 |
ANTH 5203, Archaeology Method
& Theory:
Core Course, Spring 2003
|
In Honor of Professor Allen McCartney
with Professors: Thomas J. Green, Marvin Kay, Kenneth L. Kvamme, Fred
Limp,
Robert C. Mainfort, Jeffrey M. Mitchem, Claudine Payne,
Martha A. Rolingson, George Sabo, and Frank Schambach
Meetings: Tuesdays, 6:00 - 8:50 pm, OLD MAIN 322
Overall course coordinator and contact: Professor
Kenneth L. Kvamme (kkvamme@uark.edu;
place "CORE COURSE" in the subject line; 575-4130)

Introduction
This core class is intended for all graduate students in the M.A. or Ph.D.
programs in the Department of Anthropology. It presents an intensive look
at the realities of archaeological research and practice at the dawn of
the 21st century by focusing on the work of 9 individuals through direct
interaction, but also a host of others through readings. This is a team-taught
course made up of faculty members of the Department of Anthropology and
members of the Arkansas Archeological Survey from throughout Arkansas,
who also hold titles within the department. The topics and case studies
are unabashedly slanted toward Arkansas and nearby regions, although exposure
to other areas and a host of methods and theoretical concepts will also
be broached. Students, regardless of background or previous experience,
should come away with a good feel for what archaeology is all about.

Class Format
In addition to two summary meetings (the first and the last), the course
will present 13 faculty lecturers who will describe case studies and theoretical
perspectives from their own research. Each of these lectures will be 1-1.5
hours; the remainder of each of these meetings will center on discussion
led by a student discussion leader. Back
to top

Course Approach & Evaluation
Our approach to this seminar and its evaluation is based on 13 independent
assignments that each possess similar elements, participation in the 15
class meetings, participation in monthly discussion groups lead by an
archaeology faculty member (or guest speaker), and being a discussion
leader for one (or more, depending on class enrollment) of the weekly
in-class formal discussions. These domains are described as follows. Back
to top
- 13 independent assignments. (New format;
supersedes original syllabus) Prior to each weekly discussion
the seminar participants will be provided with a list of assigned readings
and questions about the topic, or equivalent materials. Each
student will be expected to be familiar with the readings and questions
prior to the lecture and participate in an open discussion that immediately
follows each lecture. Based on the lecture, discussions, and readings,
the student will prepare in the following week a 5-6 page double-spaced
paper that thoughtfully addresses the questions (more lengthy responses
of moderate length are acceptable). The paper should specifically refer
to points raised in the lecture and discussion, and make reference to
several of the assigned readings. Two copies of the paper, identified
only by the student identification number, the date, and the topic,
should be delivered to the course supervisor at the meeting in the week
following the lecture. Each paper will be evaluated by at least two
of the faculty; their average score, up to a maximum of 100 points,
will be awarded for each paper.
Back to top
-
Monthly discussion in mini-groups. Class participants will
be divided into equal sized groups and randomly assigned to an archaeology
faculty member, who will serve as their class mentor and advisor providing
more direct and personal interaction should questions and difficult
issues arise. Each of these mini-groups will meet once a month at
a mutually agreed upon time and place. The purpose is to provide a
less informal meeting to discuss the course, its strengths, weaknesses,
and possible improvements. The archaeology faculty mentor will evaluate
participation at these meeting for grading purposes. Back
to top
|
MINI-GROUP ASSIGNMENTS
|
| GREEN: Tonya, Matt, Jason |
KVAMME: David, Opal, Stacey |
| LIMP: Sarah, Crystal, Kath |
MAINFORT: Mary, Elsa |
| KAY: Mark, Angie, Jeff |
SABO: Andy, Leslie |
-
Discussion leader. Each week the faculty presenter will be
appointed a student discussion leader for the topic. This will be
done in consultation with the seminar participants, who will elect
someone to volunteer for a specific weekly topic, or random assignment
may be used. The discussion leader will meet with the weekly presenter
(or be in communication by e-mail) the week prior to the presentation.
The two will discuss the topic and how the discussion leader will
serve during the class. The discussion leader will serve as a second
contact person for other seminar participants prior to the weekly
meeting. Back
to top
-
Robert L. Stigler, Jr. Lectureship In Archaeology: Seminar
participants are required to attend these two formal lectures this
semester, and are urged to attend the informal discussion groups led
by the Stigler guest lecturer. Both of these activities are on Thursdays.
The speakers and topics are:
- March 6, 2003, Michelle
Hegmon, Associate Professor, Department of Anthropology,
Arizona State University, Tempe. Lecture: "Culture, Style and
Technology in Southwest Archaeology" Giffels Auditorium, 7:30
p.m.
- April 3, 2003, Linea Sundstrom,
Ph.D., Day Star Research, Shorewood, WI . Lecture: "The Art
of Transformation: Religion and Indian Rock Art in the Northern
Plains" Giffels Auditorium, 7:30 p.m.
Back
to top

Readings
Copies of many of the course readings will be placed within the Anthropology
Reading Room at least a week prior to each lecture. These readings
should not leave the room except for purposes of making copies, which
should be accomplished in under an hour. Books and other readings may
be on reserve at Mullins Library. For students unfamiliar with archaeology,
a suite of introductory textbooks have been place on reserve.

Guests
Guests are individuals not enrolled in the course, usually graduate students
in the Department of Anthropology or the Environmental Dynamics Program.
They are welcome to attend the lecture portion of each of the 13 lecture-based
classes, but should leave prior to the discussions. Students enrolled
in the class and faculty are to be given seating priority.

Attendance, Academic Dishonesty
Other than due to illness or an emergency, regular attendance is expected.
University policies will be strictly adhered to with regard to academic
dishonesty. Refer to the Graduate School Catalog for general information.
Back
to top

Grade Evaluation
Evaluation is based on a set of 15 individual activities, each worth 100
points. Specifically, the 13 independent assignments (described above)
constitute a maximum of 1300 points (87% of grade), up to 100 points (7%)
are allowed for the mentoring of faculty member's assessment of the mini-group
meetings, and up to 100 points are awarded by the entire faculty to reflect
class participation, student interest, commitment, and devotion to the
course.
Extra credit. Up to 75 points of extra credit will be awarded
at the discretion of the course coordinator for an essay that evaluates
the implications for archaeology of the two Stigler lectures. The essay
should be no more than three type written, double-spaced pages. It should
be turned in April 8, 2003.
Grade Scale: A: 90-100%: B: 80-90; C: 70-80; D: 60-70; F: < 60%
Reporting Of Grades To Students. Grades will not be posted. The
student may submit an e-mail message or a self-addressed, stamped post
card or envelope to request current grade status from the course coordinator.
Back
to top
Basis For Grading Research Papers & Oral Presentations
|
A-level work
EXCELLENT
|
- Responds fully to assignment requirements.
- Presents a topical sentence or section containing the issue
to be analyzed and the position taken.
- Exercises critical thinking that is clear, logical (coherent
and relevant), deep, broad, and discriminating.
- Expresses the purpose or goals clearly and persuasively.
- Invokes and uses disciplinary facts and terminology correctly.
- Provides adequate supporting arguments with reasons, evidence,
and examples.
- Is focused, well-organized, and unified.
- Uses direct language that is appropriate for the audience.
- Invokes discerning sources when appropriate.
- Correctly documents and cites sources.
- Is free of errors in grammar, punctuation, word choice, spelling
and format.
- Displays originality and creativity in items 1-9
|
B-level work
VERY GOOD |
Displays high quality in 1-11 fully and completely,
but does not include originality and creativity. |
C-level work
ADEQUATE |
Shows adequacy in 1-11 and overall competence, but contains
a few relatively minor errors and flaws. A "C" paper or
presentation is adequate in all regards, but could use polish and
usually looks and reads like a next-to-final draft or sounds like
the speaker is not comfortable giving the presentation. |
D-level work
WEAK |
Fails to realize some elements of 1-11 adequately and
contains several serious errors or flaws or many minor ones. A "D"
paper or presentation is less than adequate for public presentation
and commonly reads like a first or second draft or sounds like it
has been poorly prepared. |
F-level work
POOR |
Fails to realize several elements of 1-11
adequately and contains several serious errors or flaws as well as
many minor ones. An "F" paper or presentation commonly contains
fatal errors or execution and commonly looks and reads like private
writing or sounds like it has not been practiced. |
Back
to top

Course Schedule
Back
to top

 |
Department
of Anthropology
Old Main 330, University of Arkansas
Fayetteville, AR 72701
Phone: (479)575-2508; Fax: (479)575-6595
E-mail: chitt@comp.uark.edu
Maintained by
Course Coordinator
|
|