Society for American Archaeology 2012 77th Annual Meeting, Memphis, TN Session: Lessons from the Trenches: The

Pedagogy of Archaeology and Heritage

Teaching Indigenous Archaeology to Indigenous non-Archaeologists, non-Indigenous Archaeologists, and non-Indigenous non-Archaeologists: Hitting the Important Points Joe Watkins, University of Oklahoma Email: jwatkins@telepath.com Keywords: Indigenous archaeology, pedagogy, Native American; Geographic focus: North American General Teaching archaeology in a Native American Studies program carries with it challenges beyond those faced by archaeologists who teach in an archaeology program. Questions of pedagogy in an archaeology classroom are compounded in situations where there are people who believe that archaeology is the handmaiden of colonialism; that archaeologists are at worst grave-robbers and treasure hunters; or that ALL histories (real or imagined) are equivalent. The challenge in working in a Native American Studies environment is to accurately present the methods and theories within which archaeology operates while giving value to non-archaeological approaches to the past.

Pedagogy is a foreign word to many college instructors, unless the instructor has at least a passing background in education theory. I admit I dont have one, except what Ive picked up from my wife or from others along the way as Ive taught college and graduate classes. A quick check on the Internet (where else?) gives some good sources, but I chose to focus on the information at http://pedagogy.merlot.org/. The website lists five areas (Learners and Learning; Course Instructional Design; Teaching Strategies; Teaching Challenges; and Assessment), and each of those sections offers suggestions and readings to help improve an instructors understanding of the ways that teaching and learning are inter-related. I urge everyone who has not looked at these sections to do so and to book mark the page for future reference.

But rather than proceed further with the information available on the website, I want instead to focus on some of the techniques I use in the classroom to serve four purposes: first, to teach Indigenous archaeology; second, to teach the subject to non-archaeologists; third, to teach the subject in such a way that even those who have an original aversion to the topic understand it;

and fourth, but most importantly, to teach the over-arching concept that archaeology has utility in contemporary society.

Teaching Indigenous archaeology Indigenous archaeology, as defined by Nicholas and Andrews (1997:3, note 5) is archaeology with, for, and by Indigenous peoples. It was subsequently popularized by the publication of Joe Watkins volume, Indigenous Archaeology: American Indian Values and Scientific Practice (2000), which critically explored late 20th-century relations between archaeologists and Native Americans, particularly in the context of reburial, repatriation, and cultural resource management. More recently, Nicholas (2008) offered the definition, in part, of Indigenous archaeology as an expression of archaeological theory and practice in which the discipline intersects with Indigenous values, knowledge, practices, ethics, and sensibilities, and through collaborative and community-originated or -directed projects, and related critical perspectives (1660).

Teaching Indigenous archaeology is more than teaching about archaeology by, with, and for Indigenous peoples: it is about teaching alternative perspectives on the archaeological enterprise so that everyone in the classroom understands that alternative perspectives have value. In this regard, it is as much about tolerance for alternative perspectives as it is about the scientific methods. Indigenous students, especially in classes where they are the minority, need to have their varied perspectives validated by the instructor in such a way that they are not afraid to make comments that might be misinterpreted as subjective and value-laden rather than the more normal objective and value-free opinions usually expected in an academic setting.

I usually begin discussions of Indigenous archaeology by examining the concepts inherent in origin stories of North American Indigenous populations. I have written about this previously (Watkins 2006: 106-107) but it is important that everyone understand that by contextualizing foundational topics within alternative cultural methods of understanding, students feel less threatened by institutionalized truth and more aware of alternative means of examining the same data. This allows critical evaluation of the class materials without providing a model of rote acceptance of the instructors views. Occasionally I have to cope with the perspectives

archaeology students have that archaeology somehow offers the truth about the past and that alternative perspectives are somehow flawed if they do not follow scientific protocol.

Teaching the subject to non-archaeologists It is often difficult to teach archaeology to non-majors because of many of the misunderstandings and misconceptions people have. We all know we dont do dinosaurs, but we now also have to compete with misconceptions generated by Spike TVs American Digger and the National Geographics Digger about why we excavate and about the real value of artifacts we find. We must enforce the idea that artifacts without context have no scientific value something we must also try to teach our Art History colleagues. I find it easier to teach concepts with different methods, especially when it comes to methods archaeologists use to discuss the past, particularly such things as observation and inference.

In one class, in order to teach about observation and inference, I asked students to collect data about particular car owners based on observation of the automobiles. I asked them to note particular features of the exterior of the car as well as things they could see within the car, and to then offer some interpretations of the cars primary user. From the material they observed, they were surprised about the amount of information they could gather. I then moved from this example to talk about how archaeologists use similar sorts of observation to provide reconstructions of past societies. By making the process fun and removing some of the magic, students realize more of how we do what we do.

Teaching archaeology to those who might be averse to it This perhaps is the most difficult of all trying to teach archaeology to those who are somehow averse to accepting it as having any beneficial aspects. This group of students usually comes in with a preconceived notion of either what archaeology is (its relationship to Indigenous groups) or what archaeology purports to provide. Indigenous students usually are predisposed to believe that archaeologists are grave robbers whose only meaning in life is to plunder graves in search of goodies to fill museum displays or to fulfill tenure (or other occupational) requirements. As such, it is often more difficult to address this aspect of the class without seeming to be overtly self-serving. While there is nothing wrong with being self-serving in the sense that we should be

supportive of our discipline, it is important that we not be overly antagonistic about our disciplines history. There have been times in the past where notable (notorious?) members have plundered and pillaged in the name of science, but we must make it known that such instances now are the extreme minority rather than the norm. Discussions of ethics, especially the SAAs Principle # 2 (Accountability), helps situate the discipline within contemporary populations. This discussion of ethics serves multiple purposes in that it helps all students understand that ethics are as essential to the practice of archaeology as is careful measurements and observations. In this regard, I usually tell the story of my involvement in archaeology about how I felt it was at my grandmothers urging to not let the unwritten history of those who lived in the area of our homestead before we did as a means of letting the students know that we each come to the field in different ways. I also try to let them feel comfortable NOT wishing to come to the field. By leaving the decision totally up to them, it alleviates stress or implied pressure to become one of us.

Teaching the contemporary relevance of archaeology Perhaps most difficult of all of the above aspects is to teach the contemporary relevance of archaeology to anyone. As archaeologists we can discuss the bigger picture and time depth we can offer; we can talk about how he who ignores the past is destined to repeat it; about how we have to know where weve been in order to know where were going. Still, at the end of the day, all we can do is offer our interpretations of how archaeology can help inform contemporary populations about how cultures of the past dealt with issues similar to those we face today.

Does this work? Occasionally. I find that some groups of students are more open to the discussion than others. I also find that some students are more disposed to being uncomfortable with discussions revolving around the past and someones alternative interpretations of that past. I also encounter aspects of the discussion that revolve around questions of authenticity related to culturally determined issues such as status, gender, age, and shared cultural context things most instructors do not think about. In those instances, I try to find ways of alternatively communicating the information I want them to leave with, and then go on. There are certainly

some things I cannot teach them perhaps as many they cannot learn from me but I keep trying to find ways of reach them.

I do believe an awareness of the different ways that our own culture influences not only our communications but also the ways that our communications are accepted and interpreted is extremely important when we are involved in trying to teach (and reach) students who are not members of the dominant Euro-American cultures. If we become more aware of the underlying contexts that influence the ways our teaching is interpreted as well as the way our students from non-dominant cultures learn, we will be better able to meet their needs as well as to be able to communicate that which we feel those students need to gain from our classes.

References cited: Nicholas, George 2008 Native Peoples and Archaeology. In: Encyclopedia of Archaeology, Deborah M. Pearsall (ed), pp 1660-1669. New York: Academic Press. Nicholas, George P., and Thomas D. Andrews 1997 Indigenous archaeology in the postmodern world. In At a crossroads: Archaeologists and First Peoples in Canada. Nicholas and Andrews (eds.), pp. 118. Burnaby, BC: Archaeology Press, Simon Fraser University. Watkins, Joe 2006 Communicating Archaeology: Words to the Wise. Journal of Social Archaeology 6(1): 100-118. 2000 Indigenous Archaeology: American Indian Values and Scientific Practice. Walnut Creek, CA: Altamira Press.