Picasso. The Clearing House 72 (3):153-5. Nolen, Jennifer L. 2003 Multiple Intelligences in the Classroom. Education, 124 (1):115-119. Owen, Roger C. 1986 Coming of Age in Anthropology. In Social Studies and Social Sciences: A Fifty-Year Perspective, edited by Stanley P. Wronski and Donald H. Bragaw, pp.139-152. National Council for the Social Sciences, Bulletin No. 78. Perkins, Phil 1996 University Archaeological Educ ation, CD-ROMs and Digital Media. Antiquity, 71(274): p. 1066. PulidoTobiassen, Dora and Janet Ganzalez-Mena 1999 Teaching Diversity. Scholast ic Early Childhood Today, 14(3):44-50. Rampton, Ben et al. 2002 Methodology in the Analysis of Classroom Discourse. Applied Linguistics 23(3):373-392. Renfrew, Colin and Paul Bahn 1999 Archaeology: Theories Methods and Practices. Thames and Hudson, London. Rice, Patricia C.and David W. McCurdy (eds.)
120 2000 Strategies in Teaching Anthropology. Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River, New Jersey. Robins, Lynne S. 1982 High School Peer Group Classification System. In a Guide for Student Anthropologists: Researching American Culture, edited by Conrad Kottak, pp.130-138. University of Michigan Press, Ann Arbor. Sarouphim, Ketty M. 1999 Discovering Multiple Intelligences Through a Performance-Based Assessment: Consistency with Indepe ndent Ratings. Exceptional Children 65 (2):151-61. Saturno, William A. and Dennie Palmer Wolf 1996 Introduction: Archaeology and Cultural Exploration. In Digging Deep Teaching Social Studies Thr ough the Study of Archaeology, edited by Dennie Palmer Wolf, Dana Ba lick, and Julie Craven, pp.1-23. Heinemann, Portsmouth. Schmertzing, Lorraine and Richard Schmertzing 2002 Adapting to Distance Education: How an Ethnogra phic Look at Student Experiences can Inform Instructiona l Design. Computers in the Schools 19 (3/4):9-22. Selig, Ruth and Marilyn R. London (eds.) 1996 Anthropology Explored: The Best of Smithsonian AnthroNotes. Smithsonian Institute Press, Washington and London. Shanks, Michael and Randall H. McGuire 1996 The Craft of Archaeology. American Antiquity 61(1):75-89. Silver, Harvey; Richard Strong and Matthew Perini 1997 Integrating Learning Styles and Multiple Intellig ences. Educational Leadership 55(1): 22-26. Sinacore, Ada L., Karen R. Blaisure, Monica Justin, Patricia Healy and Sarah Brawer 1999 Promoting Reflexivity in the Classr oom. Teaching of Psychology, 26(4): 267-270. Snyder, Rebecca 2000 The Relationship between Learning Styles/Multiple Intelligences and Academic Achievement of High School Students. The High School Journal 83 (2): 11-20. Smardz, Karolyn
121 2000 Digging with Kids: Teaching Students to Touch the Past. In The Archaeology Education Handbook: Sharing the Past With Kids, edited by Karolyn Smardz and Shelly J. Smith, pp. 234-248. Altamira Press, Walnut Creek, Lanham, New York, Oxford. Smith, Shelley J. et al. 1993 Intrigue of the Past: A Teachers Activity Guide for Fourth Through Seventh Grad es. United States Departme nt of the Interior Bureau of Land Management. Spindler, George and Louise Spindler (editors) 1987 Interpretive Ethnography of Edu cation: At Home and Abroad. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers, London. 2000 Fifty Years of Anthropology and Ed ucation. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers, Mahwah, New Jersey. Stone, P. and R. MacKenzie (editors) 1990 The Excluded Past: Archaeology in Education. Unwin Hyman, London. Sweet, Sharon S. 1998 A Lesson Learned About Multiple Intelligences. Educational Leadership 56(3):50-1 TIMMS 2003 Trends in International Math ematics and Science Study. http://nces.ed.gov/timss/results.asp Valverde, Gilbert A. and William H. Schmidt 2000 Greater Expectations: Learning From Other Nations in the Quest for World-Class Standards in US School Mathematics and Science. Journal of Curriculum Studies 32(5):651-687. Veenema, Shirley and Howard Gardner 1996 Multimedia and Multiple Intelligen ces. American Prospect 29:69-75. Weber, Ellen 1999 Uniting to Introduce Multiple Intelligences Teaching Approaches (MITA). NASSP Bulletin, 83 (604):57-68 White, Nancy Marie 2000 Teaching Archaeologists to Teach Archaeology. In The Archaeology Education Handbook: Sharing the Past With Kids, edited by Karolyn Smardz and Shelly J. Smith, pp. 91100. Altamira Press, Walnut Creek, Lanham, New York, Oxford.
122 Wheat, Patricia 2000 Developing Lessons About Archaeo logy: From a Teachers Journal. In The Archaeology Education Handbook: Sharing the Past With Kids, edited by Karolyn Smardz and She lly J. Smith, pp. 117128. Altamira Press, Walnut Creek, Lanham, New York, Oxford. Winn, William and Mark Winchitl 2001 Toward an Explanatory Framework for Learning in Artificial Environments. Cybernetics & Human Knowing, 8(4):5 Wolf, Dennie Palmer, Dana Balic k and Julie Craven (editors) 1997 Digging Deep: Teaching Social Studies Through the Study of Archaeology. Heinemann, Portsmouth. Wolcott, Harry F. 1997 Ethnography? Or Educational Travel Writing? In Ethnography and Schools, edited by Yali Zou and Enrigue Trueba. Ro wman and Littlefield Publishers, Lanhan, Boulder, New York and Oxford. Wulf, Christoph 2000 Anthropology of Education. Transaction Publishers, New Brunswick, London. Zhang, Jian 2001 Cultural Diversity in Instructional Design. Inte rnational Journal of Instructional Media, 28(3): 299-307. Zou, Yali and Enrique T. Trueba 2002 Ethnography and Schools. Rowman and Littlefiel d Publishers, Lanhan, Boulder, New York and Oxford.
124 Appendix A: Sunshine State Curriculum 1998 Florida Department of Education COURSE DESCRIPTION GRADES 9-12, ADULT Subject Area: Social Studies Course Number: 212071A Course Title: Anthropology Honors Credit: 0.5 A. Major Concepts/Content. Through the study of anthropology, students acquire an understanding of the differences and similariti es, both biological a nd cultural, in human populations. Students recognize the characteristics which define their culture and gain an appreciation for the culture of others. The content should include, but not be limited to the following: human and biological origins adaptation to the phys ical environment diversity of human behavior evolution of social a nd cultural institutions patterns of language development family and kinship relationships the effects of change on cultural institutions This course shall integrate the Goal 3 Student Performance Standards of the Florida System of School Improvement and Accountab ility as appropriate to the content and processes of the subject matter.
125 Appendix A (continued) Course student performance standards must be adopted by the district, and they must reflect appropriate Sunshine State Standards benchmarks. B. Special Note. None Course Number: 212071A Anthropology Honors C. Course Requirements. These requirem ents include, but are not limited to, the benchmarks from the Sunshine State Standard s that are most relevant to this course. Benchmarks correlated with a specific course requirement may also be addressed by other course requirements as appropriate. Af ter successfully completing this course, the student will: 1. Demonstrate understanding of the significan ce of physical and cu ltural geography on the development of Eastern and Western civilizations. SS.A.2.4.1 understand the early physical a nd cultural development of humans. SS.A.2.4.2 understand the rise of early civilizations and the spread of agriculture in Mesopotamia, Egypt, and the Indus Valley. SS.A.2.4.3 understand the emergen ce of civilization in China, southwest Asia, and the Mediterranean basin. SS.A.2.4.6 understand features of the theolo gical and cultural c onflict between the Muslim world and Christendom and the re sulting religious, political, and economic competition in the Mediterranean region. SS.A.3.4.4 know the significan t ideas and texts of Buddhi sm, Christianity, Hinduism, Islam, and Judaism, their spheres of influence in the age of expansion, an their reforms in
126 Appendix A (continued) the d19th century. SS.B.2.4.6 understand the relationships between resources and the exploration, colonization, and settlement of different regions of the world. 2. Demonstrate understanding of the interactions among scien ce, technology, and society within global historical contexts. SS.A.2.4.2 identify and understand themes in hist ory that cross scientific, economic, and cultural boundaries. SS.B.2.4.1 understand how social, cultural, economic, and environmental factors contribute to the dynamic nature of regions. SS.B.2.4.2 understand past and present trends in human migration and cultural interaction and their impact on physical and human syste Course Number: 212071A Anthropology Honors SS.B.2.4.3 understand how the allocation of c ontrol of the Earth s surface affects interactions between people in different regions. SS.B.2.4.4 understand the global impact s of human changes in the physical environment. SS.B.2.4.5 know how humans overcome limits to growth imposed by physical syste SS.B.1.4.4 understand how cultural and technological characteristics can link or divide regions. 3. Demonstrate understanding of how economic and government institutions apply basic economic concepts and the possible results. SS.B.2.4.7 understand the concept of sustainable development.
127 Appendix A (continued) SS.C.2.4.6 understand the argument that pers onal, political, and economic rights SS.D.2.4.1 understand how wages and prices are determined in market, command, tradition-based, and mixed economic systems and how economic systems can be evaluated by their ability to achieve broad social goals such as freedom, efficiency, equity, security, and growth.. SS.D.2.4.2 understand how price and quantity demanded relate, how price and quantity supplied relate, and how price changes or contro ls affect distribution and allocation in the economy. SS.D.2.4.3 understand how government taxes, po licies, and programs affect individuals, groups, businesses, and regions. 4. Demonstrate understanding of the processes used to create and interpret history. SS.A.1.4.1 understand how ideas and beliefs, de cisions, and chance ev ents have been used in the process of writi ng and interpreting history. SS.A.1.4.4 use chronology, sequencing, pattern s, and periodization to examine interpretations of an event. Course Number: 212071A Anthropology Honors 5. Apply research, study, critic al thinking and decision maki ng skills and demonstrate the use of new and emerging technology in problem solving. SS.A.1.4.1 understand how ideas and beliefs, de cisions, and chance ev ents have been used in the process of writi ng and interpreting history.
Appendix B: Gardners Intelligences Linguistic Intelligence This intelligence involves the ability to read, write, and communicate with words. A student may be expected to use their linguistic skills to communicate what they already know or what new information they have learned. Logical Mathematical Intelligence This intelligence requires the ability to look for patterns, reason, and think in a logical manner. It can also be associated with scientific thinking. Visual Spatial Intelligence This intelligence is the ability to think in pictures and visualize outcomes. This skill should not be thought of only in visual terms because Gardner believes that blind children develop spatial intelligence. Musical Intelligence This intelligence gives a person the ability to make and compose music, sing, and use rhythm to learn. It is important to note that functional hearing is needed for a person to develop this intelligence in pitch and tone, but not so for rhythm. Bodily Kinesthetic Intelligence This intelligence encompasses the ability to use one's body movements to solve p roblems. This may contradict the belief that mental and physical activities do not relate to each other. Interpersonal Intelligence This intelligence involves learners to use their social skills and good communication skills with others. They may also show the ability to empathize and understand other p eople. Intrapersonal Intelligence This intelligence is the ability to reflect, analyze, and contemplate problems independently. A person may look upon himself or herself to assess one's own feelings and motivations. Naturalist Intelligence This intelligence is the newest addition to Gardner's theory of Multiple Intelligence (1996). This is the ability to make distinctions in the natural world and the environment Encyclopedia of Educational Technologyelectronic document htt p ://coe.sdsu.edu/eet/Articles/multiintell/index.htm, accessed December 2003 128
129 Appendix C: Ms. Cohens Sources Archaeology Textbooks Renfrew, Colin and Paul Bahn, Archaeology: Theories Methods and Practice, Third Ed. Thames & Hudson: 2000 Fagan, Brian M. In the beginning: An Introduction to Archaeology, Seventh Ed. Harper Collins Publishers: 1991 Periodicals (articles/features/reviews from various magazines) Archaeology Odyssey Dig National Geographic Education Materials Stark, Rebecca. Archaeology. Educational Impr essions, Inc. 2001 Teachers Edition and student edition Archaeology of Early Colonial Life. Volume 13Teaching with Primary Sources. Developed by Cobblestone Publishing Company Other Sources www.pbs.com Public Broadcasting Station s upplemental material to various TV shows NOVA Website (http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/). NOVA has been an incredible source of information. Not only are their features available for purchase, but their website almost always contains a set of documents, lesson plans and links to other sites about subject matter. Discovery Channel/TLC (http://www.discovery.com/) Various websites through search engines Anthropology: Textbooks: Haviand, William A. Anthropology, Ninth Ed. Wadsworth Group/ Thomson Learning: 2000 Schultz, Emily A. and Robert Lavenda. Anthropol ogy :A Perspective on the Human Conditions. Mayfield Publishing Company:1995 Educational Materials: Anthropology. The Center For Learning Annual Editions, Anthropology 94/95, Seventeenth Edition. Elvio Angeloni, Ed. Other Sources: National Geographic Website Nova Website
130 Appendix D: Worksheet to Formulate Ethnography Project The word ethnography literally means the de scription of a people and its way of life. In current anthropology ethnography refers to a process of re search and the account of that workusually in written form. Th e following is an outline to aid your group in designing a research project. Try to fill out e ach area with as much detail as possible. The better planned the project the ea sier it will be to accomplish. I. Choose a Topic Select a subject that interests the en tire group, narrow down that subject to a particular aspect, and finally, if applicable, form hypotheses that you may be able to test during your project. II. Design the research project Define the population to be studied, figure out the best ways to obtain data during this project-think of participant observation, interviewing (appropriate methods to conduct interview), or any other methods you might deem appropriate for this study. Also, decide on the best way to organize and record the data.
131 Appendix D (continued) III. Justification It is important to answer questions that are inevitabl y asked of an anthropologist: Why is this research important? (Why are you doing this?) How does this contribute to anthropology, society, or humanity as a whole? Try to state the most efficient way to conduct this projectwhich might reflect later application of your results. IV. Self Analysis Every person goes into a field project with their own opinions, worldviews, and preconceived notions. In this section explore what these biases may be for yo ur group. How will this affect your research? How will you be able to limit these biases from interrupting your research? Should bias be ignored all together or should it become an integral part of your research?
132 Appendix D (continued) V. Modes of Presentation This is a good time to discuss the best form of writing to be used for your project. However, sometimes it is easier to decide what writing style you will use at the end of you data collection. Also, this is your first opportunity to discuss the preliminary plans for your visial presentation. The above steps are preliminary to actually conducting field work. The following are the steps you will be following through out your project. III. Collect Data Use the methods that you outlined in step II. If necessary you can alter your methods mid stream. However you should have a detailed account of your reasoning to make such a shift. IV. Evaluate the Data Here you need to organize any quantitative data you may ha ve collected into tables for presentation. This is also time to decide whether or not your data supported your hypotheses, and if they did notwhy? Finally, you need to identify the findings that you did not expect. V. Writing the Ethnography Evaluate, describe and present the information that was generated from the other steps leading to this final report (those named in this outline). This includes presenting data in written formhowever, the style in which the ethnography is to be written will be left to the group. Your goal is ultimately to produce a description of a people within high school culture. Be sure to create a bibliography if necessary. Finally reflect upon your group, the research you have carried out and explore the biases that may echo in your research. Tosuner-Fikes, Lebriz 1982 A Guide for Anthropological Fieldwork on Contemporary Amer ican Culture. In Researching American Culture, edited by Conrad Phillip Kottack, pp.10-35. The Univ ersity of Michigan Press, Ann Arbor. Angrosino, Michael V. 2002 Introduction, In Doing Cultural Anthropology: Pr ojects for ethnographic Data Collec tion, Edited by Michael V. An grosino, pp.1-9. Waveland Press, Inc. Prospect Heights
133 Appendix E: Archaeology Questionnaire 1. What do you think about archaeology now that you have taken the class? 2. What are some of the sections of the class that you most enjoyed? 3. What sections of the class do you think were the most effective in providing you with the subject-matter and why? 4. What sections of the class would you change if you could? Please explain. 5. Did you find that facets of archaeology conf licted with your own beliefs, morals, values, et cetera? Please explain your answer. 6. In what way has learning about archaeology altered your world-view? 7. What did you think about working on the mock site? 8. Do you believe that the mock site exercise helped you to better understand archaeology, and how archaeologists work? Please explain your answer. 9. If you had the chance to change the mock site exercise in any way, what would you change? Please explain why. 10. Do you believe that guest lecturers enhanced your class experience? Please explain briefly. 11. Imagine if another student asked you about your experience taking the archaeology classwhat would you tell them? Think of both favorable and unfavorable aspects. 12. What do you believe you are taking away from this experience? 13. How would you make this class better for future students? 14. Do you think that you will pursue archaeology in your future academic settings? If not, what will you pursue? 15. Do you believe that High School students should be required to take an anthropology course (such as archaeology), just as you are required to ta ke math or history? Please explain your answer. 16. What is archaeology?
134 Appendix F: Internet Exercise Jamestown Web Activity This activity requires you to follow the inst ructions on the overh ead and answer the questions on the worksheet. Go to the website: http://www.apva.org/jr.html 1. Click on History of Jamestown. Answer questions 1-5 on your worksheet 2. When you reach the bottom of the histo ry page, click on lists. Answer questions 6 and 7 on your worksheet. 3. Return Home. Click on What have we found, then click on Artifacts from Jamestown, then National Geographic Exhibit. On your worksheet, for each of the categories listed, locat e on the website one artifact that interests you, list the artifact and what the webs ite claims it was used for in Jamestown. When you have finished all of the ab ove, you may continue to look at this websitefor other information. Jamestown Website Activity Worksheet 1. When Was Jamestown first settled, and by how many people 2. What was the shape of the fi rst palisade walls around Jamestown? 3. When was the starving tim e in Jamestowns History? 4. When did the first slaves arrive in Jamestown, and who brought them? 5. When was the capital of Virginia ch anged from Jamestown to Williamsburg? 6. What was the occupation list ed for most of the settlers? 7. What is the second most common occupation? Ceramics Work and Play Trade Signet Ring and Personal Tools Coins Household Furnishings Status Food Shelia Cohen 2001
Appendix G: Schedule for Fieldtrip DHS December 12, 2003 Fieldtrip Schedule 9:00am General assembly of students -opening remarks from Dr. Weisman 9:30am Begin Rotation Rotation 9:30am Group 1 Area A USF Library Visit SOC 107 Group 2 Area B Anthropology Exhibit Gallery SOC 111 Group 3 Area C Dr. Weismans Archaeology Lab SOC 120 Group 4 Area D Dr. Tykots Archaeological science Lab SOC 039D Group 5 Area E Dr. Himmelgreens Bio Ant Lab SOC 038 Grou p 6 Area F Graduate Suite SOC 015 10:00am Group 2 Area A USF Library Visit SOC 107 Group 3 Area B Anthropology Exhibit Gallery SOC 111 Group 4 Area C Dr. Weismans Archaeology Lab SOC 120 Group 5 Area D Dr. Tykots Archaeological science Lab SOC 039D Group 6 Area E Dr. Himmelgreens Bio Ant Lab SOC 038 Grou p 1 Area F Graduate Suite SOC 015 10:30am Group 3 Area A USF Library Visit SOC 107 Group 4 Area B Anthropology Exhibit Gallery SOC 111 Group 5 Area C Dr. Weismans Archaeology Lab SOC 120 Group 6 Area D Dr. Tykots Archaeological science Lab SOC 039D Group 1 Area E Dr. Himmelgreens Bio Ant Lab SOC 038 Grou p 2 Area F Graduate Suite SOC 015 11:00am Group 4 Area A USF Library Visit SOC 107 Group 5 Area B Anthropology Exhibit Gallery SOC 111 Group 6 Area C Dr. Weismans Archaeology Lab SOC 120 Group 1 Area D Dr. Tykots Archaeological science Lab SOC 039D Group 2 Area E Dr. Himmelgreens Bio Ant Lab SOC 038 Grou p 3 Area F Graduate Suite SOC 015 135
Appendix G (continued) # 11:30am Group 5 Area A USF Library Visit SOC 107 Group 6 Area B Anthropology Exhibit Gallery SOC 111 Group 1 Area C Dr. Weismans Archaeology Lab SOC 120 Group 2 Area D Dr. Tykots Archaeological science Lab SOC 039D Group 3 Area E Dr. Himmelgreens Bio Ant Lab SOC 038 Grou p 4 Area F Graduate Suite SOC 015 12:00 Group 6 Area A USF Library Visit SOC 107 Group 1 Area B Anthropology Exhibit Gallery SOC 111 Group 2 Area C Dr. Weismans Archaeology Lab SOC 120 Group 3 Area D Dr. Tykots Archaeological science Lab SOC 039D Group 4 Area E Dr. Himmelgreens Bio Ant Lab SOC 038 Grou p 5 Area F Graduate Suite SOC 015 12:30pmLunch and Closing Remarks 136
137 Appendix H: Ethnography Comparison Worksheet Ethnography has been called the art and the science of describing a group or culture (Fetterman 1996). The two ethnographic sketches that you rev iewed represent those approaches to research. Answer at least tw o question groups (A. B. or C.) from each section. Be as detailed or concise as you feel necessary. High School Peer Group Cl assification Systems A. How does this article contrast with your experience and observing of high school today? Is the same hierarchy in place? Are the same labels being used? B. Name some of the conclusions that Robins reached. Are these types of hypotheses that she suggested before starting fieldwork or after? Was their sufficient evidence to support these claims? Taking in to consideration the last statement of Robins studyhow do you interpret the results of the investigation? C. Briefly describe some of the methods th at Robins used to co llect data. Is it important that she mentioned her me thods of data collection? Why? Where the Heart Is A. In your opinion from who s point of view is this story being told? Give a brief description of him. Do you believe that this story captures the subject as an individual only or does it also help to illuminate his group as a whole? Do you believe that this ethnography c ould be related to the lives of people outside of this group? B. Describe two conclusions that you draw from reading this ethnographic story. How does this persons perception of the world differ from your own? How is it similar? C. Besides the storyteller and the group that he belo ngs to, what other social institutions are being explored here? Compare and Contrast A. Which ethnography do you believe is most effective in describing the subjects under study and why? What are th e differences between the two? What are the similarities? B. Simply because the styles of presenta tion are different does that also mean that the data collection methods must have also been different? Explain. Which one did you enjoy reading more and why? C. Compare this statement from Robins st udy: I will argue that these labels are purposefully applied to indivi duals and groups in order to maintain a ranked social order, with these statements from Angros inos story, Im tryin to listen to the opera music just to see what Daddy sees in it but it dont mean not hin to me and I guess its way too complicated to explai n to a retard even though the food at OH aint all that great cause its mo stly other retards who cook it How are all of these statements related to one another? Can there be conclusions drawn cross-culturally (that is relating or comparing aspects of two or more cultures)? In what way does this illustrate the importance of language to human beings?
138 Appendix I: Ethnographic Project Worksheet Ethnographic Project The objective of this exercise is for you to practice anthropological techniques firsthand by concentrating on various component s of high school culture. Here, you will become acquainted with data collection ( note-taking, audio tapes, video, interviews, questionnaires, etc.), par ticipant observation, data anal ysis, and anthropological writing. The final goal of the project is for classroom groups to compose an ethnography that describes their chosen subj ect. You may also choose to concentrate your efforts upon activities that the majority of the student body participates in as a whole such as, lunch room etiquette, courty ard behavior, pep-rallies, sporting events and countless others. It mu st be realized, however, to write an accurate ethnography you must practice ongoing observation and da ta collection. For example, if you decide to study something such as audien ce behavior at a spor ting event, you must observe more than one or two games. What to write The writing of an ethnography take s on many forms, and there are a considerable number of methods and protocol that researchers follow. The ultimate goal is to present an accurate description of the people or th e particular social aspect being studied. In this case the writing style will be left up to your group to decide. In choosing this style remember to keep in mind that you want people to be able to read and be interested in the subject matter you chose to illustrate. There are ethnographies ranging from day-to-day accounts of a society to fictional stories that the researcher feels best represents the people under study. In the end, the success of an ethnography can be gauged by the extent in which it makes sense and is truthful to the people being studied and readers of the work. Group Activity The class will be separated into groups of 3 or 4. It will be the responsibility of each group to produce an ethnography and vi sual presentation about the subject in which they chose to observe. All decisions will be made as a group, such as type of visual presentation, the most effective form s of data collection, and the writing style in which the ethnography will be written. Each group member will write approximately three pages of the ethnogra phy. Also, it is the responsibility of the group to determine how the work will be di vided up when it comes to the written and visual presentations. However, each student must play an equal role in the data collection process. Finally, as a collective the entire class will discuss the ways in which the research they have conducted can be applied practically to high school in general.
139 Appendix I (continued) A Final Product When designing the visual presentati on there should be a conscious effort towards producing presentations that can be displayed as a whole. Perhaps the greatest responsibility charged to a researcher is the pres entation of their findings. This presentation should not be reserved for an elite few, but rather be dispatched to the public, giving everyone the opportunity to draw their own conclusions. With this in mind, your findings will be presented to th e entire student body in the form of an exhibit consisting of your pos ters. Students will be ab le to view the classs reflections upon high school culture and form their own opinion. Schedule of tasks Choose a topic for your ethnography If it is a club, team, or organization on e must gain entry into the group or get permission to be an outside observer. Observation and data collecting should begin immediately. Good methods of data collection include writing of no tes, interviews, questionnaires, video recording, and audio recording. Finally the data must be translated in to your ethnography and presented to the class and eventual ly school population. Terms of Interest Ethnography is that aspect of cultural anthr opology concerned with the descriptive documentation of living cultures. The books produced by anthropologists containing description of a part icular society or culture are usually referred to as an ethnography Ethnology is a subdivision of cultural an thropology which focuses upon the comparative study of contemporary culture s, and often seeks to uncover general principles about human society. A work that synthesizes two or more ethnographies, with the intent to compare a nd contrast the different groups being studied in order to uncover general explanations is called an ethnology. A Formal interview is an interview that consists of questions designed to elicit specific facts, at titudes, and opinions. An Informal interview is an unstructured question-and-answer session in which the informant is encouraged to follow his or her own train of thought, wherever it may lead. Informant is a person who provides information about his or her culture to the ethnographic fieldworker. Participant observation is participation in a cu lture practiced by an investigator in order to gain social acceptance in the society and acquire understanding of her/his observations. The goal of the researcher is to participate but also to maintain a distance that allows ad equate observation and recording of data.