Archaeology and Education – Learning Outdoors (pt 2): During the Visit

This is the second part of a three-part post series about outdoor education – primarily the education at archaeological sites.  In this post we will explore what should happen at the site.

But first, let me quickly mention what should not happen at a site.  The teacher should not give the history of the site.  This should happen back in the classroom where it is easier to do (audio/visual aids, maps, charts, white/chalkboards, etc).  The students should know the history when they get to the site or else, by the time you get there much of your trip will be wasted as they will have to try to learn the history while they are trying to make observations about the site.  Another problem is that students will not be listening to you as keenly at the site as they would in the classroom.  The sort of education that happens here is unlike that in the classroom.  And again, the team you have with you should know what you are going to do at the site so they can be more effective in teaching (for they will have to do the teaching for you – each in their own small groups).

There are three models that we were given in class for what you should do at the site and the questions you should ask (this said, I suspect that after you read them you might get your own ideas – of which I would love to hear).  It seems to me that these models are based on cognitive ability: Beginner, Intermediate, Advanced.  I will present each of these separately.

Teachers of the younger ages (and some older ones as well) need to keep questions to the basic level.  These questions answer What, How, Why, When, and Who in the following ways:  What was this place used for?  (This question utilizes some of the skills learned in the classroom – focusing on the overall purpose of the building, individual rooms, fire places, etc.)  How was it designed and constructed? (This question focuses on materials used in the construction, design features
like arches and pillars, and some basic construction techniques.)  Why was it built and why here? (These questions are less of purpose and more of landscape.  The students can see the hill that the fort is built on, or the river nearby for water to drink, etc.)  When was it built and when was it changed? (This is when you remind them of what they learned about the history of the site so they can identify that this used to be a place used by people but at some point in history this changed and the site is now what it is.  Again, the more work you put in while back in the classroom, the more the students will get out of the site now that they are here.)  Who built it and who lived here?  (Did a king or queen build this site?  Was it a man making a place for is family?  Answering questions along the line of family life verses village life, etc.)

For those students ready for the intermediate stage of learning, other questions might be more appropriate (or in addition to the previous).  These students will be asked to observe, find/record, and hypothesize.  The observing activities are designed to encourage the students to understand ancient buildings.  The activities that require finding and recording build on these observations and develop the questions, “What can I see?” into “What does it tell me?”  The students will then take the evidence that they have gathered and make historical deductions.  This approach was designed by my professor Dr. Corbishley and I think it is the most effective.

First, ask the students to make a list under headings “I see”, “I hear”, and “I feel” to help them organize as they observe.  They are to record words at particular locations.  (These lists can also be used later back in the classroom to discuss the history of the site.)  Ask them to look for “clues” that might help to explain what happened at the site.  Then they are to write three adjectives (descriptive words) and three verbs (doing words) to explain what people might have done here.  They should also find evidence for repairs and/or alterations to the buildings answering the questions “What has changed?” and “Why?”  Finally, they should sketch (rough) or photograph a part of the site which they sense reflects the atmosphere of the place.

Second, ask the students to record different materials used at the site and answer the questions “What is natural?” and “What is man-made?”  They should also identify ways the site has changed over time answering questions “What has been added?” and “Why?” as well as “What is now missing?” and “Why?”  You can have the students measure and record dimensions of different doors and windows (you can then use this data back in the classroom, cross-curricularly to compare with modern versions of each).

Third, ask the students to hypothesize from the evidence collected and tell you something about the owners or occupiers of the site.  What do we definitely know?  And what can we reasonably guess?  Have them work out which was the noisiest room and which was the quietest (this helps them to link physical condition with living condition).  Have them draw incomplete features (which they will try to complete back at school in say an art class).  Another thing you might do (ahead of time) is to prepare an artist’s impression of this site to be handed to the students on location (at the end) and ask the students to critique it based on the evidence that they have collected.

Advanced students should have even more critical thinking.  This level of learning (designed by Copeland and published in 1993) focuses on three basic types of questions: present, past, and the influence of the past on the present.  This level requires a bit more thinking about how this affects the students themselves.  Ask questions like: What is this place like? (present – expecting students to describe the ruinous state) What was this place like? (past – expecting students to describe the pre-ruinous state of the purposes for the rooms, building overall, etc) and What elements of the past can we still see? (influence – expecting students to identify not just walls, but other possible features).  Another line of questioning might be: Why is this place as it is? How and why does it differ from or resemble other place? (present - expecting students to describe processes comparing and contrasting with others they have experienced as ruins) Why was this place as it was? How and why did it differ from or resemble other places? (past – same questions again but this time asking them to explain the processes of life at the site and comparing and contrasting with other sites as they were when they were used) And what influence have these elements had on this place? How does this influence differ from or resemble what has happened at other places? (influence – expecting students to relate present and past elements to what is happening currently at the site)  The same sort of questions can be asked for about the present connection this site has with other sites, past connections, and the influences that these past connections have on how we connect the current condition with other sites.  A fourth line of questioning can be around how this place is changing and why, who this place changed, and the changes that are reflected from the past on the present.  The fifth line would be to ask students what it is like to be here in the present, what would it have been like in the past, and how does the past influence what it feels like to be here now?

You might have noticed how that the three methods build upon the previous in a way that, depending on your students’ ability and the time you have at the site, you might find it worthwhile to include more than one method in your visit.  You also might see these and become inspired in alternate methods.  If so, I would appreciate you posting a comment to tell us what you did.