Assessing, Teaching, Learning...of questions from a teaching and learning perspective: ... How can...

1

Assessing, Teaching, Learning

Archaeological Skills

(ATLAS) http://sites.google.com/site/atlasreading

Narrative Report

Tim Phillips and Amanda Clarke with contributions by Cath Neal,

Steve Roskams, Paul Booth

and Kenneth Aitchison

October 2010

2

Contents

Acknowledgements 3

1. Background to the Project 4

2. Project Aims and Objectives and Outcomes 5

3. Methodology 6

4. Fieldwork Teaching at Three Archaeological Field Schools: 8

4.1 University of York 8

4.2 University of Oxford 14

4.3 University of Reading 19

5. Results: 26

5.1 Summary of the Results 26

5.2 Limitations of the Evidence 26

5.3 York – Heslington East 27

5.4 Oxford – Dorchester-on-Thames 37

5.5 Reading – Silchester 45

5.6 Supervisor Questionnaires 54

5.7 Overview of Results 56

6. Discussion : 58

6.1 The Provision of Technical Skills 58

6.2 The Provision of Transferable Skills 62

6.3 Organisation, Management and Resourcing 66

6.4 Assessment 68

6.5 Employability 70

6.6 Training and Employability: The View from the IfA 71

7. Conclusions and Further Work 73

7.1 The Results 73

7.2 Further Work 74

7.3 Concluding Comments 75

References 77

Appendices: 78

Questionnaires 79

Comments on the Questionnaire 83

Transcriptions of Focus Group Discussions and Interviews 106

3

Acknowledgements

This project was made possible by a Teaching Development Grant from the Higher Education

Academy’s History, Classics and Archaeology Subject Centre. The authors would like to thank

the Archaeology Departments at the Universities of York, Oxford and Reading for providing full

access to their teaching materials and archaeological Field Schools. They would also like to thank

all the site supervisors and students who participated in the project for their assistance, the IfA for

their contribution to the project, and to Mike Rains of York Archaeological Trust for setting up

the project website.

4

1. Background to the Project

Fieldwork training remains a key component of the study of Archaeology at undergraduate level

and many of the institutions providing an education in Archaeology see the fieldwork element as

an integral part of the course. Croucher et al (2008) highlighted the perceptions, expectations and

challenges facing university staff and students during archaeological fieldwork training. Five

years on from this study changes to the economic climate and continued funding and resource

issues provide a challenging environment for university fieldwork training. How do different

university fieldwork projects address these issues and can examples of good practice, in relation

to fieldwork training, be developed? The challenge is not only to provide high quality training in

archaeological fieldwork practice, but also to link undergraduate learning experiences with

personal development plans and employment skills and opportunities.

The provision of training has a number of difficulties and tensions inherent to the context in

which it is provided. Some institutions provide an organised Field School that is dedicated to

training, whilst many others train their students on a variety of research projects within their

respective departments. At some institutions, students are expected to find placements for

themselves on fieldwork projects elsewhere. In many cases these are research projects in which,

inevitably, the research aims are paramount, reflecting the nature of their funding. This can create

a tension between achieving the research aims and the teaching aims. This in turn can affect the

way in which the work is carried out and the time and resources that can be dedicated to training

as opposed to dealing with the archaeology on site. Additionally many archaeology students will

not go on to pursue a career in the discipline and consideration should also be given to their

experience and employability.

The challenge, therefore, is how to deliver effective training in fieldwork skills within a research

environment that is under pressure to achieve specific results within a restricted time and

resource framework. As this is ‘education’, there is also the need to provide students with some

form of assessment of their performance. This is not just giving them a ‘grade’, but providing

them with effective feedback on their areas of strength and weakness. This in turn leads to

questions of employability – how can students use this unique experience of fieldwork training in

pursuing a future career, whether this is within or outside archaeology?

Within this context of a unique student experience and competing priorities, this raises a number

of questions from a teaching and learning perspective:

What are the most effective methods for teaching archaeological fieldwork?

What aspects of fieldwork training should be assessed?

How effective are the different methods of assessment?

How can assessment be linked to a student’s future employability?

5

2. Project Aims and Objectives and Outcomes

In response to these questions the Assessing, Teaching, Learning Archaeological Skills (ATLAS)

project was set up. The aims and objectives of the project were to:

Evaluate the effectiveness of archaeological teaching modules as preparation for fieldwork,

and evaluate any follow-up during the rest of the undergraduate degree

Evaluate the different teaching and learning and assessment methods used on training

excavations

Highlight the technical, academic and transferable skills gained through practical fieldwork

Increase student self-reflection on the skills they acquire through fieldwork training, linking

this with Personal Development Planning (PDP) to enhance future employability.

The outcomes of the ATLAS project would be to:

Collect examples of good practice for teaching fieldwork skills

Evaluate methods of assessing student performance on fieldwork and their effectiveness

Enhance student awareness of their own potential and the importance Personal Development

Planning (PDP) for future employability

Enhance staff awareness of student expectations

Gain an understanding of the link between skills and employability.

6

3. Methodology

The project ran for 10 weeks from late May to the end of July 2010. Within this time frame three

established archaeological Field Schools run by university departments would be visited. These

were the University of York’s excavations at Heslington East, the University of Oxford’s

fieldwork at Dorchester-on-Thames and the University of Reading’s Field School at Silchester.

The data collection methods included:

An evaluation of the teaching modules and courses at each of the institutions involved in the

study

Observation of fieldwork teaching in practice

Questionnaires of students and supervisors

Student Focus Group discussions

Interviews with site directors and supervisors.

Previous projects (e.g. Croucher et al 2008) had concentrated on the perspective of students and

site directors on training excavations, but had presented less data from the site supervisors’ point

of view. It was, therefore, important that this aspect should be included to an equal extent.

The questionnaires concentrated on student expectations, and methods of teaching and

assessment (Appendix I). These were kept short and limited to two sides of one sheet of paper.

The objective was to balance the need to collect relevant data whilst maximising the number of

questionnaires returned – a short questionnaire is more likely to be completed than a longer one.

The student Focus Groups were made up of three to five individuals. These were mostly First

Year students, but at Silchester it was possible to have a discussion with one group of Second

Year students. It was also possible to have separate groups of Single Honours and Joint Honours

students at this site. The discussions with the students were based around a number of themes

including:

What did they like or dislike about fieldwork?

Did they want to pursue a career in archaeology?

What were their expectations of fieldwork before coming on site and had the experience lived

up to them?

How well had their First Year modules prepared them for fieldwork training and did they

relate to it?

What were the on-site teaching methods and did they think that these were effective?

What did they think they were actually getting out of the experience?

Was it important to be assessed on their performance on fieldwork?

What methods could be used to assess them?

What did they think of Personal Development Planning (PDP)?

Could their fieldwork assessment feed into PDP and eventually employability?

What were the benefits of residential and non-residential training excavations?

Fieldwork is not a compulsory module for the Joint Honours students at Reading so, in addition

to the questions above, they were also asked why they had decided to take the module and come

7

on the Field School. The question about residential and non-residential Field Schools was asked

because this could potentially relate to the nature of the fieldwork training experience; the

excavations at Reading and Oxford were residential, whilst those at York were non-residential.

The interviews with site directors and supervisors revolved around a number of similar themes

including:

What was their background and experience in archaeology?

What did they think were the students’ expectations of fieldwork before coming on site and

had the experience lived up to them?

Did they enjoy teaching practical fieldwork techniques?

What were their on-site teaching methods?

What did they think the students were actually getting out of the experience?

Was it important that the students were assessed on their performance on fieldwork?

What methods could be used to assess them?

What did they think of Personal Development Planning (PDP)?

Could the fieldwork assessment feed into PDP and eventually employability?

What were the benefits of residential and non-residential training excavations?

8

4. Fieldwork Teaching at Three Archaeological Field Schools

4.1 University of York

Year One Teaching: First Year Modules

In the autumn term of the First Year the Single Honours students take three modules in

archaeology and two in the spring term; the Joint Honours students take one archaeology module.

These are examined in Week 10 of the respective terms.

Term 1:

Introduction to British Archaeology

Accessing Archaeology

Development of World Archaeology.

Term 2:

History and Theory in Archaeology

Introduction to Archaeological Science.

In the spring term the students also spend two days field walking as an introduction to fieldwork.

Field Archaeology Module

In the summer term of the First Year the York Department runs a single 40-credit module that is

compulsory for all Single and Joint Honours archaeology students on Field Archaeology.

Practical work is therefore concentrated within a ten-week period. In the previous terms, the

students will have done modules on the general background to British and world archaeology,

history and theory in archaeology and an introduction to archaeological science. In the second

term they also do some limited field walking as an initial introduction to fieldwork. However,

students studying Joint Honours in History and Archaeology will only have done one

Archaeology module, Introduction to British Archaeology, before embarking on fieldwork.

Aims:

Introduce first-year students to all aspects of assessing, collecting and analysing primary data

Provide hands-on experience of fieldwork.

Learning outcomes:

Appreciate historic landscapes

Describe and assist with a general survey of landscape features

Describe and assist with geophysical survey

Understand excavation techniques, record stratification and take environmental samples

Contribute to the recording of a plan and elevation of an upstanding building

Record an upstanding feature such as a gravestone

Sort and care for artefacts

Process field records from building and excavation work

Process and sort environmental samples.

9

Structure of the Field Archaeology Module

The module is separated into four discreet sections involving landscape archaeology, survey and

recording, a training excavation and post-excavation techniques. These are supplemented by a

series of six lectures which run concurrently with the practical work.

Historic Landscape Appreciation:

Landscape field trip x 1 day.

Survey, Cemetery and Buildings Recording:

Topographical and geophysical survey x 2 days

Buildings recording x 2 days

Cemetery recording x 1 day.

Excavation – 14 days over a four-week period.

Data Processing and Archiving:

Finds processing x 1 day

Excavation records x 1 day

Sieving and sorting environmental samples x 1 day.

Lectures.

Supporting material on the Virtual Learning Environment (VLE) – various explanatory

documents about fieldwork techniques.

The VLE at York is website on the University’s intranet which can only be accessed by the staff

and students registered on particular courses. It allows staff to upload information for students, as

well as on-line quizzes and exams.

Assessment

The Field Archaeology module is assessed informally through a fieldwork diary kept by the

students, supervisor and teaching staff reports on their attendance and performance on fieldwork,

and a student exhibition held at the end of the module. The formal part of the assessment consists

of an Open Exam of 10 questions which is made available on the VLE. This is supported by a

Quiz of 5 questions which the students can use as practice for the exam. In the event of failing the

exam, re-assessment is carried out by resubmission.

Fieldwork Diary:

Housed as a wiki on the VLE

Teaching staff and supervisors have access and make comments - feedback on attendance

and performance.

Supervisors:

Produce a short summary of the performance/attendance of each student

Field Project Officer writes a summary of each student on the basis of this.

Exhibition:

Exhibition of work done in the course of the module

Four Power Point slides per student group.

10

Quiz:

Quiz of 5 questions on the VLE.

Open Exam:

Formally assessed

10 questions on the VLE

Re-assessment if fail by resubmission.

In 2010 the exam consisted of questions on the following topics:

The Harris Matrix

Cut features

Archaeological deposits

Techniques of geophysical survey

Health and safety on an archaeological site

Small finds

Environmental sampling

Graveyard surveys

Building recording – methods

Building recording – exercise.

At the end of the Field Archaeology module each student group prepares an exhibition of four

Power Point slides summarising their work on the module. This occasion is also used by the Site

Director to give an overview of the results of the excavation. Students also have an opportunity to

provide feedback on the module.

Training Excavation

The Heslington East site is situated about 5 kilometres to the east of the York city centre, beyond

the village of Heslington at a place called Grimston Bar. The area chosen for excavation is in the

northeastern corner of a large area of development with the construction of the new University of

York campus. The site itself is located on the southern slope of a glacial moraine running

eastwards across the Vale of York providing extensive views to the south and of the Yorkshire

Wolds. This moraine would have provided a higher dry area from the marshy lowland to each

side of it. Previous work in the area of development had identified Bronze Age, Iron Age and

specifically Roman settlement and activity.

The development of the new campus for the University in this area was seen as an opportunity to

devise an integrated project that could stand astride the various sectors within the discipline and

include:

The commercial sector

A Field School for training archaeology students

Contribute to academic research

Include community groups.

11

The project was centred on a series of research questions. The Romans had reached this area

north of the Humber in the late 1st century AD:

How quickly was the impact of Rome felt in the area?

What form did this impact take?

Were the changes confined only to functional needs, or was ideology involved as well?

Previous seasons had targeted geophysical anomalies and uncovered Roman structures, including

a high status building with hypocausts set within ditches. This was associated with 3rd

and 4th

century coins and pottery. Two inhumations were also found to one side of these buildings

amongst other structural evidence. This was a highly controlled landscape subdivided by

substantial north/south ditches.

Fig. 1 Heslington East – hypocaust building Fig. 2 Heslington East - inhumation

Fig. 3 Heslington East – layout of the trenches

Trench A

Trench B

Trench D

Field

boundary

Site of

Roman

building

Inhumations

Spring

line

N

Trench C

12

The ongoing work in the 2010 season extended the trench beside the burials and two trenches

were opened in a field further to the east to investigate the extra-mural area of the Roman

buildings where there were a series of geophysical anomalies. Trench C was planned, but was not

in fact excavated. The plough soil was removed mechanically and the areas of the trenches

cleaned with trowels to reveal any features.

The features in Trench A consisted of a substantial north/south ditch which had been re-cut

several times suggesting successive phases of activity. A hearth with nearby charcoal spreads in

hollows indicated artisanal production. An inverted pot had been placed over another pot at one

of the ditch terminals indicating structured deposition.

Fig. 4 Heslington East – Trench A Fig. 5 Heslington East – Trench A

In Trench B another north-south ditch with recuts appeared to define areas of activity. Towards

the south end of the trench, this turned eastwards in the direction of a spring. In the waterlogged

area on the spring line there were well-preserved timbers which appeared to line a cut feature.

The area seemed to have been subdivided into a number of activity zones with charcoal spreads

in scoops. At the time of writing it is uncertain as to the exact nature of these residues, but they

may represent evidence of some form of metalworking.

Fig. 6 Heslington East – Trench B Fig. 7 Heslington East – Trench B

Trench C was not opened in the 2010 season.

Trench D was on a steeper part of the slope and was opened to investigate whether there was a

cemetery in this area. There were no more burials, but a substantial amount of structural evidence

was uncovered. Some of this related to the apparent terracing of the steeper slope, but there was

13

also evidence for clay and cobble floors of presumably timber structures and associated roof tiles

representing their destruction. A small kiln-like structure suggested industrial activity. Different

phases of structural development were observed, with different stone sources being utilised in

different phases.

The artefacts from the 2010 season were broadly from the 3rd

and 4th

centuries, but earlier Roman

pottery was also recovered including late 1st century Samian Ware. Large sherds of late

prehistoric pottery were found in Roman levels suggesting that they had been re-deposited from

nearby. Pottery, a brooch, a comb and a possible pinbeater of Anglian date may indicate that

there may also have been an early medieval cemetery nearby.

Fig. 8 Heslington East – Trench D Fig. 9 Heslington East – Trench D

On Site Organisation

Work was carried out on the site Mondays, Tuesdays, Thursdays and Fridays – a four-day week.

The working day was from 9.30am to 4.30pm, with a 30-minute break for lunch and a 15-minute

tea break morning and afternoon. The supervisors would arrive at about 9.00am to organise the

equipment. On Wednesdays the students attended associated lectures within the department and

they did no work on site at weekends. They were split into groups of 10 students and stayed in

these groups throughout the Field Archaeology module, participating in the geophysical survey

and buildings and cemetery recording together, as well as the excavation and post-excavation

work. Each group had a professional archaeologist as supervisor and an experienced Second Year

student as assistant supervisor. The latter were specifically responsible for the context sheet

recording. The number of groups assigned to each trench varied depending on the intensity of the

archaeology found in each area. Two groups were working in Trench A, three in Trench B and

five in Trench C where there was a much greater amount of structural evidence to be excavated.

Year Two Teaching

In the spring term of the Second Year students can choose a 20 Credit module on Practical Skills

covering one of the following topics:

Animals

Artefacts

Buildings

Environmental archaeology

Heritage

14

Human bones

Professional and management skills in archaeology.

In the summer term they then participate in a 20-credit Team Project module based on their

chosen topic for Practical Skills. This involves independent research separate from the Third

Year dissertation and can include work on that year’s Field School in the summer term.

Personal Development Planning

All the materials and support information for PDP are provided on the VLE. In the autumn term

of the First Year the students are introduced to the system. They complete a PDP Form and

discuss this with their academic tutor at the term-end supervision meeting in the summer term.

During the summer term of the Second Year the students have skills training as part of

Dissertation workshops, when they are also offered a session on CV writing. Their PDP Form

and CV are then discussed with their academic tutor at the term-end supervision meeting.

An Archaeology careers day is run in the spring which is attended by the Year Three students and

it includes a short group session to talk about PDP. The PDP form and CV are discussed with

academic tutors at the beginning of term supervision meeting in the summer term.

4.2 University of Oxford

First Year Courses

The University of Oxford does not provide a Single Honours course in Archaeology; the students

take Anthropology and Archaeology. This is essentially a theoretical literature based course with

examinations at the end of the Summer Term. In the First Year of study students take four papers:

Introduction to World Archaeology

Introduction to Anthropological Theory

Perspectives on Human Evolution

The Nature of Archaeological Enquiry.

The Nature of Archaeological Enquiry

Part of this paper provides the background to archaeological fieldwork.

Aims:

Introduction to the nature of archaeological enquiry – theory and method

Provide an understanding of the practice and possibilities of archaeology, the main

methodologies archaeologists use, the strengths and weaknesses of empirical evidence, an

overview of the main questions addressed by archaeologists.

15

Learning Outcomes:

A good understanding of the major issues confronting contemporary archaeology and how

these questions have partly arisen from the history of the discipline

An appreciation of the methods available to the archaeologist and their genesis, including

field methods, analysis and dating.

Transferable Skills:

Critical thought when evaluating the competing approaches to archaeological method and

theory

A practical appreciation of the discipline and its methodology.

The students can also go on an optional field trip to Avebury in connection with understanding

landscape archaeology; they can also attend optional practical classes:

Chronometric dating

Diet and Bioarchaeology

Environmental Archaeology

Materials and Technology

Animal Bones

Human Bones.

Fieldwork Requirements

University training excavation project:

2 weeks

start of Year 1 summer vacation.

Another approved excavation project:

3 weeks

during Year 1 summer vacation

or, Year 2 Easter vacation if necessary

usually an archaeological project, but can be a suitable anthropological project (social,

cultural, biological) – must include training in relevant techniques.

Fieldwork Preparation

Presentation discussing the background of the site and the past fieldwork seasons

Handout from Drewett 2003 (Field Archaeology, chaps 6-7) – to be able to understand what a

site should look like and how it works

Purpose of briefing:

Remove false expectations about the site by showing them what it is supposed to look like

when they remove the geotextile

Get them working immediately after their Health and Safety briefing.

16

Assessment

The Departmental Field School assessment is essentially informal and was only introduced a

couple of years ago as a response to the excesses of behaviour by some students on a previous

season. It consists of two parts. A short report is sent to the individual students’ College tutors

outlining whether they got on with the work and showed a good attitude. A checklist is also used

to ensure that each student has satisfactorily carried out certain tasks on site. These tasks include:

Excavation:

Safe use of mattock, shovel and barrow

Trowelling techniques

Significance of context numbers

Lifting of finds.

Finds:

Labelling of finds trays

Logging and bagging small finds

Plotting E/N and level of small finds.

Recording:

Context sheets

Section drawing

Planning a feature

Site planning

Total Station

Photography.

Other skills taught.

The students are required to submit a written report on their second project words outlining:

The project aims

The principal results

Their part in achieving these results.

17

Training Excavation

The main excavation site at Dorchester-on-Thames consists of one trench located amongst

allotments towards the edge of the present day village and close to the Abbey. This was an area in

the southwest corner of the late Roman town. The project is now in its third season and the main

research aims include investigation of the nature of 5th

century occupation. In this context the two

major questions are to determine the extent to which this was an important and high status local

centre in the late Roman period and to understand the nature of later Saxon occupation. The

principal north-south road through the Roman town was at the east end of the trench. The other

features uncovered included pits and other cut features. Previous work on the site by Sheppard

Frere includes three small trenches (Frere’s Site D) which are being re-excavated. The finds

being recovered included much late Roman pottery and animal bone, coins and a belt buckle.

Occasional artefacts of 5th

century and later date were also present.

Fig. 10 Dorchester – looking north-east Fig. 11 Dorchester – looking south

The second excavation site lies to the northwest of Dorchester between the villages of Burcot and

Berinsfield. This had uncovered a probable Beaker period ring ditch and one of the ditches of the

northern part of the Dorchester cursus. This appears to be part of the large lowland ritual complex

which was mostly destroyed by gravel extraction and road construction in the 1960s and 70s.

Very few finds were being recovered at this site.

18


Work was carried out for six days a week, Sunday to Friday, with Saturday as the day off.

Working hours were from 8.30 to 17.00 with two 15-minute tea breaks and a 40/45 minute lunch

break. The Field School was residential with the students camping on a site a few miles away.

The facilities at the campsite were fairly basic and some of the students were finding this difficult

to cope with. At the main site there was a tool shed, planning and finds huts and three portaloos.

There were also two small marquees, one for finds processing and general use and the other for

educational activities.

Fig. 12 Dorchester – looking south-west Fig. 13 Dorchester – facilities

The hierarchy of the project included a Site Director, an Assistant Site Director and the group

supervisors. The students were split into six groups each with its own supervisor and five or six

students to each group. They spent most of their time in the same groups, but could be moved

around to ensure that they got experience of each of the archaeological tasks. Each team would

spend two to three days on the Neolithic site to give them experience of simpler archaeology with

fewer finds. The groups were also rotated through the Finds tent and would also spend time

attending specialist talks on topics such as photography. There were also a number of local

volunteers working alongside the students on the site.

Year Two Courses

In line with the theoretical and literature based nature of the course at Oxford, the papers studied

in the Second Year reflect this approach:

Social Analysis and Interpretations

Cultural Representations, Beliefs and Practices

Landscape and Ecology

Urbanisation and Change in Complex Societies.


The University of Oxford does not provide an organised system of PDP. It was felt that issues

such as the acquisition and development of skills and the question of future careers was

adequately dealt with by the regular interaction with their College tutors.

19

4.3 University of Reading

First Year Modules

Practising Archaeology: methods and approaches

Primates to Pyramids: an introduction to world prehistory (includes field trip)

From Rome to the Reformation: introduction to historical archaeology (includes field trip)

Bones, Bodies and Burials: the archaeology of death (BSc)

Analysing Museum Displays (optional)

Examinations – Term 3.

Practising Archaeology Module

The compulsory Practising Archaeology module runs in the Autumn and Spring Terms of the

First Year and is worth 20 credits. It includes lectures on the methods and techniques involved in

archaeological fieldwork, as well as practical sessions.

Aims:

Provide a basic knowledge of the methods and techniques of archaeological work

Provide an understanding of the current practice of archaeology.

Learning outcomes:

Describe the main methods by which archaeologists acquire, date and analyse primary

evidence

Locate published and IT sources identified by the staff, as well as additional sources relevant

to the course, and extract relevant information from them

Organise material to present an argument in writing in essays.

Additional outcomes:

The lectures on archaeological methods provide an appreciation of aspects of numeracy and

information handling

The seminars encourage the development of problem-solving and oral communication skills

in group situations

The Blackboard assignment provides the necessary skills to locate and process information on

the Internet.

The lectures are supplemented by seminars on specific artefacts such as Samian Ware pottery and

topics such as stratigraphy and interpreting archaeological sites.

20

Silchester Module

The Silchester module is a compulsory 2nd

year module for Single Honours and optional for Joint

Honours students. The module requirements consist of:

Single Honours – 4 weeks on the training excavation, 20 credits

Joint Honours – 2 weeks on the training excavation, 10 credits.

Aims:

Experience of field archaeology and gain basic knowledge of field techniques and site

recording methods

Insight into setting up and running a large field project.

Learning outcomes:

Basic surveying skills

Environmental sampling

Processing of artefacts

Work as part of a team

Receive and implement instructions

Communicate observations

Understand deposit formation

Recognise individual archaeological contexts

Take responsibility for own work

Use of the on-site archaeological database

Develop an awareness of own abilities and assess own understanding and performance

Develop analytical and problem solving skills.

Fieldwork Preparation

The preparation for the training excavation consists of a week of various activities:

Background lecture on the Silchester site

Introduction to finds and finds processing, logistics, Health and Safety and assessment

Stratigraphy and Post-ex processes – stratigraphy exercise

Artefact exercise (IA coins) AND Opportunity for voluntary finds washing and analysis.

Provision of Information:

Every student is issued with a Field School Handbook. This includes information on

archaeological field practice and techniques and the procedures used on this particular

excavation. It also provides details of the logistics and Health and Safety procedures on site. A

separate section outlines the teaching aims and learning outcomes of the module, including a

skills checklist and details of the assessment.

On the Departmental VLE the presentation Power Points from the preparation week are made

available. These include Logistics, Health and Safety, Finds, Environmental and Assessment.

21

Assessment

The assessment for the Silchester module is split into four parts. A quiz based on the Integrated

Archaeological Database (IADB), which is used on the project, helps introduce the students to

this resource, as well as giving them some background to stratigraphy and the Harris Matrix. The

main assessment is by the site supervisors using prepared criteria sheets and covers excavation,

finds, environmental sampling and giving visitor tours. This is adjudicated by the site director.

The students sit an exam of twelve questions. In 2010 this included questions on:

Interpreting the drawn record

The site matrix

Finds

Environmental sampling.

Finally, the students have to write a self-reflective essay on their experience working on-site.

They are given a sheet of self-assessment criteria and are encouraged to keep a fieldwork diary to

help them with this part of the assessment.

IADB Quiz – 5%.

Supervisor assessment – 40%:

Excavation skills – Analytical (not JH), Technical, Written Description, Oral Description

(not JH), Graphic, Observation, Stratigraphy (not JH), Attitude, Group Working,

Responsibility

Finds Skills – Observation, Consistency & Accuracy, Attitude, Group Work,

Responsibility, Continued Interest (not JH)

Science Skills – Observation, Consistency & Accuracy, Attitude, Group Work,

Responsibility, Continued Interest (not JH)

Working with Visitors – Verbal, Attitude, Responsibility, Continued Interest (not JH).

Exam – 25%.

Self-Assessment – 30%.

Training Excavation

The excavation of Insula IX at the Roman town of Silchester in Hampshire is now in its 14th

season. It runs from six weeks from the end of the Summer Term. This is a research project that

is used specifically to train Reading students in archaeological field techniques, but is also open

to students from other institutions, A level students and paying volunteers. The main research

aims are to investigate everyday life and industry in a Roman town and the relationship with the

earlier Late Iron Age town on the site. This is an open area excavation that is methodically

revealing the different phases in one part of the Roman town and is currently working on the

earliest Roman period levels.

22

Fig. 14 Silchester – looking west Fig. 15 Silchester – looking east

Fig. 16 Silchester – organisation of teams within the trench


The Field School is residential with the students camping next to the excavation. About 100

people may be working on site at any one time, including students from other institutions and

volunteers. They work a six-day week from Saturday to Thursday, with Friday being the day off.

Working at weekends is seen as important because, as this is a scheduled monument, there are

many visitors. The workday lasts from 9.00am to 5.30pm, with two 15-minute tea breaks and

about an hour for lunch. The dig lasts for six weeks, stating at the end of the Summer Term.

The workforce is split into five teams each with an experienced archaeologist as supervisor and

one or more assistant supervisors. Site ‘trainees’ are also present in each of the teams; these are

usually students who have completed their undergraduate degree and are being trained as

1 2

3

4

5

23

supervisors. The teams are assigned to different areas of the site and their size relates to the

nature and intensity of the archaeology in each area. There are also dedicated planning, finds and

environmental supervisors who have their own assistants, as well as a supervisor running visitor

tours. Students have the opportunity to spend time working in each of these specialist areas.

Various huts on the site are allocated to different aspects of the excavation including HQ,

supervisors’ cabin, planning, finds, environmental, computers and a visitors’ hut.

Fig. 17 Silchester – finds processing Fig. 18 Silchester – environmental sampling

Various talks and practical instruction sessions are provided throughout the working week. A

typical week will include aspects such as Health and Safety, science, soils, context sheets,

drawing, photography, giving visitor tours, the Integrated Archaeological Database (IADB),

finds, geoarchaeology, experimental archaeology and the archaeological matrix.

Fig. 19 Silchester – talk on small finds

Year Two Teaching

Compulsory modules:

Contemporary Practice in British Archaeology (including Career Management Skills)

Archaeological Thought

Archaeological Science (BSc).

24

The students also choose a number of period based modules.


The students at Reading use a VLE-based System for their PDP. They attend Personal Tutorial

meetings and discuss their academic development and progress with their Personal Tutor. An

Individual Learner Profile (ILP) is completed on the VLE and they reflect on this whilst

progressing through the degree programme recording their reflections, thoughts and evidence for

personal and learning development and employability and future options. PDP and aspects of

employability in archaeology are also included in the compulsory Year Two module

Contemporary Practice in British Archaeology.

Contemporary Practice in British Archaeology Module

Aims:

Introduction to the organisation and practice of contemporary British archaeology

Specific reference to the key archaeological legislation and the principal organisations and

practices involved in the management, recording and preservation of the British

archaeological resource

Highlight the potential employment areas currently available in British archaeology

Provide the opportunity to develop self-awareness, and gain experience in the contexts of

career decision-making, acquiring knowledge of career opportunities, and enhancing the

skills needed to effectively find employment (whether archaeological or not) after graduation.

Structure:

Presentations from a range of speakers, working in a number of professional archaeological

fields

The purpose of the presentations is to develop an understanding of how British archaeology

actually works out in the real world today

Linked to these presentations is the optional visit to the offices of two contracting

archaeological firms

Specialist session, led by Department and Careers Advisory Service (CAS) staff, focus on the

key issues associated with starting to plan for post-degree careers, including an opportunity to

talk to ex-Archaeology students who have used their degrees to help them pursue other, non-

archaeological careers.

The module uses the VLE as the key resource for a Personal Portfolio assignment. This provides

a range of information and resources, as well as links to a series of useful websites and specific

web pages.

The assessment on the module includes an essay on Contemporary Archaeological Practice

(30%) and a Personal Portfolio exercise (70%). The latter assessment involves:

Occupation Profiling – a short report researching a specific job or career area

Selling Yourself – a single page statement about presenting skills, abilities, values and

priorities, with supporting evidence

25

Targeted CV – a short CV (two pages/500 words) and accompanying worksheet (500 words)

targeted towards one of ten work experience and/or volunteer posts listed on the VLE site.

This assignment is designed to develop a series of key transferable skills, all central to the

process of gaining a graduate job through information research and presentation, self-assessment,

and self-promotion. For mature students there are a number of alternative assignment options

detailed on the VLE site.

26

5. Results

5.1 Summary of Results

Discussions were carried out with 22 student Focus Groups; interviews with 31 supervisors,

assistant supervisors and site directors; and questionnaires were returned by 78 students and 19

supervisors as detailed in the table below.

Interviews/Focus Groups:

York Oxford Reading Total

Student Focus Groups 8 4 8 20

Second Year Students 3¹ 1² 4

Site Trainees 1² 1

Assistant Supervisors 4 4

Supervisors 6 5 8 19

Assistant Site Directors 1 1 2

Site Directors 1 1 1 3

Total 19 11 23 53

Table 1 Results – Interviews and Focus Groups

¹ individual interviews with Second Year Students working as Assistant Supervisors

² Focus Groups

Questionnaires:

York Oxford Reading Total

Students 42 15 21 78

Supervisors 5 2 11 18

Total 47 17 32 96

Table 2 Results – Questionnaires

5.2 Limitations to the Evidence

The way in which Archaeology is taught and fieldwork training provided at the three institutions

used in this study is very different, so in some instances we are not comparing like with like.

There are also inherent biases in the collection of the data. Heslington East was visited towards

the end of the excavation when the students were tired and had worked through a period of wet

weather. Dorchester-on-Thames was visited in the second week. The team had suffered from a

stomach bug in the first week and this had significantly affected morale. The students at

Silchester were spoken to in their second week. They had been working through good weather

and the archaeology being revealed was very interesting. Consequently, morale was high and

there was a very positive attitude on site.

27

Most of the students involved in the study were at the end of their First Year and, for many, this

was their first experience of archaeological fieldwork. This meant that the students were being

questioned on their expectation of fieldwork and assessment rather than on actual experience.

The only Second Year students involved were the assistant supervisors at Heslington East and

one Focus Group at Silchester who had already undergone basic fieldwork training and had

returned to acquire more experience. It also meant that very little information could be gathered

relating to post-fieldwork teaching or from students who had relevant experience of PDP.

5.3 York – Heslington East

York Students

What liked about fieldwork

The majority of the students in the Focus Groups were enjoying fieldwork training; only a few

individuals were disenchanted by it. The factors that they enjoyed were that it was practical

outside work, as opposed to sitting in lectures and seminars; being involved in real archaeology

and making a contribution; finding things; and the dynamics of team work. Another important

factor was they felt it was a real experience of archaeology, a ‘taster’ that would help them to

decide if they wanted to do it as a career.

Archaeology as a career

In the Focus Groups about two thirds of the students wanted to pursue a career in archaeology,

but only a few of these wanted to carry on in field archaeology. The other areas cited included

laboratory and museum based work, or general employment in the heritage sector. About one

third of the students said they were undecided as to their career, but very few had firmly decided

against archaeology. These responses were only broadly reflected in the questionnaire survey

where there was an even split between those students wanting to follow a career in archaeology,

and those who were undecided.

Q 9. Do you intend to follow a career in archaeology?

28

n = 42

Student expectations The unexpected aspects of fieldwork training were mainly related to the nature of the work

including how physical it was, the low number of finds, the importance of soil differences and

that it was such a logical process. It was recognised that some of these factors were related to the

nature of the individual site. Some students said that they were enjoying it more than they had

expected, and only a few stated that they were not enjoying it. Their reasons included it being

hard work for very little reward, not understanding it because of a lack of explanation and the

constantly changing interpretations, or the feeling that they were just labouring and not being

properly ‘schooled’. The students who felt that the Field School was what they had expected

tended to be those who had previous experience of fieldwork.

Q 1. How has participating in fieldwork training lived up to your expectations?

n = 42

A – very low B – low C – below average D – average

E – above average F – high G – very high

First Year Modules

Most of the students felt that the First Year modules, especially the science and history and

theory modules, had provided them with a good background for fieldwork training. Their reasons

included that it had helped them with on-site interpretation and understanding the need to ask and

answer questions. They also felt that it would be of great help with the post-excavation training

and that it was important to understand both the academic and practical sides of the discipline.

The field walking in the second term was also seen as a good introduction to the field

archaeology. The notion of a First Year Field Archaeology module was very popular in that the

practical work was concentrated into one term and complemented the other First Year modules,

and the students liked the idea that the bigger picture of archaeology was being narrowed down to

the level of the individual site. Moreover, the emphasis on fieldwork was why some students had

chosen to study at York. The complementary lectures on the Wednesdays were seen as useful, as

29

were the clear and easy guides made available on the VLE. Only a few students felt that the First

Year modules had not provided a good background or were unrelated to fieldwork and wanted a

more thorough introduction to the practical aspects. Overall, there was a sense that the only way

to understand field archaeology was to actually do it, any amount of preparation and prior

explanation could not provide a full background to the actual experience. A couple of the Joint

Honours students said that they had only done one archaeology module, and this did not cover

the background of theory in history. In consequence they were finding the fieldwork more

difficult to understand than the Single Honours students.

At the end of module feedback session some students felt they needed more practical information

from the associated introductory lectures, perhaps some short ten minute instruction sessions on

some of the techniques such as using a level. This would mean that they would have at least some

background before they went out in the field and it would not be something completely new.

Teaching methods

There was an overall feeling that you need to do fieldwork to be able to understand it. The role of

the supervisors was seen as central. The students regarded them as professional archaeologists

and had a high opinion of their experience and abilities. Their methods of teaching usually

involved an explanation followed by a demonstration, then the students tried the tasks out on the

actual archaeology. The supervisors would then comment and correct technique. Proper

explanation was seen as essential, some of the students saying that they learnt a great deal from

observing an archaeologist’s thought processes and how interpretations and understanding

changes as a site is being excavated. Being coached was also important – as the work progressed

the supervisors were asking the students what they thought the features they were digging were

and how they should approach excavating and recording them. It was good to be thrown in at the

‘deep end’ and many students had seen an improvement in their performance after only a few

days digging. The role of the Second Year students as assistant supervisors was seen in a very

positive light. The First Year students had a high opinion of their knowledge and experience, but

also found them less intimidating than the supervisors and Site Directors.

The main complaint about the teaching was when there was not enough explanation and students

were left feeling that they did not understand what they were doing and why they were doing it.

There was a suggestion that it would be useful for them to be included in the daily briefings

between the Site Directors and the supervisors so that they could gain a better overall

understanding of what was happening and why particular decisions were made; gain a fuller

understanding of the whole process. It was sometimes felt that they were being fed contradictory

information by different people, making it difficult to understand how an interpretation might be

changing and how this affected the method used to excavate a particular area or feature. The

other main complaint was not being able to have a go at all the archaeological tasks on site. This

diversity of experience was mentioned again at the end of module feedback session. Examples

included filling in a context sheet and using a level.

30

Q 3. Please rate how well you think that the ways in which you have been taught field skills

have been effective:

n = 42



Skills

The students only recognised that they were acquiring a number of important skills and

experiences by participating in fieldwork training after they had been asked to think about it.

Then the main skill mentioned was team working, aspects of this including collaboration with a

larger group, the camaraderie involved, the need to recognise the differences between people and

adapt to them, and the need to pull one’s own weight and not let the team down. The other main

factor referred to was that fieldwork training is very like work experience. Apart from an

experience of what working in field archaeology is really like, this included having to work nine

to five, probably for the first time for many students; the ability to learn on the job; having to do

the less enjoyable tasks; setting realistic work goals; time keeping; and, in relation to team

working, it was seen as very similar to working in a small team in any environment, including

office work. Other skills identified by the students included:

Individual working

Leadership skills

Confidence building

Communication

Time management – prioritisation

Problem solving

Logical thinking

Social skills

The ability to follow instructions

Diligence and working methodically

31

Presentation skills

Perseverance and coping in a tough environment

Physical stamina

Interpretation when not all the evidence is available

The reality of research – primary data collection.

Assessment

The assessment of performance on fieldwork was seen as important by nearly all the students in

the Focus Groups, mainly because fieldwork was regarded as an essential part of being an

archaeologist. The feedback from assessment is crucial for a student to know that they are doing

something properly and the areas where improvement may be required. It is also important for

employability and the writing of CVs. Fieldwork is a key and integral part of an archaeology

degree and, as such, should be assessed to a set standard. This should not just provide a mark, but

should also be a recognition of what an individual student has done. One student did point out

that any assessment of First Year student performance can only be preliminary or formative, as

they had only had a few weeks experience, and it would be more suitable to carry out any

summative assessment in the Third Year. In the questionnaire survey there was a wider spread of

opinion, but the majority view was that the assessment of performance on fieldwork is important,

including its importance for pursuing a career in archaeology.

Q 5. Please rate how important you think it is that your performance of fieldwork is

assessed:

n = 41



32

Q 7. Please rate how important you think the assessment of your performance on fieldwork

training will be for you in pursuing your career in the future, whether this is within or

outside archaeology:

n = 41



When it came to the question of the method by which the performance of fieldwork should be

assessed, there was a much wider range of opinion. The suggestions put forward included:

A written exam – show interpretation and understanding of the principles

An oral exam

A practical test

A portfolio or exhibition of work

A group report

The fieldwork diary which can show understanding and level of commitment

Supervisor feedback

Attitude, not aptitude

The way in which one worked, as this represents the reality of the world of work

Assess all aspects of it including understanding, technical ability and attitude

Just do the hours and one acquires the necessary skills and experience

The important thing is to take part and to understand and experience it.

There was an overall recognition that a student’s performance on fieldwork training is something

that is very difficult to assess. Attending a Field School involves a very personal learning curve

and is subjective. Individual students will have had different experiences and opportunities on

site, so a generalised assessment would not be appropriate. Moreover, all excavations are

different so the experience will be relative to what an individual has done. An exam would not

33

reflect how good a student actually is at fieldwork or their attitude on site, only their academic

ability and understanding after the fact. In the case of an open exam, students could simply go

and look up the answers. Assessing technical ability poses difficulties because of the variability

of individual ability and the possibility of injuries sustained through working on site. In a similar

way, an assessment of actual attendance would have to take into account individual illness or

disabilities. Assessment by supervisors poses the difficulty of possible biases – for example,

would a student be marked down for not carrying out tasks in the particular way preferred by a

supervisor? And there was also the problem of potential personality clashes between individual

students and supervisors.

Fieldwork diary

There was a mixed response to the usefulness of keeping a fieldwork diary and many of the

students had not kept up to date in recording their experiences. The reflective aspect was

recognised – thinking about what one was doing, why they were doing it and also what it meant;

as well as seeing a progression in ability and understanding over time and observing one’s own

thought processes. It could help students contextualise the things they were experiencing and

understand them better; seeing what they were actually getting out of fieldwork. It could also be a

memory prompt and useful for writing CVs in the future. However, it was emphasised that, to be

of value, it should be a critical assessment of experiences, not just a record of what had been

done.

On the negative side, some students expressed feelings of a lack of motivation or urgency to do it

as there was no deadline for its completion and it was not being formally assessed. For some

students it was seen as irrelevant and would just be a record of mattocking and trowelling; any

skills they acquired on fieldwork would be remembered without it. There were reports that there

had been difficulties with the technology in completing the diary on-line. At the module feedback

session some of students felt that they needed more direction on what to write about in the

journal and that they would like more feedback from staff and supervisors as they were going

along.


Very few of the students had engaged with PDP and many did not understand what it actually

involved as it had only been mentioned briefly to them. It is not something that is being enforced,

with only some academic tutors encouraging it. Some students felt that it would be a useful

method for keeping a record of achievements and to identify areas of strength and weakness, as

well as for employability and writing CVs. One student who had engaged with the process said

that it can be hard work understanding its value, but eventually its benefits do become apparent.

Another student felt that it could be useful for intensive things like fieldwork, but not so urgent

when related to a few hours of weekly lectures spread over a ten week period.

On the negative side, some students saw it as irrelevant. A person could state that they had certain

skills on their CV, but not actually be very good at them. Alternatively, they could believe that

they were competent in a particular area where this was not actually the case. PDP might not be

so relevant for First Year students because they do not know which skills they need to develop

and it was probably only useful for extra-curricular activities such as sports or voluntary work. It

was felt that the reality is that it only gets done in the last few months of the Third Year at

university, if at all.

34

Residential/non-residential Field School

This question produced a range of mixed responses. The positive sides of a residential Field

School were seen to be that a group of students would bond better as a team and the attendance

rate would be much higher. They would become more involved in the archaeology, spending a

greater amount of time discussing it, and they would get to know the environmental context of a

site much better. They would also be able to spend more time with dedicated people. On the

negative side it was felt that the experience would be too intense with a greater chance of

arguments and personality clashes, as well as a lack of personal space. Students would miss their

friends and have to opt out of other activities such as music and sport. Certain students could be

excluded from a residential Field School because of disabilities or other commitments, especially

in the case of mature students, and individuals who did not ‘fit in’ could actually feel excluded.

There would also be the problem of facilities, especially the toilets.

York Supervisors

Backgrounds

The supervisors were mainly from a background in commercial archaeology, although many of

them had extensive experience of working on Field Schools. Some of them had recently

completed a PhD in archaeology. Their reasons for working on the Field School varied from

seeing it as a being a break from the pressures of commercial archaeology to being rather

disheartened by working in that sector. All of them reported enjoying training students in

fieldwork, finding it satisfying and rewarding to see the students develop and their attitudes

changing. A couple of the supervisors saw engaging in practical teaching as part of their own

professional development, and one commented that it had helped them learn how to explain

things to other people and had increased their own understanding of the techniques involved.

Teaching methods

The supervisors emphasised that to fully understand the process of excavation the students just

had to get down and do it. It was important to emphasise to them that excavation is an ongoing

process that can involve a variety of activities from heavy mattocking through seemingly endless

trowelling down to the fine excavation of features. It was important to explain why each part of

the process was being carried out in a particular way and that they were working towards a

particular goal. In showing that each task was being done for a purpose, there would be a sense of

achievement when that goal was reached. The main approach was to explain and demonstrate

each task before getting the students to try it out for themselves and learn by trial and error.

Where possible, individual students would be given their own feature to excavate and record so

that they could gain experience of the whole process. Effective communication was seen as key,

finding out what individual students did not understand, as well as asking their opinion of what

they were excavating and how they thought a particular problem could be solved. The presence

of experienced Second Year students was also felt to be beneficial, as the inexperienced diggers

found them to be less intimidating and working alongside them helped to build their confidence.

The students seeing Site Directors and supervisors getting down on their hands and knees and

engaging with the archaeology was viewed as very beneficial because it had the effect of

breaking down barriers. The main problems that the supervisors cited were having conflicting

sources of advice and interpretation, as this tended to confuse the students’ understanding. It was

also felt that having smaller groups of students to supervise would make enable more effective

teaching.

35

Student expectations

The students had a variable breadth of expectations and previous experience, so their

expectations were very individual. For some, their first experience of fieldwork had been a bit of

a shock, the reality of it being very different from what they had expected. Some embarked on it

with a rather cynical attitude, but were surprised at what they got out of it – surpassing their

expectations physically and bonding with their peers in ‘adversity’. Some of the keener students

were disappointed in that they were not able to do everything that they hoped to or did not

receive a more thorough training in techniques. The main things that students did not expect were

the amount of physical work, the low number of finds, the logical processes involved, and the

crucial importance of soil differences and cut features. One supervisor explained that any

students who felt that they were above doing physical work soon overcame this when they saw

the Site Directors and supervisors get down on their hands and knees and join in.

Skills The supervisors felt that many of the students were finding the fieldwork training an enjoyable

experience from which they were gaining a range of important new skills; however, it seemed

that some students did not see the relevance of it and perceived it as simply manual labour. As

with the students, the supervisors highlighted team working as an important factor, especially the

aspects of working collectively to achieve an agreed objective, learning new skills together and

the camaraderie of the experience. They also emphasised that it was an experience of real work,

something that is not usual for many students on their degree courses. It involves working a full

nine to five day, working under pressure and to schedules and deadlines, as well as developing an

attitude of professionalism in that things have to get done to a high standard. The fact that the

training excavation was being done as part of a commercial development process was seen in a

very positive light. The students were learning that the reality of the professional world is that

sometimes corners do get cut. They were also learning that an element of commitment and

enthusiasm can go a long way, which is something of especial importance in the world of work.

The experience of doing fieldwork was described not only as a ‘process of problem solving’, but

one in which communication is essential because the students were expected to understand and

explain what they were doing and the processes involved, as well as the limitations of the

working process. Other skills identified by the supervisors included:

Individual working

Self-reliance

Developing an enquiring attitude

Discipline in physical exertion with mental dexterity

Confidence, but also humbleness to ask when not sure

Adapting to changing circumstances

Gathering and interpreting data and understanding its biases

Record keeping

Thinking about minutiae and the bigger picture at the same time

Academic skills – having to express complex ideas or revise your opinion.

36

Assessment

As with the students, the supervisors recognised that the assessment of performance on fieldwork

is important. It gives the students the incentive to perform well and to strive and engage with the

process and, as such, they will get more from it. Students are expected to put a great deal of

themselves into the fieldwork and the fact that it is assessed shows that there is a point to all that

effort. The supervisors also highlighted that fieldwork is integral to understanding archaeological

processes and a key part of undergraduate study of archaeology.

Again, similar to the students, there was no overall agreement on how fieldwork training can be

assessed. The suggestions included:

A practical test of the range of skills and basic techniques

Structured practical sessions within the student groups under controlled conditions, this

would provide a continuity with everyone doing and being assessed on the same things

How well individual students pick up the techniques

An exam would make students think critically about what they did on fieldwork; the people

who do not apply themselves on site will rarely do well in an exam

Individual supervisor reports without a pass/fail element, but which could include comment

on individual enthusiasm and motivation

A committee of supervisors assessing different aspects of the work done on site; this would

reduce individual supervisor biases

A portfolio of work done showing that the student had understood things, this could be

marked objectively

Fieldwork involves collective work and responsibility, therefore they should deliver projects

collectively; students could be given responsibility over the ones who do not contribute.

The difficulties surrounding the assessment of student performance of fieldwork training were

recognised by all the supervisors. Institutions want to assign marks and students want to receive

them, but it is very difficult to judge individuals on something as dynamic and flexible as an

archaeological excavation. In such an environment a method of quantification could assess some

people incorrectly. It would be difficult to devise a standardised assessment of individual practice

and how well a person works because everyone works differently, and the process could be

biased against certain individuals with disabilities or other issues. The attendance record would

be easy to mark, but would not reflect individual enthusiasm or ability and assessing a fieldwork

diary would only reflect understanding and the effort put into the work, but not actual ability. An

exam would favour those gifted academically, but may be biased against some individuals who

are gifted practically. Some of the supervisors were wary of becoming too involved in the

assessment process as they saw themselves as only temporary employees lacking the longer term

engagement that academic staff have with individual students. They also recognised the problems

of potential personality clashes biasing their assessment of individuals. One Site Director felt that

the whole problem centred round attempting to assess what is essentially a collaborative effort

using individualised methods. They were in favour of a form of group assessment with the

students taking the responsibility of deciding how the marks given should be allocated within the

group.

37


As with the students, the supervisors had a limited knowledge and experience of PDP and CPD.

On the positive side, some supervisors felt that it could give students something to work towards,

be useful for preparing CVs and that the assessment of fieldwork could help to get them more

involved in this process. Another outcome of engaging with it could be that students would

realise that they should be demanding professional development throughout their working lives.

On the negative side it was felt that three weeks of excavation was not long enough for a student

to realise what their skills are and which ones need developing. It could also be difficult for the

more abstract aspects such as ‘research’ skills. It was recognised that unless forced to engage

with it, most students would not do it; only picking it up later on in the course of their university

degree when they were beginning to think about their future careers. One member of university

teaching staff felt that the furthest that they should go was to provide a system of PDP for the

students and encourage them to use it, but that is as far as it should be taken as it was up to the

students to engage with it themselves, otherwise it would be using up staff time and morale.

Residential/non-residential

Both positive and negative factors of a residential field school were identified by the supervisors.

On the one hand it could provide a much deeper and fulfilling experience of archaeology,

becoming a ‘life event’ that would be recalled many years later. The group spirit and camaraderie

would be much greater and students were more likely to form solid friendships that could last a

lifetime. There would be a greater opportunity for engaging with the archaeology, not just of the

site, but of the whole area with extra teaching and field trips. Flexible working would be possible

and the best could be demanded from the students with a much higher attendance rate. On the

negative side, it was recognised that residential Field Schools can be overly intense and all

consuming, as well as exhausting for staff. People who were unable to be away from home for an

extended period of time could be excluded and there may be problems of scale if a Field School

had to cater for a large number of students.

5.4 Oxford – Dorchester-on-Thames

Oxford Students


There was a mixed reaction to fieldwork training amongst the students; this was partially due to a

stomach virus which had struck a large number of the team in the previous week. Those who

were enjoying it cited their excitement at finding things, hands-on work with primary material

away from lecture rooms and putting what they had read about into practice. There was also a

sense of achievement in contributing to understanding something larger and it was a ‘taste’ of

real archaeology, although many found the cleaning work tedious. The students who were less

enamoured by fieldwork had difficulty coping with the long working hours for which they were

not being paid and felt that they were being treated as simply manual labourers. There had also

been incidents of personality clashes with some supervisors. As Joint Honours students, many

said that they were more interested in the Anthropology aspects of their course than Archaeology.


Very few of the students spoken to were considering a career in field archaeology, but several

were glad to have experienced it to find out what it was like. They cited things like the low pay

38

and hard work, the scarcity of jobs and a lack of interest. Some expressed an interest in other

heritage related areas such as museums, work on artefacts, museums or further study. Others said

they were more interested in exploiting the Anthropology aspects of their course in pursuing a

career.


n = 14


Some of the students had known what to expect because they had either done fieldwork before

and were enjoying the experience or the Second Years had told them what it was like. To some it

had been a shock because they had only handled material before coming on the Field School and

they had been surprised by the amount of physical labour involved, although some realised that

they had got used to this. Others had realised that they preferred theory to practical work and a

couple of the students said they would have liked to have done anthropological fieldwork instead.

A couple of the students were unhappy at being forced to go on a mandatory excavation and

would have preferred to have found their own fieldwork to fulfil the requirements of their course.

One student had been surprised at how quickly they had been told to take the surface off one area.

They thought that this was had been a rather rough and ready method, their expectation had been

that excavation involved only fine trowelling.

First Year Courses

Not many of the students saw much of a relationship between their First Year courses and the

fieldwork training, although the paper on Archaeological Enquiry had provided a limited

background. They explained that it was mainly a theoretical and literature based degree and it

was noted that the images they had been shown of archaeological sites were nothing like what

they were experiencing on this site. They had had a few practical sessions on artefacts and

environmental aspects, but these had not been well attended. Despite this, other students felt that

39

the theoretical aspects would be boring if they could not apply them and there was a need to see

how things actually work in the field.


n = 15



Teaching methods

There had been a mixed experience of teaching methods; this was put down to the individual

supervisors. Some students felt they did not understand what they were doing and why they were

doing particular tasks because it had not been explained to them properly and they were being

treated as if they were immature. They cited the different levels of knowledge amongst the

supervisors as a difficulty and that an explanation of on-going interpretations would be useful,

even if these were conflicting or constantly changing. Other students had had a more positive

experience. The techniques, and the reasons for using them, had been explained and then

demonstrated. They were then left to get on with the job and learn as they went along with things

being explained as and when was necessary. The supervisors did not stand over them, but were

available to answer questions. This learning by doing was felt to be a good method with

understanding sticking in the mind to a greater extent than just being told what to do. Some of the

students realised that they had to pay attention to gain this understanding and that by doing they

would get the experience needed to see things like the differences between contexts. The

organisation of working in small groups of five or six was thought to be effective because it was

a low enough number for the supervisors to be able to deal with students on an individual basis.

The difficulties cited included being time-pressured on occasions, although it was recognised this

could be related to the demands of the archaeology. Although working in small groups was seen

as efficient, an overall understanding of the site was difficult. It was felt that regular summaries

of progress and the changing interpretations would be useful.

40



n = 15



Skills

Most of the students realised that they were acquiring a wide variety of skills by doing fieldwork

training. Team working was the most commonly mentioned and included aspects such as having

to co-operate, be tolerant and manage relationships in a stressful environment. The social side

was also seen as very important with the students recognising how they had bonded together even

after only knowing each other for a few days. The other skills mentioned included:

Building resilience and self-reliance

An experience of a full day’s work doing manual labour

The ability to carry out instructions and do something again if you did not get it right the first

time

Being patient, methodical and thorough

Keeping records.

Assessment

The students spoken to were firmly against being assessed on their fieldwork training. Behind

this attitude lay the nature of their degree course and the Oxford ‘system’. They argued that they

were doing a theoretical, not a vocational, degree and that the fieldwork bore little relationship to

the course content, and also that the Oxford system of assessment was by examination. Some felt

that assessment would take away the whole point of doing fieldwork training which was viewed

as a ‘holiday’ and any assessment would distract from the enjoyment; the experience was more

important than having to prove something. Assessment would only be useful if someone wanted

to follow a career in field archaeology or as a means of deterring ‘slackers’ and to ensure sincere

41

application on site. Some feedback on performance was considered useful, but any assessment

should come down to a simple pass or fail. There was also some resentment at having to do work

in the holidays which any compulsory assessment would only add to. It was only the few students

who were thinking of pursuing a career in archaeology who felt that assessment, and especially

feedback, were of great value.

The assessment of performance on fieldwork was seen as a difficult thing to carry out. It was

difficult to do this objectively and could not be achieved to a set standard by the different

supervisors. They would be having to assess different levels of experience and ability, and it was

emphasised that attitude was more important than ability.


Most of the students were not aware of PDP and did not think it was the sort of thing done at

Oxford. Many were sceptical and saw it as bureaucracy gone mad and it would be treating people

like children. They felt that they already did something like this with their College tutors. It

would not be necessary because if someone has intelligence they would not need this type of

motivation. For some it was seen as unnecessary because they expected to receive on the job

training when they went into the world of work. It was argued that a career choice was based on

desires not skills. A few of the students felt that they could see value in a PDP system providing a

record of their skills and allowing them to identify areas of strength and weakness.


The students felt that the great benefit of being on a residential Field School was that they bonded

and got to know each other extremely well. It was observed that the local volunteers working on

the site tended to be on the edge of this group dynamic. It could encourage people to become

more involved in the archaeology and made it feel less like being a job. They recognised that it

could take someone out of their comfort zone, not necessarily a bad thing, but that it had been

tough when they were ill the previous week. The negative aspects of residential included the

potential for tensions between people and being away from facilities such as email and internet

access. It was felt that there would be greater freedom and fewer frustrations on a non-residential

Field School.

42


assessed:

n = 14






n = 12



43

Oxford Supervisors

Backgrounds

Most of the supervisors were post-graduate students with experience in a variety of research

excavations and a few had some commercial experience. Most of them had been involved in the

Dorchester Field School for several seasons. One supervisor was from the voluntary sector with

experience in community digs and another was a Second Year student who had shown promise in

a previous season of fieldwork.

Teaching methods

The supervisors all said that they enjoyed teaching students fieldwork techniques. It could be a

challenge when the people they were teaching were not enjoying the work and frustrating if they

did not fully engage with the archaeology and processes involved, but it was very rewarding

when they did show interest. It was important to fully engage with the students, and being willing

to answer questions was seen as an important part of this. The main method was to provide

practical explanations of the procedural activities; if the students understood it as a systematic

process they were more likely to adhere to that. After explanation, it was important to show them

how a particular task is done and then get them started on it. There would be some explanation as

they went along, but it was felt essential to leave them to it and allow them to make mistakes and

learn by that; a matter of learning on the job. Cleaning back was usually the first task to be

tackled, and then as time went on, students would be moved on to other tasks as the archaeology

allowed. There would be some teaching by example, such as getting down in a pit and working

alongside a student to show how it was done and using coaching methods by getting them to

explain how and why a particular problem should be addressed. However, after a few days on site

some of the supervisors liked to take a hands-off approach leaving the students to get on with the

work and take control of what they were doing, although it was important to remain close by in

order to answer any questions. They found the check-list system of tasks that each student had to

do very useful as this was an easy way of making sure every student received a rounded

experience of fieldwork.

Skills

The supervisors felt that the experience of fieldwork training was expanding the students’

horizons in a number of ways. Working in a team was a new thing for many of them and they

were having to learn to take into account the requirements of other people and also realise that

they had to rely on others for their own safety and to get the job done. It was an opportunity to

develop a work ethic, especially with the physical labour involved. They had to be accountable

for their own work and time-keeping, although this could be difficult to explain to some who

might find that condescending. There was also the discipline in having to follow instructions and

do things they did not want to do. Other aspects that were mentioned included:

Doing a practical activity and learning commonsense

The opportunity to contextualise theory

Precision, accuracy and analytical skills in having to think about what they wanted to achieve

Developing perseverance in an uncomfortable environment.

44

Assessment

All the supervisors felt that it was important that the students were assessed on their performance

on fieldwork training. The main reason was that it provided a stick along with the carrot, giving

them the incentive to fully engage with the work with a good attitude. It could provide a focus for

why they were there and make them see that what they were doing matters and thereby giving

them a sense of achievement. Along with providing them with a definition of what they were

doing right and wrong, it could also provide their tutors with a more rounded view of their

students, how they performed in a context different to the academic environment.

Originally there had been no fieldwork assessment at all, but it had evolved after a season where

there had been some excesses of behaviour. For some of the supervisors the existing system of a

basic checklist provided a baseline and they felt that anything more than that would be too

subjective. The report to the tutors could say whether they got on with the work and showed a

good attitude. Other supervisors were keen on the students having to keep a fieldwork diary as

this would get them to think about what they were doing. Others were keen on being involved in

the assessment because they felt, as they were the on-site supervisors, they had got to know the

students best.


Most of the supervisors were not positive about PDP, especially in the Oxford context. They

thought that the students would not be interested in engaging with it, especially at this stage in

their education. It would also not be seen as being of much use as their degrees would do the

talking for them. It would only be useful for people who knew exactly what they wanted to do,

perhaps in following a career in archaeology. One supervisor did like the idea of PDP and CPD

and saw it useful to keep a record of skills. It was also important to understand that someone is

continually learning throughout their professional career and it is important to let employers

know that.


The supervisors were very positive about residential Field Schools. A major factor was that it

built a sense of community with students from different Colleges, being able to meet and get to

know one another. The students could make friends and professional contacts and it could also

break down the ‘us and them’ barrier with supervisors. As well as being able to organise evening

field trips, it also gave the staff a measure of control over the students and ensured their

attendance on site. The biggest criticism of residential training excavations was that it could add

several more layers of complexity to the organisation.

45

5.5 Reading – Silchester

Reading Students


The vast majority of students spoken to were enjoying the Field School. The most common

aspect cited was the excitement at finding things, especially as these were things that had not

been seen or touched for nearly 2,000 years, followed by just being outside. The students liked

the practical and hands-on nature of the work and felt that they were putting into practice what

they had been learning all year, with some commenting that it involved a combination of

practical and academic skills. The joint learning was seen as enjoyable and added to the whole

experience and there was a sense of achievement in being able to see that they had physically

done something.


A substantial number of students said that they wanted to go into field archaeology. They

understood that they had to start at the bottom and work their way up and saw the Field School as

a stepping stone into a career. Some were still undecided and others were interested in following

careers in related areas such as museums, specialist aspects or teaching. Of the students who did

not want to continue in archaeology, nearly all were glad that they had come on the Field School

as they were enjoying the experience and it was helping them to make their minds up about their

career choices.


n = 21

The returning Second Year students and graduates who had been taken on as Site Trainees were

asked why they had decided to come back to the Field School. The main response was they

wanted to get more fieldwork experience and this would look good on a CV. This was especially

46

the case with the Site Trainees who explained that it was a positive thing to be able to say that

they had been paid to work in archaeology. The other main reason for returning was to be with

the friends they had made in previous seasons.


For most of the students, the Field School had exceeded their expectations and they were

enjoying the experience. Some had been nervous before arriving, but had been pleased by the

variety of the jobs and that they were able to get involved in everything and not just stand on the

sidelines. It was also giving them an idea of what to expect if they took up a career in field

archaeology. The unexpected aspects included there being much more to the process than just

digging; there were all the aspects of planning, recording and paperwork. The hard physical

nature of the work had also not been expected by some of the students.


n = 21



First Year Modules

Some students could see little relationship between the Field School and the First Year teaching;

others felt that the modules on Practising Archaeology and Rome to Reformation had given them

a basic background to what was involved in fieldwork and a general overview of the

archaeological period, although much of the practical information they had been given was more

related to the before and after of excavation. The practical seminars and assignments on Samian

Ware and stratigraphy were felt to have been of great use. The returning students felt that one of

the most useful aspects of the teaching modules was that they had given them a critical

perspective when working on site.

47

The Silchester module is optional for Joint Honours students and they were asked why they had

chosen to do it. The responses included that there was no point in doing a part-Archaeology

degree without it having a fieldwork element, they had heard good things about the Field School

and wanted to see what it was like and if they would enjoy it.

Teaching methods

There was an overwhelming sense amongst the students that the teaching methods on site were

effective. It was understood that the only way to learn was to actually do the job. To start off, the

student would often be given an area to clean and, although this could be a mundane task in some

ways, the students understood its importance and that it was an opportunity to learn trowelling

techniques and build up their confidence. The things that worked well were that the supervisors

would explain, show and then get the students to do the job. They were then left to get on with it

with the supervisors returning occasionally to correct technique and make any necessary

comments. The students appreciated this because it allowed them to learn themselves and

develop their own technique, as well as giving them a level of personal responsibility over what

they were doing and having to work things out for themselves to a certain extent. Despite

allowing the students an amount of independence, the supervisors were always around and

willing to answer questions. Understanding the what, how and why of what was being done was

seen as crucial. Every morning one supervisor would give a summary of the area being worked

on to their team and what had to be done and why. The students felt that it was good to be given

their own feature to excavate and to go through all the processes including excavation, recording

and being involved in putting the information on the site database.

The students had a very high opinion of the supervisors, seeing them as professional

archaeologists and had a great respect for their knowledge and experience. However, they were

seen as less daunting than academic staff and, therefore, more approachable. The presence of

Second Year students working alongside them was also appreciated. They were seen as people

with some experience who had recently been through the same process. The separate teaching

sessions on aspects such as planning and the site matrix were seen as providing a useful

background for what was being done on site, although for a couple of students they felt that these

got in the way of the work they were doing.

Skills

The majority of the students were fully aware of the transferable skills that they were acquiring,

not just from the work they were involved in, but the whole experience of the Field School. The

most commonly mentioned skill was teamwork. This was related to actually having to get the job

done as well as aspects such as having to be tolerant and patient with other people, sharing ideas

and getting different perspectives on things. Listening to others and taking instruction and

constructive criticism were also seen as important, as well as the character-building and self-

reliance elements which were taking place in what was seen as a safe environment. Other

transferable skills mentioned included:

Analytical skills and the objective assessment of situations

Problem solving

Developing a good attitude towards work and following through with a task

Being motivated and proactive by keeping busy

48

Time-keeping and working to a schedule

Recording things in detail

Organisation in keeping work and living areas tidy

Communication skills, especially with carrying out visitor tours

Teaching others by passing on knowledge and skills once they had learnt something.



n = 19



Assessment

The assessment of performance on fieldwork was seen as important by all the students who were

spoken to. Indeed, it was felt that it was the major thing that gave purpose to the fieldwork

module and that it would be pointless if this was not assessed because it was an essential part of

their degree. Some students even felt reassured by the fact that they were being assessed. The

important factors included the constructive criticism of feedback showing areas of strengths and

weaknesses. Assessment was seen as a major incentive to work hard, learn and behave properly,

not treating the Field School like a holiday: ‘If we weren’t assessed the trench wouldn’t be half

so deep.’ One student also thought it could act as a ‘regulator’ to help develop better teaching.

49


assessed:

n = 21



The students recognised that fieldwork is something difficult to assess, as it is difficult to judge

people at a standardised level on practical work. However, they liked the idea of being assessed

on different aspects of their performance and the different areas of the work. The assessment

should not be like academic modules because fieldwork is something so unique and personal and

a balance is required between the practical and academic aspects. Because fieldwork involves so

many different things, they could always shine at something and, therefore, it was important to be

assessed on a range of things. They felt it was essential that team working skills were included, as

well as willingness and enthusiasm. The continuous assessment carried out by supervisors was

seen as the most important. The supervisors are the people who get to know the students best and,

as it is a continuous assessment, progress can be properly evaluated even for people who are

slower at picking things up. The exam and self-reflective essay were seen as important to show

understanding within the whole assessment process. Several of the students felt that it would be

difficult to come up with a standardised assessment for all training excavations and assessment

should be tailored to each Field School because conditions are so different on individual sites.

For many of the students, assessment was seen as crucial in helping them with their future

careers. It could help them decide whether archaeology was the job for them and would be

something to show potential employers. Indeed, if various aspects such as enthusiasm and

transferable skills are being assessed along with technical skills, this would be valid evidence of

for the possession of a range of abilities that could be shown to future employers.

50




n = 21



Fieldwork diary

Most of the students spoken to were keeping a fieldwork diary. Generally, this was seen as being

most useful for writing the self-reflective essay as part of the assessment, and a few could not see

much use for it beyond that. However, other students were finding it useful as a reminder,

especially about details of the work they were doing, and it they could also see if they had missed

doing a particular activity. For the future it could be a record of what had been done right and

what had been done wrong; it would be good to look back over, especially if they got a job in

archaeology; and it would also be a record of their experiences and the skills they had acquired.

One student was writing down questions for themselves which they tried to answer each day. The

Site Trainees felt it was a record of how they had learnt and progressed; it was a contribution to

the larger aims of the project; and one had used it to prepare their CV when applying for their

current post.


Not many of the First Year students knew what PDP was or they did not fully understand it. On

having it explained to them, some felt that it would be a useful tool for knowing what their

strengths and weaknesses are and to identify what they needed to do by having a check list with

set dates. The archaeological and transferable skills they were gaining on fieldwork could easily

feed into this and it could potentially help them develop not only as an archaeologist, but also as

a person. It was emphasised by some of the students that they would need to do this with

someone’s advice and the feedback from assessment, positive and negative, would be crucial in

making it valid. It was also pointed out that some form of motivation would be required to

51

actually go out and do the things that had been identified. The Second Year students who had

already had practice in doing PDP felt it could help in targeting their CVs towards particular jobs;

a couple of them felt that they would only do this after they left university. The Site Trainees felt

that, although having the right ‘key’ words was important, PDP could help in having the evidence

to hand to back up these words.


The majority of students were very keen on excavation being a residential Field School, despite

the rough conditions associated with camping. The main factor was that they bonded with the rest

of their Year group and were part of one big community. Apart from being a levelling process,

this led to them having more respect for each other. They could also talk more fully with the

supervisors and find out about the nature of work and conditions in commercial archaeology.

Some felt the teaching and learning experience was no different from a non-residential dig.

Others said they could talk to people working on other parts of the site and get a better overview

of the archaeology, as well as discussing aspects of the work together. The major downsides of a

residential Field School were seen to be the lack of facilities and, occasionally, sleep, as well as

the potential for personality clashes.

Reading Supervisors

Backgrounds

Many of the supervisors had a solid background in commercial archaeology, but had also

originally trained at Silchester and ‘risen through the ranks’. For some of them, this was a

sabbatical from their normal job and it was emphasised that the nature of the excavation was very

different from commercial archaeology in that the methods being employed at the Field School

were more meticulous and complex. The supervisors without a commercial background tended to

have either academic jobs or be postgraduate students. Again, they all had a long association with

the site having received their initial training there.

Teaching methods

All the supervisors said that they enjoyed teaching and it was one of the main reasons why they

came back to Silchester each year. It was seen as a very rewarding activity, but could be

frustrating if a student did not seem to be enjoying it. It was felt that the teaching method may

have to be adjusted for different personalities, as some students were more independent than

others. The basic approach was to run through things to ensure that they understood and to ask

them regularly to ensure that this was the case. This could involve going through the whole

thought processes so that the students could understand the reasoning behind the what, how and

why of what was being done. It was important that they understood the process of archaeology –

uncovering, discovering and often changing your mind in light of what had been uncovered, as

well as how this fits in with the bigger picture of the site. It was essential to enthuse the students

with the excitement of this process of discovery to ensure that they enjoyed it. Coaching methods

were also useful, asking the students their thoughts and opinions and how they thought particular

problems should be tackled.

The most common way to start the students off was by learning trowelling skills through cleaning

an area. It was important to leave them to get on with the work after initial instruction and to

learn by themselves, even if this meant making mistakes, but this would help them build their

52

own confidence in what they were doing. The same method would be used for planning and

recording and could require patience on the part of the supervisor. It was felt to be bad practice to

stand over students when they were working or to ‘stalk’ them, but important to be nearby and

ready to respond to any questions or problems. The supervisors were keen for the students to get

good experience of every task on site and it was suggested that a check-list of things each student

should do would be useful. Where possible, individual students would be given a feature to

excavate and record so that they gained experience of all stages of the process. A limiting factor

could be the nature of the archaeology. One supervisor was concerned that there were not enough

sections for each student in his team to get experience of drawing and was considering having the

same section drawn several times by different students to ensure that they learnt this technique

correctly. Another limiting factor could be the student/supervisor ratio which could restrict the

amount of time a supervisor could spend with each student. To increase student understanding

and engagement with the archaeology, the Site Director had started a policy of going round the

site talking to students and getting them to explain the areas they were working on themselves.

The various tensions on site between the needs of a project’s research aims as opposed to the

needs of teaching were also recognised. The main thing was to recognise that this tension did

exist. The Site Director explained that management methods could be used to alleviate this by

putting supervisors with a greater interest in and experience of teaching into the less

archaeologically complicated areas with groups of untrained students. As students became more

experienced they could be rotated between the areas of archaeology; the objective being to

achieve a balance between the research and teaching aims.


The supervisors emphasised that the students come with a variety of expectations, including what

they have seen on TV. Their experience may be different from what they expected, but that was

not necessarily a bad thing; if they fully engaged with the archaeology then they would get so

much out of it their expectations would be fulfilled, or even exceeded. Unexpected aspects were

cited such as the amount of physical labour involved, the long working hours and understanding

the crucial benefits of cleaning and other apparently mundane tasks, but there could be a sense of

achievement at the end of that. The detail and complexity of what archaeology involves was also

a surprise to some students, as was being asked to use a mattock. Not finding things may be

disappointing for some, but excavating a series of different gravel contexts could actually be

more beneficial as proper archaeological experience.

Skills

The supervisors fully recognised the range of skills that the students were acquiring through

fieldwork training. Going on a Field School for the first time was seen as a rite of passage for the

students. The importance of teamwork was emphasised and how this involved sharing and was

related to communication skills. Fieldwork involved a unique combination of using both practical

and academic skills. Other aspects mentioned included:

Understanding the bigger picture when only working on a small part of something

Having to work in different ways

A sense of discipline and responsibility and respect for a chain of command

Recording and analytical skills and being methodical

53

Life skills such as self-reliance, self-confidence and self-awareness

Patience

Social skills, especially being able to make lasting friendships and contacts.

Assessment

All the supervisors felt assessment was a crucial part of coming on a Field School. It was a way

of recognising the work that the students put into the excavation and gave the whole thing

significance. It was also an incentive for them to make an effort and it provided them with

relevant feedback which would be important if they were thinking of following a career in

archaeology. Indeed, it could give them confidence when applying for jobs. It could also allow

the less academically gifted students to shine.

It was recognised that a student’s performance on fieldwork is something that is very difficult to

assess. Any assessment would have to take into account differing skills and abilities and no one

method would be able to cover everything. An exam was seen as important as a way of testing

understanding. However, continuous assessment by the supervisors was seen as crucial because

they could follow the progress and development of individual students. There were difficulties

that were recognised with this, such as the need to keep a close eye on students, especially the

quieter ones who may not initially appear to stand out. It was suggested that to achieve a

reasonable standard across the board, the supervisors should get together and discuss the criteria

for assessment. It was also noted that, as fieldwork training involves a lot of very close and

intensive teaching, it was not surprising that many students received good marks.


Nearly all the supervisors were positive about systems of PDP and CPD. They saw this as a

useful tool to help students develop and they recognised that the student experience on the Field

School could feed into this. It could force them to think about their future careers and help them

become aware of the sort of working person they are, as well as letting other people know what

their aspirations are. Because it is based on self-evaluation, it would mean they were not being

spoon-fed, but they would require a positive and constructive person to advise them so as to

make it beneficial. One of the supervisors was actually doing a simple form of PDP for the

students by having a list of all the things he wanted them to achieve. The difficulty of getting

students to engage with PDP was recognised. It was felt that a trigger of some sort was needed

such as using the fieldwork diary to get them into a self-reflective mindset, or asking older

students who were in a similar peer group and were doing PDP to talk to them about it.


All the supervisors were positive about residential Field Schools. They cited the importance of

the social side of fieldwork with the added effect of a greater emphasis on the archaeology

leading to a more rounded experience for the students. It was observed that the people who did

commute in were somewhat outside this sense of belonging and slightly isolated from the rest of

the group. The negative aspects of a residential Field School were seen to be that it could lead to

tiredness and there was greater mental pressure with students outside their usual comfort zone. It

could also be treated like a holiday by some students and issues of inclusion would have to be

considered for those who were either shy or had difficulties in social situations.

54

5.6 Supervisors’ Questionnaires

Given the small number of supervisors on each site the data from the questionnaires returned by

them at each of the Field Schools has been combined. Generally, the data confirms the other

information given by the supervisors in interviews and on the questionnaires with relation to

student expectations, teaching methods and assessment.

Q 1. How well do you think participating in fieldwork training lived up to student

expectations?

n = 19



Q 3. Please rate how well you think that the ways in which you teach field skills have been

effective:

n = 19



55

Q 5. Please rate how important you think it is that student performance of fieldwork is

assessed:

n = 19



Q 7. Please rate how important you think the assessment of student performance on

fieldwork training will be for them in pursuing your career in the future, whether this is

within or outside archaeology:

n = 19



56

5.7 Comparative Overview of Results

The following table provides a comparative overview of the results from the three training

excavations that were visited in the course of the project.

Reading York Oxford Length 2 or 4 weeks 3 weeks 2 weeks

The working week 6 days: Sat – Thurs 4 days: Mon, Tues,

Thurs, Fri

6 days: Sun – Fri

Days off Fri Weds, Weekends Sat

Residential? Yes No Yes

Assessed? Yes Yes No

1st year preparation? Yes Yes No

2nd

year follow-up? Yes Yes No

Careers lectures? Yes No No

Numbers in teams c. 20 10 5-6

Type of archaeology Complicated,

urban, lots of finds,

difficult

Less complicated,

rural settlement and

fewer finds, but

intercutting

features make

interpretation

difficult

Fairly complicated,

urban, many finds,

can be difficult

Students: How has

participating in fieldwork

training lived up to your

expectations?

% Yes

90.5% 86% 33%

Students: Please rate how

well you think that the ways

in which you have been

taught field skills have been

effective. % Yes

90.5% 83% 60%

Students: Importance of

assessment. % Yes

100% 59.5% 21%

Students: Career in

archaeology? % Yes

62% 45% 28%

Students: how important you

think the assessment of

student performance on

fieldwork training will be for

them in pursuing a career,

whether this is within or

outside of archaeology: %

95% 64% 40%

57

Reading York Oxford Type of Supervisor % Commercial – 67%

PG – 25%

UG – 0%

Other – 8%

Commercial – 83%

PG – 17%

UG – 0%

Other – 0%

Commercial – 0%

PG – 60%

UG – 20%

Other – 20%

Staff: training met, exceeded

student expectations? %

100% 20% 0%

Staff: how well you think

that the ways in which you

teach field skills has been

effective? % Yes

82% 80% 66%

Staff: how important you

think it is that student

performance on fieldwork

training is assessed. % Yes

100% 80% 100%

Staff: how important you

think the assessment of

student performance on

fieldwork training will be for

them in pursuing a career,

whether this is within or

outside of archaeology. %

Yes

100% 80% 66%

Table 3 Comparative overview of results

58

6. Discussion and Recommendations

Providing students with fieldwork training is something that is integral to Archaeology as an

undergraduate degree in Higher Education, and provides an intensive practical aspect to the

course. It is an experience that students, on the whole, find enjoyable and exciting. Another

unique aspect is that there are no short-cuts or ‘fast-tracking’ in archaeological fieldwork; it is a

case of starting at the bottom and learning by experience. The three case studies used in this

project are very different, but there are also a number of similarities. Each one is facing similar

issues in training students in fieldwork techniques, as well as providing examples of good

practice in the way that these issues are tackled.

6.1 The Provision of Technical Skills

‘We spent over two hours trowelling down an area and then they just come along and tell

us to mattock it. I don’t see the point, what a total waste of time and effort.’(Student)

One factor that relates very closely to the provision of technical skills is the expectations of

students. The responses in the student Focus Group discussions were more about what had been

unexpected. The major factors cited were:

The amount of physical work involved:

‘It’s much harder work than you expect, the physical labour and the kneeling.’ (Student)

‘The physical hard work can be a shock to many of them; wheel barrowing and mattocking.

Perhaps their expectation had been they’d be on their knees with a trowel slowly picking off

things.’ (Supervisor)

Realising that excavation is a methodical process involving a series of different excavation

and recording tasks:

‘I thought you just excavated and there wasn’t all this planning and doing context cards, it’s a

lot more in depth.’ (Student)

‘It’s much more detailed, like the planning, there’s so much more to it; I thought I’d just be

digging, I didn’t realise there were quite so many stages to it.’ (Student)

Being able to grasp an overall understanding of what was going on and how changing

methods and interpretations related to the archaeology as it was being revealed:

‘There’s a lot more behind the scenes and pre- and post-work to it. I didn’t really ever think

about that. I suppose I thought it would just dig, and that’d be it. There’s a lot more to it and

that’s really good and interesting.’ (Student)

In the interviews the supervisors felt that the logical processes and the detail and complexity of

doing archaeology were factors that had been widely unexpected. Instruction in technical skills

59

cannot be divorced from understanding; the two aspects are inextricably linked. The objective of

fieldwork training is not just teaching students how to carry out the techniques competently, but

to get them to understand what and why they are doing something and using particular methods –

to understand archaeological fieldwork as a whole process and the reasoning behind that process.

It includes understanding that the methods used and interpretations formulated will change in

response to the archaeology as it is revealed. If students understand that process then they are

more likely to adhere to it. Understanding is essential, not only to ensure effective training, but

also so that students get the most out of the experience. This aspect should be the driving force

behind all the activities carried out on site by students.

The experience of their pre-fieldwork teaching and briefings had been similar for most of the

students at all three Field Schools. There were only a few aspects of the First Year teaching that

they thought related directly to the practical work that they were involved with on site, but there

was a feeling that these were two aspects of the same thing and that in the final analysis they

would be able to make relevant connections between learning the methods of the collection of

primary data and its interpretation and how it would fit in with a larger picture of the past. It was

felt that no amount of explanation could help prepare them fully for the actual experience of

working on an excavation.

Overall, the students at all three sites in the study felt that the effectiveness of instruction in the

field was good. In outlining good practice for teaching fieldwork techniques it is important to

remember that flexibility is required because of the personalities involved. Some students will

pick things up faster and more easily than others and individual supervisors and site directors will

have their own personal and effective teaching methods. A set of strict criteria could, potentially,

restrict the good practice that is already being followed. Therefore, the good practice identified

by the ATLAS project should be seen within the framework of these personal methods, as well as

in the context of the unique conditions of an individual site. These pointers are applicable not

only to excavation, but also to other activities such as the processing of finds and environmental

samples, and surveying.

Explain → demonstrate → let them do it:

Nearly all the students and supervisors spoken to said that the only way to learn is to

get down and have a go.

‘Nothing else you can do – you’ve got to do it and they’ve got to let you do it. Make your

mistakes at first and then they advise on things like you’re digging too deep or not taking

enough off. No point being in a safety blanket, you won’t learn; think this works really

well.’ (Student)

‘My method is to do it as hands-on process. I don’t tell them the answers, but try to do it

as we go along.’ (Supervisor)

Explain and demonstrate each task as it arises:

Learning fieldwork techniques is an on-going process in itself

60

It is important to understand how each technique fits in with the whole process of

excavation

Specific briefings and demonstrations on specialist techniques such as surveying and

planning can provide a foundation of knowledge that students can build on when

applying these on site.

‘The supervisor tries to explain it as we go along. We’re going through the process of

trying to interpret and understand it. The supervisor takes us through his own thought

processes so it’s good to see it from a real archaeologist’s point of view. He’s a

commercial archaeologist and tells us where things would be done different if this was a

commercial dig, so it’s good to see a different approach.’ (Student)

‘I show them what we’re doing, talk them through the process and explain why we’re

doing it and why to do it in a particular way.’ (Supervisor)

Do not stand over the students as they are working, but give them some distance:

Leave students to get on with a job and, if feasible, let them learn by making mistakes

This will allow them to take control and be responsible for what they are doing and

also builds confidence.

‘I find it really intimidating for someone to stand over me and watch me working.’

(Student)

‘I’ve seen some supervisors who stand on the edge of the pit and they look like prison

warders on a chain gang’ (Supervisor)

Be approachable and available and willing to answer questions:

It is just as important to gain confidence through understanding as it is to become

competent in a technique.

‘They don’t mind explaining it more than once if you don’t get it the first time.’ (Student)

‘It’s very easy to ask and they always give very comprehensive answers and make sure we do

understand what we’re looking at and what we’re doing.’ (Student)

Provide on-going explanations and summaries:

This helps with understanding changing methods and interpretations and the reasoning

behind them.

61

‘The supervisors tend to teach us as we go along; they say this is what you do, now go

and do it. You’ve also got the support of them coming along and telling you what’s okay

or if you need to do something else instead.’ (Student)

‘They tell you what we’re going to be doing as when you do something. They talk you

through it and show you if they need to and they’re there to help if you’re struggling.’

(Student)

Use coaching methods:

Ask students how they think a particular problem should be tackled and what their

interpretations are

This builds understanding and confidence and helps students to become more engaged

with the archaeology.

‘We encourage them to talk to each other and ask questions.’ (Supervisor)

‘I’m tending to ask them questions to get them to think about what they’re doing, rather

than keep giving them instructions because that isn’t helpful.’ (Supervisor)

Ensure students gain experience of each task on site:

This should include all aspects including excavation, planning, writing context sheets,

finds, surveying and sampling – this not only helps with understanding but also

impacts on the academic and analytical skills being acquired

This may cause a tension between the needs of training and the research aims of a

project

The use of a check-list of tasks for each student at the Oxford excavation was very

successful, although it is important to be aware that this should not become a simple

‘box-ticking’ exercise, but should ensure that students become competent at and

understand each of the tasks.

‘Every student should get the opportunity to do every single stage of the process. Perhaps

we should have a piece of paper with a flow chart and a list of things it is essential that the

students get experience of on a Field School, and all the transferable skills as well.’

(Supervisor)

‘One of my main priorities is to make sure everyone gets experience of doing each part of

the process.’ (Supervisor)

If feasible allow an individual or small group of students to tackle an individual feature:

62

This would include cleaning, defining, excavating and recording the feature to give

them experience of each part of the process involved

Not only does this enhance competence and understanding, but also allows students to

take ‘ownership’ of and to engage more fully with the archaeology.

‘As we get features try to get an individual to have a feature of their own. That works

really well because they can focus on that and think about the processes involved.’

(Supervisor)

‘It can become like it’s ‘your’ pit if you stay on one thing.’ (Student)

Be aware of the transferable skills that students are also acquiring through fieldwork training.

‘They develop an inquiring attitude’ (Supervisor)

By emphasising understanding along with competence in technical skills, the students will also

be developing their analytical and academic abilities.

6.2 The Provision of Transferable Skills

‘An excavation involves working collectively to achieve an agreed objective.’ (Site

Director)

‘The whole process of excavation involves problem solving at every stage.’(Assistant Site

Director)

The uniqueness of an Archaeology degree in providing students with fieldwork training also

gives them experience of a number of important transferable skills. It is important to be aware

that many students will not follow a career in field archaeology and probably not even in the

Heritage sector. Indeed, for many of the students the fieldwork training was a ‘taster’ that would

help them to decide if they wanted to follow a career in archaeology. Therefore, it is crucial that

students recognise the transferable skills that they are acquiring on a training excavation as

potentially beneficial to any other career path that they may follow. A comprehensive list of the

transferable skills identified by the students and staff spoken to by the ATLAS project includes:

Team working

Individual working

Leadership skills

Communication

Time management and prioritisation

Problem solving

Record keeping

Logical thinking

Social skills

The ability to follow instructions

63

Diligence and working methodically

Presentation skills

Perseverance and coping in a tough environment – resilience and self-reliance

Physical stamina

Interpretation when not all the evidence is available

The reality of research – primary data collection

Developing an enquiring attitude

Discipline in physical exertion with mental dexterity

Confidence, but also humbleness to ask when not sure

Adapting to changing circumstances

Gathering and interpreting data and understanding its biases

Thinking about minutiae and the bigger picture at the same time

Having to express complex ideas or revise your opinion

An experience of a full day’s work doing manual labour

The ability to carry out instructions and do something again if you did not get it right

Being patient, methodical and thorough

Doing a practical activity and learning commonsense

The opportunity to contextualise theory

Precision, accuracy and analytical skills in having to think about what you want to achieve

The objective assessment of situations

Developing a good attitude towards work and following through with a task

Being motivated and proactive by keeping busy

Organisation in keeping work and living areas tidy

Teaching others by passing on knowledge and skills once they had learnt something.

Having to work in different ways

A sense of discipline and responsibility and respect for a chain of command

Of these, team working was mentioned by nearly everyone who was spoken to and was regarded

as one of the most important things that students would take away from a training excavation.

Some of the people spoken to qualified what the experience of team working involves on a

training excavation.

Understanding that you rely on others and they rely on you:

‘The experience of working with a lot of other people and hopefully learning to take account

of the requirements those other people have.’ (Supervisor)

Co-operating with and being tolerant of other people:

‘You learn about how to manage relations in a stressful environment.’ (Student)

Understanding and working within a hierarchy of command:

64

‘This is good experience of learning how to respect the chain of command; the students do

seem to have a great deal of respect for the supervisors because of our experience.’

(Supervisor)

The camaraderie of the experience;

‘It’s a camaraderie sort of thing.’ (Student)

Learning new things together:

‘To be able to work together and learn new skills together, bounce ideas of one another and

share what I’m teaching them; that will be the big thing that they take away from this.’

(Supervisor)

Bonding in adversity:

‘As a group, they’ve bonded in terms of adversity.’ (Supervisor)

The second most mentioned transferable skill was problem solving; indeed, the whole process of

doing archaeology was seen by some as an exercise in problem solving at every level. An

appreciation of this can help with an understanding of why the methods used and the

interpretations being formulated by archaeologists are constantly changing.

‘Problem solving – not just saying we haven’t got a 30 metre tape I can’t do the work; it’s

thinking how can I get the work done. It’s about not giving up because it’s not perfect.’

(Supervisor)

‘It is a problem solving thing, it is this idea that there’s a cycle that we go through in

trying to work things out.’ (Supervisor)

Fieldwork training as an experience of real work, and something that most students on other

courses did not get, was mentioned by a number of participants. This included the discipline of

having to work set hours for full days over a complete working week, as well as having to follow

instructions and be responsible for one’s own work. A lot of this was seen to involve developing

a good ‘attitude’ towards work, even when it could be carrying out the more manual and less

exciting tasks.

‘They can find out if they really want to become a professional archaeologist.’

(Supervisor)

‘Working full days is very much like a full time job; it makes you come and actually do

something and stick at it.’ (Student)

The social aspect of a training excavation was also mentioned in many of the Focus Group

discussions and staff interviews. For some students it was a matter of being thrown into a

situation where they had to socialise and they were finding they were blossoming with the

65

experience. There was also the realisation that they were making close friendships that would

probably last a lifetime.

‘The social side of it, getting along with your team and getting to know people; if you talk

to people you can get to know the whole site better.’ (Student)

‘They get a lot of experience with people, socialising. I was a very closed person before I

came on the Field School and I made most of my friends here.’ (Supervisor)

At a practical level, they were also making professional contacts that would be useful for them in

the future; not only with their peers, but also with the professional archaeologists amongst the

supervisors.

‘Archaeology is a very small profession and if they decide they want to go into it they

will know a fair spread of people who work for different companies already. That’s how I

got my first job.’ (Supervisor)

‘You can hear about the supervisors’ experiences in archaeology.’ (Student)

The important factor is to recognise the transferable skills that students can acquire through the

experience of fieldwork training and to understand that many of these can be just as important as

technical skills. This does not have to be difficult as many of these skills, such as team working

and problem solving, are inextricably linked with carrying out the archaeological tasks. However,

it is crucial that students are made aware of these skills so that they fully understand what they

are getting out of fieldwork training is more than just learning how to do field archaeology.

‘Learning to recognise their own skill base and that they can transfer those skills into

other areas.’ (Supervisor)

‘I think this particular experience sets us aside from a lot of students and I shall be using

the fact that I’ve been in a practical situation on my degree course on my CV in the

future.’ (Student)

It is also important to ensure that students are put into situations where they can gain a proper

experience of these skills. This can include things like making sure a student does not end up

working on their own all the time, to encouraging students to work out how to solve questions of

excavation methods themselves.

66

6.3 Organisation, Management and Resourcing

The supervisors are the most important people on site both in ensuring the archaeology gets done

properly and in providing effective training for students. They are at the brunt of the inherent

tension between the research aims and the teaching aims that is present on any training

excavation. This can be a major limiting factor when it comes to providing effective training. The

selection, support and management of the site supervisors are, therefore, of crucial importance.

On all three sites involved in this study the students had a great respect for the experience and

knowledge possessed by the supervisors, especially if they came from a commercial archaeology

background. The supervisors themselves all said how much they enjoyed teaching students and,

for some, it was a welcome break from the type of work they usually did. This emphasises the

importance of employing supervisors who are not only skilled and experienced archaeologists,

but also effective teachers who can pass on their skills and knowledge to students. Indeed, one

site director was considering a major investment in their staff by providing them with some

training in teaching and assessment methods. At Silchester many of the supervisors had risen

through the ranks at that particular site so that they had several years’ experience of the

archaeology and the methods used and organisation of that particular Field School. There were

also several assistant supervisors who were hoping to work their way up to supervisor level in

subsequent seasons.

The organisation at all three sites in this study had separate teams of students working under an

individual supervisor. The sizes of these groups varied at each site. At Heslington East and

Dorchester-on-Thames it was a simple mathematical division with one supervisor to ten students

at the former site and one to five or six at the latter site. The teams were distributed across the

sites as demanded by the intensity of the archaeology. At Silchester the sizes of the student

groups were determined by the demands of the archaeology in each area of the site. Obviously it

was felt that the smaller the group, the more effective the teaching would be. However, at

Heslington East this was offset by using an experienced Second Year student as assistant

supervisor in each group; and at Silchester the number of assistant supervisors and site trainees in

each group were directly related to the number of students present.

The use of Second Year and other students who had some digging experience to work alongside

the First Years was seen in a very positive light. They were seen to be less intimidating and more

approachable than many of the staff as they came from a similar peer group and had recently

been through the same experience of being a complete novice on a training excavation. Their

presence helped take some of the pressure off the supervisors as they could advise on many

aspects of techniques. However, the Second Year students also required support and advice from

the supervisors as their knowledge and experience had its limits. At Silchester the number of

Second Year students had decreased in the 2010 season which was seen as a limiting factor by

many of the staff. The reasons for this were that they had opportunities to dig on different sites

and thus widen their experience of fieldwork, but also there were financial pressures. Attending a

Field School in the summer break reduced the number of weeks that they were available to do

paid work elsewhere which they needed to help fund their degree courses. This is an aspect that

has to be taken into account at all training excavations that are carried out in the university term

breaks, especially with the increasing pressures on student funding.

67

The tensions between the research aims and the teaching aims on a training excavation will

always be there, but ways can be found to alleviate these. The main thing is to be aware that this

tension exists. One site director actually saw it as being partially of benefit to students, giving

them a realistic experience of the pressures involved in carrying out an excavation and how a site

director will try to resolve these. However, it was important to ensure that the students

understood this and why certain decisions were being made that could alter the methods used on

particular areas or features. Another site director tackled this difficulty through the way in which

they managed their staff and students. The skills of the individual supervisors were recognised

and encouraged, and they were assigned areas of the site according to their ability, interest and

experience. Students could be rotated between groups as they developed their skills, abilities and

self-confidence.

The question of whether a training excavation is more beneficial if it is residential or non-

residential received a number of mixed responses. In general, the students on a residential

excavation (Oxford and Reading) favoured that, whilst the students on a non-residential Field

School (York) favoured that set up. Overall, most of the supervisors were in favour of a

residential Field School. At a basic level, whether a training excavation is residential or non-

residential will be determined by its location in relation to the respective University. The positive

aspects of a residential Field School included:

A greater engagement with the archaeology and the context of a site within the surrounding

environment

The development of team working and social skills, as well as other transferable skills

The opportunity to interact with professional archaeologists in a non-working environment

A greater sense of discipline towards the work and a reduced rate of absenteeism

A more all-round experience that has the potential to become a ‘life event’.

The negative aspects of a residential Field School were seen to be:

The potential for personality clashes

Tiredness, fatigue and discomfort in a potentially challenging environment; for example, the

illness experienced by the Oxford students

The possible exclusion of people with disabilities or other issues

It creates extra layers of organisation and resourcing.

68

6.4 Assessment

‘If we weren’t assessed on this, the trench wouldn’t be half so deep.’(Student)

Nearly all the students and supervisors at York and Readingregarded assessment as an essential

part of participating in fieldwork training. Their reasons for this included:

Ability at fieldwork is an essential part of being an archaeologist

It is a key part of an undergraduate course in Archaeology

It provides an incentive and a point to participating in a training excavation

It provides a sense of achievement in return for the effort put in

Feedback informs on areas of strength and weakness and whether a student would want to

pursue a career in archaeology

It can incorporate the transferable skills being acquired.

In contrast, the students at Oxford were not in favour of being assessed on their performance. The

crux of their argument was that their course was not vocational and that the fieldwork element

was only a minor part of it and the majority of them would not be pursuing a career in

archaeology. There is also the Oxford ‘system’ whereby assessment is traditionally by

examination. However, the Oxford supervisors were very much in favour of the students being

assessed. The reason for this was that it would give them greater incentive to engage more fully

with the archaeology on the site.

This highlights an important aspect of assessment – what is its ultimate purpose? For students

studying at different institutions, this may vary. It appears that those studying at York and

Reading are more likely to follow archaeology as a career, or at least some other aspect of

heritage. The transferable skills they gain will also be crucial for those following other career

paths. The students at Oxford are more likely to follow completely different career paths and, as

one site director put it, ‘their degree will most likely do the talking for them.’ Seeing it from this

perspective emphasises that a standardised system of assessment will not be applicable to every

single Field School or training excavation, it will depend on its usefulness to a particular group of

students at a particular institution. This in turn will be linked to specific questions of

employability which is the ultimate purpose of a university education. Therefore, assessment is

not just about assigning a mark, it is more about providing effective and accurate feedback on a

student’s skills and abilities and potentiality for pursuing their future career in what may be very

different areas for different groups of students.

‘Feedback is very important; if they’re interested but think they’re not very good at it they

may not continue with field work.’ (Supervisor)

‘The feedback can boost your confidence, as well letting you know the areas where you

need to improve.’ (Student)

‘The feedback is important; you can tell what you’re good at and what you need to work

on.’ (Student)

69

The method of assessment was the question that caused the greatest diversity of opinion amongst

the students and supervisors at all three of the Field Schools visited in this study. It was seen as a

very difficult exercise to carry out, mainly because the experiences of individual students on a

training excavation differ widely. Positive and negative aspects could be cited for the different

methods that were proposed and no single method was seen as covering all the aspects required.

In considering how student performance on fieldwork should be assessed for a particular project,

the overriding factor is what each group of students needs to get out of the experience. The

emphasis may be on technical skills, generic transferable skills or academic ability, or even

aspects such as general attitude which can say a great deal about an individual. In considering

how to assess students’ performance a combination of methods may provide the answer for some

institutions.

The methods of assessment considered and the comments on them included:

A practical test:

Can demonstrate technical ability

Difficult to standardise.

An exam:

Can demonstrate understanding and academic ability

Can favour the academically gifted over the more practically able.

An essay:

Can demonstrate understanding and foster a self-reflective approach

Can favour the academically gifted over the more practically able.

Fieldwork diary:

Provides a record of developing understanding and skills and can foster a self-

reflective approach

May not demonstrate actual ability.

Continuous assessment by supervisors:

The supervisors get to know the individual students more closely

Assesses progress in and attainment of technical skills

Can include transferable skills and aspects such as attitude and highlights these to

students

Requires staff suitably experienced in assessment

Potential of personality clashes between individual supervisors and students, although

this can be alleviated by different supervisors assessing different aspects.

A portfolio of work:

70

Demonstrates individual achievement and understanding

Difficult to standardise because of variable student experiences.

Group assessment:

Reflects archaeological fieldwork as a group activity

Difficulty in distributing marks fairly, although this responsibility can be delegated to

the students within each group.

6.5 Employability

‘People know what their skills are and there is no need to write them down.’(Student)

If training and assessment are specifically targeted towards what a student can potentially get out

of participation in fieldwork training in terms of skills and experience, then there should be no

difficulty in relating these to employability. The challenge appears to lie more with getting

students to identify and reflect on their skills and experience and to engage with tools that are

designed to enhance their employability, such as Personal Development Planning (PDP).

Most of the students who participated in the project were at the end of the First Year of study and

had very little previous engagement or even knowledge of PDP. At York the system is informal

and relies on a certain amount of self-incentive by the students, whereas at Reading a more in

depth system is provided as part of one of the Second Year modules. At Oxford there is no

formal system of PDP it being considered that aspects such as employability and career choices

were effectively dealt with by the interaction between the students and their College tutors. There

were only a small number of students at Silchester who had gone through the PDP system and

they had found it difficult to engage with to any great extent. There was a mixed reaction to PDP

amongst the supervisors mainly because of the temporary nature of much archaeological

employment. However, many of the supervisors did see the benefit in reflecting on skills and

experiences.

Much has been written about the benefits of self-reflection for employability (e.g. Aitchison &

Giles 2007). The students at Reading seemed to recognise the range of skills that they were

potentially acquiring through fieldwork training, but at York and Oxford the students only

seemed to realise this when they started thinking about it. This emphasises the importance and

effectiveness of self-reflection. The ATLAS project discussions were centred on the self-

reflection aspects of PDP and the keeping of a fieldwork diary. The students at Oxford were not

keeping a journal, whilst many at York felt they had very little incentive to do so as it was not an

assessed exercise. However, there had been a much greater engagement with keeping a journal

amongst the Reading students. The students there felt that there was an incentive to do this

because they had to write a self-reflective essay on their experiences on the Field School as part

of their assessment. Although not mentioned directly, at the pre-fieldwork briefing the previous

year’s students had encouraged the First Year students to keep their journals up to date. As this

message came from their peers, this may well have had a positive impact on the students.

The discussion of the fieldwork diary led naturally into a discussion of PDP. The York and

Oxford students were sceptical and felt it would probably be something that they would only do

71

towards the end of their university course when they were actually applying for jobs; however,

there was a more positive response from the Reading students. It was thought that the results of

fieldwork assessment, and especially feedback on areas of strength and weakness, could most

definitely feed into some form of PDP. This in turn could build up as a record of their skills and

experiences and help them to identify areas where they needed to improve and to identify any

gaps in their skills’ base. This was true for all the skills they were acquiring from participation in

fieldwork including technical, analytical, academic and transferable skills. The self-reflective

nature of the fieldwork diary could form a basis for this and, indeed, one of the recently

graduated site trainees at Silchester had used their undergraduate journal as an aid to applying for

that post. This emphasises the targeting of assessment methods towards the specific things that

students should be getting out of fieldwork training at a particular institution.

At a more general level, getting students to engage with these methods of self-reflection are

strewn with difficulties. The major sticking point is a lack of student awareness and interest

which only seemed to appear towards the end of a degree course when there was pressure to

secure employment. For some of the staff this seemed to be an almost insurmountable barrier.

One assistant site director felt that it was important to provide students with these resources and

to encourage them to use them, but that it should be left up to them to find the incentive to

engage with it and that staff time and morale should not be wasted on this aspect. This may

actually provide a pointer for a method for getting students more involved with employability and

tools such as PDP. The encouragement by peers, rather than by staff, to keep a fieldwork diary

appears to have had a marked impact at Silchester; a successful route may be to get older or

recently graduated students who are doing PDP to encourage those still in training to engage with

some form of self-reflection and highlight its importance for future employability.

6.6 Training and Employability: the View from the IFA

This section of the report outlines the views of the IfA (Institute for Archaeologists) with regards

to training and employability in archaeology. It is a summary of a presentation given by Kenneth

Aitchison (the IfA Head of Projects and Professional Development) at a Workshop organised by

the ATLAS project team in July 2010.

What the IfA wants:

Sectoral commitment to standards

Individuals demonstrating their technical and ethical competence

Archaeologists better at working in archaeology, archaeology better for archaeologists

to work in.

What employers want:

Good employers do not want ‘the finished item’

They want someone who can show that they can learn

Someone who can fit into a team.

What students want:

To be employable.

What universities want:

72

To demonstrate that they are delivering employability

This can be done by embedding employability in their courses and teaching skills

awareness.

The skills that are seen as important are not only technical skills, but also a range of

transferable skills including: initiative, team-working, working under pressure,

communication, adaptability, attention to detail, taking responsibility and decision making.

Along with a range of skills, an employee’s knowledge is also important, especially with

regards to the commercial context of archaeological practice and the roles and responsibilities

of differing sectors of archaeological practice in the UK.

This leads to two major questions:

Who delivers the training?

How do you demonstrate skills?

The IfA suggests that the questions of training and demonstrating skills can be tackled by:

Transforming the work experience into learning

Ensuring that work experience is credit-bearing through the Accreditation of Field

Schools.

To ensure that the employers, students and universities get what they want, the IfA would like to

see greater emphasis placed on the learning aims of archaeological fieldwork training and also

that this training is carried out to a recognised standard. The possession of technical and

transferable skills, knowledge and experience is important, but so also is an employee being able

to demonstrate their ability to learn. This emphasises the how importantly the IfA views

programmes of PDP and CPD as an aid to employability.

73

7. Conclusions and Further Work

The ATLAS project is limited in scope by being able to visit only three Field Schools, but the

results have highlighted a number of important aspects of archaeological fieldwork training.

7.1 The Results

Every training excavation is unique in the way it is organised and managed.

Pre-fieldwork teaching:

Important to provide a context for fieldwork

No amount of preparation can replicate the actual experience

We can address student expectations to some extent – visiting an excavation,

disseminate student experiences from previous seasons, interactive websites etc.

On-site teaching:

Students only learn by actually doing it

Understanding the process and methods involved is essential

Students need to gain experience of all the tasks involved

The acquisition of transferable skills is inextricably linked with carrying out the

archaeological tasks and these need to be emphasised to students.

The supervisors are the most important people on site:

They require effective support and management

Training in teaching and assessment should be seen as an investment in staff.

Residential/non-residential projects:

This may be determined by the location of fieldwork

A residential Field School tends to provide a more rounded experience.

Assessment:

An essential aspect of fieldwork training

The methods used may vary, but should be related to the ultimate outcomes of

training

Different methods assess different aspects of fieldwork training and each one has its

limitations.

Employability:

The ultimate purpose of training – teaching and assessment should be linked to this

PDP can incorporate much of the experience and feedback from assessment; it is seen

as important by employers and the IfA, but there are problems of student engagement.

74

7.2 Further Work

Despite the limited scope and the limitations of the actual data collected by this project, it can

inform potential areas and methods for further work:

Include a wider sample of institutions that have a greater or lesser emphasis on fieldwork to

collect data on their pre-fieldwork teaching, the provision of fieldwork training, PDP and the

career destinations of students.

Visit a larger and more varied sample of fieldwork training projects to collect further data on

teaching and assessment methods and effectiveness:

Different types of fieldwork

Different times of the year

In-house research projects and students gaining experience on other projects.

Interview a wider range of subjects, including:

Experienced students

Second Year Students who do not return to gain further fieldwork experience.

Students and ex-students with experience of engaging with PDP.

Follow a 1st year group of students into their 2

nd and 3

rd year and beyond.

75

7.3 Concluding Comments

Fieldwork is fundamental to our discipline; it informs and shapes it. Archaeological fieldwork

provides the raw data which feeds our research agendas. It follows therefore that fieldwork needs

to be carried out in a way which ensures that this data is recovered and recorded rigorously. To

do so we need to ensure that all those working in the field are trained to the highest standards

possible.

It used to be that archaeological fieldwork training was carried out alongside the everyday

business of a research or rescue excavation. The archaeology got done – and if people got trained

at the same time, all well and good. But there has been increasing recognition that archaeologists

are eminently employable, and in the current economic climate, vocational degrees are

paramount. The rigour of fieldwork training is now seen as the perfect background to a useful

working life. Increasingly universities are integrating archaeological fieldwork training into their

syllabuses in an attempt to standardise such training and provide their graduates with a basis for

employment and a route into a useful career.

The situation now is that we have several interested groups all with the same aim – to have access

to a trained and useful archaeological workforce. The aim of the ATLAS pilot project has been to

gather data from these different groups, as a starting point.

So, who are these groups?

Students of archaeology – whether formally (i.e. on an educational course) or by experience.

Teachers of archaeology – universities, professional units, amateur groups etc.

The ‘discipline’ – represented and spoken for by the IfA.

Employers of archaeologists.

What do each of these groups want?

Students:

To learn how to carry out their chosen discipline on a practical level

‘Job’ satisfaction

To discover new things

To get a job (i.e. to be employable).

Teachers of archaeology:

To uncover new data

To answer research questions,

To move archaeological knowledge forward

To inform the public

To make their students employable.

The discipline:

76

Archaeological fieldwork to be carried out to a rigorous and monitored standard

A highly trained workforce

A good working environment for archaeologists.

Employers:

‘Raw material’ to train and develop and fit into the workforce

A workforce who has demonstrated that they can learn

A workforce who can work as part of a team.

It is desirable to produce a professional workforce who will do their job well, will fit into a

working environment, will add to the sum of our archaeological knowledge and will be fit for any

employment purpose. Archaeological excavation is the training ground for all of this and has the

potential to offer opportunities to all. ATLAS aims to start the ball rolling by finding out exactly

what our teachers and learners want and what is being done to achieve this. Gathering this data is

the starting point for identifying pivotal issues in fieldwork training. The ATLAS project has

identified some of the major issues involved in fieldwork teaching, learning and assessment, as

well as some of the practicalities involved in implementing it. One of the key outcomes of this

project has been to understand how generic the skills gained on an archaeological excavation are.

Archaeology graduates emerge with a variety of skills which can fit them for many employment

purposes. The next step is to understand exactly what the employers want, and how we can use

this knowledge to embed employability within university fieldwork training.

77

References

Aitchison, K & Giles, M 2007. Employability and Curriculum Design. Liverpool: Higher

Education Academy Subject Centre for History, Classics and Archaeology; Guides for Teaching

and Learning in Archaeology No. 4.

Croucher, K, Cobb, H & Brennan, A. 2008. Investigating the Role of Fieldwork in Teaching and

Learning Archaeology. . Liverpool: Higher Education Academy Subject Centre for History,

Classics and Archaeology.

78

Appendices

I. Student Questionnaire

II. Supervisor Questionnaire

III. York – Student Questionnaire Responses

IV. York – Supervisor Questionnaire Responses

V. Oxford – Student Questionnaire Responses

VI. Oxford – Supervisor Questionnaire Responses

VII. Reading – Student Questionnaire Responses

VIII. Reading – Supervisor Questionnaire Responses

IX. York – Student Focus Groups

X. York – Supervisor/Site Director Interviews

XI. Oxford – Student Focus Groups

XII. Oxford – Supervisor/Site Director Interviews

XIII. Reading – Student Focus Groups

XIV. Reading – Supervisor/Site Director Interviews

79

Appendix I – Student Questionnaire Assessing, Teaching, Learning Archaeological Skills (ATLAS)

Student questionnaire

University:

Year of Study: Course of Study:

Sex: M/F Age: <21 21-25 25-30 30-35 35-40 >40

1. How has participating in fieldwork training lived up to your expectations?

Very Low Below Average Above High Very

low average average high

2. In what ways do you think it has met, not met or exceeded your expectations?

______________________________________________________________________________

______________________________________________________________________________

______________________________________________________________________________

______________________________________________________________________________

______________________________________________________________________________

____________

3. Please rate how well you think that the ways in which you have been taught field skills have

been effective:



4. In what ways do you think the teaching has been effective or non-effective?

______________________________________________________________________________

______________________________________________________________________________

______________________________________________________________________________

______________________________________________________________________________

______________________________________________________________________________

____________

80

5. Please rate how important you think it is that your performance of fieldwork training is

assessed:



6. Why do you think the assessment of fieldwork is important or unimportant?

______________________________________________________________________________

______________________________________________________________________________

______________________________________________________________________________

______________________________________________________________________________

______________________________________________________________________________

____________

7. Please rate how important you think the assessment of your performance on fieldwork

training will be for you in pursuing your career in the future, whether this is within or outside

of archaeology:



8. Why do you think this is important or unimportant?

______________________________________________________________________________

______________________________________________________________________________

______________________________________________________________________________

______________________________________________________________________________

______________________________________________________________________________

____________

9. Do you intend to follow a career in Archaeology?

Yes No Don’t know

81

Appendix II – Staff Questionnaire Assessing, Teaching, Learning Archaeological Skills (ATLAS)

Staff questionnaire

University:

Type of supervisor: Postgraduate student Professional archaeologist

Sex: M/F Age: <21 21-25 25-30 30-35 35-40 >40

1. How well do you think that participating in fieldwork training has lived up to student

expectations?



2. In what ways do you think it has met, not met or exceeded student expectations?

______________________________________________________________________________

______________________________________________________________________________

______________________________________________________________________________

______________________________________________________________________________

______________________________________________________________________________

____________

3. Please rate how well you think that the ways in which you teach field skills has been

effective:



4. In what ways do you think the teaching has been effective or non-effective?

______________________________________________________________________________

______________________________________________________________________________

______________________________________________________________________________

______________________________________________________________________________

______________________________________________________________________________

____________

82

5. Please rate how important you think it is that student performance on fieldwork training is

assessed:



6. Why do you think the assessment of fieldwork is important or unimportant?

______________________________________________________________________________

______________________________________________________________________________

______________________________________________________________________________

______________________________________________________________________________

______________________________________________________________________________

____________

7. Please rate how important you think the assessment of student performance on fieldwork

training will be for them in pursuing a career, whether this is within or outside of

archaeology:



8. Why do you think this is important or unimportant?

______________________________________________________________________________

______________________________________________________________________________

______________________________________________________________________________

______________________________________________________________________________

______________________________________________________________________________

____________

83

Appendix III – York Student Questionnaire Responses

Q2. In what ways do you think fieldwork training has met, not met or exceeded your

expectations?

01. Even though it was hard, I really enjoyed learning about the processes that allow us to

excavate an archaeological site.

02. Fieldwork training has lived up to my expectations by showing me what is involved in field

archaeology, using the methods and techniques to understand the archaeology. It has also shown

how we can work in a group and help each other, as some areas link together with other areas.

03. Done excavation before, so knew what to expect.

04. Exceeded expectations as we have more independence than I expected.

05. It’s exceeded my expectations as there have been opportunities to try and use a variety of

techniques in both excavating and recording.

06. It is as I expected it.

07. The course has been as hands on as I expected it to be. I would have liked a more interesting

site, but you never know what you’ll get.

08. Generally the things we are doing are what I expected, for example spending time cleaning

the trench etc. Although, the type of fieldwork was different as I was expecting a much smaller

area to excavate with more compact archaeology.

09. Form a really strong team bond; really enjoyed having all work within one team; supervisors

friendly and approachable; lots more to it than I thought.

10. A lot more enjoyable than expected, people were really friendly and willing to help.

11. The weather was good for almost all the time and our group worked really well together and

had a lot of fun.

12. It has been better than my expectations as it’s been more than I thought it would have been.

13. Much harder than I thought.

14. It has exceeded my expectations as it brought techniques from paper into action, it provides a

better level of understanding.

15. Given me an understanding of fieldwork techniques, taught me that sometimes you will find

nothing and shows what the life of a field archaeologist is like.

16. Not a lot has happened, it’s been hard work and repetitive for not a lot of reward.

17. There was less fine excavation than I expected, and also more paperwork to do.

18. I didn’t really have any expectations, but I am happy so far.

19. Good hands on experience and thrown us in at the deep end, but in a good way, allowing us

to make our own mistakes.

20. I think the fieldwork we have done so far has been good preparation for archaeological

fieldwork in general. The ‘taster’ sessions for cemetery, buildings and geophysics worked well to

give a basic overview, whilst excavation has provided both hot and wet working conditions. It

has pretty much covered most extremes.

21. As it cannot be particularly structured due to the fact that finds will appear through digging,

not everyone so far has had the opportunity to attempt such activities as photography, drawing

and such things as the dumpy level and GPS etc. Other than that, it has been as I expected.

22. At first it was very disillusioning because we didn’t find anything. In some ways this is a

lesson that must be learned as well; otherwise I wouldn’t have enjoyed the things that we did

find.

84

23. We’ve had the opportunity to gain practical experience in a variety of archaeological

practices. The lack of actual archaeology in our trench was the luck of the draw.

24. Given the limitations caused by my disability, I have been impressed by the way in which I

have been dealt with. I have been able to go at my own pace and participate in whatever way I am

able to on the day.

25. It has met my expectations in terms of interest and workload, and it has been an enjoyable

experience; have learnt many skills.

26. Much more thoughtful and reflective than I expected, but some of the other students certainly

don’t feel committed (quite high absence rates I think). This makes the group experience less

good. Staff don’t appreciate that the work is very hard and a lot of people really aren’t fit enough:

some of the absences are injuries I think, including me!

27. Don’t feel that enough techniques have been taught on site. It is also unfair that people have

been stuck doing one job day after day, whilst others have been having a go at many different

jobs.

28. I feel that the experience has contrasted with lectures delivered in conjunction with the

subject. I expected more direction to excavation; however, the staff have been very

knowledgeable and helpful.

29. Met my expectations – practical training and key skills.

30. I was expecting much less and thought that I would hate fieldwork after the bad experiences

during fieldwalking in the previous term. But the environment, and doing some real archaeology

instead of just learning the theory have been very enjoyable.

31. I have enjoyed myself – learnt new things and put theory into practice.

32. Important skills, interesting people teaching and wide range of activities.

33. The supervisor is excellent; however, I expected that we would dig deeper trenches.

34. Been enjoyable, but very hard work as I expected.

35. It has been hard work in all weather conditions, but I have still enjoyed it. Sometimes it

became frustrating because we would trowel back and then, moments later, mattock it.

36. I have done fieldwork previously, so I had an idea of what we would be doing for this part of

the course.

37. Covered most excavation techniques – more hands on than I expected.

38. I didn’t really have any expectations coming into it; I just wanted to get out of the lecture

room. It’s been fun so far and I would definitely love to do more of it.

39. Very active and very involved.

40. Having an excellent supervisor and the team helped.

41. Group bonding, learnt new skills.

42. (no answer)

Q4. In what ways do you think the teaching has been effective or non-effective?

01. (no answer)

02. The teaching has been effective as it gives us a hands on experience of what field archaeology

is like. However, we do have the luxury of living so close to the site. Giving a hands on

experience let’s you see what it is really like; gives you the work experience, instead of reading

text books.

03. Often feels like blindly learning for nothing.

04. Hands on training helps people grasp principles with more easer.

85

05. There are a number of experienced people ranging from 2nd

Years to lecturers. They all have

digging experience which means there are always plenty of people to help who know what they

are talking about.

06. They have taught us many useful field skills.

07. We have been allowed to have a go at everything, rather having to observe trained people

doing the jobs. I believe this is an effective way of teaching.

08. General skills like trowelling, surveying, context recording and drawing are easy to pick up as

we go along; but some techniques such as studying soil might have been more useful if we had

learnt from the start rather than after the first week into it.

09. Although skills have not been taught on a one-to-one basis, the small talks which are backed

up by further explanation from individual supervisors ware really helpful in reinforcing ideas.

10. We weren’t really taught the drawing skills and how to use the equipment very effectively, it

seemed a bad method.

11. It is a lot easier to learn by doing, so that was very effective.

12. It’s been effective as I’ve learnt all kinds of new skills.

13. We just had to learn as went along.

14. If students had some experience in fieldwork it made the excavation objectives more clear.

Sometimes it was assumed that we already had experience; for those without it was harder to

learn the techniques.

15. Teachers are experienced in fieldwork so can teach you first hand; everything has been

clearly explained; and they try to get you to do a bit of everything.

16. Supervisors have been excellent and friendly.

17. Teaching through practical skills and activities was a very good way of embedding the skills

properly.

18. Seminars every week to discuss what we have been doing and being able to express our ideas

would have been better.

19. A few introductory lectures, then ‘on the job’ training seems to work well. However, I have

often had to question why we were doing something as it was not always made clear from the

start.

20. I believe the teaching of field skills has been very effective. Those involved have been

knowledgeable, even passionate, about their chosen subjects and for me that always helps

someone to get their point across.

21. It has been as effective as possible as it is also a matter of teaching oneself certain skills in

archaeology; but if problems occurred, or if certain things had to be explained further, they were.

22. The teaching in general was good, just that you are not able to write it down right away. I

guess that a lot of things that I actually learned never were noted down.

23. One supervisor explained well what was being done, treating everyone with respect despite

our collective lack of experience. However, certain individuals have shown a lack of supervisory

conduct, be it – in my opinion – poor teaching or insufficient communication between them and

other teams (metal detectors, for instance).

24. Our supervisor is an excellent teacher and I’ve learned a lot from hi in a very short time. All

the supervisors and staff have presented information effectively, even if that information is

occasionally contradictory.

25. Our site supervisor has taught us some very good techniques and explains himself very well

and everyone understands. Some of the talks we’ve had from other supervisors have not been as

good as they could have been.

86

26. I felt very unprepared when I started and worried that I might dig through something vital. I

would have liked a lot more focussed lecture presentation beforehand or maybe during fieldwork,

especially on excavation. The teaching in the field (excavation, churchyard, buildings) has been

very good, both from staff and students in higher years.

27. Practice – better to learn.

28. The staff are exceptionally well versed in archaeological investigation and communicated

their skills well.

29. Effective – efficient, properly treated, relaxed atmosphere.

30. Having had no fieldwork experience previously, I believe I have been taught the basics pretty

well in this short time. I feel confident enough to work alone, use my initiative and am able to

spot features by myself. I do think we needed more time to fill in the context sheets and draw

plans, as I feel this is only dictated to us as we go.

31. I think my supervisor has been very clear and instructive, if I have any queries I can ask him.

32. Basic instructions, help when needed and close contact with an expert.

33. It has been continuously relating the newly acquired skills to the current stage of the

excavation, placing the teaching in an active and pragmatic environment.

34. Teachers and supervisors very approachable, I felt my knowledge of fieldwork had improved

a lot.

35. I really enjoy the hands on teaching. My supervisor has been very supportive and always

explains what he wants us to do clearly.

36. Effective – trial and error, ability to try things and supervisors advise and correct your errors.

Non-effective – group talks in the field about context sheets etc, have a tendency to switch off

when you’re just being spoken to and not actually doing it.

37. The supervisors and 2nd

Years have been giving advice on techniques and teaching us how to

go about specific tasks.

38. It works: the supervisor tells and shows us how to do things as they come up, so we get the

explanation immediately followed by the practice.

39. Very effective in teaching how to spot features, as well as improving methods.

40. Clear and easy guides online and clear explanations from supervisor.

41. Could have had more, were left to do it wrong sometimes.

42. (no answer)

Q6. Why do you think the assessment of fieldwork is important or unimportant?

01. It is important, but certain factors have to be taken into account such as disabilities and

injuries.

02. I think that it is important to assess fieldwork because we can only learn from the things we

have done, and it will help us in the future if we go into a career in field archaeology.

03. Need to show that you’ve learnt something.

04. Because there are so many variables, it is difficult to make an accurate assessment.

05. I think it is important to assess an individual’s ability to participate, but not how well they do

because it’s all practice that requires a lot of experience.

06. If someone is brilliant at fieldwork, but isn’t at exams/essays they may get a lower grade than

their ability on an archaeology degree.

07. Some aspects do not need assessing, such as the fieldwork you couldn’t do for other reasons.

However, showing what a person excels in could prove beneficial to the area of archaeology that

they follow.

87

08. Many universities don’t offer fieldwork as part of their course, so to make the ones that do

worthwhile it is important to assess the fieldwork.

09. I feel that it is unimportant at this stage and in the manner of paper-based assessments. The

module is practical, so should the assessments be. However, attendance should be enforced, as

should involvement. Should be more of a pass/fail based on effort.

10. It should be assessed to show that we have understood. However, I’m not sure an exam/VLE

is that effective; maybe more of a practical test?

11. It is important to make sure that people turn up and do their best, but at the same time it is

very hard to assess.

12. It’s hard to assess fieldwork as it is an individual process in a way.

13. Small part of archaeology, no really fair way to test performance.

14. As long as we can explain the basics and understand them, assessment is moderately

important. Techniques can develop over time.

15. Hard to see how we are being assessed outside of our tutors on site; exam on the subject has

not been explained properly; and the Field Diary could be explained in a better way.

16. I hope they are sympathetic.

17. Outside of fieldwork I don’t think the specific skills will be all that useful and we will not

have been taught everything that will be used on every type of excavation.

18. It’s important, but the assessment we do could be improved a lot. Also, how do you assess a

practical exam?

19. I feel a more practical application must be assessed as some students (myself included) prefer

and excel in more practical based situations rather than theoretical ones. So, an even balance

would be preferable.

20. The assessment of fieldwork is important as it is the key component of archaeology!

Whatever you eventually want to do within archaeology you will need at least a grounding in

fieldwork. It is therefore important that your contribution is assessed to determine where your

strengths and weaknesses lie and to address them as required.

21. It can be assessed as to how one takes direction on board and works to the best of their

ability, Also, how committed people are to their work.

22. (no answer)

23. Archaeology is a practical discipline, there is only so far a textbook can go in teaching

excavation. We are incredibly lucky to have this opportunity. The assessment therefore has us

evaluate and critique both our performance and the excavation which aids our learning.

24. The fieldwork needs assessing as it is a valuable skill to every archaeologist, even if they do

not intend to do fieldwork. The skills are crucial to understanding the ‘boots on the floor’ of the

field. Assessment ensures a clear understanding has been achieved.

25. You need to be assessed since this ensures that you understand what you are being taught and

also it challenges you to think for yourself and have an explanation instead of simply following

the herd.

26. I don’t know! How is it assessed? What criteria do they use? Where does it appear on my

record? Is it like an exam? Should I be getting feedback as I go along? How do I know if I’m

performing well so far? How do I know where I should be trying to do better?

27. Average importance because not everyone wants to do fieldwork, but everyone should at least

have a taste.

28. Because the fundamental connotation (?) of fieldwork is to excavate at least some practical

assessment is necessary.

29. Important – the key point of archaeology, the most important skill.

88

30. Fieldwork is part of the degree and I believe that it is just as important to be assessed in

essays, exams and practical work equally. After all, a large part of archaeology is the fieldwork

and you will only be able to improve with feedback.

31. I think it is important as it can be used to inform potential employers. It is good that the

amount of work you do during fieldwork training is recognised.

32. Attendance is important and willingness, skills less so.

33. It helps us to address our weaknesses and recognise our strengths.

34. It is hard work and long hours, so we need to know how well we’ve coped with the situation.

35. I have always tried my best, even when injured I turned up.

36. I think it would be more fair to have your actual performance in the field assessed rather than

an academic assessment.

37. Some people don’t get the chance to do much fieldwork during the course, so it is important

that what you do get is assessed.

38. The assessment of fieldwork is important. It’s good to get feedback on your performance in

the field, it helps to develop your skills and weed out the chaff at the same time. It sets a standard

of quality that everyone has to meet and hopefully improves the quality of the work that’s done.

39. Important to know how well you re doing.

40. It gives you a good and clear idea on how to proceed.

41. Need to know if doing it right.

42. (no answer)

Q8. Do you think the assessment of fieldwork is important in pursuing your career in the

future, either within or outside archaeology?

01. (no answer)

02. It is important as I have been able to see if I do want to go into archaeology as a carer. It has

also given me some practice which will help in the future.

03. Shows you can try your hand at anything. Also, if you do pursue a career in archaeology, you

know how well you do at fieldwork. Shows you can work in a team.

04. Depends on if you want a career in field archaeology.

05. It reveals your ability to work as a team, but unsure if employers will be that interested.

06. I would like a career in archaeology after I’ve left university, so my fieldwork ability would

show potential employers how good I am.

07. This is important as the assessment will reflect on myself as a person and can provide

reference of my character and aspects hat I am good at/enjoy for the future.

08. It’d be important to me as I would be likely to decide on a field archaeology career partly

based on how well I do here.

09. The likelihood that a future employer is going to look at how we have done in an individual

module is small.

10. I’m not really sure; it is only a basic understanding so I guess it won’t be too important.

Although the skills learnt may be very useful for a future career.

11. Really not sure.

12. It will help you gain basic skills which can be used in all kinds of places. Assessment can

help build on what you have learnt.

13. Fieldwork often voluntary, not many jobs around.

14. It depends on whether we pursue archaeology, although skills learnt during fieldwork can be

transferred to other careers.

89

15. (no answer)

16. Nothing happened.

17. It is a useful thing to have, but if we are not going into archaeology it may not be so helpful.

Also, all assessments on it will be relative because every excavation is different.

18. It will boost confidence in wanting to do fieldwork in the summer.

19. Shows stamina, fitness, teamwork and the ability to survive outside the office.

20. It is important to be assessed at all stages of our university courses, for many of the reasons I

gave in answer 6. Such assessment will help to bring strengths and weaknesses into the open.

21. It shows how one can work in a team and how one can listen to instruction and criticism and

take it on board to become more productive. Also it shows that we can keep loosely to a time

scale for certain tasks and time management in how one gets to the site on time.

22. It gives an exact idea of what field archaeology really means and how it’s like. For example,

how hard the labour really is. It was good that I was able to have this experience before choosing

this job, otherwise you might give up too soon. In this way I gave it a possibility and realised that

you grow into the work, and after a while it isn’t so hard to handle anymore.

23. I want to leave university to go into field archaeology, this is quite important for more

experience.

24. As in question 6. I am no different from the rest, I want to know where my strengths and

weaknesses are. While my interests are primarily in buildings, I want to incorporate some

element of fieldwork.

25. Again, it is to ensure you understand and therefore if you understand you may be told to teach

someone else the skills you have. If you don’t understand it yourself, how can you or would you

be able to teach someone about it.

26. See my answer to Question 6.

27. (no answer)

28. Practical skills and interpretation are always useful in future employment situations; however,

they probably don’t enhance your chances outside the discipline.

29. Practical skills most important career-wise.

30. The fieldwork will provide good skills for a range of different careers, such as team work and

initiative. However, it is very specific to the career of archaeology and not every aspect is

transferable.

31. I am hoping to get a career in the fieldwork part of archaeology.

32. Not totally interested in working in field archaeology as a commercial archaeologist.

33. I doubt it will be important for my future career as it is unlikely to be connected to either

archaeology or fieldwork.

34. See my answer to Question 6.

35. I enjoyed doing field archaeology before; it is an option for the future.

36. It can advise you on ways to improve aspects such as group work or attention to detail, and it

also help illustrate your strengths and weaknesses.

37. It shows you have the ability to learn skills and work as part of a team.

38. It trains you to work to a certain standard and indicates whether or not you actually know

how to handle yourself in a trench.

39. Important to know that field skills are of a high quality if a career in the field is pursued.

40. (no answer)

41. If good at it, more likely to do it.

42. (no answer)

90

Appendix IV – York Supervisor Questionnaire Responses

Q2. In what ways do you think fieldwork training has met, not met or exceeded student

expectations?

01. I feel they thought they would have found more artefacts and didn’t initially understand the

importance of cut features. I don’t think they realised the amount of physical work or the

processes involved in excavation. I think the latter point has been well demonstrated by the

number of features we have identified and excavated.

02. I think the students expected to find more things (buildings/artefacts) and don’t expect or

understand the importance of looking at soils or the absence of features. Also, many of them

don’t want to do the digging/physical labour.

03. Have managed to get across the complex range of actions required to excavate a site. Down

side is the conflicting range of direction given from a number of different voices.

04. For many students the process of excavation is much harder, particularly physically, than

expected. A common complaint is the quantity of heavy digging. Many students expect the

training excavation to result in a thorough training in archaeological practice in the field, but

often the nature and sheer size of the excavation means that certain aspects of the process, usually

the recording aspects, are not as extensively taught as required.

05. I think most students were expecting the work to be physically hard, but I also get the

impression that they expected (or hoped) that they would find more objects.


01. I think I have ably demonstrated the process of field archaeology to the students and they

understand how the work progresses. I also feel that I am happy to leave them alone to excavate

discreet features without having to stand over them.

02. I think that my teaching is effective as I was recently a student and have also worked on a

variety of sites/situations. However, the variability of excavations makes it difficult to always

convince students you know what you are doing!

03. Effective – attempt to show range of skills and methods required. Non-effective – number of

sources of advice.

04. Experience of other Field Schools shows that students need a much more focussed teaching

programme, a process that can often lead to better assessment. Often in large groups there is

plenty of room for the less motivated students to hide, and the clever student manipulate the

system. Smaller groups mean less room to hide. Also, when students are taught in these large

groups they return to their supervisory groups with only a very basic understanding of

techniques. There needs to be room, an extended programme, whereby students can practice

these skills before they become actively involved in recording a site.

05. Having only 10 students and a 2nd

Year assistant supervisor means that it is possible to spend

time with each student and respond quickly when they have queries.


01. I think it is important to assess fieldwork as it is integral to understanding archaeological

processes. If one doesn’t know where or how the material is retrieved, a post-excavation or

91

research objective may be flawed. As assessment of this will demonstrate that the student does or

doesn’t understand these processes correctly.

02. I think it is important as it forces the students to participate. Having informal or no

assessment gives students the excuse to not be present, or to slack off. When the students are an

integral part of the excavation this can make finishing difficult.

03. Important as it will help advise any approach taken in the future in a number of roles within

heritage. Also a good range of transferable skills for future development.

04. There is still a common tension between a fieldworker in commercial archaeology and

university education; with the former contending that the methods employed in teaching field

techniques is woefully inadequate for graduates to be employed in the field. For many academic

archaeologists, field archaeology and particularly training are somewhat secondary to the

theoretical and period based courses.

05. Fieldwork should be assessed like any other course, even if the student is not planning on a

career in fieldwork, as an understanding of fieldwork techniques is important for all

archaeologists and a fundamental part of the discipline. It also reflects on the student’s broader

ability to accept and deal with responsibility.

Q8. Do you think the assessment of fieldwork is important for a student pursuing a career

in the future, either within or outside archaeology?

01. Field archaeology is a job that is learned ‘on the job’, so a 3 week introduction doesn’t go

much further than simply showing archaeological processes. Having said that, in a situation

where I was deciding to employ two prospective post-grads I would favour the one with at least

some archaeological experience, even if it was only 3 weeks.

02. Receiving any form of feedback is important as it provides the ideal way to provide positive

and negative feedback in a nurturing environment.

03. Broad range of skills needed are fundamental for any working environment.

04. The problem solving methods employed in field training can be important in the future, as

well as the process of working within a variety of group sizes and with individuals of mixed

ability. Skills learnt can also be transferable, even if they are not strictly applicable to other

positions.

05. Knowing they will be assessed will hopefully encourage the students to engage fully with the

training giving them a better idea of whether or not they want to pursue a career in archaeology

and, if so, in which area.

92

Appendix V – Oxford Student Questionnaire Responses


expectations?

01. The quality of the archaeological work and the level of teaching exceeded my expectations. I

was, however, let down by organisation and infrastructure – accommodation, subsistence

equipment.

02. Unexpected – harder work, manual labour. Met expectations – hands on, raw material of

archaeology, sociable, multi-faceted, unique experience.

03. I thought it may be hard work, but I did not expect it to be such backbreaking and mind-

numbingly boring work.

04. Good organisation and efficient working on the site – what I’d expect from a dig – also plenty

of finds/features.

05. I’ve participated in field work before, so sort of knew what to expect; have enjoyed learning

about planning and drawing which I haven’t been taught before.

06. I’d worked on a few digs before and this met my expectations and my experiences on other

digs.

07. Very tiring, more food!

08. Have done digs before so it was fairly similar to those, although we were given less

responsibility. Living with the other students for a bit has been good.

09. My expectations were low. Digging is mildly more entertaining than expected. Work is a bit

harder, longer and less relaxed than I hoped. Archaeology is more pedantic as a profession than I

anticipated, but overall it’s alright.

10. Waits to be determined.

11. Good fun, hard work.

12. It exceeded my expectations for how enjoyable the actual excavating would be. It did not

meet my expectations of comfort, we have to camp for two weeks.

13. I did not have many expectations as I had never excavated before. For this reason the

excavation has exceeded my expectations.

14. I’ve been on a dig before so this pretty much met my expectations on all levels.

15. I was looking forward to the archaeological dig and had heard positive things about it.

However I feel that a lot is expected of us considering we had no expertise and this is a

compulsory dig. I felt at times slightly undermined, useless and under-valued. We received sound

talks given to us all about how we were letting people down.


01. I was impressed by the variety of tasks we get to do and different skills we could master –

GPS, levelling, planning, photography, etc.

02. Effective – based on experience, talked to as knowledgeable adults, features explained,

excavation and analysis participated in.

03. The teaching is excessively coercive and takes out all the fun of archaeology. We are not

getting the credit we deserve. I feel students are just used as manual labour; anyone else could do

the same work.

93

04. Effective because you’re taught when you need the knowledge/skills as we go along – very

practical and has worked for me.

05. Very helpful learning lesson watching and working alongside the supervisors, but also being

allowed to in with things yourself not only having to watch.

06. I’ve done a similar course before on a previous dig so this teaching has solidified my

knowledge, but not really expanded on it.

07. (no answer)

08. They made sure we knew what we were doing and were helpful when asked specific

questions. More detailed tuition, e.g. for techniques, would be useful.

09. Being on site forces quick learning and supervisors over small groups is effective. Experts

nearby which is good and inspiring. Authority, however, is wielded by some as a tool of abuse

and self-aggrandisement.

10. Instructions are often not well thought out and can contradict; otherwise, fine.

11. Hands-on.

12. Teaching is done on-the-go; we are shown a new task and then do it quickly. I find this to be

very effective.

13. The supervision has been excellent. I feel that I have been taught a wide range of

archaeological methods and skills. The emphasis placed on equipping all students in all kinds of

activity at the site has given me a much greater appreciation of the archaeological process.

14. Teaching as we go in an informative and interesting manner means that knowledge sticks,

whilst being able to see on a practical level what we are meant to do. Hands-on is good.

15. When I ask about finds I am always met with enthusiasm and I recognise there is much

academic prowess in the field, BUT sometimes I feel I am made to do work to fill up the time.

Such an example is when I clear up areas which get trampled on within seconds by those who

told me to clear it and make it tidy. When I expressed enthusiasm to do a certain pit I was

working on, I was swapped for no reason – this seemed spiteful.


01. I am usually sceptical about the effectiveness of assessments like this.

02. Important – can ensure sincere application of individuals. Unimportant – detracts from

enjoyment/experience; turns the unique feature of archaeology into another exam/test; not

relevant to personal experience and skill development.

03. You should take into account that not everybody is dying to dig on a compulsory dig.

04. It’s important because I plan to carry out fieldwork in the future and would like to

learn/improve and receive feedback.

05. Possibly only important if you’re planning to take part in other field work or considering

studying the field work aspect of archaeology further.

06. If entering a career in archaeology it is important to know how to carry out fieldwork. Best

way of assessing your own abilities is to have them assessed.

07. Natural learning.

08. The degree is very theoretical and people like that, so assessing fieldwork skills would not be

entirely appropriate.

09. It’s not that important if you’re not planning to do archaeology or you are anthropology

focussed. Camp site conditions and rudeness encourage poor performance.

10. To prevent slackers from getting away with incessant slacking.

11. No, because it bears no relation to topics covered in term time.

94

12. Fieldwork should not be assessed as part of a non-vocational degree.

13. (no answer)

14. I think it’s important for a student to have a general idea that they are working in the right

direction, but no formal assessment should take place as it seems unnecessary.

15. I do not believe that this is reflection of my enthusiasm nor my intellectual/archaeological

interests. I also find that I work better under the guidance of certain supervisors, and the team in

which you are in and the students with which you work matter. You can also have a good day and

not such a good day. Also, what makes a good archaeologist? Someone who has been constantly

working well on mundane areas or the person who gets an impressive find?



01. I believe that I have already mastered the skills that will help me in the future, not the training

I get here.

02. Important – demonstrably transferable and diverse skills. Unimportant – practical vs

academic, different sorts of skills required; experiential is the unique part of archaeology.

03. Digs should recruit truly passionate volunteers, e.g. 15-17 year olds, and not students who

don’t want to do work in the field.

04. I want to be confident in fieldwork skills in future and assessment is important for this.

05. I am considering a career in field archaeology so a bad report from this site would show me

areas where I need to improve, or perhaps reconsider my plan if I turn out to be rubbish at

fieldwork.

06. Important – skills both archaeological and personal are learnt and developed.

07. (no answer)

08. (no answer)

09. I personally probably definitely won’t do archaeology.

10. The day you need a First in trowelling…..

11. I do not intend to pursue such a career.

12. I want to be a film director/novelist.

13. (no answer)

14. If you go into archaeology it’s critical to have practical skills and a working knowledge of the

field. In other terms it promotes meticulousness, teamwork and being able to think on your feet.

15. May I add that I have been for most of the duration of the dig not treated as an equal but even

sometimes like a child. Though the food and catering staff are lovely, more food would be great

and the fact that people were expected to bring tents is not very fair – it is a huge added expense.

Soap in the loos should have been a priority from the start.

95

Appendix VI – Oxford Supervisor Questionnaire Responses


expectations?

01. I do not think the students knew exactly what to expect. A lot were not prepared to work as

hard as they have or be responsible for certain aspects.

02. Although students were told on two different occasions that excavation involves occasionally

mundane tasks and hard labour, they seemed shocked and often irritated that this was indeed the

case.

03. My sense is that some of the students had no idea what was going to happen, e.g. physical

labour, disciplined times of work and the like. Also much of the time is cleaning and recording

while some think they are just going to be finding ‘treasure’ all day. Those who have been

involved in a dig before demonstrate higher engagement and understanding of the process.


01. The students have continued to improve their skills and work more quickly by understanding

the importance of the features, finds and techniques.

02. Trying to link procedure to real-world examples helps students the ‘why’ behind the ‘how’.

03. Again this is as a result of the spread of engagement and the differing personalities of my

group. Using an individual coaching method and developing their confidence does seem to work

well with some. Others seem to retain little of what they are told or shown


01. It gives the students personal goals and makes them focus more on their individual tasks. It

also gives the Field School meaning as part of their course, as opposed to part of their holiday –

or a nuisance in their holiday, however the case may be.

02. This is only the second year that we have had any form of assessment for students. Without it

there was no sense of achievement on the part of the students, nor any leverage for supporting

discipline.

03. Assessment will focus those who feel they are there under duress and for those who are

genuinely engaged they will have something to show for the hard work. It demonstrates a level of

attainment in practical skills which may help when applying for other digs.



01. Assessment allows them to know what skills they are good at and where they need to

improve. Knowing their strengths and weaknesses helps them to make future decisions.

02. As it stands, the Oxford assessment is barely a statement of attendance and participation.

Tutors are informed of substandard behaviour, but these ‘assessments’ could never be fed into a

larger portfolio to be taken forward in career pursuits.

03. It depends on what they will be engaged in in the future; if they want to go into practical

archaeology, then very important. However, for those who do an academic job then it does give

96

insight into the process and assessments would demonstrate that they know the basics. For those

going on to unrelated jobs/careers then it may inspire a life-long interest. Overall, I would say

important.

97

Appendix VII – Reading Student Questionnaire Responses


expectations?

01. Was expecting to be taught on many aspects of archaeology and not just being in a trench and

that is what I got. I became aware of more than just fieldwork, but of what happens off site within

the Supervisors’ Hut and post-excavation.

02. (no answer)

03. (no answer)

04. (no answer)

05. I didn’t really know what to expect when I arrived for the first time, so obviously it lived up

to my expectations. However, this season it is definitely higher as I only expected to be a helper

in an area, but I now have more responsibilities which I enjoy.

06. It has helped me with understanding what archaeology involves and what to expect if doing

archaeology in a future career.

07. I didn’t really know what to expect, but it’s been a fulfilling experience.

08. It met them because I’ve dug before, but it exceeded them because I’ve learnt more.

09. Met my expectations, but thought a little more guidance would have been given on how to

dig correctly.

10. Variety of things, not just digging, has meant it has exceeded my expectations.

11. Variety is good, physically harder than I thought it would be.

12. More paperwork than I expected, otherwise it’s as I expected – hard work, rewarding and

exciting at times.

13. Exceeded – in-depth training is good.

14. It has exceeded my expectations because I didn’t expect so much variety and behind the

scenes work. The preliminary cleaning stages were a bit of a disappointment, but a necessary

step. It is great fun.

15. As it’s still the first week or so we’re still cleaning, but being on site and learning different

aspects of archaeology has exceeded my expectations.

16. I didn’t know what to expect, but it wasn’t as bad as I thought.

17. It has exceeded my expectations by the variety of activities, rather than just digging.

18. As I was unsure about how the excavation was going to be, but since being here the teaching

and hands-on training has been highly enjoyable.

19. I have found the practical fieldwork aspect of archaeology thoroughly enjoyable. I did not

know what to expect, but it has exceeded my expectations.

20. The position of Science Assistant has enabled me to develop my digging skills as well as

sampling, which I did not expect. In being given more responsibility than I expected and my

opinions are being listened to.

21. In the First Year expected to be more informed regarding post-excavation, so more

responsibility this year than I expected.

98


01. We were not just assessed on our fieldwork ability, but also other aspects such as teamwork

and motivation, so while we could not be not so good at planning, our enthusiasm could make up

for that.

02. (no answer)

03. Amanda is amazing.

04. (no answer)

05. It’s effective as you’re involved with the digging of the site and you’re almost thrown into

digging and planning etc. It’s also effective as it’s a compulsory module.

06. It has helped me to understand what fieldwork involves and what I need to do for practical

archaeology.

07. I thought it was effective because we were shown how to do it on site when we were there, so

we didn’t forget it. Good for first time experience.

08. I like that, even though we are left to our own devices, the supervisors come round and give

us tips to improve our technique.

09. Effective – more independent and left to do it yourself. Non-effective – a bit too little actual

teaching.

10. Effective as they let you do everything yourself and when you need help all you have to do is

ask for it.

11. It is effective in that there is a good mix between spoken teaching and learning as you go

along.

12. I personally think hands-on teaching is better than lectures/seminars interrupting my

excavation to talk about something we’d been doing which seems counter-productive.

13. Explained fully how to do everything and why we do it.

14. Supervisors are available to help at any time, but they do not hold your hand and you are left

to learn on your own. Also the variety of activities from planning to finds allows me to develop

other skills.

15. The best way to learn is to do it yourself, which is the most effective way for me to learn. It

also helps establish confidence and independence.

16. We get to do a bit of everything with supervision, and then do it on our own.

17. When the time has come for me to do particular things, it has been told to me in a way that I

know what I’m doing and how.

18. It has been very effective. The supervisors are ready to help and explain and go back over any

issues.

19. The teaching has been very effective from the supervisors and in the group talks. We have

gone really in depth into subjects that we only briefly covered in lectures.

20. I have been able to apply what I have learnt at Silchester to other digs. I am able to pass on

what I know to others.

21. Very hands on right from the beginning, workshops very useful. It has enabled me to teach

others.


01. Most of the supervisors are commercial archaeologists so they teach what we need to know to

go on into commercial, so where our strengths and weaknesses are so they can aid us further in

our weaker areas.

99

02. It is important because it enables us to consolidate our knowledge and skills.

03. I think it is important because it’s archaeology and it would sort of defeat the object of an

archaeology degree if we were not assessed on our chance to do real archaeology.

04. (no answer)

05. It’s important because if you’re looking for a job in field archaeology it can be used as proof

that you have experience in the field and how capable you are at digging.

06. It helps you to understand where you have gone wrong and how you can improve on your

weaker points.

07. It’s important because archaeology is a practical subject and everyone should experience it

and try it out to see if you like it. Being assessed is important, good to have for your CV and

makes you work conscientiously and to the best of your ability.

08. So that other dig directors know how well you did. Also as it is the main part of archaeology.

09. Important to get feedback to see how well you are doing.

10. It shows you what your skills are and how to improve, which means you’re able to get better

at the skills you learn. It also shows future employers how well you work on an archaeological

site.

11. It is very important as four weeks is a long time to spend in the field without having

something to show for it. Plus, it’s not all about academic capability; some people excel in other

areas such as the field.

12. Important because without assessment you cannot learn how to do things properly and bad

habits take hold.

13. Important to be told your progress to know your strengths and weaknesses.

14. Motivation to work; so you can improve on weaknesses; to know your own strengths and to

use them; to give the four weeks a purpose.

15. It helps us self-evaluate and find our own strengths, but also our weaknesses and what we

need to improve. For future employers to see how confident and skilled you are.

16. We see how we have improved and it makes it worthwhile.

17. It helps to learn about archaeology by seeing how it is being done.

18. It is important, but if you wish to do something not involving field archaeology then it may be

wise to rate other areas as well.

19. I think the assessment of fieldwork is extremely important so the teachers can work out areas

of improvement for each student. We can also improve our own archaeological skills.

20. Without fieldwork assessment there is no gauge of how well you can do archaeology as you

can be very intelligent but know nothing about the practical skills.

21. Important aspect of the discipline. If assessed from the beginning, you can assess how much

you improve.



01. What we learn at Silchester means it is much easier to get into commercial archaeology as it

is known how good the quality of teaching here is and it means we are confident with our own

skills.

02. It is important because it will teach us the skills we will need to know for a career in

commercial archaeology and provide us with transferable skills.

03. The assessment of my performance will most likely make the difference for whether or not I

am hired in archaeology.

100

04. (no answer)

05. Because future employers will be able to determine whether you are right for the job based on

your performance at Silchester, especially if it’s a job in field archaeology.

06. It will prepare me for coping with the future in working in the wider world.

07. It shows a range of abilities: working in a team, being positive and having a good attitude,

and other transferable skills; also, specialist ones like small finds and environmental.

08. So that when you apply for digs there’s a clear record of your performance. Also transferable

skills are learnt so it doesn’t matter if you don’t go into archaeology.

09. To help develop skills that can be applied to any job.

10. It shows how you deal with different aspects of work, i.e. team work, time management,

environmental work, etc. It assesses your ability working on an archaeological site which shows

archaeologists who want you on your site how well you work.

11. It shows commitment, hard working attitude and it is very interesting. On a CV it looks good,

but even better if you show you can perform well in all situations.

12. Better idea of skills and strengths thus allowing you and employer to assess whether you’re

good or not.

13. Good for employers to see how you perform on site.

14. You will now which areas/skills you enjoy; it is a tangible example to show employers your

ability; it allows strengths to be written on CVs; provides transferable skills which all employers

look for.

15. Within archaeology the assessment will show the employers what level of competence we’re

at. Out of archaeology some skills are enhanced here such as team work, patience and

organisation and can be applied to any jobs.

16. I want to continue with archaeology so it will all be helpful.

17. How else do we know how well we are doing? Plus, it helps to motivate us.

18. It is important as having a good reference will mean you will be more likely to get another

job or be part of a dig in the future.

19. Being assessed well can help you in going forward with a career in archaeology.

20. I feel everything I am learning at the moment is preparing me for my Masters which will

develop my career.

21. Highlights skills as a digger as well as transferable skills such as team work and timekeeping.

Trainee system allows opportunity for responsibility in a role.

101

Appendix VIII – Reading Supervisor Questionnaire

Responses


expectations?

01. I think the students were surprised by the level of detail of planning and excavating requires.

However, there are many who are just cleaning.

02. I believe that students have found it a surprise how much planning (i.e. recording features) is

an important part of the archaeological process. From my experience, once they see that what we

are doing on site will be used to construct the story of Silchester, they realise that they have an

important role to play.

03. I think the fieldwork has exceeded the expectations because of the variety of departments

they get to be involved with such as finds, environmental and visitors. The students also appear to

enjoy being given a project/feature that they can work on for the entire process, including the

digging, recording and sampling.

04. They are well briefed before attending the Field School and are aware generally what they

will be expected to achieve. I notice that often students become more confident and develop skills

they might not have expected during the excavation process, for example becoming more patient.

05. I believe students get to interact more with the Finds Hut more than they might have

expected. We are open to questions and willing to explain certain aspects of finds and share good

small finds with those who are interested and ask about them. I think some people may not have

expected the hard/repetitive conditions in the trench and repetitive finds processing.

06. Some students are unaware of the level of work that can often be involved in field work.

However, the level of teaching provided by the more experienced members of the teaching staff

will usually quickly remedy this, especially as many are excellent in encouraging students.

07. The amount of work involved – some students expected a less amount of work, particularly

where working hours are concerned. Furthermore, some students were confused about the

amount of recording that is involved; they thought that it would be primarily just excavation

techniques.

08. Students have very varied expectations, so it is difficult to generalise. However, most show

some nervousness about what is expected and are apprehensive when first asked to do something

new, However, there is a great sense of achievement when there is success at such a new activity.

09. All students have the opportunity to learn, take part and train in all aspects of excavation

through practical experience on-site with support of supervisors/assistants and through off-site

rotas and talks. This participation and training teaches valuable skills in archaeological

excavation and many transferable skills. Making students aware of other activities that

complement fieldwork activities off-site such as finds and science gives an all-round experience

which meets student expectations.

10. Unaware of what student expectations are. I think that students have very widely varying

expectations which can be unrealistic. I think that despite this, the students will leave the project

having had the requirements of their teaching module met. Where students are disappointed or

feel let down probably results from the unpredictability and unrepeatability of archaeology, again

not everyone will get to dig a posthole.

102

11. Maybe less frequent finds on site than they expect and harder, hotter working on site. I’m not

sure if they expect being told what to do by people not much older than themselves; this can lead

to confrontations.


01. Very informed – being able to ask supervisors and trainees for help, a good thing, as well as

the formal lessons on important aspects such as the matrix.

02. There is a very structured method to teaching students at Silchester with students reporting to

Assistant Supervisors and Supervisors. This provides them with a number of people they can

work and learn with. Where teaching may not be as effective is when the requirements of meeting

targets/aims for the season puts pressure on staff to move their areas and excavation forward at a

quicker pace.

03. I think that teaching is very effective as there are lots of seminars and talk that explain the

recording before the students have to do it themselves. There are then members of staff on site

ready to help and answer queries. The students are also encouraged to develop their own ideas as

well as they are being taught which is beneficial when they start to work more independently.

04. I feel in general the skills taught are concentrated on throughout, but smaller groups in certain

larger areas would benefit from more guidance.

05. Hands-on experience is effective. We teach about certain finds (i.e. CBM) then test them on

what they learnt about an hour later and I feel this re-engagement helps their learning. However,

we often teach them while they are processing finds and sometimes splitting their attention may

not be very effective. For processing we give them instructions to start, then monitor them to

ensure they are carrying out the task correctly and explain what and why they are doing wrong if

they aren’t doing it right. I feel learning by doing and from their mistakes is useful.

06. I feel that my own teaching has not necessarily been as effective as it might well need to be,

but I feel this is more down to inexperience with teaching rather than negligence on my part. I

have been trying to incorporate the suggestions of other staff and engage more, asking if the

students themselves understand the tasks they have been asked to perform.

07. Although I am not a digging supervisor on site, my teaching has been effective through the

students learning how to communicate effectively about the archaeology to visitors in connection

to where it is positioned on site. It has possibly been non-effective due to the lack of confidence

still shown amongst students.

08. It is important that students feel able to ask questions and contribute to thinking/discussion

about what they are working on. So clear instruction, encouragement to ask questions, re-

clarification as often as is needed, and a variety of work to give a wide experience are all

important.

09. Teaching archaeological methods in practice is much more effective than lectures/talks alone.

Running through the processes from start to finish, emphasising WHY we do things and WHAT

we can tell from these practices is essential and effective. The timing of teaching – in a morning

or afternoon for some aspects is effective attention span-wise; however, enables assessment to be

more problematic.

10. I think the process of explaining what we want to achieve and why, both in general for the

site and as a focus for particular deposits, explaining how and helping to demonstrate, then

leaving them to do some on their own works, especially after having general talks on aspects of

the work. It gives students an overview of work, a general understanding of the system and shows

specific ways to work within it.

103

11. We work hands on in finds and show examples from our teaching collections. We always try

to put people through each stage of finds processing to give them a better understanding of what

we do in Finds. The contact they get with the finds and small finds as they come in gives students

a taste of the pace and excitement of our department, as well as the routine tasks like washing.

We also try to relate teaching to what they have in their trays, aiding recognition as they are

interested most in their own discoveries. Maybe we are less efficient at communicating what

happens to finds post season, including conservation, specialist study, archiving, etc.


01. They need firsthand experience of field work to effectively study archaeology. It’s useful in

deciding what aspect of the subject they may consider a career in.

02. Assessing the performance of students allows them to identify their strengths and weaknesses

in a structured learning environment where staff can help them improve on certain areas or

develop their strengths.

03. It gives students feedback into what they are doing right or wrong and gives them targets to

work to and improve upon.

04. I feel that this is imperative in the study of archaeology. People who study it are often more

practical than academic and this gives them the opportunity to expand and showcase their

particular skills. It seems strange that someone could be awarded an archaeological qualification

without having completed any fieldwork.

05. Feedback is useful for understanding where a student’s strengths lie. It gives students a

different method of assessment – practical skills rather than exams and essays – which less

academically inclined students can have the opportunity to flourish at. This field work should put

some of the skills and knowledge studied in their lectures this year into practice – i.e. Samian

Ware and the matrix – therefore assessment here is a good continuation of previously acquired

skills.

06. Assessment provides a metric for determining the ability of the students. The assessment as it

stands might not be as effective as it could be, but workable alternatives are hard to come up

with. The fact that it is part-written and part-practical is good, as it means that students that are

not as academically gifted can often exceed, whilst others are better at the written part.

07. Field work assessment is important as it encourages students to participate in the field work

activities in a more positive manner and therefore to the best of their abilities, getting a better

experience whilst carrying out archaeological activities on site.

08. Archaeology is a very practical task and, even if a student wishes to pursue an academic

interest in the subject, it is very important that he/she understands how the process of excavation

and recording works. It is also key to understanding what they read and learning to assess

interpretations critically.

09. Assessment of skills during fieldwork is really important to inform the student how well they

are doing, their competence and to guide their future career, whether archaeological or academic,

etc. It is also important to give feedback for qualifications; working towards a certificate gives

motivation and makes training more worthwhile. It is also important for job applications –

knowing your skills, how to apply them and giving areas for improvement.

10. By assessing fieldwork, students will hopefully take the module seriously and therefore learn

more from it. However, further to this aspect and possibly more significant, is the fact that field

work is sometimes seen as the poor relation to academic work – particularly commercial field

work – when in fact the two are inescapably linked and interdependent. The value of genuine

104

ability as an excavator seems underestimated by some. Why should this question even arise? No

one would question whether any classroom based module should be assessed. By assessing field

work the idea is countered and an awareness of the value of skilful and expert field work skills

maintained.

11. Archaeology must be practical and thus field work is essential to any legitimate degree

program. My own excavation training did not continuously assess field work and relied on essays

to accredit the course. The assessment, including the exam and essay, being very practical is

really very good. It allows those more practical people to get good grades and those more

scholarly to be slightly brought back in terms of their practical knowledge.



01. Great experience and even outside the subject aspects of this experience such as teamwork

and determination are great life skills.

02. Allowing them to identify their strengths may allow them to highlight particular career paths.

Silchester allows students to become involved in a number of areas such as field work, science,

visitor management and finds, and they can use these as a guide for where they want to work in

their career.

03. It gives them a gauge on their practical skills rather than essay feedback they usually get as

part of their degree. There may be students that perform better in practical archaeology rather

than theoretical; these students will benefit from their practical assessment.

04. I think the skill base gained would be appropriate to apply to a multitude of

archaeological/non-archaeological careers. I feel it is more important when considering a role in

archaeology as it allows you to experience the full spectrum of roles, e.g. finds, planning,

environmental, geophysics, digging, etc. So even if the future role is a less practical example of

archaeology the individual will still have a full and more informed understanding of the work

behind the scenes.

05. Silchester assesses skills beyond archaeological and academic skills and these transferable

skills are desirable to employers. Therefore, a module which takes into account teamwork,

attitude and reliability is extremely useful to present to employers. In determining their strengths,

this assessment of field work should help students to decide on their career paths, archaeological

or non-archaeological.

06. The skills that can be gained from experience at a dig site, whilst superficially fairly specific,

can in fact be used in many walks of life. The assessment, therefore, provides an insight into how

these skills can be applied. Other skills, such as team work, are assessed by supervisors rather

than o paper and are certainly very useful no matter the career a student embarks on.

07. It is important because the encouragement of the students to participate in the field work

process to the best of their ability is a useful skill to be used within the working world, whether it

be within archaeology or within another field.

08. Archaeology is very multi-skilled so an ability to undertake a variety of tasks and work as a

member of a team will help whatever career is pursued post-degree.

09. Knowing you are competent at field work encourages you, if you enjoy it, to take it further.

Being assessed on field work skills can also make you aware if you do not enjoy applying it in

archaeology that you can transfer these skills in different careers and knowing you are competent

is helpful. There are exceptions – if you enjoy an activity and want to pursue a career in it but

105

have not had great marks, assessment can also highlight room for improvement; the skills to work

on.

10. Field work assessment highlights and allows the development and awareness of skills that

might not be seen so easily or not at all in other assessed modules, e.g. team work, cooperation,

learning new skills and adapting existing ones, problem solving and negotiation – talking to

people and persuading them verbally rather than in writing – dealing with people with varying

knowledge bases and tailoring argument and description and maybe a first experience of teaching

and supervising. By making students aware of these they will hopefully be able to more from

future experiences and also be able to show these sort of transferable skills when applying for

work, even if not in archaeology. If applying within archaeology, assessments might put off

people who do not have the ability for the job. Some might say this is bad and everyone should

be encouraged to do what they want to do, but in reality you rarely, if ever, hear anyone in any

profession say they are happy to take up the slack for someone else because at least they’re

getting to do what they want. On the other hand, it’s a fairly short period of time to assess over

and I think that most people could progress far further given more experience.

11. A paragraph or two by an archaeologist must surely help as a reference if applying for a

practical archaeology post. In terms of outside our discipline, the transferable aspects – following

orders, being independent, working in a chain of command – is really useful. I’ve personally

found employers excited by my field work experience and my assessors’ comments. With

increasing numbers of archaeology graduates, Reading is putting their students in a better place to

compete with this method of assessment compared to those like Oxford who have a lesser focus

on field work assessment.

106

Appendix IX – York Student Focus Groups

Student Group 1

What liked about fieldwork:

At first what I thought was really great was that at first we didn’t find anything, this is

archaeology. Because we didn’t find something at first we were very excited about the things we

later found, even though it wasn’t treasure, just ditches. But it was really interesting, it was the

first thing we actually saw and an experience you have to have. /

I quite like being out and actually doing something compared to the lectures and seminars we had

for the last two terms. /

I find it really interesting to think about what we’re digging has been made by someone else and

the things coming out haven’t been seen for hundreds of years. /

Archaeology as a career:

I’m not sure yet if I want to go into archaeology. /

I’m thinking possibly more museums, it’s hard to say. /

Teaching or media perhaps. /

I’m thinking about museums or lab work. /

I can imagine myself going into forensics so, in this case, the fieldwork will be very helpful as

well. /

I have ideas but nothing to do with archaeology. It’s interesting that I am thinking ahead but

archaeology has never really featured in my plans. It’s fascinating, but not something I want to go

into./

Expectations:

This isn’t really what I expected of an excavation. The first ideas I had about it was how you see

it on the TV with the brushes. This has been much more labouring work with mattocking, digging

down and looking for soil differences and not too much about artefacts, there hasn’t been much in

this area. /

It’s not as delicate as I thought it would be. /

Perhaps in other areas it would be more delicate, we’ve just got ditches. /

It’s been a lot of hard work. The first week I was completely done in, I actually injured myself.

The interesting thing is that you really get used to it, I’m not having so many problems any

more./

First Year modules: I can see how the 1

st Year modules relate to this to a certain extent. /

The theories we were looking at last term can be applied when you’re looking at processes in

fieldwork. I get a feeling of how it may all fit together. /

The structure of the course has been quite good really. /

The Field Archaeology module works well, that’s one of the things that attracted me to York was

the fact that you could do a whole term on fieldwork, whereas some places you have to do

compulsory fieldwork in the summer and you don’t do a training school. /

107

I specifically looked for a place that was heavy on the fieldwork. I liked the way that they went

round and taught everything. We started off with field walking, and then we did geophysics and

buildings and cemeteries; so they taught us everything. /

They’ve given us a taster of everything so if we want to go into one of those specific areas we do

have some experience of it; can also help if you’re going for a job. /

It’s helped me sort out what I want to do; I have ideas of going into buildings, I now know that I

like that. /

Teaching methods:

The supervisors tend to teach us as we go along; they say this is what you do, now go and do it. /

You’ve also got the support of them coming along and telling you what’s okay or if you need to

do something else instead. /

We also have the theoretical side with the Wednesday lectures. /

That’s more about the processes; it’s hard to prepare you for what’s out here. Things like, this

soil looks different from that soil. You have to be actually on the site to see it. On the first two

days I hardly recognised anything, but you get used to it really fast. /

It’s something that you can’t learn until you do it. /

They’re helping us understand what we’re doing and why and what the archaeology is. /

Especially when it comes to the drawing process; it allows us to connect more with the features. /

They don’t mind explaining it more than once if you don’t get it the first time. /

There’s a lot of having to build our own confidence. /

Skills:

Teamwork is the main thing. /

Not giving up; the first week was like hell, but after that it wasn’t a problem anymore. /

We’re working in a team, but we’re also working individually. You can end up working on one

bit on your own and have that to think about. /

We have transferred some jobs between us. There was this gully which I found, someone else

cleaned it up and another person dug it. /

It’s helped us with better communication skills. /

I think the interpretation side of things is extremely transferable, certainly if you want to do

things like criminology. It’s the skill of interpretation when you don’t have all the evidence, just

part of a wider picture. It’s making an assumption based on the evidence you have and going on

that assumption. Maybe it’s right, maybe it’s wrong; but if it’s wrong it’s a learning process. /

Assessment:

It’s important that we’re assessed so that they know we are picking it up, that we are getting the

point, and more importantly that we get the feedback so we know that we’re getting the point. /

You need to know how well you’re doing and that you know what’s going on and what you need

to do better. /

Some of it is simply being skilled, but if someone hurt their arm or something it difficult. You

can’t really assess someone on just being good at digging generally, or just trowelling. /

It’s more the interpretation you need to be assessed on. /

It’s an odd thing to be assessed on because someone may be less able to do these things or less

physically fit, so to assess someone on that may be almost discriminatory. /

We need to be assessed on the whole thing, rather than just trowelling or mattocking. /

108

On how you’re thinking about things, the processes that are going through your mind. Your

drawing and your interpretation of things, it’s not necessarily your skills. Maybe your interest and

the processes you’re being made to think about whilst practising he skills. /

The portfolio is probably one of the best ways you can assess fieldwork. /

It’s hard to assess it because some people are just not able to the work, even if they’d like to. /

I don’t know if it needs to be assessed because of the differences between people. There’s one

guy who’s mother has been ill and he hasn’t been able to come in much; to assess him is really

quite unfair. With fieldwork you get out of it what you put in, you learn as you go along.

Spending three or four weeks in a field you will learn a lot just by way of being there. I’m not

sure if it’s an exam or a portfolio thing, perhaps something of a very personal learning curve

rather than some wide general exam given to everyone. /

Fieldwork diary:

I feel a bit left alone with journal because at the beginning I didn’t know what to look out for and

what is actually important. There was a one or two sentence example. /

We need a more detailed example, such as a list of things that could be important. /

I ended up writing about what I thought might be important and things I wasn’t sure about as

well. / The idea of doing something self-reflective makes sense, but I don’t think it was well

planned in this case; maybe we should have been given a talk about it first. /

It’s a good idea because it makes you think about things rather than just turning up, digging and

then going home to sleep. It definitely makes you think about what you’re doing which is

important to the wider site. /

It’s about reflecting on what you’re actually doing. It’s not just about digging, we are academics

and we’re supposed to think about it. The journal is exactly that, thinking about it – what did I do,

why did I do it and what does it mean. /

It’s a good memory idea. If you’re on a different site you can refer back to it. /

It’s something to help with your CV. Also gets you into the habit of writing things down when

you do reports. /

It helps you see a progression. At the start it was very simple, but later you are adding lines of

interpretation putting it into a wider context so it becomes explanatory rather than just

descriptive. /

Personal Development Planning:

This is on the VLE, but my academic tutor hasn’t really pushed me on this. /

We were supposed to start in the autumn. /

My tutor didn’t tell me anything about it. /

My tutor is on about it all the time. /

It was something that was mentioned briefly at the start. /

Fieldwork is a very intense few weeks, so there is very clear development within that and you can

see how you’re learning. Whereas, with 10 weeks of a not very strenuous module it’s difficult to

see how that would feed into it. /

Residential/non-residential:

I can see that you’d probably bond more on a residential project. /

If it had been residential I would have missed my friends a lot. /

It would be a lot harder if you didn’t have that difference, being able to get away from the site. /

109

A residential field school would have been much more intense and there would probably have

been more arguments. /

We wouldn’t have had to walk into site every morning. There’d also be less of the can’t be

bothered to get out of bed. /

But that’s about learning self-motivation. /

It would suit certain people better. /

From a learning point of view I don’t think it would be much different. /

Student Group 2


I enjoy the practical aspect and actually getting involved, touching history I suppose. /

Finding our own archaeology rather than just learning about what other people have found,

especially finding something yourself. /

It’s nice to have a hands on experience of it, but I’m not over-enamoured with it at the moment.

That may be more to do with what we haven’t found, rather than the experience itself. It feels as

though we’re just labouring at the moment. /

I like the physicality of it, makes an interesting break from sitting down with a book or listening

to people talking about it. I like the prolonged informal contact with real archaeologists and I’m

very impressed with the supervision. /


I definitely want to head into the heritage sector, whether it be through archaeology or whatever. /

I’m possibly thinking about going into conservation, the post-ex side of things. I prefer that to

actual excavation. I’d like more involvement in labs and post-ex. /

I don’t want another job, I’ve had enough with jobs. I’d like to be able to go on digs, so I want to

know how to do it and the theoretical basis. /

Expectations:

The reality is very different to what I expected. I have felt it to be a bit of a let down. /

Maybe it’s the way it’s run; I just haven’t felt it to be exceptionally interesting. /

That’s the nature of expectations, you expect the best. I’ve been spending much of this year

thinking about going on digs, but actually doing it has been a bit of a let down. /

That may be just the nature of this trench which hasn’t very much in it. If we were in another part

of the site it might be different. /

Talking to the archaeologists this is only one kind of dig; some are much more meticulous and

slow and much less physical. This one is mattock and shovel stuff. I’m fine with it. /

I wasn’t expecting very much and dreading this term. I’ve actually enjoyed it more than I thought

I would. /

This is a Field School and I feel like I haven’t really been schooled, I’ve just been digging. /

First Year modules: The previous modules haven’t really helped as preparation. /

There’s been mention of techniques, but it’s never really meant anything up until now. /

The integrated Field Archaeology module is a good thing. Last term we concentrated on theory

and we became immersed in that. We’ve got the same level of being immersed because we’re

110

actually here doing it. So it’s good to keep similar things together and then you can draw your

own links between them. /

I would have preferred a bit more introduction to it. We had a bit with Accessing Archaeology,

but when it came to this module we were just thrown into it. /

I like it being all together because you get the continuity. /

If you lose the continuity it wouldn’t have the same meaning. It’s not just about what we’re

finding; it’s about teaching us to do excavation, so you have to take the rough with the smooth.

We had our own little holes and features and it’s like they belong to us individually. /

It’s nice be able to think that; probably says something about the human condition. /

Teaching methods:

I think the staff and supervisors’ experience is phenomenal and they impart their skills and some

really good tricks and wholesome advice very well. Perhaps there are too many people to one

supervisor though. /

At times it seems they’re running from person to person trying to help. /

It’s good you can use your own initiative and try to learn it by yourself, but they’re there to help

if necessary. /

The supervision’s been really good and I’m astonished how much the 2nd

Years’ know. /

At times you’re learning more from them than the supervisors. I can’t see the colour change

between different horizons and maybe sometimes I’ve not been as informed by the supervisors as

I could have been. There have been leaps of faith and sometimes when I haven’t fully understood

something it hasn’t been explained to me appropriately. /

I’m slowly understanding what I’m doing and why I’m doing it /

Skills:

We’re getting practical skills, experience of teamwork, collaboration with large groups of people,

and recognising people’s different ways of working and adapting to that are very important.

We’ve drawn together a lot more. On campus there’s lots of people who never have anything to

do with their course mates except for lectures, whilst we’re in each other’s pockets most of the

day. /

It’s a camaraderie sort of thing. /

It’s informed me of where I want to go from here on. I would imagine with some subjects you

don’t really get a taste of what the actuality of working in that discipline is like until you’ve

finished university, and maybe you find it’s the wrong thing for you. We’ve only been here two

terms and we already know what it’s going to be like. It helps not being bogged down in

academia and theory. It’s almost like work experience. /

I’ve enjoyed working with other people on an actual dig, and I’ve learnt that it’s probably not the

job for me, but it’s good as a one-off. /

I would consider doing fieldwork in the future. /

I wanted to know if I would like to do it for fun and it does actually feel like being in the world of

work in a way that is seldom the case at university. /

For other careers definitely the teamwork aspect is useful. I don’t get on with everybody in the

group, but I’ve found I’m able to work with them. You need that ability in any workplace./

I think this particular experience sets us aside from a lot of students and I shall be using the fact

that I’ve been in a practical situation on my degree course on my CV in the future. How

specifically it can be used, I’m not sure. /

111

I think it gives you good experience of the realities of research; comparing writing it up on paper

to what it was actually like digging it. /

Assessment:

It is important that we are assessed because it is part of the degree. Going back to questions of

employability, I can put it on my CV and say that I’ve been assessed on that. /

Some people are better at practical work and some people are better at essays, so I think it’s

important to be assessed on both to compare it. /

It is a practical discipline and to be able to be assessed on the way that you work in that situation

is in some ways more important than how well you can write essays. It’s more key to the

actualities of the discipline. /

In some ways it’s really early days to be assessed because it’s so new and we’ve only had just

over two weeks so far. That is not very much given that the amount of knowledge we had before

we started was approximately zero. To assess you after only a few weeks feels like it would only

be a preliminary thing. If you really wanted an assessment of what people are like at fieldwork,

you should look at it again in the 3rd

Year or something like that, then you’d have a much fairer

idea. /

I would be really unhappy if people were marking my mattocking efforts or trowelling technique.

/ Because it’s an assessment of things you’ve learned on site and practical skills, the open exam

that we have with 10 fairly short questions covering a wide range of techniques is a very good

thing. It forces you to think back to how you’ve done things on site. You need an understanding

of how it works, rather than just hitting the ground with a bit of metal on a pole. /

I’m not sure about the open exam because if it’s marked on a set scheme you’ve got to get the

exact phrase right. /

This is formative assessment, not summative, and that’s important because formative assessments

allow you to be a bit experimental and try things out. If it doesn’t work out, it isn’t going to go

into your degree. It should also allow you to reflect on what people say. /

Attitude is important when you think of employability; you will be assessed by an employer on

your attitude as a worker. /

It will vary from supervisor to supervisor. There are some supervisors who, whatever you do,

they wouldn’t be consistent. Of the two supervisors I’ve had, they had completely different

approaches. One was very laissez-faire, hit it with a mattock it doesn’t matter. The other one was

a lot more calculating. What they wrote could reflect their personality rather than the way you

acted. If you didn’t follow fieldwork in quite their way, maybe they wouldn’t be as positive

towards you. /

In the working world you come up against different personalities and, unfortunately, you have to

adapt and bend with the wind. That’s a valuable lesson to be learned as well. /

Fieldwork diary:

I remember talking to someone about theory and asked them if they were a processualist or a

post-processualist, and they said that when they were at the trowel’s edge they weren’t thinking

about interpretation, but about how they were going to get a feature looking nice. /

With something that is practical like this it is your reflection about what you’re doing, so I think

the diary is a positive way of looking at what you are getting out of the experience. /

I think the journal is a good form of assessment because it is just like a self-evaluation of what

you’ve done. It’s also showing your thought processes throughout the dig and the lecturers can

see how you’re considering the different features and finds and maybe thinking ahead. /

112


I did a few years work before I came to university and the idea of PDP is something that sounds

really positive to me. I’m looking at where I might possibly be after the end of this degree and to

start plotting a path using PDP sounds like a good idea to me. I’ve not properly looked at it yet,

but in theory it sounds good. /

Having a good PDP has to be based on knowing what your educational needs are and in the 1st

Year you don’t know what your educational needs are because you don’t know where you’re

going. Say if one us were to become a Chartered Accountant, then the PDP would be about group

skills, adaptability and all those kind of things and wouldn’t really be about interpretation at the

trowel’s edge. If one of us was going to be an archaeologist, then we’d be looking at the skills

around that particular area of expertise. So the two PDPs would be utterly different, but we can’t

do it right now. At the moment it’s just get to grips with everything and see what you like.

However, keeping a record of what we’ve done will be important, that’s where the journal will be

so useful. /


Personally, I’d like to be resident on site; you’d become really involved with the archaeology. We

go home every night and we all have the different facets of our different lives. If you lived on

site, everything else would have to go on hold. You could spend some unscheduled hours with

dedicated people. /

On a residential field school it would perhaps be a harder experience because you’re always with

the same people and it is nice to sit down in your own space after digging. I don’t have to think

about the site or people or supervisors. But that probably reflects the type of person I am. /

It would raise the team spirit, people would be a lot closer; but some people do need their own

time at the end of the day. /

It would separate the wheat from the chaff, the people who wanted to be the field archaeologists.

It’s a very hard core way of doing it though. /

Student Group 3


It’s a lot more sociable than writing essays and doing exams. You work in a team and get to

know everyone; it’s like being in a family. /

It’s physical activity and you get stuck in, it’s good exercise. /

It’s nice being outside and I really enjoy the process. /


Maybe archaeology, but not field archaeology. /

I think I might do field archaeology for a few years and travel. /

Everyone’s different, but this gives you the option to know what it’s like and experience it first

hand. /

Expectations:

It’s not really different to the expectations that I had. /

113

You have in your mind that you’re going to find a lot more. People, when they think of

archaeology, don’t think of what we’re doing as we’re not finding much. /

I expected to find more artefacts rather than ditches and features. /

I did archaeology A level and the teacher did stress that you don’t always find too much. /

It’s a lot of manual labour and really tough. /

We hate the group in the other trench because they’re finding lots. /

First Year modules: Accessing Archaeology was probably the most practical based module. I’ve enjoyed the modules,

but I don’t think they’ve prepared us for this so well. We had field walking last term and lectures

running through this term to teach us about what we’re doing here, so it’s not much of a

problem./

It was a completely different side of archaeology, not the physical side but the historical side. We

were doing history and theory and you do need to know that as part of the course. /

It’s interesting to do that before you come on the Field School. /

It relates to how you interpret things when you find them. I’ve heard that some universities don’t

do that until the 2nd

Year, but it’s good to get that out the way as you need it. /

It’s not directly related like a theory of digging, but it has been a good background. /

I can see how it’s related, especially Archaeological Science doing bones. It’s interesting seeing

bones come up here, helps you to understand what’s going on. /

We’ve had grounding in all the basics of archaeology now, so we’re good with handling artefacts

and taking a guess at what they are and where they’re from. /

We can recognise when we find wood in wet conditions. /

It’s good having the field archaeology in one term because you do it yourself, it’s not something

that can be explained to you. /

Practice it, see what you get wrong and be able to ask questions. /

We can go through the whole process over several weeks, doing it in bits and bobs wouldn’t

make sense. /

Teaching methods:

They demonstrate what to do if you’re doing it wrong. /

On certain things they let you figure it out for yourself, which is important. When we started

cleaning they said just get down and do it. The only way you can discover how to do things is to

have a go. /

I like people showing me and helping me out. /

It depends on the person how much help they need. We’re here long enough for them to get to

know us and when we do need help. /

It’s nice having 2nd

Years as assistant supervisors because you don’t feel so intimidated. /

They remember things from last year. /

I think we’re understanding what we’re digging, the supervisors will come and ask can you see

where the dark patches are and why they’re different? /

After about a week you definitely get your eye in to see the different colours of soil. /

A lot of the supervisors are professional archaeologists and know what they’re talking about. /

Skills:

Team work skills which are very important in a lot of professions, leadership skills as well. /

114

Coping skills – a lot of people our age won’t have had a job before and are not used to a nine to

five environment. /

We have seminars where we have to give presentations, and those skills are really important. /

By the end of this we’ll have much more confidence. /

Groups of visitors come round and you have to explain to them what you’re doing, so you have

to present yourself really well. /

The ability to follow instructions. /

Social skills because we have to get on with each other. /

Assessment:

It’s an incredibly difficult thing to do; it’s a bit like assessing someone on their art. /

I don’t understand how they’re really assessing us. We’ve got the exam and the diary, but it also

seems more to get us through to the next year. /

It’s not been very well explained or how things are marked. /

As far as I understand, we have to do the hours. /

We just have to pass it to get into the 2nd

Year. /

We’re not being assessed practically, no one’s going to stand over us and watch what we’re doing

and say you’re doing it wrong, marks deducted. /

I don’t think the written exam is really going to reflect how good or bad we are at fieldwork. /

The supervisor has said he’ll write us a reference if we want to go on other digs, that’s useful./

We have no idea if they’re watching us and writing little notes. /

There’s so few people on this dig who actually want to go into field archaeology, it’s not that

important. It’s important that they took part and important to understand how it works and

experience it. To get references is enough, I don’t think it should be assessed. /

As long as we did the hours. /

Fieldwork diary:

I think it’s more interesting than useful; it’ll be nice to look back and see what you did. It’ll be

useful for the open exam, beyond that I’m not so sure. /

In terms of the skills, you can write them down but I think you’ll just remember them because it’s

such an intensive three or four weeks. You’re not going to forget how to do things. /

The process of writing it is useful, makes you remember it. /

You can be critical about it, and as long as you’re criticising things you’re learning from it. Just

writing what you did that day is not going to do much for you. /

We were told to do as much or as little as you want. /

It doesn’t count towards your mark, it’s a personal thing. /

If you’re in a trench digging the same feature all day, there isn’t that much to say about it. /


I don’t understand it. /

We were pretty much told to ignore it. /

I think I could do it myself without having to fill in a questionnaire that didn’t really relate to

me./

If you have the skills you should be able to remember them, and if you don’t you probably need

to learn them again. /

115


Residential would be good because you’re working nine to five and seeing everyone else around

you having fun, but also I do like sleeping in my own bed. /

It’s probably better for our sanity and less distracting just to stay on site. /

If I had to stay on site with everyone for three weeks I’d probably go insane. /

If you could go home at the weekend. /

If we were camping up here I’d be fine. /

You wouldn’t be able to skive; you’d have to go to work. /

You’d get more involved in it because you would be hanging out with people who’d been

digging on other parts of the site, so they’d be telling you about what was going on in their

trenches. /

You might feel a bit more personally involved, but you wouldn’t get more of a learning

experience. / We’re all in different trenches and don’t feel much of a connection with what’s

going on the rest of the site. /

We don’t get the big picture very much. /

Student Group 4


It’s relaxing in a way; you get given a job, you do it. It’s all part of contributing; it’s helping put

the whole site together. /

The cumulative nature of it is quite fun. /

It’s good to be able to get to know what you’ll be doing when you’re older. Decide whether you

want to do it or not, rather than just talking about it. /

The social side is good; it’s been nice spending time with these guys. /

It’s nice to find something yourself, something you’d see in a museum. /


I think perhaps on the teaching side, not so much the fieldwork part. /

I don’t really know yet, I don’t think I’d do field archaeology, but maybe something related to

archaeology perhaps the science side of it. /

If I hadn’t have done some excavation I wouldn’t have known if I’d liked it or not. /

We wouldn’t have known anything really, you couldn’t sit and watch Time Team and say that’s

what it’s like, it’s different. /

I probably won’t go into anything that involves fieldwork, but maybe something to do with

archaeology. /

Perhaps something more on the line of ethnoarchaeology. /

Expectations:

I expected it to be quite miserable, sitting in a muddy field just trowelling, and at the start it was.

But when we actually started to find things and have a bit of fun because of the group dynamics it

was much better. /

I certainly wasn’t expecting an earlier trench to have gone completely unnoticed in the planning

of the Field School. /

It’s quite interesting when things go wrong. /

116

After the first 3 days I wasn’t tired anymore, but it was quite demanding at the start in terms of

hard labour. /

First Year modules: We did some stuff on Roman York which was quite useful, some of the theory might be useful as

well./

It’s helped us recognise something that we might find. /

It’s interesting when two of the academics were walking round the site they had different

theoretical approaches and that was leading to different interpretations of it. I wouldn’t have

picked up on that if I hadn’t learnt the theory last term. /

It was more like looking at the bigger picture and now we’re narrowing down and looking at the

actual stuff that comes out of the ground. I don’t think it’s prepared us in the literal sense./

The science module will help us more with the post-excavation work we’ll be doing later. /

The fieldwork has been more a case of just jumping in. /

It’s better this way round rather than starting with the fieldwork and going from small to big,

better to look at the wider picture and then go down to the detail. /

You pick things up along the way. At the beginning of term we may not have been able to tell the

difference between a bit of bone and something else or recognise a bit of charcoal. /

With the Field Archaeology module there’s a lot less pressure and it feels like you’re just getting

on with the work. /

It’s good that you go through the preliminary work like geophysics first, but it’s also a bit

contrived. If you were really here you’d have a bit longer to work on it and you’d be doing it

differently. In a way it’s good that you see the whole thing through from beginning to end. We

haven’t got long enough here to do the job properly and it does get a bit repetitive. /

The Wednesday lectures are useful. /

Teaching methods:

We’re taught as we go which is pretty effective – watch and learn. We had a series of short

lectures in the field; that was less effective because it’s just someone talking. Learning on the job,

as it’s being done, that’s much better. /

The little talks that we have, you’ve either done what they’re talking about which is okay, but

more difficult if you haven’t done it. When they were talking about the soils, it’s easier to do it

than listen. / It’s better doing it as we go along; the supervisors know what we’ve got to do; if

they can explain it to their group when they’re doing it, that’s much better. /

The supervisor tries to explain it as we go along and we’re understanding it as much as him,

sometimes that’s being very unsure. That is good because otherwise you’ll get the impression

that everything is obvious as soon as you see it and it’s not. We’re going through the process of

trying to interpret and understand it. The supervisor takes us through his own thought processes

so it’s good to see it from a real archaeologist’s point of view. He’s a commercial archaeologist

and tells us where things would be done different if this was a commercial dig, so it’s good to see

a different approach. /

Skills:

Team work definitely. /

It’s good that it’s independent learning but not in the academic sense, it’s not in a classroom. This

is more like the world of work where we are doing a task. /

117

There’s the diligence of it, you have a job to do and have to get on with it, including the less

enjoyable activities. /

It’s a longer day, like a real working day rather than doing lectures. You have to maintain your

concentration and not irritate other people. /

Teamwork we’ve all done before and I don’t think my teamwork skills have developed much

since we got here. We all knew each other as a group before. You’d learn more if you didn’t get

on with the group you were with. /

It’s good exercise and plenty of fresh air; sitting out in whatever weather is one of the new

experiences./

Assessment:

I don’t know how you can be assessed on fieldwork. /

I think it’s more important that the supervisor gives feedback, not so much about whether you

were enthusiastic, but about whether you got on with the job and participated well. There will be

some people who are really going to enjoy it and others who won’t so much. /

I can’t see why they need to assess us; as long as everyone turns up and does the work they’re

going to get the skills from it and the experience of doing it. /

I thought we’d do something like a site report within our group or with people from other areas

so that you get a wider picture. It seems to be more about what you did and felt about it./

I don’t understand how they can give us an exam, what can they ask us? /

They haven’t told us a huge amount about it. /

It’s whether it’s useful. It’s useful for them to tell whether we’ve paid attention to what we’re

doing. /

It’s an open exam, if you haven’t understood you can just go on Google to answer the questions. /

It may be trying to find out if we’ve done a bit more, looking further into the different methods. /

I’m surprised we don’t have an oral exam, I suppose people like paperwork and written exams. /

Fieldwork Diary:

The problem is you get home in the evening and that’s the last thing you want to do is write down

everything that happened in your day. On your days off you don’t want to think about it and do

something different. I can see why they’ve done it though. /

It doesn’t have the same urgency as essays because there’s no real deadline. /

Once you’ve done a few days you kind of lose track of what happened what day and it’s going to

get to a point where we just guess what we did. It seems a bit irrelevant what days you did things.

/

I don’t know when the deadline to hand it in is. /

It’s a record of what you’ve done during your fieldwork and shows what skills you’re getting out

of it. / It shows our ability to analyse. /

I found it reflective; after we did the church session I came back to do the diary and remembered

loads of stuff from the talks we’d been given, and I thought if you do think about and write down

things just after doing it, that drums it into you. It’s very useful to reflect on it in that way. /

It’s not just I dug a hole, it’s I dug a hole because; and this will help me learn particular things

and highlight what has to be taken into account in archaeology. /


I find the whole skills thing a bit irritating because you can write on your CV that you’re good at

something and be rubbish at it. You can think that you’re good, but maybe you’re not. /

118

I can see learning things and doing it would help, but you’re either good at it or you’re not. /

Sounds as if it more applies to extra-curricular stuff. The practical uses of things we’ve learnt

here are quite limited, unless you work on a construction site. /

Once you get to university it’s more about social development and developing as a person. Your

degree is more about learning things and if you’re doing one that is relevant to your career it’s

about learning about the industry that you’re going in to. The social and skills development is an

extra-curricular thing that you do in your Sports Clubs or whatever. /


It would be horrible to have to stay here, I’d hate it. It’s nicer to go home and have a proper

shower. /

I want to socialise with people outside of archaeology. Spending all day with them is nice, but I

want to be with other people as well. /

To be able to forget about it. /

You’d have to give up everything else that you were doing. /

A lot of us have other commitments like sport and music. /

I think a lot of people have already missed things because of it. If you were in the middle of

nowhere, you would be living there. The fact is this Field School is compulsory and there are

going to be a lot of people who won’t want to go into archaeology and this will be their worse

nightmare and it’s quite an achievement that they just turn up. /

If it was residential people wouldn’t have an excuse to not turn up. /

It would seem a bit like a labour camp. /

We do have a structure – you get up and go to work and leave at a set time. /

The people that want that kind of experience will look for it. This is a ‘taster’, that’s how it

should be. /

It would be very intense going straight into manual labour five days a week with the same

people; it would drive some people crazy. /

You get sick of the same people if you have to live with them. You’re won’t enjoy it or work

properly./

I think some students who didn’t fit in so well socially would get excluded. /

Student Group 5


No sign of a lecture theatre, it’s good to get out. /

I like the group work. /

Lot’s of banter. /

A lot of us want to do it as a career; it’s no good getting a degree and not having any fieldwork.

You get the experience and know what it’s going to be like. /


Have a dabble in other countries, but what I really want to work with is buildings. /

I want to see the world a bit with it. This is good because it’s slowly getting us into it. A lot of

people will be doing digs over the summer, especially abroad, so it’s good to have a ‘taste’ of

what you’re going to be doing rather than being thrown into it from scratch in a different

country./

119

Expectations:

I’d been on one before so I kind of knew what to expect. /

I expected it to be quite like this. /

I didn’t think it would quite so large scale, but very similar to this. /

It’s pretty much what I expected in terms of the discipline you need to put into it. /

First Year modules: The history and theory module is a real help because it helps you understand it properly when

you start working in the field rather than going in blind. /

The history feeds into this quite well because it runs logically into what you’re digging and how

you’re digging it. The theory was useful but it doesn’t really fit into this. It made you aware a

bit./

Theory is useful in understanding your own biases on how we may interpret things. /

The theory was good in that it made you realise that you would be constantly questioning

everything that’s going on in a dig. /

The theory may come more into the post-ex when we’re assessing and interpreting things,

whereas now I haven’t really thought about it. /

Teaching methods:

You learn by doing; the supervisors will show you, but it’s really up to you. /

It’s trial and error. /

After a few days you look back on what you first did and think that was awful how I did that./

The only way to get into it is to do it. /

If you do ask they help you, they don’t leave you on your own. /

Nothing else you can do – you’ve got to do it and they’ve got to let you do it. Make your

mistakes at first and then they advise on things like you’re digging too deep or not taking enough

off. /

No point being in a safety blanket, you won’t learn; think this works really well. /

For doing context sheets, using a dumpy level and drawing our supervisor’s gone through it all

step by step. /

That would have been fairly brain-numbing in a lecture. /

It’s nice being walked through these things once, but next time I want to do it on my own. I learn

better by pondering things myself. /

I’d like to fill things out on my own and have someone check it afterwards and if it’s wrong just

do it again. /

Skills:

Simply the attention to detail that it teaches you, can pick out small changes a lot easier; in any

line of work that is useful, as well as being meticulous. /

Working full days is very much like a full time job; it makes you come and actually do something

and stick at it. /

It encourages you to set realistic goals when you’re working, rather than lofty ambitions that fall

short. It’s constantly pursuing a smaller goal. /

It’s a good introduction to small team dynamics in the work place. /

Group work is one of the major things. /

120

Assessment:

It would be nicer to just sit down and discuss progress – how you’ve done or what your problems

are; it’s difficult to assess this kind of thing. /

The assessment’s going to be an exam on field techniques. /

The people who are keen on it will always do better because they’re keen on it, that’s a bit unfair

on the people who want to focus on the theoretical side or buildings. To assess them on it and

they get a bad mark because they don’t like it is rather unfair. /

You don’t have to be amazingly academic to do this and enjoy it and be good at it because it is

quite a physical thing. /

When you’re digging it’s not a question of aptitude, it’s a question of attitude. If you’re just

going to sulk then you’re not helping anybody, including yourself. Even if you’re rubbish and

don’t really like it, if you show the right attitude that’s what’s important. /

I don’t like the idea of an exam. /

History of Art gives an overall score on how much they’ve put into it. /

It’s not just the digging; it’ll be how we interpret stuff when we do the post-ex and presentations

as well. It’s a whole range of stuff, so people may not like this part but may like others. So,

you’re going to be assessed personally followed by an exam, the academic stuff. You’ve got the

academic knowledge and how you were out in the field working with people. /

You have to pass the exam to get into the 2nd

Year, but here they’re just looking at how well you

work in a team at a practical level. /

I don’t think that’s fair – if you mess up an exam, but you’re absolutely brilliant on the practical

side. /

Would that be taken into account? /

If it was, that would be fair play. /

They said to make sure your field diary is in a decent state, because if you don’t do well in an

exam that’ll be taken into consideration. /

A bit of a problem has been the lack of communication on what the actual assessment is and what

counts towards the final mark. /

Fieldwork diary:

I’ve gone through fits and starts with it. I enjoy it when I’ve had a good run at it, but sometimes

you get home and have so much on it becomes a chore. So you find yourself updating it on a later

day. /

The system has a horrible editor. /

It’s quite difficult when you’ve not done much over a couple of days and it’s difficult when

you’re repeating yourself all the time. You’ll have a day when you’ve done quite a few things,

but otherwise you’re a bit stuck if you’ve just been mattocking all day. /

It does force you to reflect on what you’ve done though and you can see progress. /

It’s amazing what you forget that you’ve done. /

It would be nice if every day we could sit down and go through what we’ve done, because some

days I go home and think what have I done today? /

If I have written it up, I come back the next day and understand it a lot better because I’ve

contextualised it. /

It would be nice to have a regular walk round with things explained so that we know where we’re

up to and we could jot things down and be prepared when we got home. /

121


I’ve heard of it, but I don’t really know about it. /

It could help you look at where you’re struggling and where you need to work on things to do

better, and see what you are better at. /

It’ll be what your pay grade will be based on when you go into industry. /

You can work it both ways and come up with targets you need to meet, but they’ve got to help

you. It has to be a trade off. /

There hasn’t been too much. My tutor said I could maybe read a few more books and pointed out

areas where I could progress on. I then get asked about it next time. /


I think I’d prefer a residential Field School; you’d be forced to stay on site rather than go home

and have distractions. /

You’d get more of a community as well, not just with your group but with all the groups. At the

moment we’re very removed, even from the people in the same trench. It can be a bit cliquey

here. /

I spoke to someone who’d done residential and they said it was easier to get up and roll out of

bed in the morning. It was less tiring because you were there already. /

You’d probably be writing stuff up a lot better as well because you’d have more focus. /

If it was just for a week or two, that would be fine. Any longer than that I think I’d want to kill

somebody. /

You could chill out on the long evenings. /

There’s two sides to it, especially the toilets. /

Student Group 6


The sun tan. /

The team spirit, it keeps you going. /

Getting through it together. /


Definitely. /

I’m not sure at the moment. /

I haven’t decided yet. /

I’m doing Joint with History and not decided what I want to do yet; I’ll see how I can use my

transferable skills. /

Expectations:

I didn’t know what to expect, apart from what I’ve seen on TV. It was all completely unknown to

me and I’ve really enjoyed it. /

I thought it would have been a bit more delicate than it actually is, although that would get

tedious. This is a lot more like physical labour. /

I thought we’d be digging trenches two metres deep with layers of sediments, so this is more

delicate than I thought. /

122

First Year modules: I think theory has helped with questioning and to realise that we don’t absolutely know things./

It works like a puzzle. In the first term we had the broad archaeology which I don’t think has

helped that much, but we also had the other modules which dealt with landscape and artefacts,

that has helped; also the theory and science modules. Science will also help later with the post-

excavation. /

The history and theory help us ask and answer questions. /

You’re developing your theory as you work. /

My problem as a Joint student was I didn’t do the history and theory module, so it’s a bit more

difficult for me. I don’t have as much in depth knowledge as the people doing Single Honours. /

The integrating of the Field Archaeology module seems to work well. /

By the end of the theory module quite a few people were chomping at the bit and were quite

frustrated that they’d not done any physical archaeology yet. So we started this module raring to

go, desperate to do some physical archaeology rather than just reading and writing about it.

That’s helped with motivation. /

That’s what’s good about archaeology, you have the academic and the practical, and that’s

reflected in the overall nature of the course. /

Teaching methods:

I’ve been really pleased with our supervisor. He’s come from the commercial sector so it gives a

different viewpoint from what we’ve had before. That balance has been very interesting. /

He explains why we’re doing something; he says go do this because, and what we are trying to

look for. Then he’ll say something like we’ve disproven that theory. /

You’re not just doing it for the sake of doing it. /

There aren’t too many students in each group, so you can always ask the supervisor if you have a

question about something and he helps you. You learn it then. /

I like that we learn as we go along, we don’t just sit around being told stuff. The best way to learn

things is by doing it with him explaining it as we go along. /

They chucked us in and we started doing it, then they went around helping us with our technique

and what to look for. We’ve just got better and better at it; rather than sitting around getting bored

listening to them talking about it. I find this way a lot easier. /

Skills:

The main thing is team work, you can apply that anywhere. I definitely work better in a team

now. /

You get endurance and fortitude from this, most of the work has a physical aspect to it. /

I feel a lot healthier which I didn’t expect. /

You keep going if you’re in a team. If I’d been working on my own today I’d be long gone by

now. You don’t want to let anyone down; you see everyone else doing their bit, so you keep

going. /

Assessment:

Fieldwork is a key part of being an archaeologist so you need to be assessed on it. /

You want a good report because you know it’s going to be competitive getting a job, so you want

as many positive things as you can possibly get to put on your CV. If you get really good

feedback on your fieldwork, it’s going to make a difference. /

123

It’s hard to assess, it’s very subjective how hard you think someone’s worked. But it is important

that we get feedback on how we’re doing to see if this something suited to us or where we need

to improve./

The exam is a bit of a problem because people will be too exhausted to concentrate by the end of

this. /

The exam seems incongruous to everything else; we’re not going to be in academic mode, we’re

going to have to snap back into that. /

It does seem a bit at odds from working as a team in the field and then going to do an individual

exam./

Fieldwork diary:

The supervisor has had a look at the online journals and keeps reminding us to do them. He’ll be

doing feedback on that at some point. /

I think it’s been quite useful because it’s going back over what you’ve done. It’s not like doing it

one day then forgetting it. /

You can stick photos in it and make it look quite good. /

You have a record of what you’ve done. /


I did it at school and didn’t find it very useful. I think the journal is more important. /

You have to break a barrier with it. I did it at college and for a month it seemed like pulling teeth

and a waste of time, then suddenly it clicked and I was getting into it every day as it was helping

me along. /

Sounds like a Five Year Plan to me. /


I’ve got kids, so that rules out a residential Field School for me. /

I’d say no because people want their personal space and it’s very hard to keep your privacy over

three weeks. The truth is you get tired of people after two weeks. /

It does exclude people, I don’t think any of the mature students would be able to attend it and

they’d miss out on a massive chunk of the course. /

You’d get fed up and develop cabin fever. It’s nice to be able to go home at the end of the day

and be able to have a shower and go on and do normal things. It’s nice to have a balance. /

There’d be better facilities – hot food and shelter; but other than that, not much else. /

Student Group 7


It’s getting involved rather than just sitting in a classroom. Being outside and doing stuff. /

I quite like the team work, the team spirit. /

Getting involved with it, you learn more this way. If someone just tells you how to do something,

you don’t really know how to do it. /

It brings us together, before this I didn’t really know these people. /


It’s definitely what I want to do. /

124

I don’t really know. /

Building conservation. /

Heritage. /

Expectations:

Unfortunately I’m only interested in buildings and we had only two days on that whilst three

weeks here. I won’t do much excavation in future, that’s my personal opinion. This is a bit like

free labour. /

I found buildings hard to get into and I love this. I’m quite sad it’s going to be over soon. /

This is totally different from the bit of digging I’ve done before. This is a bit slower. Because

there are so many of us it’s like they’re trying to find things for us to do rather than actually

doing something productive. A feature was revealed and no one touched it for three days and we

were all trowelling absolutely nothing; it seemed pointless. /

I didn’t know what to expect, but there hasn’t been a lot of explanation about what we’re doing

and what we’ve found. Opinions change from day to day of what a certain feature might be. /

First Year modules: It was more theoretical and historical rather than practical and how to get things out of the

ground. It helps us to understand a couple of things we find, but that’s about it really. /

The reason I know about the things we find is because I’ve learnt them whilst I’ve been here./

I like the fact that the field archaeology is all together in one term. If it was spread out, by the

time you come back to it you will have totally forgotten what’s going on. /

It’s very all-encompassing. /

Some seminars would be good to explain things as we’re finding them. /

Teaching methods:

Sometimes it’s not explained why we’re doing things, perhaps not enough on the education side./

At times you feel like you’re doing something but you don’t know why. You’re right up close to

it, but no one’s telling you what it could be. /

There was one bit that it was obvious we needed to mattock it, but we spent ages trowelling it and

then they told us to mattock over the bit we’d just trowelled. That seemed a bit pointless. /

Every morning there is a briefing between the supervisor and the site director, but we’re not

included in it. Feels like we’re just here to do the manual labour, we’re not getting the education

side. /

There’s no input of what our interpretations might be of certain things. /

They’ll demonstrate the techniques for you; show you how to trowel or something. /

You pick it up as you go along. /

If they see you doing something that’s incorrect, they’ll say: no you do it that way. /

The site director’s good, he’ll show you and stay with you a while. /

Hasn’t really been hands on teaching, we were shown how to do it and just had to get on with it. /

I think we’ve picked up the field skills. We can do it, but we don’t know why we’re doing it. /

If they don’t listen to what you think or let you use your initiative that can reduce your

confidence. /

Skills:

I hadn’t thought about how we could use the skills we’re learning elsewhere; yes, we could. /

Just working together and getting on with something because you know it’s got to be done. /

125

This is useful for any form of team work. /

You know if you don’t do it someone else has got to do it for you and you don’t want to burden

them. That’s a really good skill to have, to know that you’ve got to do things. /

You can’t let the team down. /

Assessment:

I think it’s impossible to assess it. /

You’re assessing someone with a theory-based assessment on a practical subject and it just

doesn’t make any sense. I was looking at the quiz and some of the questions have nothing to do

with what we’ve been doing for the last few weeks. It’s things like how do you fill in a context

sheet, not how do you trowel or how do you mattock or dig a feature. /

It should be a practical test. /

Our group is quite lucky, we have some good features. Some groups have nothing. Also, some

people have done drawing but I haven’t. I don’t think I’ll get a chance to draw. I don’t think I

should be assessed on something I never did. /

I think you should be assessed by your supervisor. /

You either understand how to do it or you don’t. You pick it up over time; in three weeks you’re

not going to become the best troweller in the world. It’s like testing someone when they’ve just

learnt to read. Completely pointless, you’ve got to let them develop their own way of doing it. /

The exhibition we’re doing at the end might be a good way of doing it. /

Fieldwork diary:

It helps you understand it and remember what you did and see what’s going on, but I don’t think

it develops your understanding. /

It’s a useful reference when you go to do fieldwork again. /


I think the assessment of fieldwork will help with PDP because it makes you reflect on what

you’ve done. It’s not so much writing it down but thinking about it. The next step is writing it

down. /

I’m doing my own PDP in my head to be honest. /

It’s useful for younger students rather than those with work experience or the more mature. /


Residential would make a great difference to what we’re learning. /

But you’d spend all your time with everyone and end up killing each other. /

I think you’d just have to get on with it. /

It depends what sort of person you are, how patient you are. /

We could have evening talks about the site with all the different interpretations. At the moment it

just feels like labouring, not like education; interaction with people as well. /

One on one with our supervisor on what we’re not sure about. You can’t always bother them./

We’d be able to talk to each other about it more. Here, everyone just goes at the end of the day. /

I suppose you’d give 100% of yourself as well. /

126

Student Group 8


I like working outside and working as a team, we get on really well in our team and finding stuff,

if you do find stuff. /

Mostly being outside and working as a team because we haven’t really found much. /

Brutal labour, it’s what I do. /

It is tiring nine to five and mattocking the whole day. /

It’s not too bad. For the first few days there were people dying on their feet because they’re not

used to doing it; but it’s surprising how well people adapt to it. /


I’m probably going to be heading into labs rather than out into the field. /

I’m unsure yet. I’ve really enjoyed this experience and it’s made me think differently about

archaeology because I wasn’t really enjoying it before, but now I am. /

I’ve no idea what I want to do. /

I’m unsure yet. /

Expectations:

I expected it to be awful and to hate it, but I’m really enjoying it. So, my expectations have

changed. /

We’ve been really lucky with the weather too. /

I’ve been on sites before so I know what it’s like. /

I expected to do more trowelling, all we seem to do at the moment is mattocking. /

First Year modules: They haven’t really prepared us or helped us with this. /

They talked about archaeology in the whole, but not fieldwork. The preparation was basically

here’s a lecture about it. /

The science bit would be slightly useful, if we’d found something to analyse. /

It’ll probably all come together when we do the post-ex. /

I’m doing a Joint degree so I’ve only done one module before, but I think I’ve learnt more about

archaeology in this fieldwork than in the one module I did do. /

The Field Archaeology module works well. The thing is with field archaeology, it’s one of those

things where you have to do it to know how to do it. You can read about it in a book, but unless

you physically actually do it you don’t really know. There’s people here who could easily read

about how to dig a hole, but when they try to do it they just physically can’t. /

Things like the Dumpy Level – when they explained how to do it I didn’t understand anything. /

You just have to try and do it yourself and you figure it out in the end. /

I’d rather do it all this term rather than having it spread out with lectures, then you can focus just

on that. You can focus on lectures and essays separately. /

I wish we had more opportunities to do context sheets and levelling because I only did it once.

The context sheet is something you need to do to understand it. /

I’ve not even done that. /

127

Teaching methods:

I think you’re getting more from the individual group supervisors rather than from the site

directors. It tends to be ‘constructive criticism’. /

The directors sometimes come in and mattock something that you’ve just carefully trowelled, that

didn’t teach us so much. Our individual group supervisors are good. /

They teach from their own personal experience; things like if you do it this way it’s more energy

efficient to move stuff and you don’t hurt yourself, things like that. They are teaching us. /

It’s a mixture of them showing us and us doing it at the same time. /

Our supervisor will come up and ask us what we think something is. We express our ideas and

then come to a conclusion. /

It’s good to have the 2nd

Year students with us as well. Sometimes when I haven’t understood

something I’ve asked a 2nd

Year and they’ve explained what we’re doing. /

It’s good that they explain what you’re doing. /

I didn’t know that we were excavating a Roman Villa until the site tour in Week 2. /

It would be good to have a 5 minute briefing about things at the beginning or end of each day./

Skills:

I’d be good at gardening. /

There’s always the cheesy ones like team work. /

You learn to work more methodically. It’s not just the physical things; you can use the

interpretation skills in any profession. It’s using your head in the right way. /

Assessment:

Yes and no whether it’s important. It’s always good to get feedback on what you’ve done and

how well you’ve done. /

You’re just learning it as you go along. /

It must be hard to try and assess this. /

I suppose the open exam shows that we’ve actually learned things, even if it’s just things like

setting up base lines and about stratigraphy. It shows that you have actually picked something

up./

I looked at the quiz and it wasn’t really about anything we’ve done here, it was more on the stuff

we did in lectures. /

It picks up on the other things we’ve done like the cemetery stuff. /

With excavation some people are going to be better at it than others, they may pick it up easier. /

It’s hard to say exactly what we should be assessed on. /

It’s a tough one with field archaeology. They could assess us on things like can we do the context

sheets properly, can we use the Dumpy Level, how good are we at interpreting things. But at the

same time people could be amazing at archaeology but not physically able to do it. /

You can have people who can do the work but not really understand it. /

It’s hard because everything is individual in how you tackle and interpret things. /

Especially on a busy site the supervisors don’t have the time to sit down and deal with you

individually. /

I don’t think they can really assess our attitude. /

Your supervisor can say that someone was generally poo at working, not turning up and stuff.

But he couldn’t assess them by saying they’re not good in these areas because of this or that;

everyone has reasons for not being here, illness and stuff. If you’re assessing people like that,

whether you get a true idea of how good they are at field archaeology you couldn’t say. /

128

Is it an important part of field archaeology that you show up? It’s difficult to assess that. /

If you miss more than two sessions without any good reason they can fail you. If people were

being assessed on their attendance and attitude it may mean that they would turn up and be more

involved. /

Fieldwork diary:

I can see it will be useful eventually when you’re doing revision or to remember what you were

actually doing. Supervisors are looking over it, but it’s not being assessed. /

There’s no deadline for it either so you tell yourself that you’ll do it eventually. /

What are you supposed to write in it? The other day I just did mattocking and shovelling all day.

What do you get from reading that afterwards? /

Some days there’s not a lot to put in it. Because it’s not being properly marked, you can just do it

when you want to do it, there’s no real urgency or dedication to actually sitting down to write

stuff properly. Mine’s like: Week 1 I did some mattocking. /

It does make you think about what you’ve been doing, which is a good thing. You can sit down

and reflect about what’s been happening. /

You can see how your thought patterns change. I’ve been looking at stuff where I’ve written

things like: this follows this and this is going to happen, and it hasn’t. /

You work so long hours and when you come home you don’t really feel like sitting down and

writing up what you’ve done. I always think I’m going to remember it, but then I don’t. /


Is it optional? /

I didn’t even know about it. /

We’ve hardly even seen it. /


I’m glad this is non-residential because we can just go home and chill out. I wouldn’t like to be

camping after doing this for a whole day. /

I can imagine that spirits wouldn’t be so high if we had to spend two or three weeks living on

site. /

I did a residential for two weeks; it rained the whole time and I just moaned. /

Living and breathing the work all the time would be too much. /

I think we’d be blinded by it. We can get a rest at night and come back fresh. If you’re constantly

surrounded by it you may get great ideas, but it can also blind you totally. /

129

Appendix X – York Supervisor/Site Director Interviews

Second Year Assistant Supervisor 1


I get a sense of satisfaction about it, finding the features and trying to figure them out. I

particularly enjoyed this year teaching other people how to do it, it’s really solidified my

knowledge in having to try and remember things that I learnt last year. I’m getting more of an

archaeological eye in that I’m able to see the stratigraphy and things like better than before. It’s

that sense of satisfaction, you can look at things and say I’ve done this and I now understand it.


I don’t think I could hack it as a career; maybe if I had another three or four months of excavation

experience, but at this point I don’t think so. What I am thinking of doing is maybe working with

archaeological computing so that I can ‘play’ at doing field archaeology, but not have to do it day

in day out. There’s no point in trying to do something related to field archaeology if you don’t

know how field archaeology works. Say for research, if you’re having to go through site reports

and you don’t understand what they’ve done, you can’t really critique it and can only take it at

face value. Fieldwork experience is important for whatever you do in archaeology.

Expectations:

Last year was my first experience of a training excavation and was better than what I expected, I

learnt more than I thought I would. There was much more to the process that I hadn’t quite

appreciated, I had no clue about the drawing or recording you have to do. I knew it had to be

done, but I didn’t know how to do it. It surpassed my expectations in that sense. I think I had

more fun than I thought I was going to. I had approached it in a very pragmatic way, I’ll go in

and get things done, but I ended up really enjoying it, loving the sense of satisfaction you get

when you finally figure something out and show that you’ve been able to apply what you’ve been

learning about things. It’s good to know that you’re getting it.

First Year modules: They prepared for fieldwork to some extent. I had done A level archaeology at school, so I’d

already had a pretty good primer. The first term modules were more or less that. There were

lectures on digging, but taught differently to how it’s done out here; suppose everyone teaches it

slightly differently. The theory module seemed completely unrelated at the time, but looking back

that ties in very well. After doing the field school it began to make a lot more sense what they

were talking about, especially things about landscape exploitation. I didn’t really get that at the

start, but when you’re in it you can start to see things properly and it makes everything you’ve

done and everything you’re going to do more understandable having gone through the fieldwork

process. The 1st Year was a useful primer and I don’t think there was any module I did that didn’t

feed into this somehow.

Teaching methods:

Say with the context cards, I do a demonstration and talk them through it. Then I let them do it

and they ask me questions; same with the drawing. The actual digging is a bit easier because

there’s not so much to explain with that. It’s more of a thing if I can see if someone’s not

130

mattocking or trowelling right, I’ll tell or show them the best way. I’m teaching them by example

because that’s how I picked it up best last year.

Skills:

Time management and problem solving are really important things because you’ve got to get

something done before the next break or something like that. I find I have a lot of things I have to

get done and have to prioritise what I do. With something like this, in many ways, it’s a much

different type of work than say working with a team in a shop. You’re dealing with people on a

lot more personal level. If there are clashes, you get to learn to deal with the clashes much better.

There’s logical thinking, taking things through a logical process, such as trowel – dig –

understand – record. The logical process of understanding what’s going on, start from the most

basic idea and work up from there. A Field School is a valuable experience for students to be

involved in, especially for the people who want to go into it

Assessment:

I think assessment is important; it’s always nice to receive some recognition for what you’ve

done. One of the sad facts is that you do a degree to get a piece of paper at the end that says that

you’ve done it. You can’t mark it like an essay or say someone has an average grade because

they’re really good at drawing but bad at trowelling. There should be some form of recognition

that you’ve done it, if not assessment, what skills you’ve learned and picked up. I don’t know

how you can assess it – people who don’t turn up don’t get a good mark? Perhaps short essay

questions – now that you’ve learnt this apply it in a theoretical situation. Things like, go through

the process of doing a section so that you show that they’ve learnt and understood it; try to assess

what skills people have picked up. You have to bear in mind that these are 1st Years and this is

their first experience of field work, they’re not going to know how to interpret everything or

know how to run a trench. There could be some element of how far they can take what they’ve

got from this. A demonstration of skills would be the best way to go for it.

Fieldwork diary:

That’s useful in that it helps with assessment, but when it comes to writing it up it’ll be three

months down the line and they won’t remember any of it. Some people will find it extremely

useful in doing it at the end of each day as a record of what they’ve done. They’ll be able to

remember what they did because writing it down makes you remember things. It varies from

person to person.


I’ve heard about it, but I’ve not done it. Coming through school at that sort of age where things

like became popular I became very turned off at the prospect. That said, I’m wishing now that I

had done it because I’m going in for an employability/skills award. If I’d kept a record all the

way through of everything that I’d done, rather than have to remember it next year for this award

it probably would have been better. I think there is an issue in trying to sell it to people, but I can

see the usefulness of it. You can’t show it to an employer, it’d probably be too big, but I could

show them an award that I’ve got. I suppose it would be useful for writing a CV.


With archaeology the ideal would be that everybody that comes here to do this is a battle

hardened camping lover, but not everybody is. I think people would get a lot less out of a Field

131

School if they really hated camping and had to do so – no warm showers, no nice hot food and

they couldn’t see their friends for three weeks or go out and do all the things they want to do.

One of the upsides of residential is that you get a lot more sense of team and family, but I don’t

think that’s been an issue here because everyone is getting on fine seeing each other four times a

week. I don’t think you’d get any more time out of the day on a residential School either; people

would just probably get more tired and fed up.



I like being outside and doing things and the satisfaction of being able to problem solve. It’s quite

exciting, you don’t know what you’re going to find.


I don’t think I could become a commercial archaeologist, but I’m quite interested in public

archaeology and how it can help people, or maybe teaching. I’m not entirely sure yet.

Expectations:

I’d already been on a Field School before I came to university so I had expectations from that. It

was quite similar to what I’d done before as it was run in a similar way. This one is less intensive.

First Year modules: We learnt a lot of theoretical stuff and how the excavation process fits into the bigger picture of

things like reconnaissance. A lot of people were quite shocked that they weren’t shown how to

use a trowel and things like that; they were just chucked in at the deep end here. It is just the way

to do it because it doesn’t matter if you make mistakes at the start. It also helps with your

confidence because at first you don’t really know what you’re doing and then you realise it’s not

so bad and that you can do it.

Teaching methods:

Teaching is quite rewarding and it’s nice to watch people get better and learn to enjoy it. I’m only

a year older than the 1st Years so I don’t really like to be ‘teacher’ teacher. I sit next to them and

ask them what they know already and have a chat, find out if they’ve done it before. I talk it

through with them and ask them a few questions.

Skills:

There are lots of things; from the beginning just having to turn up every day and follow

instructions. You have a task to do for the day; you approach the task, start it off and have to keep

thinking about it, mindful of what you’re doing. You have to be able to interpret it yourself, make

your own decisions but also have to be answerable to someone who’s supervising you. There’s

working with other people, team work, that’s a useful skill. It’s of great value to come on this.

It’s always good to see how a dig works so when you’re reading site reports you can understand

them.

132

Assessment:

The idea of assessing fieldwork is quite difficult because some people have natural abilities,

things like spatial awareness when it comes to setting up levels. I’m not that great at doing plan

drawings. Assessing their ability to follow instructions and interpret things is good, because

that’s quite an academic skill. Everyone’s come from such different backgrounds – some have

done commercial archaeology before, some have done lots of outdoor activities or physical

labour, some are good at maths. So you have to assess them on principles. The way we do the

notebook is the best way of assessing them, rather than just making observations. It’s assessing

their understanding, that’s the important thing. Last year my supervisor wrote a short thing about

how hard I’d worked and how willing I was. Then we had to write a report about the excavation,

what happened and how we were involved. We kept a site journal, but that wasn’t assessed, it just

helped towards writing the report.

Fieldwork diary:

The journal’s extremely useful. It’s really easy to be thinking you’re just trowelling something

for the sake of it, so it’s good to put things into the perspective of the bigger picture and think

why you are doing it and about how it fits into the whole process.


It’s one of those jargon words I hear but I don’t really quite understand what it means. We did

things like that in the 6th

Form at school, but it was never really enforced as it always got pushed

to the side a bit. For fieldwork I would think that it helps you reflect and you get an idea of your

strengths and weaknesses. It’s positive in that it doesn’t matter if everything goes wrong.


When I’ve done digs before and camped you get to know people a lot better; it’s part of the

shared experience. Non-residential does give people the opportunity to not come. If you’re

residential it’s much more focussed and you’re away from computers and going out in town; and

in that way it’s more beneficial.



It’s simply being outside. I’ve worked in shops for years and I did my work experience in an

office, and that’s not for me. I’ve always had a love of history and when I came to look at degree

courses archaeology looked like history outside and that was the gateway into it, staying away

from an office. I love the banter and camaraderie that comes from it. You spend two terms in

lectures and seminars with each other, but you don’t really get to know each other. Within the

digging groups of ten people you really get on with each other. I still talk to the nine other guys I

was with last year and not many of them have actually come back this year.


I definitely do, that’s part of the reason I’m helping as an assistant supervisor to get my amount

of time logged on digs up so that I’ll be more employable. I’ve also got stuff lined up over the

summer and plan to do field archaeology for a few years after I graduate.

133

Expectations:

It did live up to the expectations that I had. I found that I’m not useless at this and that, I’ve got at

least some talent for it. I was very lucky that the guy I was working with last year was quite

happy to teach me some stuff and then let me make mistakes. I felt that I was doing actual

archaeology and that was very good.

First Year modules: In the second term we did science and history and theory which doesn’t really clock in with the

fieldwork at all. In the first term there’s lots of case studies and the development of archaeology;

that fitted in quite well. We also had a competent lecture series during the fieldwork. With

hindsight I can now see the value of theory, hated it while I was doing it because it seemed like a

distraction from the field archaeology.

Teaching methods:

I’ve found that I really do enjoy instructing other people. It’s not something that I was ever

looking at before, but I’ve enjoyed it more than finding stuff. I’m a chatty person so I just get

down on the trowelling line and start talking to them, trying to find out what they understand and

if they have any experience in it. The Director came over and told them some things, so I asked

them if there were any words they didn’t understand, specifically the terminology. It’s getting

them to feel they can talk to me. They give me a lot of grief now because they’re comfortable

with me.

Skills:

For a lot of them this is the very first time they’ve been expected to be somewhere at nine o’clock

every day and they’ve had strict breaks. They’ve had five days a week because they’ve got their

lectures on the Wednesday. They’re having to learn time management. The first two terms you

have about eight contact hours a week which is quite soft going and then suddenly they have no

free time. The thing is, they’re coming in keen, and they know what they have to do each day.

The other thing, it’s sounds corny, but it’s team work. They know perfectly well that if one of

them isn’t pulling their weight, they’ve all got to work harder. I’ve had about 90% attendance

throughout, mainly because one of the guys has got his leg in a cast. He’s here every day so the

rest feel like they can’t skive. They know from Day One that if one of them doesn’t show up, the

rest of them have to work that bit harder. That is a practical thing and a really good introduction

to the world of work. Even if they never go near field archaeology again, it’s good memories.

Also, it’s a good thing to talk about at a job interview; it’s different and can make you more

employable. It’s working in a small project team that has things to do, that’s what a lot of people

in offices do every day. Have a short briefing in the morning, they’re working in small groups of

twos and threes and me and the supervisor are floating round them, pretty much how an office

team works.

Assessment:

I think it is important that they are assessed. Personally, I’d like to see more recognition for

people who turn up every day and are keen to learn and are trying, rather than how good they are

at things. There can be people who are indispensible on site but who are rubbish at writing essays

and they can get marked down. There are some shirkers who never show up but they’ve read all

the books and they can sail through this part of the course. I’m doing this for a 2nd

Year project

and my mark for it will all come down to an essay I write at the end. However, it is a tough one

134

how you go about it. A combination of assessment methods is certainly the right way to go about

it; weight the essay heavier maybe but also talk to the supervisors. We have a pretty good idea of

how they are working. Some people may not be so good physically at mattocking, but they’ll be

very good at something like Dumpy Levels. It’s hard because the University wants grade

boundaries and boxes to tick, that’s how universities work these days, out on a site you can’t do

that which is the problem. You need to have a bit of faith in the supervisors, they do actually give

feedback. That can influence picking 2nd

Year projects, but that’s all.

Fieldwork diary:

I found the journal very useful, but I keep a diary anyway so I have a very biased view. I find it

useful because I like to keep a track of my thought processes. From this point of view it was very

useful when I did the essay; don’t think I could have done it without it. Assessing it, I don’t

know. If they’re going to do it they will and if they force them to do it some will be very half-

hearted about it. Some will find that they really hate field archaeology, and some will really like

it.


I think PDP has definitely got its place, but I’ve been neglecting the one we do here. It is a very

useful thing to be filling in throughout your three years, but in reality it’s something that gets

done in the last six months of your third year. Like keeping the diary, it’s always interesting

seeing what you thought last year, how your skills have developed and how your strengths and

weaknesses have changed.


I was always a bit disappointed that this wasn’t residential. This lot get so friendly in the day and

quite a lot of them go to the pub after work, but they do have lives outside of archaeology and

taking them away for three weeks won’t work. Perhaps bus them home at weekends? However, if

it was residential everyone would be more switched on about it, thinking about it and problems

would be talked through. I don’t live with any archaeologists, but I’ve been going to the pub with

them to talk about the site for two or three hours. So I know what’s happening in the other

trenches. If it was residential we’d be doing that over dinner.

Supervisor 1

Background:

I graduated in 2001. We did similar kinds of things as this and I left with about three month’s

experience. It was at the tail end of the Foot and Mouth problem and there was no work in the

UK at the time. What I did was work in Ireland for commercial firms for about four years and got

as much experience as I could. I moved back to the UK and worked for several different

companies. I’ve also done some battlefield archaeology in France and Belgium. So, I have a very

wide background in archaeology.

Teaching methods:

I do enjoy teaching students practical archaeology. For the last five years or so I’ve kind of lost

faith in commercial archaeology and I’ve found that working with students and community

groups has invigorated me again and revitalised my interest. Some commercial archaeology can

135

be a bit heart breaking when you’re just digging up 1970s car parks. I really enjoy this kind of

work; it’s a lot more laid back. In general we’re digging more interesting sites.

It’s difficult to say how I teach them. I shout at the students a lot and generally they don’t like me

straight away, but then they warm to me. I try to go through the processes of how we do

archaeology, explain to them we have to do the rubbish jobs at the start like cleaning and what

seems like endless trowelling before we can start looking at features and finding things. It’s to get

them to see that it is an ongoing process; it’s not like Time Team where they’re pulling out

Roman pottery left, right and centre. I’ll explain the importance of keeping records and that it is

basically down to them to make the best effort at it as possible. I wouldn’t say that I have a

particular teaching method. It’s not something that comes naturally, I try to put the different

processes of archaeology across. As a commercial archaeologist, I just work every day doing the

same thing so to me it’s like clockwork, but other people might not understand why you’re doing

certain things. I hope I convey that to the students.

Skills:

Overall, I would say that they end up enjoying the experience, something for them to look back

on. I do keep asking them if they’re enjoying themselves. You can see at the start that they don’t

really know what they’re doing until they get to a point where they’re two or three weeks into it

and they seem to pick up the enjoyment of it. What they take away from it is a sense of process

and how the real world of work works. As students they can get up at any time they want and

wander along to any lecture they like; there’s less discipline. There is a discipline to this; you

have to be in every day. That reflects on their attendance here. I’m sure that pushes some of them

to come in whether they are enjoying it or not. This sets Archaeology as a degree apart from any

other degrees because of the practical side. I am really all in favour of fieldwork training being in

place. As to whether it extends beyond this, I’m not really sure because I’ve only ever worked in

archaeology. I don’t know if prospective employers would be looking for three weeks excavation

experience, apart from giving you that discipline of how work should be. You’ve got your record

keeping and the whole process of going from A to B to C.

Assessment:

I’ve been discussing this with one of the other supervisors and we’ve been trying to think of ways

of how you would assess fieldwork. Do you grade someone on how good they were at excavating

a feature or on their attendance? It’s a very ambiguous thing, you might be trowelling for three

weeks and not find anything, so you wouldn’t be able to grade them on how good they are with

the features. Perhaps it could be based more around enthusiasm and how quick the do pick up

different techniques, but even that is almost impossible to gauge. I supervised one of the field

walking teams a couple of months ago and there were certain people that I thought were pretty

good at what they were doing, but they’ve turned out not to be the best on excavation. It shows

you how wrong you can be about certain things. Someone who’s good at one thing for two days

might not be so good at doing something for three weeks. It’s difficult to stay objective with

people especially if you have a personality clash. It’s not like marking an essay where you’re

looking for certain things because you’re dealing with a person on a day to day basis. You’ll pick

up on people’s personality traits, and the things you don’t like about them may be reflected in

that assessment. It’s difficult because there’s no physical way of assessing them. I’ve got one

person in my group who’s only come in for four days, but when he’s here he works really hard.

How would you grade that?

136


I’ve no experience of this; it’s nothing I’ve ever taken part in. The assessment of fieldwork could

possibly feed into it, but the window of opportunity when assessing the fieldwork is so small.

Three weeks is not a particularly long time to realise where your skills are. Archaeology is one of

those things that you do learn on the job. What I learnt as an undergraduate in the weeks that I

worked in the summers I’d completely forgotten by the time I started commercial work. Whether

you can pinpoint where you need to develop is difficult.

Supervisor 2

Background:

I’ve just finished my PhD, but during that time and before I was involved in Field Schools and

training excavations at another university. I’ve also done commercial contract work. I started

excavating when I was fifteen; I got interested in it early. During my undergraduate I started

supervising on training excavations. I’ve directed a Field School, not just for university students

but also extra-mural, schoolchildren and mature students.

Teaching: The easiest way I’ve found is teaching by example and on most Field Schools you’ve usually got

people who’ve done it before. The best way for people to learn is by actually doing it. Theory

lessons are an important part, but the digging skills and the experiences you get from it are got by

physically doing it. In other places I’ve taught, we’d have 1st and 2

nd Years mixing in together

and the experienced ones would tech basic trowelling techniques and so forth. Sometimes it’s

difficult for students because they’re so afraid when they initially start of making a mess of it or

doing it wrong. They may lose out in some respects. If you have somebody with a bit of

experience it gives them that confidence to be able to do things and ask questions in an informal

way. People may feel a bit intimidated by supervisors because they’re always flitting about doing

things with different people and trying to understand what’s being excavated.

Skills:

One of the difficulties we have when teaching excavation is the constant battle that a lot of

students don’t see it’s relevance in some ways. There is still that perception initially that it is

manual labour and they see themselves as above that. When they see senior and experienced

people joining in and actively involved, that breaks down that perception. The skills that they

learn do have a relevance to the future – working in teams in the most obvious one, and as

individuals as well. You learn a certain amount of self-reliance and problem solving. If

something comes up and you don’t want to bother the supervisor you try and sort it out in your

own mind. As a last resort you might go and ask somebody for some help. That’s important in

any sort of work that you do – having a confidence but also a humbleness to say that you don’t

really understand something. Once you get that confidence you can transfer that to where you

may be out of your comfort zone. A lot of people on training excavations are used to learning in a

school environment and it’s very different in a Field School. You do have some formal teaching

but you are also learning a degree of self-reliance. Some of the skills that they learn like scale

drawing, filling in forms and picking up new techniques in quite a short time are very useful in

other professions. It’s a skill set that you can use in another environment.

137

Assessment:

It’s definitely important to assess them. I’ve seen some universities struggle because it is difficult

to assign a mark to someone, especially the actual practicalities of excavation. Some people excel

at this side of archaeology and it can be an enormous disservice to them if they fall down on the

academic side. I never thought of myself as very academic and was interested more in the

practical side, but I suppose I must have had an element of academic ability to be able to do a

PhD. There has to be some sort of balance in the way we can assess the gifted practical

archaeologists who aren’t so good at the academic side. What I’ve seen in the past is people

being assessed on their actual attendance at a Field School because it’s an easy thing to measure.

But some people just turn up, it’s not for them, they put in the time and then never have anything

to do with field archaeology again. Other people will work their socks off, really hone their skills

and get the same grade. There must be some sort of way to assess that or you are doing a

disservice to those types of people. As to how you do that, I’m not sure.

For students and for teachers it is difficult to assign a mark, and we are all driven in the academic

profession by marks. People don’t look at the bottom line like a report on someone who’s worked

really excellently in the field. You’d recommend them for a job in a Unit. All too often those

sorts of people fall through the cracks. Because students are wanting marks and academics are

wanting easy ways to assess them, it’s an infrastructural issue really. When you’re a supervisor

you’re in that limbo where you’ll write a textual report on somebody, but you feel it doesn’t have

any real effect. I can see that academics are worried about that, placing an emphasis on a report

written by a supervisor who may be a doctoral or 2nd

Year student; it’s difficult to relate that to an

overall marking scheme. From my own experience, I think it’s better if you have a committee of

supervisors who have students for different aspects such as drawing, writing context sheets,

surveying and field techniques. You are no longer relying on an individual opinion. Also,

students can’t complain that a particular supervisor gave them a low mark because they didn’t

like them. You cover over a number of cracks as well. Some people are great at digging, but not

so good at other skills such as surveying; this gives them an opportunity to shine in what they are

good at. You could also try and mark as groups. Difficult if someone who is really interested is

put with a couple of others who don’t really care. But a good supervisor can spot the ones who

are interested and, if they are trying hard in that difficult situation, perhaps they should be given

even more marks.


I haven’t had much to do with this. It could be useful helping people know where they are with

their skills and it gives you something to work towards as well. Sometimes students feel that

they’re doing the same thing day in day out without thinking about the overall picture. It’s an

important part of the archaeological process. One of the problems for commercial archaeology is

that Field Schools are so variable by their very nature, so it is good to know exactly what your

skills are and if there are any gaps.

Supervisor 3

Background:

I’m an old hand at field archaeology, I’ve been digging since I was 14 years old and 41 years

later I’m still at it. I’ve worked my way around a number of commercial units, as well as work in

138

Africa. This is a busman’s holiday, a chance to get away from the grind of doing commercial

archaeology and see if I can still interact with a group of younger people. So, this is a bit of an

experiment for me.

Teaching:

One of my strengths over the years has been passing on the basics of how to do archaeology.

More importantly from my point of view, is passing on how to organise people, showing how

organisation is key to it. You have to assume the worse when you’ve got 1st Years who’ve got no

experience at all. I assume that, although they’ve been given a briefing at a theoretical

background level, they’re all starting from a very low common denominator and try and work

from there. I lead them through each task in a logical order assuming they don’t know a great

deal at the outset and just see how things flow from that. Trial and error really I think.

Student expectations:

To be honest, this group appeared to be from Day One fairly cynical about what they would get

out of this. As a result, I think they are all mildly pleased. It’s not been the most exciting bit of

archaeology, but they’ve applied themselves to it. We have an extremely good attendance record,

so in comparison to the other groups some things have gone right. It may just be bloody-minded

us against them. As a group, they’ve bonded in terms of adversity. I do think they feel they’ve

got a fair bit out of it.

Skills:

This particular group, the very specific things that they’ve learned including surveying,

photography and excavation, I doubt they’ll be using those skills in their chosen careers. At a

very bland level it’s team work and camaraderie, the ability to work together as a group

specifically with regard to heavy duty physical work. I suspect that’s a new experience for them.

Discipline in exerting yourself physically with a little bit of mental dexterity going on is

something that’s come as a bit of a shock to them and something that I hope will be useful to

them when they get a bit older. The hard grind is not something that is forced upon them in their

everyday lives as students; it’s an extra discipline which I like to think that when they look back

on it they’ll realise that they surpassed their own expectations.

Assessment:

I think it is important to assess them on their performance here. It is pretty obvious with this

group who’s learning and who isn’t. Ways of assessing them – there’s a range of skills, there’s a

range of basic disciplines that I would expect them to have thought about and endeavoured to

have mastered. That would be from team work and cooperation through to specific

archaeological skills. When I do assess them I’ll probably point-score them and then see how that

fits with my gut instinct. Probably not the most scientific way of doing it, but I suspect hiding

away behind how everybody assesses people there is gut instinct to some extent.


I haven’t had anything to do with this. If the structure of it enabled students to prepare a better

CV, that would be a good thing. Unfortunately it’s the sort of thing that if nobody forces you to

do it, you won’t do it.

139


Having worked on large residential training excavations, they were much more all-consuming;

they were life-events. I think everybody who worked on those projects will have vivid memories

of a spectacularly enjoyable period of their life 30 years later. This one, I suspect because it’s

non-residential, is little more than an extension to the university term and as such, not a big part

of their lives. Residential fieldwork is a big social event, this one less so; it’s a social event from

9.30 to 4.30, but it doesn’t extend beyond that. I’d go for residential any time.

Supervisor 4

Background:

I graduated in 2005 and then did a Masters in Archaeological Research. Since then I’ve worked

full time in archaeology, mostly in commercial excavation but with a lot of research and training

excavations mixed in.

Teaching:

I very much enjoy teaching students fieldwork and I really look forward to it. It makes a splendid

change of pace for me from commercial excavation. I really like the process of it how, over a

period of three or four weeks, students and their attitudes change. I think they develop a better

understanding of why they’re here, what they’re doing and what archaeological work is like. By

the end they tend to be asking me questions about is this is what it’s like every day in your job.

They develop an inquiring attitude; whereas, at the start, they feel a bit forced or put upon that

they’re out here. They seem to grow and become happy about it.

I start by explaining things and then demonstrating everything I’d like to be done and explain

why I want something done. Show them how it’s best done and set them a particular task. As

they work at that task, keep a check on them; make sure they’re comfortable in what they’re

doing and hopefully understand what they’re doing and see that they’re working towards

something; also, doing it in a way that is best possible practice. They seem to respond to that.

There are physical things – what is the best method for trowelling and what am I looking for

when I’m trowelling? They seem to try to take from it, even if they’re unhappy when it’s raining.

After it’s been done, if you can show that it’s been done for a purpose that helps as well, being a

bit reflective, that’s a reward after they’ve done the hard work. There is a sense of achievement

then, it’s not just for teaching’s sake, it actually has some archaeological value as well.

Skills:

A key thing here is that it’s almost a nine to five job, and that’s very different from a lot of other

university experiences. It can be a shock to the system to have that work day put upon them and

that’s a learning experience in itself. It is a form of data gathering and you’re interpreting it;

that’s transferable to other professions. As long as you can understand that all data is biased in

some form; that is important in many jobs.

Assessment:

Assessment is important, but in some ways attendance is almost more important than the

assessment of performance. There has to be some encouragement to perform well, to strive and

engage with it as much as you can. It can easily become fixed in their minds that this is only

140

fieldwork and they’ll only ever need to do this now and they’ll never become an archaeologist

and they only need to make the minimal possible effort. If it is assessed in some manner, that can

encourage them to believe that it’s more important than that and actually gain more from it which

is transferable, even if they’re only being assessed in actual fieldwork. I have to write a short

piece on each student mentioning their attendance record, their performance in archaeological

skills, whether they really engaged with the work, were they learning, did they show great

interest. It is quite a brief statement you put together on each student and that is then fed into how

they’ve performed in other aspects. I think it would be very difficult for us as supervisors to

become more involved in the assessment because of the nature of us as employees as we’re

temporary and don’t get to see much more of them. It’s good that we can express our opinion on

their performance though.

The diary is very useful for the students, but it’s difficult to assess that other than in terms of the

effort made to produce it. It does allow them to see their own development and understanding of

why things are happening. They can see what they were thinking and feeling at the start and how

that changes. It’s almost a building process that you go through. They can be unreflective if

you’re not careful, but useful for producing a portfolio. Not certain if it’s a useful assessment

tool, but certainly a very useful educational tool. A portfolio of work can be marked more

objectively, showing whether they have understood things or not.


It didn’t play a great part in the way I’ve gone about my university education and in getting a job.

I’ve never really considered this as building up into some sort of document which I can then offer

employers. It’s been more about gaining experience through working and producing a CV. For

the students, if you can break it down into essential skills learnt and you can demonstrate that, an

employer would be interested in that individual and a visible statement. That would be good if

you were going on to work in fieldwork. I don’t know if you can take that to a more abstract level

such as, I’ve done research so I can go into any research job.


I have worked in the past on residential Field Schools; they can be overly intense and become all-

consuming with some people working until they drop. It can be intense and exhausting for the

staff as well. In terms of demanding the best from the students, it can be better because you’re

controlling their lives so much more. You have the potential to have extra teaching and have

more flexible working hours. On a non-residential project the attendance can be shakier

depending on the weather or if they’ve had a big night out in town. I don’t know if the learning

outcomes would be any different. You make solid friends doing fieldwork, even more so if

you’re living together.

Supervisor 5

Background:

At the moment I’m doing my PhD. I finished my undergraduate degree in 2002 and then worked

as an archaeological research assistant. A big part of my job was coordinating a Field School for

another university, so I’ve been involved in fieldwork training for a long time.

141

Teaching:

I love teaching on Field Schools, it’s the best part of it. It’s very satisfying. You get a group of

students at the start and it’s as if they haven’t got a clue; but by the end of it they’re quite happily

tackling features, drawing, doing context sheets and their trowelling has developed so much. All

those little skills that they think they can’t do, you can see them grow and develop. Putting what

they do in the classroom into practice, you can see them make the connections and put the two

together. The way I teach is a gradual building up. This year the first few days there was quite a

lot of mattocking to do; so it was slowly and steadily, with the help of my 2nd

Year assistant,

getting them started and showing them the best way to do things. It is a case of gradually getting

them to think about doing it in a more controlled fashion, neater and tidier. The same with the

trowelling; slowly build up it up. As we get features try to get an individual to have a feature of

their own. That works really well because they can focus on that and think about the processes

involved. Over a few days they’ll slowly build up their confidence with it. Adding in bits of

context work and levelling all the way through so that they get as rounded an experience as they

can.

Skills:

The most obvious one is team work; it’s such a huge thing for them to think about; even when

you’re trowelling next to someone and not leaving a big ridge between you. It’s making that

connection and getting them to think about it. Sometimes that can be quite challenging. Just

thinking about both the minutiae and the bigger picture as well and relate what we’re doing here

to the wider research questions. Being able to communicate is a huge part of it; being able to

discuss what you’re doing, explain it to someone and the processes that you’re going through.

Being able to do that is a really good transferable skill to have and take somewhere else. Explain

to someone why you’ve done something and how you have done it – the processes you go

through to get to a point. If you’re in a position where you make a decision and someone

disagrees with it, you have to explain why you made that decision. You have to do that constantly

when you’re digging. There’s other things like maths, doing all the levelling and all the science

doing the geophysics. They get to talk to the community as well, which comes back to

communication and dialogue. There are so many things; having to do things to a schedule, having

deadlines. They have to do things like that with essays, but out here it’s much more compounded

and obvious. A training excavation is a unique experience where they can get skills that can be

used in the wider world. It’s such an amazing experience to have, whether you go on to do any

more archaeology or not. It teaches you a lot about yourself. You are constantly thinking, using

your brain all the time, but you’re working hard physically as well. That is such a demanding

thing to do, especially when you’re not used to doing that. To be able to work under that pressure

and to adapt to the circumstances, be it baking hot one day and freezing cold and raining the next.

To have the commitment, energy and enthusiasm to come in every day to do it is really

important. It’s a real struggle for some of them sometimes. To push themselves through that and

realise that it’s not always easy is really good.

Assessment:

This is important, but it’s hard to do it. They put so much energy and effort into it and, especially

for the ones who aren’t going on in archaeology, it shows that there’s a point to it. I’ve spoken to

students who say they don’t want to do it for a career and it’s not why they took archaeology. If

they don’t get marked on it and it doesn’t count towards their degree, they don’t see the point of

doing it and ask to do something different. To have an element of assessment makes it seem more

142

beneficial to them. It gives them more incentive to do it. There’s a continuous problem in that the

people who don’t want to come just don’t turn up. Without an assessment there’s no reason for

them to come. You do get people who turn up and decide it’s not for them because they don’t like

it; but if they persevere, by the end of it they can focus on a specific thing. Because it’s not all

about mattocking every day you can get them to have a more productive and enjoyable

experience. By having an incentive to come along in the first place there’s an opportunity to

encourage and entice them into the experience a bit more.

The method of assessment is difficult. Perhaps if you had more structured practical sessions

within their groups, may be longer than what they already get. Give them a demonstration

followed by a task to go and carry out and then feedback and discuss. Go through the whole

process themselves, but under more controlled or classroom conditions. That would make it

easier for someone to assess their abilities. It would provide a continuity with everyone getting

the same standard of teaching. Potentially they would get much greater benefit from it because

they would have a much more focussed learning experience and take more from it. You can talk

to people and after five minutes they switch off and later they don’t remember it. If they

physically have to do it as part of it, that would stick in their brains much better and they would

engage with things a bit more. You also have to assess them on the way they work generally on

site, but that is so difficult. People do work very differently and they have their very different

ways of engaging with things. It’s so abstract how you can grade that. It’s good that they have the

reporting system without a specific pass/fail outcome, but there is some engagement with the

staff – giving feedback on how they’ve done and what they can improve on, including

employability. These students will have a very clear idea of what we think are their achievements

on this site. It’s difficult to actually sit down on site and talk to them about what they’re doing

and how they feel about it. That’s one of those things you have to do at the end – it’s an

important system.


I haven’t had much to do with this, but I understand it. I think the assessment of fieldwork could

be linked with it. There are so many skills involved in fieldwork that you could relate to any

other career. Things like just being able to get here on time every day, team work, being able to

analyse and problem solve and all those kinds of things; they’re all really important things that

you need to be able to take your career forward; as well as confidence in yourself as an

individual. There has to be an element of these things that go beyond the Field School when it

finishes – doing the tasks here helps them develop as a person.


I’ve done a lot of work on residential Field Schools and I’ve always found them to be really

positive experiences, not that working on a site like this isn’t. On residential ones there tends to

be a much greater group spirit, a real camaraderie develops results from living together as well as

working together. That contributes a lot to the way people work on site and how they function as

a team. On the teaching side, because everyone is closer together they are really enthusiastic,

even at the end of the day when they’re tired from digging. They’ll go to evening lectures or on

field trips. They get a wider experience as a result. They get engrossed in the area where they are.

Here, they finish for the day and go home and don’t think so much about the environment and the

landscape that they’re in; whereas if they are doing more things in the area people think a bit

143

more about those relationships. That is important because whatever site you’re working on you

need to understand the context and the landscape in which it’s situated.

Supervisor 6

Background:

I was a professional archaeologist for a number of years working for a number commercial

organisations and doing various digs around the world.

Teaching:

This is the first Field School I’ve been involved in and I’m really enjoying it. I would definitely

do it again, it’s been tremendous fun. It’s taught me a lot about how I should explain things and

has helped my own understanding as well. I have to think about the stratigraphy a lot more and

how everything fits together. This is a semi-commercial excavation and I’ve brought that

methodology to the site. I’m treating the students as though they’re working on a commercial dig,

but going around and taking small groups at a time and teaching them how to put matrices

together, how they should be doing basic things like trowelling and mattocking and answering

questions as they arise. I physically demonstrate the digging techniques, how to write context

sheets, how to record, how to set up base lines and all the rest of it.

Skills:

The big and important thing is team work. They’re all 1st Years and roughly know one another,

but being thrown together into quite a tight knit group doing intensive work is, I suspect, quite a

new experience for them. To be able to work together and learn new skills together, bounce ideas

of one another and share what hopefully I’m teaching them; that will be the big thing that they

take away from this. When I was at university we did a training dig, but it wasn’t anything like

this because there were no commercial pressures. So, having that commercial aspect where things

have to be done on time and to budget – work has to be finished – is really important. There’s the

professionalism that things have to be done to a high standard and on time, rather than just

treating it as a didactic experience. I hope that they’re aware of this, I’ve tried to drum that in, but

it’s difficult to know.

Assessment:

Assessment is very important, but I’m not entirely clear how I should be assessing them. Some of

them have more fieldwork experience than others, so I’m assessing them on how motivated they

are and how enthusiastic they are about learning, rather than on what they’ve actually achieved.

It’s difficult for someone like me who’s not from a university teaching background to know how

to assess students. I’ve been asked to do a brief report on each of the students which more or less

summarises their approach to the fieldwork – whether they were enthusiastic, turned up on time

and if I found them helpful. What they take away from it at a personal and skills level is hard to

say. They use the fieldwork diary method here through the VLE and I keep track of the work they

put on that and integrate that into the reports I write about each of them. That is a very useful

tool, but on a practical level it has to be functioning properly; virtual networks are all very well as

long as students can access them and upload things. There have been issues here. I think a

combination of all these different methods is probably the best way of going about assessing

them.

144


I haven’t come across much of this before but, certainly, assessment and their diaries could feed

into something like this. From a supervisor’s point of view the diaries help you keep track of the

kinds of skills that they’re gaining strength in and the areas where they are weaker. Sometimes

just having them round in a group and discussing progress with them can also help. Although

some are more communicative than others and you may not get the full story from them. Reading

what they’ve actually done on a day to day basis is very useful in terms of seeing which students

need extra surveying skills or whatever.


My own personal feeling is that a residential Field School would be better for the students. First,

they would all turn up – there have been attendance problems here – and a residential School

draws a line underneath that. Secondly, I think there would be more scope for students to mix as

an archaeology group rather than going off and doing disparate things at the end of the day, they

would be forced to mix together and get to know each other which helps make it a cohesive thing.

Assistant Site Director

Background:

I started archaeology in 2000 as an undergraduate and I completed my PhD last year in

Geoarchaeology. I started this current role in 2008 working as the Field Officer for this project.

It’s a role that incorporates several different elements. There’s the Field School and training

undergraduates, there’s part of general research on this site which is a commercial development

involving planning control, and there’s the outreach side with community participation on the

site.

First Year Modules:

In the first two terms they study archaeological theory, classes of evidence and that type of thing,

but it’s the Field Archaeology module that aims to prepare them for their practice in the field. It’s

designed to become inter-related. We do the field walking in Term Two, which is a bit of a lead

in to being outdoors and looking at materials. We start then with an introductory lecture, a series

of fieldwork procedures’ lectures talking about the archaeological processes and the research

side. That feeds into coming out and doing actual practice. Towards the end of term there are

more lectures that try to tie everything together. The elements of the module on the VLE are

complementary to the module. I feel that, regardless of what you tell them and the information

that’s available, it really is a thing that you need to come out here and start practising.

Expectations:

We talk about things in an abstract way and it seems that some of them do have a bit of a shock

when they get out here. They’ve thought about it and heard about it, but they’re not prepared

because the reality of it is slightly different – the weather, the long days or the hard work. There

is preparation for it, but they just have to get on and do it even if they find it hard. Their

expectations are completely variable. There are students here who’ve done camping, done Duke

of Edinburgh’s Award and have been on digs before and who know what to expect, are

completely comfortable and get on with it. There are also a number of students here who, it

seems, have never worked and have not been outside much. They find working in a bit of nice

145

June sunshine presents difficulties for them. There is something about the breadth of student

expectations, and the breadth of their personal preparation that we can’t account for. We have to

encompass it all, but it’s very difficult working with that spread. As numbers have increased for

us, over 70% over the last three years, that has become more noticeable.

Teaching:

I do enjoy teaching them and it is rewarding, especially when you get towards the end of teaching

practical skills you see people starting to get things and explaining them better. You see the way

that they have developed. It’s rewarding in a similar way to if you’ve taught a module based on

lectures and seminars and you mark the essays and you can see that they’ve understood it. For

some of the students here who were rather unhappy on the first day, they are now saying that

actually it’s not as bad as they thought and they’re finding it quite satisfying. I’ve done this job

along with main Site Director and we go round the areas to see what’s going on and I’ve found I

very much follow the ways that he does things. That has really been my professional

development because it’s very different to how I was instructed. I felt I was always digging in

spits and I didn’t understand what the distinctions were I was trying to see and the relevance of

the stratigraphy. We go round asking the students what are you doing, where are the edges, what

have you decided, is this section straight? You’re trying to get them to problem solve and discuss

the way that they work out what it is they’re doing. There may be a clear cut problem and you’re

just trying to find the answer to that, but sometimes it’s a problem that you’re not really sure

what the answer is at all. It’s trying to get them to have the confidence to say that they’re really

not sure and think about how they’re going to work it out. That is the approach that we take.

Skills:

We can separate things into technical, academic and transferable skills, but I think that is quite

false. Fieldwork does highlight this false dichotomy between theory and practice. It is a problem

solving thing, it is this idea that there’s a cycle that we go through in trying to work things out.

Obviously there are the technical skills that people learn like drawing, but in deciding what it is

you’re going to draw, making decisions about you may see in a section and how it relates to

something on another part of the site, that is part of a wider application of various skills. There is

taking a problem solving approach to things, then there’s reflecting on your practice and thinking

about what you’re doing, there’s an academic skill involved in being able to express complex

ideas or to revise your opinion about something. I think there’s a slight danger that we impose

ideas of what students are learning by subdividing these things, because we want to give it some

clarity and think what it is, but they are all inter-related. It’s getting them to think about what

they’re doing and trying to understand what the problems are with what they’re doing and how

they can account for that. It has to be seen in that broader context.

Assessment:

It is difficult. Up until last year they did a reflective piece which was about the background to the

project, describing what they’d done and relating that to the research agenda. That counted

towards their final degree because it was part of their portfolio. Due to modularisation we’ve

changed it this year and decided to make it something that is much more directly related to the

different aspects of field archaeology that they’ve done. Although the excavation is a big chunk

of time, they’ve also done geophysics, and graveyard and building recording. They’ll also do

post-excavation work, sample processing, records and that sort of thing. Although excavation is

the majority of it, there are these other things. So we’ve devised this open exam which is a series

146

of questions to try and get them to think critically about some of the things they’ve learnt on site.

For example, draw a Harris Matrix from a section drawing which is a right or wrong answer.

Leading on from that, what is the relevance of the difference between physical and stratigraphic

relationships? Get them thinking a bit more about what it means. We’ve tried to get them to

recognise things they’ve been involved with and be able to describe them, but then to be able to

move on and try and think about what that means. Assessing them in that way will, inevitably,

mean that someone who was absolutely hopeless on site in terms of ability and application, but

who is quite academic, can read all this up and do a really good exam. Their mark will not be

reflective of poor performance on site. However, I do take the view that people who try to ‘wing’

it and don’t apply themselves to things, in practice they find it quite difficult to do that. Working

on site consistently and understanding what you’re doing does inevitably lead to a better result in

the assessment. I can see what the problem is with not assessing them formally, we only assess

them informally by way of a personal report on their actual practical work. I think that generally

the two things will be reflective. If we were to try and incorporate an assessment based on

practice we are opening up huge problems in that there are people here who have quite serious

problems in terms of either mental health problems or physical problems who are not able to

participate to the same level. We also have people who, obviously, aren’t particularly interested.

It’s trying to work out who was having a difficult time and was a bit disengaged, and who was

laying it on thick and just being lazy. But once you try and quantify that and give it numbers, in

terms of over 100 people you could be skating on thin ice. I write the reports on all of them based

on the comments from their supervisors, but with some of the quieter students where it’s not so

clear how they’re doing, there’s a danger of assessing people inaccurately.


Assessment should be able to feed into this. The big problem is that you have this PDP system

which is hugely beneficial to them when they finish their degree, but which they seem to fail to

grasp. When they come to university they’re really not thinking what will happen in three years

time, so they’re picking it up so late in their course. We’re saying to them that they should do it,

but they seem reluctant. I come from a background in the Health Service where we had to do a

type of CPD from Day One of being a student nurse, so it’s the way I’ve always worked. So I

find it difficult to understand why people think they don’t need to plan their careers and skills’

portfolio. There are some students who are very motivated, many of them the mature ones of

course, but what we do about the ones that do not see the significance of it, for them I don’t really

know. You can take a horse to water, but I do wonder about the amount we should help them.

There’s a system set up, they’re all made aware of it, encouraged by their tutors to do it and

things are laid on to help them do it. I feel that’s as far as we should go. Checking up on people

and forcing them to do things affects staff time and morale, bashing our heads against a brick

wall. There comes a point where you have to say they’ve had all the information and know what

to do, if they choose not to do it then that’s fine. I wonder to what extent that is our decision to

make. If they want to continue in the profession they have to make a decision about it.

Commercial excavation:

It’s been fine, our relationship with the development Project Manager is good and we can

negotiate when we feel we have certain time pressures. One thing we try to get through to the

students is that this is real work. It’s not something we’ve invented for them to waste part of their

life doing or that it’s not important, it is part of the planning agreement for this development. If

it’s not done properly or accurately, that has a very real impact. It still doesn’t quite get through

147

to them, there’s still a lot of them feel that they’re just wasting time or that they’re not really

contributing. It would be good towards the end to show them the sum total of what they’ve done

and how we can use that and show the quality of what is involved in a commercial excavation.

We think of a commercial excavation as the professional and high quality thing, but we have to

accept that, with time and money pressures, often corners are cut. The people doing the work are

novices and there are limitations on their abilities, but if we are supervising them efficiently and

doing good recording, we are solving the problems we set ourselves and there isn’t a mismatch. I

think exactly the same with the community dig. People ask me how you can let untrained people

excavate a burial, but the fact is they’re working under supervision and it’s done to a professional

standard.


As a student I went on residential Field Schools and I found it incredibly difficult to go because I

had young children at the time, but I managed to sort it out and do it. I can see that for some

people that would be difficult. The upside of it is that there’s a great sense of camaraderie and

being together as a team to solve a problem. That’s what we don’t have here; we do not have that

intensity. But I also think it’s an issue of scale; taking 30 people away is one thing, but 120

people is a whole different thing in terms of logistics and resources. We suffer from a team work

problem. Not being residential means that people have access to other things. Our 2nd

Years are

able to come out and do projects for the majority of the week because they can still do their other

modules and things like dissertation workshops. They can do that from here; if we were

residential and miles away that wouldn’t be possible and we would lose them. Their time here is

slightly broken up; at least we have the benefit of them for some of the time. We have students

here who live quite near and sometimes make feeble excuses and go home early or come in late.

The flip side of that is when somebody injures themselves we can go to the doctor’s with them.

We have people with ongoing disabilities and mental health problems as well, and when they

need to go off somewhere, they can just go. They might be excluded from a residential Field

School that was located a long distance away. I have to balance the way that some people

sometimes slack and take advantage of the nearness with the advantages it has for some of the

group.

Site Director

Background:

I have a background in commercial archaeology in London and North Africa and came to York in

the early 1980s and have been running Field Schools for archaeology in Britain and abroad. For

three or four years we did a project on the Yorkshire Wolds, and the Field School was a major

component of that, and for the last three years we’ve been running the excavations here.

First Year Modules:

The first two terms aren’t explicitly a foundation to the field work, obviously there’s a certain

level of awareness especially amongst those who have an archaeological background. In the

second term there is some relationship with what they do in science which helps them a bit. In the

third term they are learning certain aspects as they go along, some introductory lectures and then

quite soon hands on experience. That seems to work not too badly because in the 1st Year when

they’re getting lots of stuff thrown at them, if you had a kind of introductory methodology in

148

October they’d probably forget it. There is some merit in having it just as a lead in to the

excavation.

Expectations:

That is difficult because they are very variable and also they may not have an idea of what to

expect because many of them won’t have done anything like this before. Their expectations are

very individual, even if you knew them well I don’t think you’d be able to cater for them very

much. The objective thing that you can go on is feedback and that has been fairly reasonable. It

may be a bit tougher this year because of the different types and amounts of archaeology we’ve

got which has been very variable. On reflection, most of them are sort of satisfied once they’ve

got past the moans and groans – it was too hot that day or problems with the toilets. When they

reflect more deeply their expectations, as far as they have worked them out, are met at a general

level. Having said that, there are some who do have specific things that they do want to happen

and they may be met or not, but what they’re actually getting is a general introduction to a lot of

things. So, if they’re seriously interested in photographing objects for example, then they might

expect that to happen this term, but it doesn’t happen in a detailed way.

Teaching:

I do enjoy it but the problem is that it has grown so large so that my ability to actually spend

more than two minutes with someone to show them things is now quite limited. The reality is that

I don’t actually spend much time teaching people things anymore, other than showing them

where they may have gone wrong or why I’m thinking something isn’t quite clean enough to tell

what it is. You’re mainly going round pointing out obvious problems and thinking about the

strategy. I’m sort of operating at a different level. When we get to the community archaeology

stuff, then there’s sometimes an opportunity to spend a whole ten minutes actually showing

someone where the edge of something is or whatever.

Skills:

One of the most obvious things is teamwork, working collectively to achieve some agreed

objectives. They appreciate and engage with that to a greater or lesser extent. However, in

experiencing it they acknowledge its importance. They realise that so much of later

interpretations depend on the quality of the initial work. That is specifically archaeological in this

case, but at an intellectual level that emphasises that it’s not just understanding how things were

done when you were doing it, but also the limitations of the process in making use of things

further on. I suspect that that’s probably quite important. Beyond that it’s more the generic things

like realising that a element of enthusiasm and commitment goes a long way, no matter how

intellectually able you might be. Actually engaging is a lot of what work in the big wide world is

all about. So, if you’re enthusiastic, organised and committed then maybe, whether you get a low

2.1 or a brilliant 1st, that’s not quite so significant for many things outside academic archaeology.

Assessment:

The mechanisms are changing this year, so we’ll see how well that works. It’s difficult knowing

how to assess them and exactly what you are assessing. You can’t assess their technical skills;

you can’t really assess their team work and their ability to engage, although you can make

statements about that. I suppose you can give someone a warning when they’re not very good at

it or make a note when someone’s been pivotal to the whole process. There are some people who

get it and others who don’t. So you can assess them by way of passing comments. In terms of

149

other assessments, I think the difficulty, and it’s a battle I keep losing in arguing in Board of

Studies, is that what we’re trying to give them is a sense of collaborating to produce a consistent

record of an area. The essence of that, therefore, is collective responsibility. But then we go off

and give them individualised exams, and that is the real problem. What I would want to do is for

them to deliver projects collectively which are then marked for the standard of that project. I have

views of how one could square the circle of who didn’t give a damn and who did engage with it; I

would pass that responsibility to the students themselves. The problem is that our assessment

methods don’t really match at a general level the kind of collaborative aims of what we’re doing.

It is individualised in a way which just doesn’t fit the bill. That is the fundamental difference

between what we do and other departments. I’m quite hopeful that we have advanced

significantly from where we were, but we still ultimately face this barrier of individualised

assessment. Partly, it’s convincing colleagues in other departments of this because what they are

doing, giving courses with lectures and seminars and writing essays, is related to individual

assessment, but fieldwork is different. To them it seems the entirely obvious way of assessing

archaeology more generally, but it doesn’t fit this situation really.


The assessment of fieldwork does get them on that road with PDP to a greater or lesser extent.

Actually, some do use this as quite a foundation for starting on that whole process. One of the

things they start to do is realise that they should be demanding some sort of professional

development in their working lives. So, it isn’t just a case of you go to university, get a degree

and that’s the end of your education. They can see that it is a process that should continue

afterwards. Generally what we’re doing is grist to the mill, whether their subsequent direction is

within archaeology or into another sphere. At a general level it is undeniable that we need to

enhance that and I hope we lay some foundations for doing so. However, I wouldn’t want to

make any judgement as to how well we do that.

Commercial excavation:

By and large there hasn’t been much tension between the commercial demands of the project and

that it’s also a Field School. The fieldwork phase of the development is relatively distinct. Where

there is need for commercial input into our work in this area will happen separately and we will

have ownership of the results and make good use of them. It’ll be interesting to see what starts to

happen when we start to write about the commercial evaluation process on this site, not as a

criticism, but to say what the continuing issues are around the ability to predict archaeology and

to deal with it. I’m rather disappointed that some commercial units don’t attempt to have a

research dividend; I would imagine that they would be champing at the bit to show that good

units are interested in research. I think there may be a malaise amongst the higher management in

commercial archaeology, you get down below to the Project Officers who are actually doing the

work, they are still tremendously engaged but they’re not always in a position of responsibility to

take it forward. You have the paradox of people actually doing lots of work are very interested in

trying to take it forward, whilst the people who are managing seem to have lost the interest.

Presumably it’s because they are divorced from the nitty gritty that archaeology involves. They

are managers, but they were once archaeologists.

150

Appendix XI – Oxford Student Focus Groups

Student Group 1


Finding stuff and working in the Finds tent/

It’s hands-on and gets you away from the lecture room/

You can see what you’re working on, it’s the primary material/

The techniques you read about like stratigraphy, you can put that into practice/

The rain and the heat are the worst/

The dig can get you a taste for archaeology and like a last hurrah for the First Year because we

won’t see much of each other after this/

I’ve done some excavation in Hampshire, in the snow/

I did a couple of weeks at Hungate in York/


Maybe something in Heritage, so it’s good to get this experience/

Museum work/

I want to work for the Smithsonian, that’s my dream/

Academic archaeology, not commercial/

Teaching could be a back-up career/

Diplomacy would be really good/

I’m probably going to have to do investment banking/

It’s probably too early to say/

Expectations:

The Second Year students gave us a pretty good idea of what it would be like/

I didn’t realise how much I wouldn’t like camping/

It’s much harder work than you expect, the physical labour and the kneeling/

It’s similar to other digs I’ve been on/

Once you find your stride your actually okay with the digging/

First Year courses: It was mainly theoretical/

What they teach in the classroom would be boring if you couldn’t apply it/

The briefing gave us a bit of a background to the site/

An overview and what stage the dig’s at/

Teaching methods:

They tell us bits and bobs as we go along/

When they make you do a task you have to pay attention or you’ll get it wrong, that’s good/

Most of the time I understand why I’m doing a particular thing, but we don’t get an overview of

what’s happening with the whole site/

It would be good at the end if they went through all the features with us and explained the whole

thing at the end of the dig so that we get a summary/

151

They don’t give a boring lecture at the start about what you’ll find but, as you dig, they explain

things as you find them which makes it stick in your mind so much more/

Skills:

Team building, we’re all quite close to each other now/

Resilience/

Learning how to do manual labour/

Self-reliance with camping/

This will be good to mention at job interviews in the future/

Learning to carry out instructions and if you don’t get it right having to do it again/

Being thorough and methodical/

Assessment:

Being assessed takes away the whole point of doing field work. When you come out here you are

on your holidays and your enjoyment is a crucial factor to get anything out of this. If it was

hanging over you that you were being assessed your enjoyment levels would decrease/

This is a mandatory dig, so to force us to do something like a diary when we didn’t choose to do

this is a bit harsh because we didn’t elect to do this. However, it’s something we’ll do for our

three weeks of chosen field work/

People come in at different levels, some have done a dig before, so it wouldn’t be fair/

It’s not really a vocational degree, it’s a theoretical degree and that should be the main focus of it/

I don’t see there’s any strong need for us to be assessed because for some students this will be the

only dig they ever go on and it doesn’t bear much relation to the content of the course/

It’s important to do a good job, but there’s no need to be assessed at the end of it/

Assessment comes out of the Big Brother attitude with five people watching you the whole time/

You could have a check-list of different attributes and every time they see behaviour that

exemplifies that, it’ll be bonus points/

The Oxford system is just exams/

It would be fairer to have it in term time and then assess it/

We’re assessed in term time, there’s no need to assess people twice/

Overall, we’re all pretty satisfied with the Oxford system/


Never heard of it, what is that?/

I’m pretty sceptical about this/

It sounds like bureaucracy gone mad/

So many jobs have on the job training and it’s not that hard really, you just come out with a

degree and get a job. Things like this are so subjective and you can’t really quantify it/

If you have a brain on you you’re going to improve you will have your own motivation, you

don’t need someone to tell you the things you have to do/

That’s all part of being at university, becoming an independent student, as opposed to the school

system where you get shepherded around/

We have Progress Prizes at the end of courses, but everyone makes fun of the people who win

them/

I think this would just annoy everyone a lot/

It wouldn’t be taken seriously/

People know where their skills are and they shouldn’t need to write down what they haven’t got/

152

Your careers’ guidance doesn’t come out of your skills; it comes out of what you want to do. It’s

not based on your skills, but your desires; although it helps to be good at what you want to do/

It can force people to pigeon-hole themselves/

It’s an Orwellian nightmare/


On residential you get to be with everyone on the dig/

Some have to be residential if you don’t live close to the site/

It can be pretty tough if you’re ill/

It can make it an overall more interesting experience; it removes you from your comfort zone/

Student Group 2


Most of us haven’t done it before, so it’s an opportunity to do something that we’ve heard a lot

about/

This is a good site in the sense that we’re getting a lot of interesting stuff/

It’s fun when you start to see something coming out, whether it’s a feature or a find/

Once all the cleaning’s done it’s okay; the cleaning is the tedious bit/

You feel like you’re helping the general understanding and picture of it all, that’s satisfying/

When you can work without being told every five seconds how to do it is good/

There’s elements that I don’t enjoy, but I suppose it’s just as frustrating for the supervisors as it is

for us/

It can be quite tiring/

Morale’s been difficult because a lot of us were ill last week with some kind of bug going

around/

Better hygiene would improve the mood/

We are the underdogs and it can be hard to feel positive sometimes/

At times I feel we’re just being used as manual labour in a patronising way/

We’re not getting paid for this/

It’s very regimental and you’re working six days a week from 8.00 till 5.00 and I’m getting my

enthusiasm sapped/


I’ve thought about it, but probably not after finding out about the lack of money and the effort

you have to put in which I didn’t appreciate before I came here. So, it’s good to experience it

first/

I’m thinking of further study in archaeology/

I’m interested in the actual objects with doing antiques or auctioning, but I wouldn’t do the actual

archaeology of it; that’s why I enjoy finds more/

It’s important work, but it’s not for everybody. It’s valuable seeing what it’s really like/

Expectations:

People came here with all different abilities and experience and you’re thrown in straight away/

I wish I’d done this before I applied for the degree, I’d have gone for straight Anthropology

without the Archaeology/

153

A lot of people don’t realise what archaeology is really like/

I enjoyed the theoretical parts, but this is completely different/

We’ve barely handled material up until now, so this was a great shock/

You can’t do an archaeology degree without learning what it’s really about/

Two weeks is too long, it should only be one week/

But in one week you wouldn’t really learn much/

I’d prefer to have the option to do anthropological fieldwork rather than archaeology/

First Year courses: There was nothing about this, we only saw finds in pictures/

We did practical classes on animal bones and Roman pottery, but that was all/

We also did an environmental one on soils. These were extra classes and people weren’t very

good at attending them and it wasn’t clear that they were that useful/

They weren’t in the syllabus; I thought they were special areas of expertise/

We did a field trip to Avebury; that was really useful looking at landscape archaeology/

It would be good to visit more sites/

Teaching methods:

It can be hard to evaluate it objectively with everyone working in different groups with different

supervisors. I’ve been in different groups and some work a lot better than others/

One of the frustrating things is not being treated as though you’re mature/

It’s good having the small groups with each supervisor so that they’re constantly telling you what

to do and how to improve things and you get better at it/

It’s quite straight forward, they show you the way to do it and tell you to get going/

They show you by demonstration/

It’s not rocket science/

Today we were told to find the line, the edge of something, but with no pointers – it takes a

special eye/

It comes with practice and then you know what to look out for/

If you show interest in finds, they’re all very keen to tell you about things/

The Site Director’s amazing, a walking encyclopaedia of Roman pottery/

When you get them talking about it, it’s really interesting, but we’re always time-pressed because

we have to get the archaeology done. It’s really just snippets of information/

I’d like to get a better general understanding of the site; I don’t think they’re too keen to share

their theories just in case they’re wrong/

A sum up each day would be good. I know I’m digging a potential pit, but I don’t know how it

fits in with the rest of the site/

Would be good, even if they don’t know, to tell us what the alternatives are/

Skills:

It’s been a really good bonding experience for our year/

It’s a great social occasion/

There’s general things like organisation and being able to work in groups/

Patience/

At first I was angry at being bossed about a bit, but I’ve recognised that organising this whole

thing is difficult and you have to cooperate with everyone, even if you’re not on the same

wavelength/

154

Looking after things like keeping records/

The precision and minute detail, it’s very meticulous/

Assessment:

I’ve got a negative view of assessment because I can’t see how it can be done in any objective

way. For example, my supervisor from last week would probably speak more positively of me

than my current one. That’s not necessarily a reflection of how I’m doing/

I don’t know what they can see as a good archaeologist – someone who just spends all their time

cleaning might not get the recognition of someone who’s just found something really good/

We all have different supervisors and have good days and bad days/

It’s very difficult to judge because everyone has different abilities/

It’ll turn the dig into a whole different thing if you’re being assessed; makes it a test and sucks

the fun out of it/

If you do it for two weeks that’s enough to get an idea of it/

I’d want to have feedback on how well I’ve done though/

If it’s laid out as a module perhaps, but this meant to be a taster of what fieldwork is like/

You would need one person concentrating entirely on assessing you to make it fair/

Having just worked hard all term and done exams and then only one week off, assessment would

just be another thing. It’s more important that we just enjoy this – it’s a broadening experience

and about why we enjoy our subject/


I suppose you could look at the strengths and weaknesses that come out of this. It’s definitely

enabled some people who really shine at archaeology to show that/

It would be useful if I was doing something archaeologically related/

A record of the things you’ve been doing and the skills you have would be good/

We did something like this at school, but we didn’t take it seriously/

Student Group 3


We’re employing knowledge that we’ve learnt over the past year/

If you want to understand how archaeology works, it’s difficult to understand it on the page until

you get out there/

I would say that I’m not employing anything that I’ve learnt specifically. We don’t really learn

about trowelling and that’s where this comes into its own. For me, this fieldwork is simply to be

able to get money from the university to go somewhere like South Africa and have a good time

and see some good sites. Actually though, it is a great experience in that you get to do things very

few people get to do and you’re guided by professionals/

Finding stuff, that’s the best thing/


Perhaps in heritage, but I’m not sure/

Maybe something in journalism; archaeology’s a hard field to get into, but if I was offered a job

at the end of my degree I’d probably take it/

155

Nothing certain at all, I don’t think I will end up in archaeology; not that I don’t think it’s good,

it’s just not for me/

I can see the Anthropology side swaying my career a bit more. I can’t see myself doing field

work as a career/

I’d like to work with material culture and props in theatre, or maybe as a teacher/

Expectations:

I’ve done some field work before, so I didn’t have much expectation, just to pass the course/

Similar to what I expected, but definitely harder in terms of manual labour. I knew there’d be a

lot of scraping, but after that it gets a bit monotonous/

It’s pretty much standard if you’ve done a dig before/

First Year courses: None of our academic courses are geared towards anything practical, it’s a literature based

degree. You can draw on some of the knowledge you acquire/

What we’re doing here is not what you see in lectures; you get a glorified image of things with

huge monuments and excellent examples of artefacts. Here we’re not unearthing an obvious

Roman settlement, it’s a patchy kind of thing/

There can be a misconception about it all there/

Nothings quite so obvious when it’s been in the ground; only when it’s been dug up, interpreted

and labelled/

Teaching methods:

We are taught things and they do try to get us into different roles like photography/

The supervisor gives us a specific job to do and if we’re doing it wrong they’ll tell us and show

us how to do it right. We’re learning by doing/

It’s a bit more fluid than just assigning people to things; if something comes out of the ground or

a context reveals itself, they’ll show you how to do the context sheet for that bit or a section

drawing when it comes along/

They show us how to do things and explaining the why of it/

A lot can depend on your supervisor, there’s different levels of knowledge out there. They may

have to ask someone else before they tell you directly/

Skills:

A methodological rigour/

It’s a big bonding session/

We’re taught in different colleges, but we’d seen each other around at lectures, so it’s a way of

getting to know each other outside our individual teaching groups/

If we were given more leadership responsibility that would help, but as it stands we’re quite low

down the ladder/

It’s difficult to think what I could take from here into journalism; this is so scientific and precise,

perhaps heritage-related journalism? You’d have to think massively outside the box to see how

this can help, I can’t see this being majorly helpful/

Because I’m into material culture, just looking at the finds is useful and I love being in the Finds

tent analysing them

156

Assessment:

The assessment we have is pass or fail, and that’s really all they should do. It would be useful if

you wanted to follow it as a career I suppose. If you’re not really into it you shouldn’t be made to

force yourself to trowel properly every second because you’re being assessed. There should be

some assessment to stop the slackers slacking or it wouldn’t be fair on the other people/

If you’re being assessed all the time you’ll be very frustrated/

There is some feedback, a constant process of them telling you you’re doing well or not/

If the course was advertised as a vocational then fair enough, you should be assessed on it as part

of your degree/

Attitude would be a big thing to assess/

Your plans and drawings could be easily assessed, whether you’ve completed it correctly/

If the things you do mean something, that makes you work harder, but that’s not really assessing

it/

You’re in a small team and it’s difficult to assess you on how you do individual things/

People who are good at writing essays aren’t necessarily as good at practical work and working

as part of a team/

With group assessment it might just be one person working really hard, they can get let down or

have to carry the others/

That’s a life lesson and it’s what happens in the world of work/


This happens already in an informal way with our tutors, they tell you if you’re not performing in

a certain area/

It would be treating you like a child really/


On a residential Field School we’re bonding together, getting to know each other and team

building/

Non-residential you’ll get a lot more freedom and have fewer frustrations/

That might encourage people not involve themselves so much. If you’re stuck with people you

work through problems even if you have a bad day/

Residential is less like it being a job/

I get the sense that the local volunteers who come here are a bit on the edge of us a group/

You can focus on what you’re doing/

It can build up quite a lot of tension/

Student Group 4


It’s good to get the experience/

A week would be long enough, an 8.00 to 5.00 day is too much really/

Sometimes you get a supervisor you don’t get along with and that can be difficult/

I’m more into Anthropology, so for me this is not great/

I’ve done fieldwork before and enjoyed it, but I’m not enjoying this at all. They’re not making it

fun, you should be enjoying it no matter what’s going on around you/

It’s fun when you find something/

157


I don’t think I could become an archaeologist, but I’m glad I’ve experienced it/

I have no idea at all yet, but certainly not archaeology/

I have no plans at present/

Expectations:

I thought it was going to be worse than this, although I’m not enjoying it really/

It’s been nice getting to know people from other colleges, but my expectations have dropped

from eight to five – 30 degrees and only short breaks in a long day, you do need the rest time/

My previous dig was rough conditions, but the inter-personal relationships made up for that. This

has all the predispositions to be fun, but it’s not happening/

I’m not finding the material as interesting as I expected/

It’s their research aims and we’re just the manual labour not getting any credit, we’re just pairs of

hands/

I think we’ve been really lucky the amount of material we’ve had off this site/

Some things they’re less careful about than I thought they would be, I’d be interested to know if

all digs are done in exactly this way/

I hate being forced into doing things and here I am being forced into doing things. I would prefer

finding my own dig for two weeks and getting my experience there/

First Year courses: We had a paper on Archaeological Enquiry, all about the practice of digging; apart from that I

haven’t seen many links with this/

It does relate in that you need to see how it works/

It relates indirectly, that’s why I prefer digging the Neolithic site because it’s more abstract/

The digging you have to do takes about a third of your summer, two weeks here and three weeks

somewhere else. You can’t really have a proper holiday. Summer’s when you’re supposed to go

travelling when you’re at university/

Teaching methods:

My supervisor tells us what we’re looking for and gives us the background to the area. He’d give

us a demonstration and then leave us to get on with it. When we were first scraping back I was a

bit confused about why, but I eventually got it/

It’s better if someone gives you a demo and lets you struggle through rather than standing over

you all the time and telling you the same things again and again/

A bit more distance when you’re working is good; you can ask them if you have a problem/

I don’t like being moved around so much; you clean one area and then they just move you with

no explanation. You’re just a manual labourer cleaning different bits. At the Neolithic site I

enjoyed digging my own pit for two days rather than being moved around/

It can become like it’s ‘your’ pit if you stay on one thing/

I was just told to dig a section with no explanation/

You need to know why you’re doing what you’re doing/

They treat us a bit like children, we’ve left school now/

Sometimes things aren’t explained properly/

Some people are better than others on site at explaining things and helping you out/

There’s quite a lot of miscommunication between supervisors, like I’ve been told about five

different things to do by different people/

158

We’re not really told what we’re digging up, we need to know more about the context/

It depends on the supervisor you get/

I’ve dug lots of pits and never really been told why I’m trying to find the bottom of it/

There should be authority, but it shouldn’t be looking down on you, it should be helping you/

One of the weird things is that we were told on the first day to dig faster and to me that’s a

completely wrong concept because you’re supposed to dig qualitatively/

That shows that we just don’t know what we’re doing and doing it for the sake of it. We need to

know what we’re uncovering/

I’d work more effectively if I knew why I was doing something and what I had to do next/

Skills:

You learn about how to manage relations in a stressful environment/

You learn at what stage you should be complaining and what stage you should just keep your

mouth shut/

It’s a good experience working manually from 8.00 till 5.00 every day; it can be character

building/

Tolerance and having a methodical approach to things/

Assessment:

You can’t be bad at this unless you just refuse to do it/

All it comes down to is attitude, not how well you’re digging/

I think it’s good the way it’s assessed here, they just say what you’ve done/

Being assessed might give me more incentive, but I’d just be fed up because it’s so subjective if

you don’t get on with your supervisor/

That’s only one part of archaeology, the other is understanding what you’re doing/

If you wanted to be fair you’d have to get one person to assess every one and some independent

body would have to decide if that person was capable/

It would be good to split it up into attitude and practical ability/

That would be like a Socialist 1950s ‘attitude’, I had things like that on my school report/

I don’t think it should be assessed because it’s group work and you’re doing what they tell you to

do. We just get told to excavate things/

What could be assessed is how well has this person recognised a context or something like that/

It would be very difficult to assess, some people don’t have the opportunity to show they’re

learning and some people do/

It should be valued much more that you’re getting the experience and learning something rather

than trying to prove something/


Camping after a long day is a bit difficult, especially when you’re really dirty and not getting a

good night’s sleep/

There’s more of a unity and you bond with everybody/

I bond really well in a college common room/

It would be okay if we were staying in a hostel/

There is something to be said for everyone living in the same area/

It can get a bit boring in the evening and if they laid things on it would be a bit like a school trip/

I don’t mind camping, but the campsite is appalling – there’s no electricity so you can’t charge

your phone. If they’re going to make us camp they could at least find a decent campsite/

159

It’s taking two weeks out without internet connection. I’ve got things I’m trying to arrange and

emails I need to reply to because I’m on several committees and need to be in contact with

people/

160

Appendix XII – Oxford Supervisor/Site Director Interviews

Supervisor 1

Background:

I did my undergraduate degree about ten years ago and I’m currently completing my PhD and

I’ve done quite a few research digs. I’ve been involved in Dorchester since the beginning of the

project and been a supervisor since the training dig’s been going. I haven’t done much

commercial archaeology; I did one year working in it mainly as an intern.

Teaching methods:

I love teaching students practical field work. It’s a challenge because they’re always different

groups of students each year and it’s interesting how they respond to how you teach them. Some

will be really enthusiastic one year and you’ll try the same approach with another group and

they’ll not enjoy it or be interested. We have a checklist of skills we need to make sure they’ve

all learnt, so I ensure that everyone goes through that in the two weeks. Because we start with

cleaning back from the year before, that’s when we go through all the basic techniques like using

a shovel or a spade and a trowel. I tend to get them set up and leave them to it for a while and let

them make their mistakes and come and find me if they are having problems, rather than

hovering over them. They get a bit annoyed if you’re there telling them they’re not doing it right.

I make a point of explaining why we’re doing something in a particular way, what the feature

may be before we start, how contexts work, why we do half-sections and why the intervention is

placed where it is. I’m trying to understand it so they can enjoy it, rather than just mindlessly

trowelling.

Skills:

For some of them it’s the team work thing. Some of them don’t like working in teams and they’re

forced to come on an excavation and have to work closely with other people. They have to rely

on others for their safety and to get the job done. There’s getting an understanding of how

hierarchies work and how you fit into an organisation. It’s their first encounter with that sort of

structure for many of them. Some find it more difficult than others to slot into a team, whereas

others take to it. There’s a lot of them who haven’t been outside and done manual labour before.

There’s so many things that they are involved, they suddenly have to remember maths, how to do

a practical activity, draw to scale and measure things. There’s a lot of skills they probably haven’t

used since they did their GCSEs. It makes them realise all the things they’ve been taught up to

this point actually have some practical use and they have to start pulling all these strands

together.

Assessment:

Personally I think they should be assessed on this as a formal part of their degree. I was an

undergraduate and I think it’s beneficial it would give some of the students more of an impetus to

really take part in it and make an effort. Those who are enthusiastic will do the work but, without

assessment, the others sees less point for being here; they’re made to be here but there’s no

incentive to why they’re here. As a method of assessment I’m a great fan of the fieldwork diary,

writing up what you do each day is a good thing. I had to do it on my training dig and I still do

now because it helps me to remember what I’ve done in the day and understand the archaeology

161

as I see it. Apart from assessment it’s good practice to get them to really think about what they’re

doing and understand it. The checklist we use here forces us to make sure that we’ve taught all of

them the right components and what they need to learn.


I’ve come across this, but not in this context. We have something like this for my PhD reviews

and I sometimes find it frustrating. I’m not sure it would be very helpful on a dig like this. We

know the skills they need to acquire whilst they’re here and having that, I’m not sure what would

be gained by going through a plan with them.


I’m a great fan of residential digs because they get the whole experience of what archaeology is

like. Most digs involve going somewhere quite a distance from your base and camping or staying

in accommodation. It gets more of a team atmosphere going if they spend a few weeks together.

We’ve been doing trips to the local sites in the evening and that helps them get involved in what

they’re doing.

Supervisor 2 – Finds

Background:

I’ve just finished my Masters degree. Before that I was working in the States for a few seasons

doing commercial archaeology. I came here because I was more interested in studying European

archaeology.

Teaching methods:

I do enjoy teaching the students. At first I wasn’t sure because I’ve never wanted to be a teacher,

so this has been an interesting experience for me. I might now consider it as a career path,

whereas I hadn’t before. It’s a lot of fun and rewarding, as long as the students are listening,

finding new things to show them and new things to teach them. Finds is really straight forward to

teach because they mostly have an idea of what they’re looking for. Once the finds are clean and

dry, I show them what we’re looking for, what we need to do to process them and try to give

them interesting pieces when they come up. I ask them what they think things are.

Skills:

When you begin to study archaeology there’s so much theory that it’s really hard to put it all

together with how it’s actually done and the processes that you go through. The Field School

helps them contextualise everything. You get team working skills from this and project

management, just learning how to follow instructions and get from Point A to Point B. A lot of

them are doing this because they have to, some love it but others would rather be doing

something else with their holidays

Assessment:

I think assessment is important because it would make them try harder. If they’re here and not

assessed, for some of them they don’t really see the point to be being here. I would like to be able

to have a say in their assessment. I wasn’t actually assessed when I did fieldwork training, but I

162

got some references out of it for future work. For me it was a career choice, so that was my

assessment, I wanted good references. The assessment would have to be something that each one

of the supervisors would have a say in. You can look at enthusiasm, the ability to grasp new ideas

and relate what they already know to what they’re doing and the desire to go above and beyond

what they are expected to do. In my undergraduate they were quite good at having creative

quizzes that you would use to apply your knowledge, that was quite fun.


I haven’t come across this. It sounds like it would be a very valuable tool. The problem is at this

stage these students don’t have the foresight to know what they want to do, never mind how to go

about doing it. I’m not sure how much value can be placed on it as a means to an end. For

someone who knows what they want to do, it would be an extremely useful method of personal

development. It would be difficult if you’re not really sure what you want to do.


On a residential Field School it’s the personal interactions between the students that are

important. That’s really important; I had that for my Field School and loved it and made a lot of

friends, as well as professional contacts. They get to see us on a different level as actual people,

not just supervisors. I can’t see much that’s negative about being residential.

Supervisor 3

Background:

I came into archaeology in the last couple of years after having the opportunity to dig at Brading.

As a result of that I’ve done my Certificate at Southampton which included digging. I’ve been on

many local digs and I’m currently involved in a small private dig in Hampshire.

Teaching methods:

I do enjoy teaching the students; however, it can become slightly tedious people just don’t pick

up on it and you have to tell them the same thing several times. From my perspective, some of

them don’t really engage with it and they’re not learning. I’m so enthusiastic about it; I’d like

other people to be enthused. Initially it’s direct coaching because you’re showing them what you

want them to do and explaining the purpose of why they’re doing it and then letting them have a

go. As you’re watching them working, you give them other helpful tips. There are ways to

trowel, ways to brush and ways to do everything in order to do the work as well as possible. It is

on-going coaching to help them move on to the next bit. Now they’ve been here over a week I’m

tending to ask them questions to get them to think about what they’re doing, rather than keep

giving them instructions because that isn’t helpful. It can take time for people to understand the

actual processes of excavation. You can explain it theoretically, but it’s not until you actually

start doing it that you realise that it is a process. There can be the impression of archaeology that

you just go out and dig and it can take a while to understand that it is a systematic process and

things need to be recorded before you move on to the next thing. The back end of it they don’t

see or even realise, things like going back to plans to find a context number.

Skills:

163

They get used to working as a team and recognise that other people work differently. It gives

them some discipline, because it is a disciplined discipline, even if they don’t like that in practice.

Once they begin to understand the processes they can begin to be a bit more analytical about what

they’re doing and also develop their own methods of working. Instead of just getting in the trench

and starting to scrape with a trowel, it’s actually thinking about your method of work and what

you are trying to achieve. That’s all good stuff for whatever work you go into.

Assessment:

My personal view is that assessment is important for fieldwork training because it gives them a

bit more focus of why they are here. If it physically adds something to their course they will be

more thoughtful about what they’re doing on site. There are some students who don’t really want

to be here and there doesn’t seem to be a reason for them to be here. If you knew it was adding

something to your course work, it would make it different in how some of them think of what

they’re doing. Supervisor assessment is good in that you do get a feeling for the people you’re

working with and a clear view of how they’re applying themselves, understanding things and if

they’re a good team member. Keeping a field diary can give you some sort of method of

demonstrating what you are learning. An exam can demonstrate that you have understood things.

That’s important if you are going to go into field archaeology. What can be useful is having to

write an assignment on your Field School work. I think that can consolidate your thinking into a

report so that you get the idea of almost going into post-ex; pulling everything you’ve done into a

coherent whole.


It’s important to keep a record of your own development. There’s always a split between people

who will do field archaeology and those who do some other form of archaeology or a totally

different career. There is merit in understanding that you’re constantly learning, whatever career

you go into. It doesn’t have to be arduous, but that you can demonstrate that you have added to

your knowledge and understanding during your profession.


If it’s residential and you’re a Site Director, then that adds another layer of complexity of what

goes on because you have to keep them entertained, corralled and looked after on top of running

a Field School. That is another level that you might not want to do. Although, it does mean you

can get them to site on time. Residential does build camaraderie, a sense of belonging to

something and a responsibility to help make things work properly.

Supervisor 4

Background:

I’ve just finished my PhD at Oxford in archaeology. I’ve dug in Italy at several villa sites and in

Rome and this is my third season at Dorchester. I’m about to take up a post-doc in Canada where

I’ll be doing some teaching as well.

Teaching methods:

I very much enjoy teaching field work. It’s an informal environment to teach students in and it’s

hands-on, which hopefully interests them more than text books. At the beginning of each day I

run through the things that we’re going to be doing and ask them if they have any questions. I

164

tend to teach by explanation and then by example. After telling them what they’ll be doing, I

show them. I also make sure that they all get to do the different tasks, which wasn’t actually my

own experience as a student. Apart from learning, it’s important that they understand what

they’re doing. At this stage, week two, I have quite a hands-off approach because I think they

know by now what they are doing. I say things like when you see a soil change let me know, and

leave it at that. It’s a way of giving them more control over what they’re digging.

Skills:

They certainly learn team work, which is a really valuable skill. There are a number of real

characters in archaeology and that’s a really good thing for them to experience the different

personalities. They learn about perseverance, discomfort and doing things you don’t want to do.

Those are things that are useful throughout life. From a technical point of view they learn how to

use tools and be careful, health and safety and things like that. They learn about precision,

accuracy and mathematical skills from the planning.

Assessment:

I actually do think the assessment of fieldwork is important. It can make them more professional

and diligent because they know that it matters what they do. I would like to assess them as well

because I think because the supervisors can identify whether they are good at it or not. Feedback

is very important; if they’re interested but think they’re not very good at it they may not continue

with field work. The most useful thing I had as a student was keeping a fieldwork diary which

was assessed.


This could probably be useful, but not for me personally. I’m one of those people that does this

themselves anyway. For people who don’t have a self-reflective personality it could be of value.

It’s really the sort of thing I did for the various reports for my PhD. It can be a bit tedious, but it

is useful to think about your development.


I think residential Field Schools are a good thing; you get a lot out of the team building and

learning about dealing with different personalities. It tends to breed a more casual atmosphere

between supervisors and students which can be a disadvantage in terms of doing teaching and

assessment. Inevitably, in the evenings, there’s drinking and once that happens then there can be

a change in the level of respect. It would probably feel more like an extension of a university

classroom if it wasn’t residential. You get a lot of really good social and interpersonal things out

of residential Field Schools.

Supervisor 5

Background:

I’m a Second Year Archaeology student at Oxford and this is my third dig, but I came back

because I liked it so much. I do enjoy the field work because the university course is a lot of

theory.

165

Teaching methods:

I enjoy the teaching, but it is a bit strange for me because I’m only an undergraduate, so the

students are all basically my age and people I’m friends with at college. It can be a slightly

difficult position for me at times because I don’t necessarily know that much more than they do,

I’m simply there to organise them and be a focal point. When they’re interested it’s very

rewarding. It’s a learning on the job thing for them, when they need to know something you teach

it to them. With planning and levelling, when it comes up, different sets of people are put onto it.

I try to make sure that everyone ends up doing something different every day so you don’t end up

with a couple of people doing nothing but trowelling for a week because that wears pretty thin for

them. It’s important to explain all the individual parts of the process so that they understand it.

Take cleaning, it can be tedious and frustrating, but you need to explain that it has to be done in

order to see what’s going on with the archaeology.

Skills:

When I did this last year it was two weeks of solid physical manual labour with only a break to

do the finds. That teaches you something about your physical limits. There can be the enjoyment

of physical labour and learning how hard it can be. That is something unique to an archaeology

degree. Some of the students will never have done anything like this before and, at that simple

level, it can help expand horizons. There is a very methodical element to this; you have to know

exactly where you are at all times. The planning brings together all sorts of skills like

mathematics and understanding scales. It’s a very broad skill base that you get from this.

Assessment:

It’s a very casual and informal assessment here, but even that does help because it means that

both they and their tutors know if they’ve learnt sufficient stuff to be an archaeologist. If they do

it badly it has to be redone. It is necessary to have some sort of definition of if they’re doing right

or wrong. Short of teaching them techniques and giving them a quiz on it, which I don’t think

would be very productive; I don’t think it is easy to assess this. It is very much on the job

learning and having the supervisor constantly around allows them to be continually assessed. I

think that’s the best way of doing it.


There’s no harm in a system like that. I can understand why it could be useful because it provides

a checklist for something that is very subjective. For the students here, very few will go into

archaeology. They will suffer this for two weeks and forget about it because of the type of degree

their following. I’m not sure PDP would be entirely applicable for the career paths they will be

following, although they could look at their transferable skills.


Residential is quite helpful for the supervisor-student relationship because it means we do spend

some time with one another away from the excavation and they can see that we’re human. It

provides good down-time for the students because they’re all together and can socialise outside

of work and get to know one another really well. Non-residential would be more detached, like

coming to work.

166

Assistant Site Director

Background:

I’m currently working on my doctorate in archaeology, although my background is a history

undergraduate degree. I’ve worked part-time in commercial archaeology, but would prefer to

work in the academic sector in research and my ultimate goal would be to get a lectureship. I’m

the Assistant Director on this dig and I’ve been with the Dorchester project for four years and the

seen the way it’s evolved as a training dig. This included the year without assessment and the

years when we’ve brought some assessment in, which is still very minimal.

Teaching methods:

I very much enjoy teaching. It has its challenges and it can be frustrating in a degree which is

split between Archaeology and Anthropology where you have some people with no real interest

in archaeology. Occasionally you do see the spark go on in someone’s eye and they decide that

archaeology’s alright after all, that’s a positive side to it. I’m more project managing things at the

moment, but I think the best way to teach is to give real practical explanations for all the

procedural activities. It is far too easy to get six people in a trench and just get them to dig

because that’s the way it’s always been done. It’s really important to explain why they’re doing

what they’re doing and the long-term consequences of how they’re digging and recording and

why there’s a procedure; but at the same time also giving them some flavour of the site they’re

working on. It’s not a constant running monologue, but things like as finds come out of the

ground putting them in context and explaining what’s going on. It’s too easy for a student to sit

there for four hours and they’ve got a tray full of finds that mean nothing to them and it’s just

become like factory work. Another thing is to teach by example, get down in a pit with them and

explain what’s going on. I’ve seen some supervisors who stand on the edge of the pit and they

look like prison warders on a chain gang. It’s very important to engage with the students, explain

what you’re doing, get in there and show by example, but also making it relate to things that they

can get a grip on. For some of these students it’s their first experience of dealing with

archaeology in the earth and it can be hard for them to visualise how these things end up there.

They can read about all they like, but when they see things coming out of the ground you need to

tie it in to other things like metalworking and recycling. You need to talk to them and not expect

them to be working drones that just pick up on procedure. Procedure is important to ensure

continuity of standard, but if they understand why they’re doing it they’ll want to adhere to it

more.

Skills:

For many of them this is the first time they’ve done any manual labour or physical work and I’d

like to think they’d develop some sort of a work ethic by learning accountability for their own

work and showing up on time. There’s a lot of every day practical working skills that they can

get from this. Whether that is made clear to them is an issue and probably should be highlighted a

bit more, but that can be dangerous as it may sound condescending to them.

Assessment:

I think very much so that assessment of fieldwork is important, to be almost cynical, you need to

have a stick with the carrot. You need that incentive to say you’ve got to put effort into this and

you’re attitude needs to be good or you will get a negative assessment. Without that kind of

167

leverage, sometimes it can be impossible to do anything with them. That’s not to say that all

students require that sort of leverage, but for some the assessment may be the only thing getting

them to show up on site. On the other side you get students who have such an affinity for what

they’re doing then the assessment is really good because their tutors get a sense of the balance of

what their students are capable of. The tutors only see them through their essays and someone

who’s not so articulate through their essays can shine in fieldwork. The assessment is important

to get that feedback to the tutor giving an holistic view of a student.

It’s tricky to know how to go about assessing something like this. There’s the standard

assessment where you ensure that everyone has completed the bare bones of what they need to

have learned. We have a checklist to make sure everyone has learned the same skills. On a one to

five scale, that’s the average at a three – everyone’s completed this to certain degree of

competency. Beyond that I suppose you can assess attitude and enthusiasm. I wouldn’t give

someone a negative assessment because they didn’t like archaeology; it would be how much they

participated and affected their fellow workers. On the positive side, has someone gone the extra

mile and been really keen and wanted to learn more about something? The checklist assessment

provides a baseline for everyone, but it becomes very subjective after that, there’s a lot of on the

ground observation. What I’ve had in the commercial sector has been very subjective. You tick

various boxes on your performance, but did your supervisor notice that you were the one doing

the extra bits.


In the abstract fieldwork experience could fit in with this, but in reality probably not. It’s one of

those things of ticking the box of might be nice, but I don’t see that happening. There would be

so many hoops to jump through to get that standardised in the university system, but also because

I don’t think it would be any more than a subjective assessment being put into a portfolio. I’m not

sure it would add anything unless you had other things being added by a variety of people. It’s

just another thing for people to do and they’re probably not going to want to do it.


I think residential is probably preferable, particularly for Oxford. A lot of these students are

broken up into Colleges and some have never clapped eyes on each other until they get together

for the Field School. It’s been interesting to see them integrate and realise that there’s more

people doing Archaeology than perhaps they realised. We try to do things in the evenings

occasionally, such as field trips. It’s voluntary, but quite a few take up on it and it makes it a

much wider experience. It’s easier to deal with issues having everyone in one spot. The

supervisors camping with them helps bridge the gap between the us and them; we’re willing to

suffer the rain and all the other deprivations of camping and it binds us together a bit more and

helps them to respect us enough to get the job done. It also gives a degree of control over what

they’re doing.

Site Director

Teaching methods:

The Supervisors are crucial on site and you are very dependent on the personalities involved. The

Assistant Site Director has taken a key role dealing with all the day-to-day issues which I am

168

extremely happy not to have to do because I already have plenty to do. The way it works is that

all of our roles overlap, there’s no clear demarcation. I dive in wherever it seems appropriate.

Despite having supervisors, there is still a shortage of thinking time, it would be nice to step back

slightly further and spend more time looking and thinking. I personally find that difficult to do, if

I see something that I feel I have to get involved with, I’m not going to wait for the appropriate

supervisor to come round. It makes for a busy day, but that’s what we’re here for. However, it

means that there can be a lack of continuity in the thinking, there’s quite a bit of low-level fire-

fighting just checking that things are being done properly. I have to think of the end product and,

for me, that is a record that I can work with. It’s not an ideal structure, but it works okay and you

are very dependent on the personalities involved. When it comes to techniques our supervisors

know the stuff, but they have to remind themselves that the people in front of them don’t and it’s

not often second nature or the most obvious common sense thing as the students don’t have the

experience.

I like teaching and I like talking to people and I’m very happy when people ask me questions.

Sometimes the answer can be straight forward, but it can also be the cue for a couple of minutes

chat and I enjoy that kind of interaction. It’s down to the supervisors to talk to their teams about

the individual processes and techniques of excavation and the different stages of the recording

process. That level of teaching is devolved to the individual supervisors and I’m happy to join in

where it’s necessary. For example I did the basic introductory talk for the first few people who

were planning because the supervisors had their hands full with other things. That also helps me

to remember names and develop some kind of personal contact with them rather than just being a

faceless and distant Site Director. That’s another reason why I like to wander around asking them

how it’s going.

Skills:

My principal concern is that they learn how to do archaeology. The other aspects are probably

ones that I tend to get involved with myself, but obviously the whole team thing is critical. The

experience of working with a lot of other people and hopefully learning to take account of the

requirements those other people have and keeping working relationships at a level where

everybody is getting on. I don’t know much about these students’ backgrounds, because they are

at Oxford the chances are that some of them are pretty privileged and may not have had too much

contact with dirt before. What we try and do is have a commonsense approach to how we set

about things and hopefully some of that filters through as well. Lots of them have got that

anyway, but there are some to whom that doesn’t seem to come naturally.

Assessment:

This can work at several different levels and what we’ve done has actually evolved. In our first

year on this site there was no assessment at all and because of the character of some of the

students involved in that year and some of the difficulties that arose from that, we actually

suggested that there should be some system of reporting back so at the very least their tutors have

some idea of how they’ve done. That doesn’t need to be complicated. To some people that

seemed to be a radical suggestion, but most saw it as a good idea, although the Oxford way is

very laissez-faire in many ways. It is very basic. At one level it’s a check-list saying that they

have done a range of techniques which is a good way of ensuring that nobody slips through the

net. We can also provide comments on things like being good team players and that kind of thing,

which is probably one of the more important things we can feed back. I would guess their tutors

169

don’t get a sense of that because they see them in a very different setting. It is basic, but there is

just enough in there to be useful and if they know that a report will go back to their tutors there is

a hope that might curb some of the wilder excesses of behaviour that we have occasionally seen.

The things we want to report are that they got on with it and had a good attitude.


At my age this irrelevant and if I’m not doing my job properly I expect somebody to tell me, but

it is very different for these students. Because of the way the whole thing is developing they need

to be able to tick boxes in particular ways. We haven’t thought formally about those things in the

context of this site and there’s been no suggestion from on high that we should, but that may be

how things work in this particular university. The other aspect of it is how many of these people

are likely to consider a career in practical archaeology; a tiny proportion, if any at all. I don’t

think we need to get too hung up on that kind of thing at this stage. In the first instance, their

degree will do the talking for them and it’s beyond that point that’s where it becomes critical.

Personally, I don’t see any point in getting involved in a lot of PDP paperwork at this stage.


At a very crude level, the reason for being residential here is very simple. Although we are close

to Oxford, if we were relying on them to get out on a daily basis we’d be forever waiting for

people who were late or just didn’t turn up because they maybe had too good a night on the town.

If they’re all together we can make sure they’re on site on time. However, there is more to it than

that and it comes back to the community thing and being part of a team in there together and

sharing that experience as well as the archaeology. You hope that they see the two things as

combined. Certainly from the social skills side of things it is complementary to all that. I think it

works pretty well and the university staff are insistent that’s how it should be, and rightly so.

170

Appendix XIII – Reading Student Focus Groups

Student Single Honours Group 1


Finding things, I’ve done a couple of digs before this, but here’s interesting because I’m actually

seeing floor levels and occupational deposits. Before it was mostly rubbish pits/

The combining of practical and academic skills, that grabs my attention and interest/

Putting the things we’ve learnt in the year into practice/

There’s a lot of variation, although some of it can be repetitive such as cleaning, but there’s an

opportunity to do many different things. It’s not all physical, you are using your brain at the same

time/

Sore knees are a bit tough/

There are minor things that you might not like, but nothing big enough to make a difference/

You can become impatient when you just want to finish it, but you have to be methodical and

careful/


I’ve loved the process of what you do and the people, so I’m interested in doing it/

I definitely want to go into it and this has helped me understand that/

Expectations:

I was looking forward to it, but nervous that I wouldn’t enjoy it because of the level of hard

work, but it’s been much better/

So much more involved and interesting than I expected/

The learning has been really good and working in groups you get to focus on and be responsible

for a certain area and it becomes yours/

First Year modules: I think we got a general overview, especially about the Romans and knowing how things are

done with Practising Archaeology/

Even though I’d done fieldwork before, Practising Archaeology helped to build on what I already

knew/

I took a Classics module in some Roman things and even that has helped me/

You could be just digging and cleaning without knowing what’s happening if we hadn’t done

some study on the Romans/

Teaching methods:

You’re given a task and you get continuous feedback, but it’s something that you’re in overall

control and responsible for/

The best way to teach you is to show you/

First thing is you need to get experience of the ground you’re working on; so, simple cleaning to

get used to how you trowel. Something to start you off to get you comfortable with what you’re

doing, then you’re more confident when you go on to something else later/

They don’t leave you on something for too long so it keeps you interested/

171

We’re lucky because we’re in quite a small group, so we get a lot of attention. If we need

something we can go to our supervisors straight away and they’re always very helpful/

It’s a good structure here. I went on a Field School run by another university and there were no

professional staff, it was all Second and Third Year supervisors. I found that their knowledge and

willingness to help you was not of the same level as here and, as they’re professionals, they really

know what they’re doing/

They’re easy to talk to, get hold of and make it easy to understand things/

I like the idea that they teach us not only excavation, but also how it goes into the IADB

database, from the ground to the computer/

Skills:

The ability to be open and outgoing; more confident in going up and talking to people and just

getting involved/

Team work and skills of analysing/

Team work is crucial; you need to be able to get along with everyone because you’re living and

working with them. You need to be tolerant and patient. Also learning to be proactive when you

don’t seem to have much to do, finding something to keep yourself busy with/

The analytical skills are good, having to look at a lot of data and present it in a succinct and

professional format/

You make friendships which could help you with connections later on/

Assessment:

It’s important for your own confidence, it’s what they think you’ve achieved. It’s also another

reference to help you get work later on/

It gives you feedback on how you’ve done. If there was no assessment you wouldn’t take it all so

seriously, it keeps you focussed/

It makes you behave in a more professional way; this isn’t a holiday/

It can tell you your weaknesses as well as what you’ve done well/

It has to be based on what a group of people who are working professionally believe are the most

important skills you need to attain to be able to work in archaeology/

You can look at enthusiasm, willingness to work, how you interact with others and how quickly

you pick things up. In a job your employer’s not going to keep coming back to you and telling

you how to do something. Very difficult to assess some other things/

Fieldwork diary:

The fieldwork diary is useful, apart from a daily diary; I’m using it for general notes as well/

Think I need to use it a lot more, but I think it is something useful/

It’ll be good to look back on if we do follow a career in field archaeology; it’s a good record to

keep/

In the future you could be able to judge yourself objectively and see where you went wrong and

where you went right/


Haven’t really come across this/

Might be able to link the skills I’m getting here with it/

172


On my first dig I was non-residential, but after a week decided to camp with everyone else. I

wasn’t getting as involved with everyone on site by not being there the whole time. If you’re

residential it really helps to bond the whole group and you’re much closer to your supervisors. It

makes it easier to work as a team and be confident in your work/

For non-residential there are the benefits of home comforts/

Before this we were in little groups and really didn’t know each other, but now we’ve become

this single big group where we know many more people in our year group/



I hate the showers, but digging’s what I like best/

The digging is methodical and hands-on which is pretty much what I want to do/

I’ve been studying archaeology for three years and this is the first digging I’ve done. I was a bit

apprehensive about it, but the way it’s being taught and run I find amazing. I spent half an hour

last night writing an essay to my dad about what’s been happening. At the moment it’s lovely

weather and everyone’s really polite/

It’s a good atmosphere. I was apprehensive as well; I really wanted to do it but wasn’t sure if I’d

like it/

I’m not sure if archaeology what I want to do, not actually sure what I want to do. I’m trying to

enjoy, but I’m not as much as everyone else. I’m not sure that I’m cut out for it/

Expectations:

I was surprised how quickly everyone set into a rhythm. During the First Year we didn’t mingle

much, but now it’s a vast transition and I’m talking to more people/

I kind of knew what it would be like because I’ve been on a short dig before, but this is a lot

more detail especially things like planning and other equipment. I didn’t expect to do that sort of

thing/

First Year modules: Not sure they really helped towards this; there was a lot of theory and stuff to do with periods.

We did a bit on the preparatory week, that was useful. Other than that, not a lot/

The Samian Ware session, that was helpful. There were some things in Practising archaeology,

that’s the one most applicable to this/

The other ones didn’t really come into it a lot. That was almost a year ago, they need to bring the

Practising Archaeology up into the Spring Term so it’s more recent for us/

I haven’t really been able to apply much of what we did here/

The seminar and assignment on the Harris Matrix was useful/

Teaching methods:

They give you a basic how to use the equipment and then set you off and keep an eye on you/

They’re not monitoring you like hanging over your shoulder. I can see that they’re wanting us to

figure out things for ourselves/

Where I’m digging it’s quite hard to see, especially the different layers. I keep asking the

supervisors to have a look and they always seem happy to help/

173

It’s a good way of doing it because I think I’ve learned a lot and I’ve only been here a few days/

Skills:

Definitely social skills and team working/

Problem solving and interpretation/

Filling in forms and drawing/

Confidence building, you could certainly take that into other professions. I don’t know about the

other things just yet/

Yes, confidence to go up to and talk to new people/

Assessment:

Being assessed on the digging is definitely important, that’s a major part of it especially if you

want to go into field archaeology/

You can look at people’s willingness/

The amount of participation/

Seeing if they’re listening and applying what they’re being told/

How responsible people are/

Are they taking care and recording things properly/

Actual ability made be hard to assess, but there’s enthusiasm/

For the test, they’ve told us it won’t be on anything we haven’t learned/

Fieldwork diary:

I’m keeping up with mine/

I’ve written half a page, I keep meaning to but never seem to get round to it/

It’s going to be useful for me, it’s a memory/

The detail’s most useful, I’d never remember half the stuff I’ve done and learnt here/


Haven’t heard of this/

It sounds brilliant; it’ll be a useful check list of what you’ve got and what you need to get to

where you want to be. If someone could advise me on that I’d be more than up for it/

Yes, it would be great; personally I sometimes feel lost on what to do. If I had a check-list as

something to refer to with set dates would help so much/

Certainly what we’re doing here could feed into it/


I’ve been on a non-residential dig and I got to know a lot less people than I did here, that’s a good

thing about residential/

There’s a huge community thing here/

The good thing about non-residential is that you could go home, relax, sleep in a proper bed and

showers; not so many aches and pains. That makes it easier the next day. Camping’s not for

everyone/

Can’t see that the teaching and learning side would be any different/

174



For me it’s the fact that we’re doing fieldwork because I want to be a field archaeologist, this is

the first thing we’ve done on field archaeology/

It’s much better when you’re put together as a group because time goes by slower when it’s just

yourself/

This is to get experience, the theory’s okay, but I want to do this/

The first time I did planning was a bit tedious, but that should be alright now that I know how to

do it/


I want to stay in archaeology or something related to it, but I’m not 100% sure just yet/

Expectations:

It’s better than I expected, all I’d seen of an excavation was Time Team on TV and that’s not that

realistic now I’ve done this/

Much better than I expected/

First Year modules: It doesn’t really relate to this/

We don’t think about what we learnt in lectures, it’s great to know it/

We did a little bit on stratigraphy, but that’s probably about it/

It might be useful later in the process, but when we’re out there digging it’s not the first thing on

your mind/

It would be better to do field work much earlier and learn everything on sites/

Something at Christmas or Easter for a weekend and go to some sites and see how it works and

maybe get stuck in a bit as well/

It would be good to be told about other opportunities for fieldwork, digs on different periods/

And other practical aspects such as lab work and post-ex/

Teaching methods:

The first time we all did the same thing, he had us all in a line and said trowel like this, you’re

just taking off a little layer. From that he’s taken people to different areas. For me personally he’s

told me how to trowel in the different areas depending on how much you want to take off or the

kind of soil it is. The teaching is good, I like the teaching/

Every question we ask is answered/

I was chatting with him about what work as a professional archaeologist is like and he’s given me

information on working conditions, pay and the pros and cons of it. The sort of things you don’t

hear about in lectures, but what you want to know about/

It’s good to be in contact with someone who’s been through the same process as us/

We should work more with people like that so that they can share their experiences with us. The

lecturers are amazing, but they can’t tell us things like this/

Skills:

There’s team work, general skills like that/

175

Suppose there’s specific skills like planning or using levels/

Problem solving and independent work/

Taking responsibility for what you and if you get it wrong/

Assessment:

It is important because there’s no point going into a job if the employer hasn’t got anything to

look at and see proof that you can do archaeology well/

You should give more value to the field work – it’s how well you do and how well you progress

as well/

It’s important but also makes me a bit nervous thinking that I’m constantly being assessed while

I’m out there. Sometimes I ask a lot of questions and think maybe I’m asking too many questions

which makes it look like I can’t think independently, but if I don’t ask questions I could do

something wrong which is a lot worse/

It should be related more to how you do stuff and not what you know/

Making us do different things and seeing how we progress, you can then see if someone’s got the

hang of it or not

Some people may be slower to pick it up, but that doesn’t mean they’re bad archaeologists/

That’s why we’re assessed over the whole period. Some people may start off brilliantly, whilst

others progress and improve/

The people doing four weeks have more of a chance to progress than the people doing two

weeks/

Fieldwork diary:

Yes, we’re all keeping a diary/

It helps you remember what you’ve been doing through the day. When we come to write the

essay it’ll be good to look back and have all the technical terms/

It’ll be interesting, if some of us do go on to become field archaeologists we can have something

to look back on and see how we’ve changed/

I personally can’t see much use for it beyond the essay/

It’ll probably help me as a record of the skills I’ve got from being here/


The more that you put on your CV that you’ve done then that widens the range of jobs you can

go for. I suppose it can help you to identify the skills you haven’t got and need to get/


It’s good having everyone living together because you can talk to the supervisors after you’ve

finished work about their lives and the jobs they’ve done. If go on site just to be taught there’s

not going to be much conversation about things like that/

You’re also around the people you’re working with and talking to them all the time. You bond

better as a team, you’re working with your friends and living and eating with them. It wouldn’t

be the same if we went our separate ways at the end of the day/

You can ask people on other parts of the site what they’ve found and get a better overview of

things that are going on/

We are a bit isolated in our different groups on site and if this wasn’t residential I’d have no idea

what was going on elsewhere/

The main thing against I suppose is not getting enough sleep because of the noise/

176

We might start getting on each other’s nerves after a while/



I prefer finds and environmental rather than the digging/

I’ve just loved everything I’ve done so far, although I’ve not done environmental and not really

looking forward to that, it looks very slow and tedious/

Finding treasure is exciting/

Actually learning what to do; I went on a miniature dig thing and was just handed a trowel and

told to dig. I had no idea what I was supposed to do/

It’s good to be with other people who are inexperienced as you are, because you can then learn all

together. If you were on your own you’d feel a bit out of place/


Yes, but probably not field archaeology/

More the other aspects rather than field archaeology/

I want to go for field archaeology because I don’t want to be in an office doing paperwork, that’s

boring/

Expectations:

There’s a lot more behind the scenes and pre- and post-work to it. I didn’t really ever think about

that. I suppose I thought it would just dig, and that’d be it. There’s a lot more to it and that’s

really good and interesting/

It’s more than what I expected; I assumed it was just digging a hole. I’m glad there are other

aspects because I prefer them to the digging/

First Year modules: The only module we did that was aimed at this was Practising Archaeology/

A lot of that was the methods they used to use, which was interesting. It was only the preparatory

week where we learnt a bit more about here/

A lot of that was the practicalities of it. I don’t think there’s anything that could be done to

prepare you for it; it’s something you have to learn by doing it. You could talk about until the

ends of time, but you wouldn’t be able to do it/

We did have one lecture about Silchester/

Teaching methods:

I ask questions when I don’t know what I’m doing and they’ll come over and help, but they

won’t necessarily come over and tell you what to do/

You’re given a lot more responsibility by your supervisors than I thought you would be. You are

responsible for your area and if you do it wrong then it’s down to you/

Wasn’t sure what I expected, our supervisor is quite hands-off and lets you learn for yourself.

They’re always there to help if you need help, but they don’t patronise you for doing it for you or

holding your hand; they give you the job and you have to get on with it yourself. That’s good,

sometimes you need to be thrown in at the deep end/

177

It’s good, they’re there when you need them but they’re not watching over you; so it’s like a nice

balance/

Skills:

Anyone who can go and live in a field for a month and work in a team this big on a project this

long-running, that is a unique experience. It provides you with team work skills and motivational

skills that you’re not going to be able to develop in any other way. I don’t know anyone else at

university who’s doing anything like this/

The elements like talking to visitors is good if you’re unsure about speaking to people you don’t

know/

That’ll prepare you for doing museum tours. These skills can be transferred to any field that is

relevant to archaeology/

I think these skills could be transferred outside of archaeology. With the cleaning, that could be

help with things like gardening. The science stuff leads into all sorts of environmental things/

Basic skills like team work, organisation and time keeping. We’re on a tight schedule and aims

and goals we have to meet, we have new people to work with all the time, new skills to learn and

using your own initiative. Those are all things you need to be able to do in any line of work/

Working hard from 9.00 till 5.30 and learning to keep going/

Meeting new people and gaining confidence/

Assessment:

It’s important to be assessed so that you know if you’re doing things right or wrong; if you want

to do field archaeology you need to know where you need to improve/

You don’t want to be working hard for four weeks and not be told how you’ve done at the end/

It gives you a goal; if we didn’t have the assessment the trench wouldn’t be this deep/

It’s really important that the people you’re working with give feedback on you and how you’ve

been doing because there’s a lot of people who might not be so good at exams. If you can show

your abilities practically, especially if you want to go into field archaeology, that’s one of the

most important things. The supervisors need to get to know you personally and your strengths

and weaknesses and report back/

That’s good if you can’t write essays very well/

Fieldwork diary:

I’ve been doing it/

It’s a bit erratic, but I am writing stuff/

I don’t really know what to write/

I’m making notes on the training sessions we sign up for/

It’s good because we have to write the self-reflective essay. It could be useful in the future,

depends on what you’re doing/

I think I want to write some questions in it that I can try and answer every day/


It could give you a better idea of what you can and can’t do and what you need to develop/

It needs to be paired with feedback from supervisors and tutors. You can assess yourself all you

want and may think you’re really good at something, but you’re actually really bad at it, that’s

not going to help you/

You also need the motivation to do something about the things you’ve identified/

178

You can assess yourself first, get some feedback and then adjust it/

I suppose we could put the things we’ve done on the Field School into that eventually, but we

haven’t been here that long/


I just got back from the day off this morning and it was a rush. If you live on site you can tumble

out of your tent and get to where you need to quickly/

You’re talking to everyone whilst you’re working, but you can also talk to them after you’ve

finished/

It’s good to have the experience of living here in a field and all of that whilst we’re learning and

training, rather than being fantastic archaeologists but not being able to cope with rough

conditions. Being able to survive is as equally important as being able to do the job/

The downside is I would like a nice bed and a shower/



I like finding things/

I don’t like bending over all day, the physical part of it is the most challenging/

I like the fact that you’re excavating something nobody’s touched for hundreds of years and

you’re the first to do it, that’s fascinating/

Don’t think there’s anything I don’t like here/

I like levelling, it’s fairly easy/

The paperwork takes away a bit of the magic of finding something really good/

That makes you start having to think about it and understand it/

It’s not just a patch of earth anymore/


I’d like to go into field archaeology/

I’d like to do forensic archaeology/

I want to do this, research archaeology/

It is so useful coming to this because I can find out what it’s like. I enjoy it, but don’t think I want

a career in it. Perhaps teaching people more than actually doing it/

Expectations:

I was a bit scared about what it would be like and that maybe I wouldn’t be doing much because

I’m a First Year, so it’s definitely exceeded my expectations/

I was expecting a lot more people than this/

First Year modules: Practising Archaeology is probably the most relevant to this/

The other ones give you the context of what you’re looking at and what you’re finding, but in

terms of actually preparing to do it Practising Archaeology is probably the best/

Rome to Reformation is good as well because it gives you the background to understand the

things you’re finding here/

The Samian Ware seminar was handy/

179

Teaching methods:

They broke us in really easy. We were split into two groups and taught how to clean. They

showed us exactly how to use the trowel, how much pressure to use so you didn’t ruin anything.

It’s really step-by-step so you know what you’re doing/

When they ask you to do something they’ll show you what you need to do/

They’re always coming round to make sure we’re okay and know what we’re doing, that we’re

doing and telling us what we’re missing. It’s all hands-on, we don’t do any sitting around being

talked at, it’s doing and being guided/

By the end of the first week you pretty much know what you need to do/

It’s very easy to ask and they always give very comprehensive answers and make sure we do

understand what we’re looking at and what we’re doing/

At the beginning of each day a little summary going over what stage we’re at in our area – what it

means or what it could mean/

That could be useful because I keep running out of work and have to go round helping everyone

else/

It’s great if you get to do a feature to yourself, the whole process including planning and

recording, it feels like it’s yours and you’ve achieved something/

You can see it’s a process – you do a plan, do a context card, excavate and then start the whole

process again; very methodical/

Not knowing what’s going to happen next can be quite exciting/

Skills:

Team work, majorly; I’ve never worked on something this scale/

The social side of it, getting along with your team and getting to know people; if you talk to

people you can get to know the whole site better/

It’s very character building; you’re coming into a new and unknown environment. You don’t

really know what to expect and have to adapt on the spot to what you’re doing/

Assessment:

It’s definitely important that we’re assessed. It’s compulsory we come here for four weeks, but if

we leave at the end of it and nobody cares how we’ve done it seems pointless. Some people may

be slacking and others may be working really hard and that needs to be recognized/

You can find out how you’ve developed and improved/

I like the fact that we’re assessed on every part of it including environmental and finds/

The way that the assessment is set up here is very good; we’re being assessed on everything in

lots of different ways by different people/

I don’t think you can be assessed as a group, one person may do things really well but another not

so well/

You could include your team work ability in the assessment, but I don’t think it should be done

as a group/

It should be an individual assessment because some people do more than others, achieve more

and develop more/

An exam can show that you understand everything; otherwise we could breeze through with not

really knowing what it’s all about and somebody could always be helping us with things on site/

180

Fieldwork diary:

I’m keeping a note of the different contexts I’ve been through in my pit so I know how

everything I’m doing is developing. If I was asked to write an essay on it I probably wouldn’t

remember it otherwise/

It’s handy when you’re talking to the supervisors and they tell you some detail like how to use

your brush properly, writing that down you can see that you were doing it wrong but now you’re

doing it right. You can see yourself learning to do things better/


Heard about it, but don’t know what it really involves/

You could get to the Third Year realise you need to write a CV to get a job and not really

remember what you’ve done in the last three years, so that would be useful. Even little things can

give you skills that you’ve learned. If you do something like that you’ve got a collection of stuff

that you can turn into a decent CV/

Some things you might take for granted, but it could be useful for a job. If you don’t write it

down and tell them, they wouldn’t know/

It’s good to get guidance with that as well to decide what’s important/


I was really happy to go home on the day off, having my own shower, toilet and a bed. Four

weeks is a long time to sleep in a tent. I’m not a great fan of camping and I like to be clean. At

least I can go home once a week, if I couldn’t I’d struggle/

At the same time, if you do want to do field archaeology you are going to be outside a lot and

living in tents or some rough accommodation. It’s tough, but you need to know whether you’re

going to like it or not if you’re going to do it as a job/

I like the fact that you get to know your supervisors off the field as well, it makes them more

approachable/

Student Joint Honours Group 1


I like small finds, shiny things/

Doing it yourself rather than just reading about how you do it/

Too hot, too cold or too windy/

Wheel barrowing/


I think so, maybe not field work though, it’s too physical/

You’ve got to start with field work and work your way up/

Still useful coming here even if you don’t end up working in it/

Think I’d like to work on skeletons/

I’d like to do Battlefield Archaeology; I’ve found a Masters course in it/

Why chose to do the module:

It sounded like fun/

181

There’s no point in doing a part archaeology degree if you don’t do any actual archaeology, it

would be a bit counter-productive/

I didn’t want my first field work experience to be after I’ve graduated, everyone else would know

what they were doing except me/

Having a good archaeology degree but never having done any field work seems a bit stupid.

Theory won’t prepare you to do field work, ever/

Expectations:

It’s much more detailed, like the planning, there’s so much more to it; I thought I’d just be

digging/

I didn’t realise there were quite so many stages to it/

Surprising amounts of paperwork/

Mostly what I expected, less rain though/

First Year modules: Practising Archaeology has helped the most, but even that’s not a great amount. It’s lectures, so

you’re not really having a go at it/

The Prehistory was module was unrelated and the Bones one more or less unrelated because of

the site this is. The Samian Ware seminar was useful/

Rome to Reformation gave us a bit of background/

Teaching methods:

They show you how to do it and you have a go. If you get it right then carry on. They showed me

how to do a plan and the next time I’m just told to do it. I get it checked and if it’s wrong get told

off and do it again until it’s right/

The teaching is effective, there’s not so much they can teach, you’ve just got to learn for yourself/

You have to develop your own technique/

They’re there if you’ve got any questions and they come round to see how you’re getting on/

I think there’s too many lectures and talks taking you away from digging. The other day I was

doing planning all morning then was taken away to talk on it. I learnt better actually doing it than

anything I got from the talk. Hands-on is better/

I’d like longer teaching sessions, things like a session on planning all morning/

Skills:

Team work skills/

Responsibility because you’re doing your own thing a lot of the time/

Life skills/

This will look good on a CV because it shows you can commit yourself to two weeks, and it’s not

exactly easy to do/

You learn to look at things objectively and to assess situations/

There’s lots of problem solving involved/

Thinking outside the box

Assessment:

I think it’s helpful to be assessed/

The feedback is important; you can tell what you’re good at and what you need to work on/

182

If you’re not assessed you could be doing it completely wrong all the time and not know. You

need to learn how to work properly and develop your skills otherwise you’ll just be doing a bad

job all the time because nobody told you what you were doing wrong/

I like to know how I’m doing at something and have feedback about what I’m doing right or

wrong/

It’s reassuring knowing we’re being assessed/

You can look at how you interact with other people/

I think a lot of it should be based on your independence because if you have to ask your

supervisor how to do absolutely everything that’s not good. It’s alright at the beginning when

you’re learning, but if you can’t go on to do things yourself that’s not very good/

It’s observation, letting you get on with it and observing what you do, how you work in a team

and marking your paperwork like context cards and plans/

They seem to have it pretty much covered here; we’ve got the supervisor assessment and the

exam for what you’ve learnt/

Fieldwork diary:

It’s fine, I’ve been writing in it and drawing pictures/

It’s very useful for the essay we have to write/

It’s good to put down what you’ve actually been doing, I’ll forget if I don’t write it down/

I wrote a lot about pottery after my finds session/


I’ve heard of it, but don’t really understand it/

Sounds like it could be useful/

It could help you develop as an archaeologist and as a person/

I think all the skills we’re getting here could probably be used in it/


Non-residential you’ll have showers and beds/

But then you’d have to get to site and back home every day/

On residential you can get to know people better and everyone’s in the same situation/

If you really hate somebody it can be a bit of a pain, but I can’t actually think of anybody I really

hate/

We’re all doing the same thing and working to the same goal so everything works okay/

It’s a lot more social and fun/

I don’t know if it would affect the teaching side because you do the learning on site/

You could talk to the supervisors informally off site and ask them questions/



It’s so much more interesting. In lectures it’s just looking at slides, but this the practical aspects

of archaeology. It’s good to be able to see it in practice. It’s really good fun/

The Field School is good, it’s all laid on rather than having to sort it out yourself/

I love the digging, I prefer that to finds washing/

183


Originally I wanted to be a Primary School Teacher, but after doing this field archaeology seems

quite exciting/

I’m not too sure yet/


I’d heard fantastic things about it from Second Years and the lecturers/

It seems a bit pointless doing a half course on archaeology and not doing any field work/

Expectations:

It’s definitely lived up to my expectations. I thought it was going to be good fun and it’s even

more enjoyable than I thought. We’ve only been here just over a week and we’re already doing

so much/

I was a bit worried we’d end up doing things and just be watched, but we’re involved all the time/

First Year modules: Rome to Reformation has definitely helped; it’s very relevant to Silchester/

Practising Archaeology talked about all the scientific and excavating methods and stratigraphy/

It would have been quite daunting coming here if we hadn’t had that/

You need to understand stratigraphy before you start/

Teaching methods:

The supervisor’s always around and if he’s not here there’s the assistant supervisor. You can

always talk to them. The on-site teaching is really good/

The matrices talk was really helpful, that cleared up the things I didn’t understand/

It’s useful to have the supervisors on-site; it’s easier to talk to them/

It’s less daunting than going up to a lecturer and asking them/

For planning, the supervisor went through it with us and did the first couple of things and talked

to us about it before leaving us by ourselves/

On our first day he showed us how to do trowelling and again left us to it. But then he’d pop over

every 20 minutes to make sure we were doing it right/

Skills:

Learning how to work in a team, which is beneficial for any career/

Learning to listen to others and take instruction and constructive criticism/

Really good life skills, rather than just archaeological skills/

There’s the physical side of it, rather than just learning in lectures/

Learning to look after yourself being out here camping, that’s good learning/

Assessment:

It is very important we are assessed because, otherwise, we won’t know how we’re progressing/

It’s good we’re assessed on practical things, better than just having to do an essay when we get

back/

It helps to learning what we can do better next time if we come here again/

You can be assessed much more easily when you’re doing rather than writing about doing/

It gives you an aim for next time/

You can find out where you’re going wrong and what you want to do to sort it out/

184

If you weren’t sure if field archaeology is for you, you’d be able to make a more informed

decision/

Our supervisors are constantly assessing us – how well we work together, listen to instructions

and things like that/

The exam test our knowledge of things we’ve learnt/

It’s better to be assessed when you’re on-site because they can constantly see what you’re doing/

They can see you progress rather than just look at a section in time/

Fieldwork diary:

Yes, we’re keeping a field work diary/

It’s definitely useful, especially for when we come to write the essay/

Could be useful for looking back to see what you did, especially if you go into archaeology/

You can see what you were like at the beginning/

Check back and see what you missed/


It sounds useful for any career you go into/

I think what we’re doing here could possibly be used in something like that/


Residential’s much more beneficial because you’d miss out on the evening otherwise/

You can talk about what you’ve done during the day/

It’s easy to get on to site; you don’t have to worry about being late/

It’s a whole big team, we all sit together and eat together/

The only down side was I had to buy quite a few bits and bobs/

You get to know people you otherwise wouldn’t get to know/



This is actually getting to do it after spending a year learning about it, it’s so different from just

looking at pictures/

There’s not too much you can hate about it because, obviously, you’ve come to learn. You just

have to bear with the bits that are more difficult. Generally it’s what you’ve got to do and you

just get on with it/

It’s just a great experience/


I don’t think so/

I’m actually doing Ancient History and came because I’ve been interested in it since I was little

and wanted to experience it. Glad I’m doing it, but it’s not the career for me/

Maybe, I haven’t decided yet what I really want to do/

I think I’d be interested in working in museums/


I wanted to dig again/

185

It was something I always wanted to try, the experience of it/

I wanted to try it out to see if I liked it, it’s there and you can’t not go on it/

Expectations:

It’s pretty much what I expected, digging in dirt. What has been difficult is trying to figure out

the different layers, but you do end up learning about it. Without the supervisors’ help I wouldn’t

be able to do half the things/

I’ve been on digs before and kind of knew what to expect, but this one is more complicated than

what I’ve done before. The other one was very rushed time-wise, so not quite as delicate a

procedure as this/

First Year modules: Practising Archaeology had a bit on the techniques/

It was more about surveying than actual digging, suppose they assumed we’d learn that here/

It was more about the before and after of digging/

Teaching methods:

They tell you what we’re going to be doing as when you do something. They talk you through it

and show you if they need to and they’re there to help if you’re struggling. They don’t expect you

to know everything/

They start you off and leave you to do your own thing and you can always grab one of them if

you’re not sure because they’re always wandering around/

They point things out as you go along which is easier than being given a list of things to do that

you might forget whilst you’re digging/

I’m pretty happy with the way they go about it/

Skills:

There’s all the transferable skills like working in a team/

Having a good attitude towards the work/

My communication skills are getting a bit better because I was always quite a shy person in

school/

Doing the visitor talks can be very helpful for developing communication skills/

Assessment:

It is important because if you do want to go into a career in archaeology, this is what you are

going to be doing, so you need some idea of how good you are at it. Potential employers need to

know that as well/

Most people when they’re doing something like grades or where they’re going. Bit like sports,

there’s set levels you have to get to. There are some who just do it for fun, but you still want to

know how well you’re doing/

If you know you’re being assessed you put more effort into it and work harder/

You can look at how they behave to other people, whether they get on with what they’re doing/

See if people understand what you’re talking about because a lot of it is a case of communication

and trying to say it in the most simple way. Seeing how well you can interpret things for yourself

and how well you pick up the different skills/

You’ve got to try and cover everything in some way because there’s so many different bits to it

all/

186

Fieldwork diary:

I’m keeping mine/

I’m not because I’m not being assessed on this/

It’s useful; I’d forget some of the little things that I need for the essay I have to write. It’s good to

write it all down whilst it’s still fresh in your head/

I have problems trying to remember what I did, so I have to write it down/


Not sure I really know what this is/

It definitely sounds useful because you’re not really sure what kinds of things employers are

looking for, so it helps if you know what you’re good at/

You can pick out things that you’re not so strong at and work on those rather than concentrating

on the things you’re good at/

It’s good you’re doing it with someone else’s advice, what you think you’re good at you may

actually be rubbish at/

You could add the things we’re getting here like team work and communication/

You could stress the analytical skills you pick up from going on a dig/


Residential there’s all the problems of camping and sleeping, but at the end of a day’s work

you’re quite happy to sleep anywhere/

It’s easier to get to site on time/

There’s less distractions in the evenings so you have more chance to read up on things and write

your journal/

Evening is ‘your’ time and it’s your choice what you do with it/

You can get to know the supervisors a bit better/

Second Year Student Group


I hate planning, trying to get what you see into little squares on a board is quite challenging. You

can have two people looking at the same thing and see it different/

Why returned:

We’re crazy/

This what I want to do, I want to get as much experience as I can whilst I’m studying/

It’s a good experience – the people you meet as well as the work you do/

We didn’t know each other at all before we came here and now we’re really good friends/


I’m sceptical at the moment/

Something to do with archaeology, but not in a trench/

Expectations:

I thought you just excavated and there wasn’t all this planning and doing context cards, it’s a lot

more in depth/

187

You don’t really know about it till you get on site/

First Year modules: Practising Archaeology now seems like it was worth it because when we came here it helped us

put things into practice/

I think a lot of it related more to rescue and commercial archaeology rather than research/

It’s better to learn this way than go straight into commercial archaeology, you learn the right way

before you learn all the tricks/

If I’d known then what I know now I’d have paid more attention and made more notes/

It did give you a rough starting point and you could sort of understand why things were

happening and what you were doing to some extent when you came on site/

Second Year modules: Theory was the main one, but I’m not sure how it’s put into practice here/

If we were more involved in doing the matrices and post-excavation, maybe we could relate

things more/

Teaching methods:

In the First Year they were a lot more hands-on, this year they just want you to remember it/

They do expect quite a bit of you because they have so many First Years/

We’ve done a bit of teaching First Years and that helps a lot because it reiterates what we know

and understand and relearn things if necessary/

We’ve been in the same situation and it’s nice to pass things on/

They’re a bit scared but they see us being friendly and they inch forwards, we’re not in authority/

We’re intermediate between the First Years and the supervisors, they’ll ask us first if there’s a

problem/

We work alongside them which is useful/

Skills:

You learn to live in a small group and you have get along with people even if you don’t like

them/

Sharing/

You work as a team sharing ideas and getting different perspectives/

You learn how to record things in detail/

Public speaking from doing visitor tours/

How to explain things to different age groups/

My analytical skills have improved from being here

Assessment:

Yes, being assessed is important/

It’s definitely worth while, it wouldn’t be worth coming out here if you weren’t assessed/

If you get a really low mark it’s telling you that this is not the job for you/

The feedback can boost your confidence, as well letting you know the areas where you need to

improve/

You can be really good on site and get a good mark there and your exam could bring you down

slightly, but overall you’re not going to get a really low mark/

188

They’re not negative on the feedback, even if you get a low mark they tell you where you can

improve rather than you did something badly/

Here they’re very clear on what they expect from you, our supervisor specifically asked us what

do we want to get out of this. It works both ways – what we want to get out of it and what he

wants to give us/

To assess it you can compare it to what you see out in the real world such as how well you can

identify the different contexts and if it’s to the standard an employer would expect/

You need to look at how well you work with a team because that is what archaeology is about/

The self-assessment bit is a good idea, but it would be better if we had a higher word limit. I

think I’d have done better with a 2,000 word limit because I could have expanded more on it/

I struggled getting to the word limit because I hate talking about myself/

It forces you to say the negative things, you must have two weaknesses

Difficult to be precise, especially when you’re talking about yourself/

The supervisor assessment is good because they know you best, off-site as well as on/

The exam is useful to show your understanding/

Group assessment would be a very difficult thing to do/

You’d need some structure of hierarchy rather than just bunching some people together. That

could bring out leadership qualities/

Can’t really see the students in a group allocating individual marks very well/

Fieldwork diary:

We kept a diary last year to some extent/

This year I’m keeping a note of what I dig and try to do little matrices/

It helps with the self-assessment and you can see where you went wrong later/


The Contemporary Practice module was terrible. Basically they told us archaeology was a crap

career/

They said you’ll have loads of fun but be poor, it wasn’t the best way to enthuse us/

The CV writing practice was good and how to sell yourself/

PDP is quite a good idea; it can help with doing job applications/

Helps you target your CV more effectively/

The feedback on the fieldwork assessment could fit in with it, help see your good points easier/

None of us are doing it at the moment though/

Will probably start doing it before I leave university/


Residential is definitely better, there a few days last year when I had to go home because my tent

was damaged and it was so different rather than staying here/

You have the professional relationship with everyone and at 5.30 that disappears and you have

the social side of it/

You can go up to supervisors and just be yourself/

If it was non-residential it would just be like any day job/

You have more respect for the people you work with if you stay here/

You can hear about the supervisors’ experiences in archaeology/

People do see you at your worst, but we’re all dirty and dusty so nobody’s bothered about that/

It’s definitely a levelling experience/

189

Site Trainees Group


It’s constructive, you feel like you’ve achieved something/

There’s a visible alteration to something/

I just love being outside/

There’s a really nice balance, if you’re not good at one thing, there’s always something else/

Just starting out by digging, it’s a platform you can build on to do other things/

Why applied to be Site Trainees:

Experience, it looks really good on a CV and I get to spend a little bit more time at university/

It shows that you’ve been paid to do archaeology/

It’s also just wanting to be here/


I want to stick with archaeology, but I’m still unsure as to what type of job. I want to build up

experience in other things like museum volunteering/

I’m staying on at university to do my Masters, because I like the academic stuff as well. I’m

interested in linking the artefacts with the academic side/

I plan to go into field archaeology and I see this as a stepping stone into that/

Expectations:

I came as an A level student and loved it and, for me, it completely altered where I was going/

I came before university and only did a week, but it affirmed that I’d chosen to do the right

degree/

I had done fieldwork before and it was what I thought it was going to be/

I was a bit scared at first, but that was when I started to really enjoy my course, the best bit of my

degree/

Teaching modules: I don’t know about the First Year/

One of our lecturers was very field work and theory orientated and from she talked about it

helped give me an eye for things. She made us think outside the box and it did help when we

came to the practical bit/

Gave you a perspective for it; you’ve got to keep your head about it because you’re interpreting it

as you dig/

It changed my perspective in that I don’t look at things the same way, so having both sides of it

was good/

It helped you realise that you mustn’t force your preconceptions on things/

They taught us critical thinking basically/

Teaching methods:

I haven’t been assigned any students, my teaching has been helping people where they’ve been

having difficulties/

I like to explain it, go through the processes and then leave them to it. That’s because I find it

really intimidating for someone to stand over me and watch me working. I also tell them that if

190

they don’t know, to ask and that it’s okay to ask questions and that everyone starts off by

struggling a bit/

I show them what we’re doing, talk them through the process and explain why we’re doing it and

why to do it in a particular way/

I’ve had to learn to convey my understanding to other people; the Staff Training Day really

helped me with that. Rather than just telling them how to do things, I ask them if they understand

why they’re doing something and what we’re trying to achieve especially when they’re getting a

bit bored doing cleaning. It actually helps me to get things straight in my head as well/

I go back to my own experience as a student, there were times when people told me something

that really helped make it click for me and I try to show them the way that I learnt to do it.

You’ve got to put it over in a way that makes sense and you have to make sure they understand

the terminology/

You have to be patient and learn not to be frustrated if someone doesn’t understand straight away

and you have to go through it all again/

There’s times you can’t put too much pressure on them/

If you’ve built up your own self-confidence, that’s the difference between being a student with

some experience who helps out and being able to teach effectively/

If you are patient with them then they’re more likely to see you as approachable/

They also get more enthusiastic about the things they find and come up to you to tell you about it

and they want you to be proud of them/

It’s about creating a rapport/

If you’re working with a large group of students it can be a bit harder to get round to everyone,

you need quite a high staff/student ratio to make it work well/

Skills:

People on other courses are always saying they don’t have as strong a friendship group as we do

because we do field work. Even if you don’t learn anything and you hate field work, you’ve had

the experience. It’s not just what it does for you academically; it does something for your self-

confidence and the way you get on with your peers/

It’s a team bonding experience more than anything else and you make all these friends/

It shaped me as a person, it allowed me to be a bit more independent and it’s quite a safe

environment to do that in because you’re in something that’s like a large family/

There’s patience and following through with a task; you know you have to complete it and the

steps that it takes to do it. There’s being on time, being tidy because it’s your responsibility to

keep track of your things on and off site; that’s a skill for life, organising yourself. You’re not

spoon fed here/

Independence of thought whilst also knowing how to think within a group/

Problem solving/

There’s teaching because once you’ve been taught how to do something you often have to go and

show someone else; explaining it to someone else reaffirms what you’ve learnt/

I work in a shop to get through university and there’s lots of things I can take from here for that,

like understanding scales and that’s a really good skill to have. They give me a plan of how they

want things arranged drawn on a piece of paper and I can understand it/

Being able to measure things properly is important and doing paperwork properly and

standardised working methods/

It’s the little things as much as the big transferable skills/

191

Assessment:

It’s really important because it’s such a huge part of your degree. At university we learn how to

think like an archaeologist, but to actually come and do it adds a whole new dimension to it and

that’s an important part of the whole learning process. To not be assessed on this is lacking

something/

You shouldn’t assess it in the same way as exams because it’s much more personal and you

shouldn’t try and compare it with other forms of assessment, it doesn’t fit in with other criteria

like that. But it should definitely be assessed/

It provides not just what the student gains, but it is also a regulator for better teaching by the staff

and how the university can do things better/

It’s a very difficult thing to assess because you need to allow people to show they understand

things with something like an exam, but that favours the academic ones over the practical people/

That can be balanced with continuous assessment by the supervisors because it can be hard to

transfer what you’ve learnt onto paper/

You’re trying to assess something where people are constantly learning/

You’re always working together and helping each other as well/

Trouble with group assessment is that some people will carry others through it. To allocate marks

within a group would come down to group rapport and could cause a lot of problems; it would

have to be very strongly mediated/

It can be difficult to judge people at the same level/

You can revise for an exam, but this is practical work and it’s very different/

I don’t think a standardised assessment is going to happen; it’s such an individual thing. Even a

context card, different supervisors like things done in different ways. It’ll also vary so much from

site to site, it has to be tailored to each particular site/

There’s so much involved in it, there is a bit for everyone to shine at something/

Fieldwork diary:

The journal was useful to keep a record of things/

The self-reflective essay is to easy to copy out of the handbook/

But at least you realise what you’ve done/

What I wrote down was things I did each week and what I thought I was trying to contribute to

the project/

The diary is good to see how you’ve progressed and what you’ve learnt. Then you know what

you’re talking about in the essay rather than just looking at the handbook/

I didn’t keep a diary and I reckon that was good because I actually had to think about what I’d

done and it wasn’t written down in front of me/

I used my diary to help me apply for this job; it’s a prompt for writing my CV/


Things like that do help because I don’t always notice or am aware of the life skills things. When

you apply for a job you can sit down and write the key words for different skills. You can’t do

that after one week here, it’s something that builds up/

Writing lots of different CVs for different jobs is almost like having an extended PDP/

You write the skills as key words on your CV and then in the supporting statement you say that

you did an archaeology degree and how you got the skills from that/

Things like saying I came back to Silchester – that’s showing dedication, as well as mentioning

other projects you’ve done as well. That’s applicable to most jobs/

192

When I applied for a part-time job at the end of my First Year, I got that because I’m doing a

degree in archaeology. It was seen as interesting and different and none of the other applicants

had that; it’s something totally unique/

It gives you a talking point for interviews; it’s a common interest degree/

193

Appendix XIV – Reading Supervisor/Site Director

Interviews

Assistant Supervisor 1

Background:

I was here as a student and I’ve been working my way up the staff roles and I’m now an Assistant

Supervisor. Since graduating I’ve been working in commercial archaeology.

Teaching methods:

I enjoy teaching the students as long as they’re enjoying it. It can be quite frustrating if you’re

trying to teach someone who has no interest and they have to be here. It’s not a compulsory

option for the Joint Students now, so the ones here are more likely to be enthusiastic. Even if they

take a while to pick it up, as long as they’re willing and eager that makes it easier. They have

talks about various aspects like context sheets and planning, but I’ll still run through things with

them to ensure that they fully understand it all. I’m always asking them if they understand things.

With different contexts I’m trying to ensure that they can see the differences. You sometimes

have to be patient and explain things in different ways. Sometimes the students are a bit too

scared to say they don’t understand; I’d rather they asked me about ten times and get it right than

not at all and have to do the work again. Some people like being spoon fed, whilst others quite

like the independence. You have to push some people and they find that they really enjoy it when

they try it. We do try to ensure that everyone at least has a go at everything. That doesn’t happen

on all Field Schools so you can’t assume that they’ll be fine if they’ve been on other digs


Some people think it’s going to be like it is on TV. They have the opportunities to do finds and

environmental and some may ask if they can spend extra days on those. Not everyone likes the

digging side. As long as they have a go at everything they can usually find their niche that they

enjoy. If I’ve got something I know a particular individual will enjoy, I will try and give it to

them in the hope that it will fulfil their expectations, but that’s not always possible. Most of the

time I think people are quite satisfied.

Skills:

The obvious thing is team work, but there’s also patience. Looking at the bigger picture is

important. I try to get them to think about what they’re digging and see it as part of something

bigger; learning to look at things in a three dimensional sort of way. Theorising happens a lot and

being creative and having ideas. It will depend on the individual person, how much of themselves

they put into it. There’s working in different ways and meeting a whole new group of people.

Even if you’re working alone, everything you do can affect the work around you.

Assessment:

If they want to go into field archaeology being assessed will matter. If they know they have

targets they may push more to try and do certain things. It is very important for them to know

what they’re being assessed on so that they know what is expected of them. At the end of it they

can be confident of going into a job if they’ve covered everything here and been assessed on it. It

makes them more comfortable going into a job if they know they’ve reached a certain level. In

194

assessing it, understanding is important. If they’re just doing it then they are just following

instructions without knowing why they’re doing it. From that they can be more independent in

their work when they go into a job. The outcome of their work is important as well. Some areas

can be hard to assess, some people are really enthusiastic but actually not very good at it. So it’s

good to be able assess attitude and enthusiasm.


If people take it on board this can be very useful. With the assessment the students will be spoken

to about how they are doing and they’ll get their feedback and this can be very useful for PDP.

They may not do so well in the First Year, but this can help them develop and they come back in

the Second Year and they’ve improved.


Residential you get the more social side of things and get to interact with people outside of your

own particular team. I found that I didn’t know many people on mu university course until after

my first season digging. Socialising with the staff can be important because quite often people

will come and talk to us and ask us about our work.


Background:

I recently graduated in Archaeology and I’m starting a Masters in October. I’ve been coming to

Silchester for four years now and worked my way up to Assistant Supervisor.

Teaching methods:

I enjoy teaching the students; it’s a good way for me to learn as well – I can learn from my

mistakes and the students’ mistakes. It’s rewarding to see them go away with the skills they to

move up the ladder themselves. They all have to learn the basic skills so they will start with

cleaning. I will teach the necessary techniques as we go along depending on the features we have.

We try to get them all to do a bit of everything. I’m on site working alongside them. So, if it

comes to planning, the first time I’ll do it myself and have them following and doing everything I

do so they get a feel for it. Then I’ll leave them on their own and see what happens.


When I first came everything was completely unexpected; it was great, it was living a dream to

be excavating for the first time. I loved it no matter what. I think for the students they discover

that there’s a lot of hard work involved in archaeology, but that can be good because it makes feel

like you’re achieving something.

Skills:

They get a lot of experience with people, socialising. I was a very closed person before I came on

the Field School and I made most of my friends here. That opens doors for you anywhere you go,

whatever career you choose. There are loads of techniques in archaeology that are a good

experience for the outside world things like visitors’ tours. I remember my first year doing that I

was very nervous about showing people around, but I had to get used to talking to people. No

195

matter what job you do you’ll have to be able to argue your case or point of view. I was fortunate

that I was allowed to come out here and get plenty of field work experience, but as a Joint

Honours student I don’t think I got enough on the archaeological theory.

Assessment:

I think the assessment is very important, they can prove they’ve learnt something, but I think the

practical work they do is more important. If the assessment is just a mark or trying to find how

much they have learnt that’s okay, but the assessment on site is more important – what

supervisors think of them and what they think of the supervisors. I think it should be more of a

one-to-one thing; if they’ve got problems then they can come to us and we’ll help them. An exam

isn’t so relevant; it doesn’t tell you about their practical ability. If they fail that, they should be

able to resit it.

Fieldwork diary:

I think the field diary is very useful. I know that a few of the students here are doing it and it does

seem to help them. Looking back on my diary from the First and Second Years has been very

useful to me.


That is definitely a good idea. I didn’t get to do the Contemporary Practice in British

Archaeology module which covers PDP because I was Joint Honours. That’s one problem of

being a Joint student is that you probably don’t get as much help as a Single Honours student

because you’re dealing with two departments. It was very divided and half the things I wanted to

in archaeology, I couldn’t.


It’s clear what’s good about a residential Field School; it’s like a family here. The problem with

that can be that some of them might not focus on the archaeology enough and think we’re just

here for a holiday. If the staff are close as a group they can help each other to help the students

and, consequently, they learn a lot more. It can help with the assessment as well because you’re

talking to the person, not just the digger. The social skills you build on a residential Field School

are important; after my first season here in my Second Year I had the confidence to start talking

to my lecturers. However, I’ve not got anything to compare Silchester to as yet.


Background:

I worked at Silchester as an undergraduate for three years and after that went into commercial

archaeology for about a year. After doing my Masters I worked in heritage management and

planning. I’m now going on to do a Teacher Training course in history. Working here this

summer will give me a bit more experience of teaching.

Teaching methods:

Teaching the students is one of the things I enjoy, working one-to-one with the students, helping

them to learn and dig. It’s one of the things that helped make my mind up about going into

teaching, I also volunteer to help with the Young Archaeologists Club back home. My methods

196

of teaching depend on the type of features you’re working on and the type of student. It can take

a day or two to work out an individual personality, whether they need to ask questions or need

more guidance. Sometimes they pick it up really quickly and you’re able to give someone a task

and they can get on with it for 15 or 20 minutes. Others may need a bit more guidance – you have

to show them what they need to do by demonstrating it yourself. You can’t say that one method

works for every student.


In the first couple of days it’s not what they expected. In the first week there’s a lot of cleaning

involved and getting the site ready. A lot of students find it hard to understand the benefits of

cleaning; frustrating, cleaning something up and not finding any archaeology and not being able

to see the wider picture. After that, I think they see the benefits of that and it lives up to their

expectations. The physical hard work can be a shock to many of them; wheel barrowing and

mattocking. Perhaps their expectation had been they’d be on their knees with a trowel slowly

picking off things. When they’re told to use a mattock, in the first couple of days they can be

quite worried that they’ll ruin some archaeology. You have to let them know that we can all make

mistakes at time. It’s important to let them know about the bigger picture, you can become quite

isolated working in one particular area working on one patch of gravel – you need to see how

important that is to the wider area.

Skills:

The Field School is a rite of passage for students. It can be quite hard to make friends at

university, but here you’re forced to come out of your shell and make friends and learn to get on

with people and you become more confident. You’re thrown in with such a wide range of people

of different ages and backgrounds. Team work is so important, working within your own team;

you have to work with other people whether it’s planning or digging. You can transfer that to

working together in seminars in the Second Year, swopping ideas and talking about different

topics. Even if you don’t go into archaeology there are so many skills that you pick up that can be

used in other professions.

Assessment:

It is important that they are assessed. This is the practical side of an archaeology degree and if

you want to go into commercial archaeology you need to learn the practical skills; it’s part of

their degree. To assess someone you need to follow their progress right from the beginning. You

need to realise that nobody’s going to be an expert in just four weeks. As long as they can show

that they’ve understood what they’re doing and begin to interpret the archaeology, that’s

probably the best way. You can assess their recording skills because that’s something physical on

a piece of paper. It’s also important to see how they’ve actually dug a feature. You need to be

doing a continuous assessment as someone may struggle at the beginning but bloom later. An

exam can be tricky; someone may be good with practical things on site but struggle with an

exam. I’m uncertain whether you can assess someone’s archaeological skills through an exam; it

can only really cover theoretical things.

Fieldwork diary:

I think something self-reflective like a journal is really useful, at the end you can see whether you

have picked things up and understood the archaeology and what’s going on in the wider area.

197


I’ve done CPD at work. PDP sounds really useful, it’s something that I would have liked to have

a bit more of at university; I think self-evaluation is really important. You can focus on the areas

you need to develop and show your strengths as well. What they do a Field School can feed into

that. There’s the practical side, knowing whether field archaeology is something you want to do

or if finds or science is their thing.


Personally, I think a residential Field School works better. You’re working with such a wide

range of people and you have the opportunity to get to know them better. The friends I’ve made

here are friends for life, that’s important if you go into commercial archaeology. It helps build

your self-reliance as well. You’re mixing with everybody, especially the supervisors, and that

builds up the working relationships on site and gives you the confidence to ask questions. On the

downside, residential is not for everybody, especially shy people. If it’s going to be residential

you need to ensure that it’s inclusive for everybody.


Background:

I graduated from university a couple of years ago and have been working in commercial

archaeology since. I’ve also been involved in a number of university field projects. I like to keep

close ties with university, but I like the stability of working for a commercial firm as well. At

Silchester I’ve worked my way up from Site Trainee.

Teaching methods:

Teaching people fieldwork is probably my favourite part of archaeology as a whole. When I’m

here I’m not that much of a hands on digging person, I like to let the students do it and learn from

their own mistakes. First thing we’ll do is give them a talk about the tools, what they’re used for

and the dangers. Then find an area where they can start cleaning back. I monitor them quite

closely and show them my technique of cleaning. I don’t think there’s a ‘right’ way, there’s a lot

of different ways people can clean and use a trowel; it’s best for people to find their own way and

what they’re most comfortable with. It’s the process of cleaning, defining a feature, planning it

and then excavating the feature. It’s useful to remind them of those steps. Every student should

get the opportunity to do every single stage of the process. One of the problems on this site is that

there aren’t many sections to draw. In commercial archaeology sections can be all that you draw

and they need to be taught that. In our team we’re actually getting them to draw parts of a section

that have already been recorded so that they can get experience of the task. It’s a waste of time in

archaeological terms, but teaching is more important here. Sometimes people forget about the

teaching element and just want to push on with the archaeology. Another thing lacking is that

they should get taught how to take professional photographs, so we’re thinking about getting a

digital camera, a scale and a board and giving them experience of that. I think we do a good job

and teach well, but it doesn’t prepare you for everything. Perhaps we should have a piece of

paper with a flow chart and a list of things it is essential that the students get experience of on a

Field School, and all the transferable skills as well.

198


There’s always a wide range of reactions to it; some people are a bit underwhelmed and some are

a bit overwhelmed. It’s good if they don’t come with too many expectations of finding amazing

fantastic things, because some may be in area where all they do is peel back levels of gravels; but

they may actually learn more from that just working through contexts. It’s good to give them a

variety of things though with having a go at digging postholes or pits. A big difficulty is that a lot

of students rely on the summer break to earn money and this eats into that. It’s getting

increasingly harder for Second and Third Years to be able to come and do this; we’ve definitely

seen that this year. That’s a shame because they’re the people that make the supervisors’ job less

pressured as they know what they’re doing to some extent, they’ve got the basic skills. That is a

problem which is difficult to solve, the university can’t pay the students to be here.

Skills:

Team working is a big thing you learn here. There’s also physical labour, that’s what archaeology

is; but even doing this doesn’t prepare you for how physical commercial archaeology is, this is

only about a tenth of what you have to do on a day-to-day basis. You can see people either like to

push themselves and work hard or they can sit back and not exert themselves too much.

Archaeology is a good way to teach people to think practically and through processes. Every

employer looks to someone who’s got good team working skills, nobody wants a lone ranger.

This is good experience of learning how to respect the chain of command; the students do seem

to have a great deal of respect for the supervisors because of our experience. Everyone knows

that it’s not a well-paid career and people do it because they’re passionate about it. I like the idea

of students doing placements; they always make a very good impression on the companies

because they’re always very keen. They’re not seasoned veterans, more budding amateurs, but

they learn fast because they’re willing to spend a year learning commercial archaeology. There is

the question of how well does research archaeology prepare you for commercial work. The Field

School is about taking your time because you have to teach people, in commercial archaeology

you’re given a mattock and get pointed at a hole and told to get going. Going on a Field School is

something that should be looked on highly even if people don’t want to go into archaeology –

staying in a field for a month and working six days a week is a big ask.

Assessment:

Assessment is very important. If they didn’t do a training dig as part of their degree, or maybe got

some practical instruction on techniques, it wouldn’t work. Archaeology is something you only

learn by getting down and doing it, doesn’t matter how many books you read. You need to assess

their progress from the beginning when they don’t know anything all the way through to the end

when they’ve either picked up all the skills or if they’ve struggled. Sometimes archaeology isn’t

for everybody and assessment can be a good way of showing people whether they’ve made the

right choice or not. However, if you do archaeology you don’t have to do field archaeology. An

on-going assessment is the best way to do it. You have to have an exam as well, but that only

really assesses the theoretical side not skill at excavation. I encourage the students to spend ten

minutes each day writing down what they’ve learnt, that’ll help with the self-reflective essay. I

remember when I did my diary, I wrote the whole thing the day before it had to be handed in.

That does show that there are flaws in the way we assess this work. I think this is probably the

most difficult module to assess. I don’t think anybody really leaves site with a bad on-going

assessment, unless they’ve been basically lazy. You need the assessment because you can’t come

out of university without the essential skills and expect to get a job in field archaeology. The job

199

market is saturated with experienced archaeologists; it’s whether an employer wants to choose

new blood.


This isn’t something I’ve really thought about. I think it could be good for students to assess

themselves as they go along, I don’t think they’d get anywhere if was just us telling them what

they need; they don’t want to be spoon-fed. A lot of them have a clear idea of what they want to

get out of this, get the raw make up of a field archaeologist if that’s what they want to go into. If

not, this process can help them understand archaeology in a more academic sense.


A residential Field School allows people to become a lot closer to the people they’re working

with, and their supervisors. Living right next to the site is good for staff as well; we don’t have to

be up so early. It’s a welcome break or staff. It’s important that staff are happy or students won’t

get the best level of teaching. It’s good to have the students creating a close-knit relationship. It

does have its flaws, sometimes it can be treated as a festival or holiday. As the years have gone

on and the staff grown up a bit more, we keep a lot closer check on that side of things. It’s also

quite a long way to travel out here every day and people don’t necessarily have their own

transport. It cuts out absenteeism as well, residential helps you keep tabs on where people are.

Supervisor 1

Background:

I was at Silchester when I was a student and in my Second and Third Years I was planning

assistant on site. After I graduated I started working in commercial archaeology. I’ve managed to

get time off every summer to come back here and worked my way up from planning assistant

through trainee supervisor and assistant supervisor to full supervisor in the last two seasons. Over

the years I’ve worked on most parts of the site which has been very useful. This is more

complicated than what I do in commercial archaeology. There are clear research objectives to aim

for, rather than just digging everything as quickly as possible.

Teaching methods:

I enjoy teaching the students, along with the archaeology that’s why I come back here. People

will come here not knowing how to trowel and will leave knowing how to do the whole process

of archaeology, why they’re doing it and the best way to do it. I want to teach people to do things

absolutely right in the way they do things. Initially they get some talks about the background to

the site and an introduction to things like contexts. The first thing I get them to do is clean so that

they have some understanding of how to trowel. I show them how I hold a trowel, the kind of

pressure to exert and how to actually go about it. I keep a close eye on them and correct their

technique as they work, Some people seem to get it straight away, so I don’t stalk them; but if

they’re doing it wrong there’s no point in leaving them. Then I’ll get them clean a particular area,

something like a gravel deposit that’s not too important if they go too deep. After that I’ll take

them through a context from beginning to end – defining it, going through how to fill out a

context sheet, then the process of planning and its relation to the site grid. On the planning I have

a fairly set pattern for what I say because I’ve been teaching it for so long. As I set up the

planning area with them I describe why I’m doing various things. I think if you can tell them

200

everything as well as possible in the first instance it gives them a better opportunity to use that

information. If it’s not explained thoroughly there can be a lack of understanding in their minds

which can persist later on. I suppose you could teach them in a more roundabout hit and miss

way and then they’ll perfect their technique later on and gradually gain knowledge; but there is

the risk they might never learn the right way to do it. I’d like to have the opportunity to go into

greater depth teaching individual students something, but that means I could be neglecting other

students. Perhaps it would be good if I could go through the whole process of planning or writing

a context card on site with a small group of about three people. That would give them a model of

best practice to work to. It’s very difficult because sometimes you may be over-stretched. It’s

very dependent on the archaeology, sometimes you’ll be able to teach everybody in sequence and

you will get to spend time with everyone. But sometimes different people will need to start a plan

ten minutes apart and you’re already doing the planning with someone else. You can’t always do

it quite as you’d like to, but I don’t know how you can get around that when you have to meet the

research targets as well. You have to care about both the students and the archaeology.

Skills:

I think they learn a sense of self-reliance, responsibility and commitment to a project and turning

up on time and doing things to a high level. There are basic surveying skills. Even as students

they learn teaching skills because they help each other and go through things that they’ve just

learned. They will have a different perspective; if you’ve being teaching something for a while

there are may be things that seem obvious, whereas a student can teach it in a way that may not

occur to you because things have become so natural. They learn team work, although some

people may spend the whole six weeks working on their own and resenting everybody else for

having the 30 metre tape that they want. If there is a lack of equipment they have to learn to

cooperate, negotiate and share. Problem solving – not just saying we haven’t got a 30 metre tape I

can’t do the work; it’s thinking how can I get the work done. It’s about not giving up because it’s

not perfect.

Assessment:

They should be assessed; it adds a sense of significance to this as a module of their degree,

otherwise it would just be a ‘jolly’. If they are being assessed it means that they work harder at it.

You could argue that people who want to go into commercial archaeology will work harder

anyway, but that’s not always true at 19. You could be here, not be assessed and have a really

good time, but be a real slacker and not get that much out of it. From an outside perspective it’s

hard to judge how to assess it, but when you work with people every day and talk to them you

can see the difference between somebody who has a natural flair for archaeology and

immediately starts using their judgement. When you’re talking about it, some people will just

listen to what you say and some will ask you questions. You can tell when they understand things

by talking to people. It’s about drawing conclusions from evidence rather than just collecting

evidence. An unfortunate thing is that nobody is going to work on the same thing as everybody

else which can potentially put some people at a disadvantage, but over a period of a few weeks

they will have the opportunity to demonstrate their ability and knowledge and the way they are

thinking about things. Planning is much easier to assess – some people draw hideous plans and

some draw brilliant plans; and some people will never understand the site grid. There is the

chance for everyone to have a similar experience with planning.

201


I know about this from my professional background. This could definitely be useful to them; I

don’t see how this is any less relevant to their personal and general career development than any

other part their degree or their life. If you do volunteer work you put that down and this is no less

significant than that.


On a residential Field School they probably bond better as a team. It gives them a chance to have

more social interaction with the people supervising them which can give them more of an

understanding of the life of a commercial archaeologist. Living in the place your working gives

you a sense of belonging to the archaeology; you begin to properly care about the project, its

goals and the people you are working with rather than it just being a task you have to do.

However, it doesn’t suit everybody, especially things like camping which can put a dampener on

it for some people. Boundaries may be lowered a bit and level of respect students have for staff

may be slightly reduced. I don’t think that actually affects assessment, but it is something you

need to be aware of and careful about. You do need to keep a professional distance even if you

are socialising with students; you are someone providing education and you should act

accordingly.

Supervisor 2

Background:

I’ve worked on various projects over the years in commercial archaeology as a Field

Archaeologist. After a while I decided to get a job in the Graphics Office because I’ve always

had an interest in illustration. In previous years I have been able to go out and do a bit of digging

when extra field staff were needed, but as I’m now the senior in the Graphics Department I’m not

allowed out so much now. The Field School is really the only field archaeology I get to do and

it’s important to me to be able to come and do this and my employers let me have time off to

come here and I’ve been coming here for several years now. The good thing about my job is that

it’s acceptable to take sabbaticals to go and do field projects.

Teaching methods:

I very much enjoy the teaching. I like talking to people and ask them what they understand of

what they’re doing. It’s easy to forget that people don’t understand much after they’ve only been

here a few days. I ask them questions and see what their answers are and then what they need to

know. Before I set them off on a job I explain what the feature is that they are doing and take it

from there. I show them physically how to trowel. When they first start I put them with

experienced people so that they know what they’re aiming for; otherwise they wouldn’t know

how much to take off, they might be a bit frightened. If they’re working next to somebody who

knows what they’re doing, it makes my life easier. They learn from each other quite a lot of the

time.


It’s very rare to get people who don’t enjoy themselves, although it has happened. In those cases

it’s usually people whose expectations aren’t met. It’s difficult to know what their expectations

were; perhaps they might have assumed they’d be brushing something delicately for two weeks.

This year I’m really fortunate that the team seems to be really enthusiastic; they’re all overjoyed

202

to be here. They’re having a good time, even the ones who have just been trowelling for two

days.

Skills:

They’re learning social skills because they’re thrown into a situation that’s out of their comfort

zone and they’re all doing communal activities and being part of the rotas. Some of these people

might not be used to having to do any domestic activities, so it’s good for them to experience it.

When I get First Years who are only 18 or 19 years old they can seem quite immature and

innocent. It’s interesting to come back the following year and see how they’ve changed. Not just

a result of doing fieldwork, but doing a degree makes people more confident and comfortable in

themselves. The skills they can use for other professions are team work, being very methodical,

having a set way of doing something – you clean the archaeology, you record it and do a plan and

then you excavate down to the next level – everything is done in a set way. There’s sharing –

sharing tools, sharing features – and also communication.

Assessment:

It’s very important that they are assessed; I’ve noticed a change since people have been assessed

– they’re aware that they have to make an effort. I don’t know if their attitude is better because

they’re being assessed or because they’re genuinely keen, but it must have an impact in some

way. In assessing them I make sure that I’ve worked and talked with all of them. Also, I’ll

discuss with my other staff about individual students when I come to do the assessment, as well

as just my own opinion. A practical test is kind of what they are doing anyway on site, and that’s

what I’m partly assessing them on. I don’t think it would be a good idea to give them a feature

and then and for them to feel that they were being assessed at that moment as they were

excavating it; that would be strange and intimidating.


I do CPD at work and it’s a good thing to do because we have appraisals every year and it’s all

linked in together. Our managers wouldn’t necessarily know our aspirations unless they were

recorded and it is like having a record of your career progression. PDP can feed into what they do

here, the Field School is part of their course and this is practical; they probably don’t do much

practical outside of this.


A residential Field School enables you to get to know each other better and makes the team work

stronger. I live nearby, but I choose to stay here because I think me being here all the time is part

of my experience, and equally part of theirs’. It’s all part of the learning experience of being here.

Supervisor 3

Background:

I graduated two years ago and since I’ve been working mostly in commercial archaeology, short-

term contracts. This is my 5th

season at Silchester and the first time I’ve had my own area with a

fairly large team.

203

Teaching methods:

I enjoy teaching them. From my own selfish point of view I benefit from seeing other people’s

enthusiasm. Many environments that archaeologists work in can be quite negative, whereas

something like this is much more positive. To start with I get them cleaning and I work with them

so they can follow what I’m doing. Then I leave them to it, come back later and tell them what

they’ve done right and done wrong and how to improve on what they’re doing. Once they’ve got

some basic trowel skills and it comes to recording and planning I’ll sit down with them in pairs

going through with them what to do. Things like what they need to put on a context sheet and

why. For planning, again in pairs draw something with them. This all follows on from various

talks they’re having so they should have a basic understanding. There’s a lot of just letting them

get stuck in, but keeping an eye on them as well. There is a lot for them to take in in quite a short

period of time, especially for the Joint Honours students. Their biggest worry seems to be that

they’re not doing it right or not picking it up. I tell them it’s something that comes with

experience by just doing it.


From my own I experience, five years ago I wasn’t really looking forward to coming here, but

within a week I was having the time of my life. They seem to be enjoying themselves and not

getting too bored yet. There is quite a lot of variation in what they’ve got to do once they’ve done

the cleaning. They also go off and do finds and environmental, other sides of the job that I can’t

really teach them because I’m a field archaeologist.

Skills:

There’s the usual clichés of team work and communication, but it is true. A lot of the time you’re

working in pairs – digging big features and passing buckets. When you’re planning you’re

talking about it and discussing things. This all involves problem solving which will help in other

aspects of life, even if you don’t become an archaeologist. There are analytical skills, being able

to look at something and interpret it; that’s relevant to a lot of non-archaeological environments.

It’s benefitting from a very different experience that not a lot of people get. There’s the social

aspect, meeting a lot of new people. From my own experience, Archaeology is probably one of

the most tightly knit courses at university; not many students spend a huge amount of time with

the people they do their courses with and live in a field with them for several weeks, that is a

great benefit for them.

Assessment:

Assessment is very important. When I was assessed I did very well, it was the only First I got.

The assessment enables people who aren’t necessarily academically able to thrive. If you want to

be a Field Archaeologist, you need to be able to the job and the assessment process allows you to

sort out who’s good at what. Also they can find out for themselves what they were good at and

are they actually capable of doing it. I don’t see the point of them coming here and being taught

and there not being some kind of assessment process. You don’t get a module at university that

isn’t examined in some way.

The new assessment sheets we have are much more designed towards the job, before it was just a

practical fieldwork sheet. At the moment I’m keeping in mind how everyone’s doing and who’s

good at what. I think the exam’s good, it’s the best way of assessing their stratigraphic

understanding and dating methods. The only way you can really assess someone is by examining

204

them or someone else assessing their performance. Perhaps there should be some kind of

personal critique where they say what they think they were good at and what they want to

improve on; but I’m not sure how you could mark that as a piece of course work. Perhaps you

could have some kind of post-excavation interview, not so much an assessment but as part of

their development as an archaeologist.


I think it’s a good thing, but it’s also something that, from my own experience, is massively

underused. One problem I have with archaeology as a profession is that the word ‘career’ is a

very loose term. The longest contract I’ve ever worked is four months; I normally move after

every twelve weeks – you either get laid off or the job finishes. It’s so hit and miss as a job, there

is no career development. On my first ever job I was given a career development folder and it’s

still sat somewhere at my mum’s house with nothing in it. You can go for months and not really

learn any new skills. However, maybe doing it at university level will be good because it will

give people an understanding of what they’ve learnt. Perhaps they should be spoken to about it

before the excavation, then after their first excavation they can work out the areas where they

need to develop. Keep a record of what they’ve done and learnt as they go from project to project

and by the time they leave university they’ll have a good knowledge of what they’re capable of

and be able to assemble a CV. All the other skills their learning could feed into that. For myself, I

have a quite strong CV for archaeology, but if I wanted to go into some form of management I

would struggle because it involves skills I haven’t developed. For an Archaeology student who

wants to go into teaching, if they’ve kept a record of what they’ve done, they can say they have

the relevant skills for a teaching job because of what they’ve done on field work. I think any kind

of career development is a massively good thing.


A residential Field School is a lot of fun. Socially, it’s very rewarding because you meet a lot of

people you’d never meet normally. It helps people get on and do well in quite odd environments,

like living in a tent for several weeks. However, you do get people who don’t want to be here,

they don’t like living in tents. I do think residential is better because the relationship between

students and staff is a good thing. Really small things; archaeology is a very small profession and

if they decide they want to go into it they will know a fair spread of people who work for

different companies already. That’s how I got my first job.

Supervisor 4

Background:

My original background is in Local Government and then I did a degree in Archaeology. Since

then I have worked on a variety of archaeological sites, but I’ve not been a professional

archaeologist. I’ve taught Archaeology as an academic subject, but I work in Local Government

for my day job. Coming here is like an interlude of archaeology for me.

Teaching methods:

I enjoy teaching the students. The most important thing is to enthuse people and get them

thinking that they can actually contribute something. I to engage them with the process right from

205

the beginning and make them ‘own’ the bit they are working on and have an opinion about it. It’s

important to be clear about the techniques they are expected to use and to not make them too

scary. You may have to go over it again and again and make it clear to them that that’s okay;

they’re not expected to understand everything straight away. You need to get people to talk about

what they’re doing. If I’m worried about someone, if I didn’t think they were actually working at

it or achieving very much, I would try and arrest that by talking to them.


Usually, if they’re here for any length of time, on the whole their expectations are met in some

way. They may not be fully met, for example if they don’t find a small find over the whole six

weeks they can get a bit upset; but some of them wouldn’t be upset by that. It depends on how far

they engage with the process, as long as they get fully into it, their expectations are met. Their

experience might be different from what they expected, but that’s not necessarily a bad thing; it’s

just shifted. They may have a picture of what it’s going to be like and it just hasn’t worked out as

they thought it would; but that’s not a negative thing.

Skills:

There’s team work, cooperation, learning to recognise their own skill base and that they can

transfer those skills into other areas. They can surprise themselves in terms of technique. There

are skills that they probably never thought they’d master; they always learn something

completely new. Past students have gone into all different sorts of professions which require the

ability to work together and cooperate, and dealing with all sorts of different people. This is a

great training ground for a lot of things, not just archaeology.

Assessment:

It’s very important that they’re assessed on their performance. It’s quite good to have a test, I’m

not a great believer in exams, but in some ways it forces them to think through what they’ve

learned and it helps the supervisors to identify any gaps in their learning. That forces the

supervisors to make sure they’ve covered the ground and revise with them and understand what

they’ve been doing. The supervisor assessment is a very good idea, but it’s not always operating

consistently because we’ve never really got together to look at it which means we all do it

slightly differently.

Fieldwork diary:

I think a field work diary is a very good idea, I don’t really know how many of them do it. If

they’re going on to do archaeology it’s important to record what they’re doing


As long as the person doing this with you is positive and constructive it can be very useful;

continuous assessed learning is a very good idea. It has to be applied consistently. If you were

going to use something like that here, you’d have to have supervisors trained up to do it. I’d hope

that what they’re doing here could feed into a system of PDP; it would be really great if it could

tie in with some of the academic work they’re doing, particularly post-excavation because that’s

something the degree doesn’t cover very well. They’ve been it at the sharp end, but how does it

206

develop from there – those are skills they need to think about. They can see what they have done

contributes to a final product


The good thing about residential is that you get to know the people you’re working with really

well and it becomes a whole experience. That’s not just here, but any dig that is residential. You

become a very close-knit group and it helps cooperation and the level of that can extend beyond

the site. The downside is that it can become so all-absorbing that you forget that there’s a world

somewhere else.

Supervisor 5

Background:

I graduated in 2002 and I’ve been coming here since my first year at university, 11 years. Since I

graduated I’ve been working pretty much non-stop in commercial archaeology here and in

Ireland.

Teaching methods:

I very much enjoy teaching students, it’s very rewarding. A lot of the archaeologists I work with

have been doing it for a long time and become quite cynical and jaded; so it’s very refreshing to

come here and work with people who are so enthusiastic. We explain to the students what the

processes of archaeology are about and then the first thing is to get to learn how to use a trowel;

that is the most basic tool. We start them off with something fairly simple like scraping things off

or cleaning up the sections of features. Once they’ve got a feel for that, I tell them how to identify

an archaeological context, which bits are distinctly different and to look around the edges of it to

see if it’s overlying or underlying any of the surrounding deposits. If it’s on top we show them

how to plan it, write a context card, take levels and then get them excavating the feature. One of

my main priorities is to make sure everyone gets experience of doing each part of the process.

One of the problems we have here is that there aren’t many cut features where they’ll have an

opportunity to draw a section. That requires the most effort on my part to make sure that

everyone’s done at least one section, even if that means the same section gets drawn five or six

times by different people. In commercial archaeology sections are much more common than

plans are; where I work we very rarely draw plans, everything’s done digitally by Total Station

and GPS.


There are certainly unexpected things; it’s usually very different from what they expect. Things

like Time Team give people a certain expectation and when they come here and find this

incredibly complex site that we have to deal with in the most minute detail, it’s on a much

smaller scale.

Skills:

They’re certainly getting good team building skills, working with other people is essential in this

sort of thing. Also being able to communicate with other people, understand their instructions or

their ideas about things and to use that to inform the way in which you yourself are working.

There’s a lot skills they can take to other professions. Archaeology draws from so many different

207

disciplines and you have to use different parts of your brain and different skills – visual skills,

linguistic skills, numeracy and so forth. Also, because we’re quite rigid about how neat things

have to be, it gives a sense of discipline.

Assessment:

Assessment is a very important thing because how good somebody is at this is something that

should be reflected in some sort of mark. Also, the people who put the most effort into this are

the ones who get the most out of it and that needs to be reflected in some way. I don’t know how

for those who go on into commercial archaeology what they managed to learn in a short space of

time here will reflect their ability to maintain that for a sustained period of time, or their ability to

enjoy doing that for a sustained period of time. How you actually assess them is very difficult.

There are various different things that have different levels of importance. The actual technical

skills are very important for someone who will want to go on and do commercial archaeology.

So, for that, it’s important to assess how accurately and neatly someone can draw a plan, how

well they can identify a context and then excavate it. Then there’s the other side of it which is the

interpretive skills which is something people always struggle with when filling out context

sheets; how to go from this descriptive process that we’ve taught them and start thinking about it

on another level and turn something descriptive into something narrative. Those two things are

very separate and assessment needs to cover both of them with equal importance.

Fieldwork diary:

A self-reflective method can be useful, but my main concern is that people can become quite self-

conscious about what they write in a diary if they’re going to be assessed on it; they may be less

honest than they would otherwise be.


This is something that is becoming increasingly commonplace. For all of my students I’ve come

up with a sort of PDP, a list of things I want them to achieve by the end of their time here. I’m

keeping a record for each person to make sure that they achieve the best level that we can teach

them to. It’s a good idea to look at things in that sort of way, rather than just throwing someone

into the field and giving them four weeks and assuming that they know everything. It’s important

that there is feedback and that we’re monitoring carefully what we’re teaching them to make sure

that there aren’t any gaps anywhere.


The people who camp here will have a very different experience, that they wouldn’t have

otherwise, of being out in the middle of nowhere without any of the normal trappings of modern

life. That’s a very positive experience for people. On a residential Field School they have the

opportunity to get to know each other better, particularly the people who aren’t in their working

or even peer groups. I’ve had the opportunity to talk to a lot of students that I wouldn’t do

otherwise if they went home every night. I hope, from their perspective, it gives them a chance to

learn more about what it is I do and make a more informed judgement about what they want to do

with their career.

208

Supervisor 6 – Planning

Background:

I’ve been a professional archaeologist for about six or seven years. I’ve done commercial

archaeology for several years, but more recently I’ve been trying to get into digs abroad and

avoid the British winter as much as possible. I can’t decide if there’s anything I’m passionate

about enough to study back in academia, but I don’t want to spend my life working on

commercial archaeology in Britain – you’re not appreciated enough and it’s not worth it for the

lifestyle and the money.

Teaching methods:

The one thing that I enjoy about the Field School most is the teaching element and feeling like

my job is worth doing because it’s actually having an influence on people and helping them

decide about their future in or not in archaeology. It’s very rewarding. I’m not actually on site

because I’m in charge of planning, but there are several ways that I go about teaching. I do

weekly talks for the students because it’s very rare they know about this sort of thing. I do an

overview of how people draw on site and why we do it. Not so much the nitty gritty of using a

pencil, but the reasons for doing what we do and what the drawn record actually consists of. Then

there’s a more practical hands on bit looking at how you take levels, use the Total Station and

how the Site Grid fits into it all. For the students who are assessed I’ve done small seminar

groups a few days before they do their written test about the Harris Matrix and stratigraphy. I try

to get into a complex understanding of it so that they can not only understand it for the exam,

which is a fairly basic assessment, but so that they can understand the wider context of how the

deposition of layers can be turned into a stratigraphic matrix.


Generally their expectations are met or exceeded. Practical archaeology isn’t for everyone and in

some instances there’s just nothing you can do about that. The teaching and the whole set up here

is great, but there are some people who just don’t want to do it or feel that the fine detailed,

accurate and methodical way of digging things isn’t quite as interesting as what they expected.

That’s archaeology; you can’t just go to sites and expect to find amazing things without the

accurate method to back it up. Most people are impressed by the set up and teaching, and the

social side of it as well. They can find out if they really want to become a professional

archaeologist.

Skills:

On site it’s about trying to get people to think independently and confidently as well. A lot of

archaeology is about being confident about what you can see. Some people need to be pushed a

bit to do that. Hopefully after a few weeks here they can demonstrate that and in the assessment

show some flair, being able to see what you’re going to do next. For the Second and Third Year

students there’s the opportunity to take on responsibility and help other people, even if it’s only

the basics of showing where things are or setting up equipment for planning. We have under-18s,

so there’s that aspect of keeping an eye on people as well. Off site we’re all staying in a very

confined environment. There’s the social aspect so you have to get to know people, you can’t sit

on your own. The groups on site are so mixed, but you’re forced to get to know them and work

209

with them and you can take that off site. After a while everyone knows each other and there’s this

rather strange mix of people from all types of backgrounds who’ve been thrown together.

Assessment:

It has to be important, but it’s a very difficult thing to do – assess someone for a practical skill.

The criteria we have can sometimes be difficult to assign to different characters. Sometimes

someone might be an exceptional archaeologist, but they do it in a very quiet and not outgoing

way and may not appear confident, but their technical skills might be very good. You may have

someone who’s the reverse of that, they’re confident, chatty and friendly but their archaeological

skills aren’t up to the same standard. Sometimes it’s hard to pick apart those differences. You

may have two different people doing two totally different things on site – one excavating and

recording a road section and the other one digging a well. How do you compare that, is one easier

and one more difficult? But the assessment is still an essential part of it People come here for a

reason and they should get something out of it. By being enthusiastic, open and friendly, and

asking questions about things it’s not hard for them to get a good mark. If you do six days a week

for seven and a half hours a day, that’s a lot of teaching and learning often on a one-to-one basis,

so it’s not surprising if they get good marks.

Fieldwork diary:

It’s a way of assessing your own time on site; I’ve never actually had to look at one. It’s good to

reflect on how well you did and it’s important for people to realise that the piece of archaeology

they’ve been digging is integral to the site as a whole.


I don’t know much about this, but field work training involves such a wide scope of things, not

just the digging. There’s finds, environmental, doing visitor tours, planning and surveying and

things like that. They can start thinking about if they want to go into archaeology there is some

kind of career development from there. For a lot of the students may be it’s a bit too early to

think about careers. In terms of personal development and finding out the things that they’re

strong at, it’d be quite a good thing. The problem with professional archaeology is it’s such a

short-lived business, very itinerant all the time; there’s never been much of a push for it.


A residential Field School gives the site a whole different feel and ethos. There’s the feeling of

everyone being in it together and the social aspects that go with it; people interacting off site is as

important as on site. I think it would be very strange if everyone just turned up in the morning

and went to work and went home at the end of the day. They can learn a lot about archaeology

and archaeologists

Supervisor 7 – Finds

Background:

I spent four weeks here as an undergraduate, but I got very badly sunburnt which meant that I

couldn’t dig and I was sent to Finds. I loved it so much that I came back the next year and did

more finds. After that I became a trainee and now I’m the Finds Manager. So I’ve developed and

grown and learnt through doing field work. I’ve also been involved in other projects doing finds

210

and excavation. I can apply myself in many different ways, even though my specialism is finds.

Eventually I would like to go into teaching and lecturing, but I also have the option to become a

specialist in Roman or late prehistoric finds.

Teaching methods:

We have students who become part of our finds team so they are involved in every aspect from

the trench right through to the recording, bagging and labelling. They learn by hands-on

experience about pottery, bones and other small finds. You can learn so much from books, but

until you’ve actually handled the objects and see the difference between them, you don’t get it.

When I was at university we didn’t have teaching collections and everything was done from

books and that was reflected in the small number of people who did finds; I was the only person

in my year who was interested in finds and artefacts. Now it’s different and you can see them

using the objects and connect with them in their heads more. I love teaching them, I get a real

kick out of seeing them learn and when it clicks in their heads and they get enthusiastic.

Sometimes they find something that they love, Samian Ware or brooches, they thrive on it. My

method is to do it as hands-on process. I don’t tell them the answers, but try to do it as we go

along. They start with washing and getting used to handling the objects and then we start to

identify the things. We learn by feel and how it looks, thinking about how it’s been made. It’s all

about getting them to think about it. I don’t immediately tell them what things are, it’s more

important for them to think things through themselves; things like, what does it mean if we have

an assemblage with no fine wares in it. If you get them to think about it, it goes in more by

making it interesting. Teaching wise it’s creating a different world for them to inhabit. Making it

exciting is the important thing, getting them engaged that’s the challenge.


Some of them have seen things on TV and they’re influenced by all different aspects about what

archaeology is like and sometimes the reality is a shock. The actual physical work digging in a

trench in the heat, it is hard work. Some of them aren’t used to this kind of work. However, that

can be the making of some of them; it forces them into a new kind of work ethic. For some it’s

more exciting than they thought it might be. They perhaps don’t expect digging a hole can be

fulfilling or seeing something through from beginning to end will feel as good as it does. Some of

them might decide they don’t like it or there’s no treasure, just different layers of gravel and

some people are more theoretical than practical. But that’s good, this gives them a chance to find

out if they like it or not. It can help crystallize which part of archaeology best suits you as a

person, or decide that you don’t want to do it as a career. To be an archaeologist you have to be

passionate about what you’re doing, especially to be a field archaeologist. The Field School sorts

out the ones who really want to be there.

Skills:

Team work is one thing, in archaeology you have to be able to work as part of a team and also do

things that you might necessarily not want to do. You may have to take on roles that you don’t

like or enjoy. So, there’s a lot of self-discipline involved. Attention to detail is important; you

can’t just dig a hole, you have to think about it. This is important with finds as well, things like

marking. Being in charge and managing aspects. If you’ve got a team can you organise them and

be strong with them. There’s also recording and writing, you have to be able to put down what

you see on paper so that other people can understand it. Presentation – you may be on site and

you’re telling people what you see, they might not see it. That’s about using your brain as well as

211

your mouth. There can be learning to work on your own, if you’re left to get on with it there can

be a lot of self-discipline.

Assessment:

I do think them being assessed is important. Some of them may come along and think it’s going

to be a four week holiday in a field in the summer and a great social life in the evening.

Assessment gives them a reason to be here as they are here to learn. It gives them an aim and we

as supervisors can tell them if they’re not pulling their weight. With the skills that they get, any

employer has an idea of what level they’re at. An exam tests their academic knowledge and

whether they’ve been listening or not. Everything they need to know for the exam here is in their

handbooks and they’re told it in training sessions. Practical skills do come down to personal

views of how you think someone has done. You can look at how well they do the different tasks

and their ability to see things. Attitude is also very important and it can be difficult to judge

whether they are being part of the team and so forth. Sometimes that might be affected by

personal interaction.

Fieldwork diary:

The self-reflective idea of the diary is good. I did it when it was assessed and I found it difficult, I

never knew what to write. I would come off site feeling quite happy, but I was never quite sure

what I had achieved. It was only when I looked back a couple of years later that I realised how

much I’d learnt and how confident I had become. At the time, I didn’t realise what I’d gained.


This would definitely be useful to sit down and think what you can and can’t do and what you’d

like to be able to do. This is especially true if you know what you want to do, but many students

are not clear about that at this stage. A degree can be very much a ‘floating’ time. They may try

and put things off, but a system of PDP may actually force them to think about what they want to

do. It can be difficult to formulate things properly at this stage though.


Living on site is good thing because it means that they’re central and enjoy the whole experience

and makes it more rounded. However, if they’ve over-done the partying and they’re not in a fit

state to work in the morning I find quite annoying because it shows a lack of respect for what

they’re doing. They are here to learn and in some ways it’s like going to class. It’s a good thing

from a teaching and learning point of view because they can discuss things with each other more,

interact and talk about what they’re digging and share their feelings about it all. That will

enhance their experience of what they’re actually learning.

Supervisor 8 – Environmental

Background:

I did an undergrad in Environmental Earth Science, but I discovered my love for archaeology

through this Field School as a student. This is my fourth year as a member of staff, seven years in

all. This year I’ve been employed for the whole year as the Environmental Technician doing an

inventory of all the samples.

212

Teaching methods:

I love teaching the students; getting to know them and promote the science side of the Field

School to get them interested in why we take the samples and what we can find out from them.

The role on site is fairly passive, just taking a sample. Some people don’t like it because it

interrupts their digging, but I try to pass on to students how important it is and that it’s a

compliment to excavation, part of the whole process. I have two students in the morning and two

in the afternoon. I give them a brief talk about what we’re doing and the different methods. They

then have a chance to do the flotation technique from start to finish – floating a sample, sieving

and then sorting it. It is important to explain the importance of all this. We encourage them to talk

to each other and ask questions. I try to come across as someone who is approachable, then I can

support them and get them interested.


Some them say that it’s a lot better than they thought it would be. Some of them think that sorting

will be really boring and a waste of a morning, but they’re surprised when see what it actually

involves; sorting can be quite therapeutic. A lot depends on the weather; flotation in cold weather

is not so popular. I suppose they have background lectures on this, but doing it in real life they

can understand it better, like how the mechanics of it actually works. I hope that this consolidates

what they’ve done in theory and applying it in practice. Environmental archaeology and

geoarchaeology isn’t in the spotlight in the media, so I hope they get an idea of how important it

really is.

Skills:

The other skills are things like time-keeping, knowing where they’re going and being somewhere

at the right time. Definitely social skills and team work, we try to get dialogue going when

they’re doing this. Communication is also a big skill they get.

Assessment:

Assessment is important, it’s a really good way for them to get feedback and know if they’re

doing something right or wrong. It gives them motivation and they pay more attention. To come

away from here with a certificate that says you have a certain skill set is something important to

add to your CV, whether you end up working in archaeology or not. It is very hard to assess

something like this. To assess someone fairly and unbiasedly even against a checklist is a very

difficult process. It is a practical thing and different people have different strengths and

weaknesses. If someone isn’t strong on the physical aspects, regardless of whether they

understand the method and why they’re doing it, it can be very hard for them. For environmental

flotation is pretty straight forward, but when it gets to sorting it can be pretty hard for them to

identify small stuff. But there are things like attitude and do they ask questions and a general

willingness are points to note. In science in general, for filling in the paperwork there are step-by-

step guides and you can see if they follow them or not.


I’ve heard of this through the university and it seems to be good for writing your CV. I have a

grand plan that I will write this as I go along, but of course that doesn’t happen. What the

students are doing here is applicable to it, there’s a lot of transferable skills that are relevant.

213


This is the first year that I haven’t actually been camping here and it is a completely different

experience. There are the home comforts if you’re non-residential, but it is tiring travelling every

day. I think the tiredness is less if you’re actually here because your home, food and work are all

in one place. Of course, there’s all the social aspects of residential as well. It can be a nerve-

wracking experience to start with, but a good experience to go through. It’s a bit like going into a

Hall of Residence for the first time. You are forced to communicate and get involved, which

some people are better at than others. The friendship legacy is massive, bonds are formed here

that last for a very long time.

Site Director

Background:

I’ve been in field archaeology since I graduated and have worked on a variety of sites all over the

world, but I developed an interest quite early on in teaching fieldwork partly because my early

experience of fieldwork training was not positive. I was doing that when I was working in

commercial archaeology and brought those ideas with me to Reading. In my time here I have

been developing a system of assessment based on the way I see we ought to train people in

archaeological fieldwork.

First Year Modules:

On my experience of the students I see here, I would say they look as though they’ve never heard

of anything practical before. However, I know that they do have a very good training in the

Practising Archaeology module. I don’t know where the gap comes; maybe it’s the application of

practical methods that defeats them, what they learn in the lectures having no relation to what

they do here. I’m sure there are some who benefit from the preparation that they get in the First

Year, so it may depend on individuals. Personally I think that module is good, but we may need

to look at some more practical options as well, more integration with the Field School perhaps.

Teaching methods:

I absolutely love teaching them and I wish I could do more, my greatest sadness is the nature of

my job here means that I very rarely get an opportunity. I think the best way to teach is on site,

not in the lecture room, showing them stratigraphy, demonstrating techniques and talking to them

about what they’re doing. I do a couple of traditional Power Point classroom-based lectures, but I

try to get them to interact with some of the slides. I also do site tours for the students and try to

get them to see the site in a different way by talking about colours and textures. I try to relate it to

things they will be familiar with and put myself in their position to remember what it was like

when I was learning. I have on-site in the trench sessions when I take small groups around the

excavation and try to get them to understand the concept of stratigraphy by showing them

sections. I’d like there to be more interaction, but that can be hard because most of the groups

here are quite large and they often feel very intimidated in groups. One-to-one sessions would be

good, but that is impossible.

The way I think on-site teaching should be done is, rather than telling, you show and do. In the

past I would always get in there, explain exactly why I want them to do a particular thing and

demonstrate. I like to talk them through my reasoning because that’s what field archaeology is

214

about. You start something, but after a bit of cleaning you may change your ideas or direction of

what you want to do next. It’s important that students see that process and understand it. It’s a

process of uncovering and discovery and you do change your mind all the time. I also say that

you can mistakes and that can sometimes be the way that you find out an answer because to do

something, even if it’s wrong, actually moves you along to the next step of reasoning. I try to get

them to see that these are problems that you follow through and may change tack. It’s very

important to say that it’s an enjoyable process.

I see the whole thing of teaching and learning and assessment as a journey, I don’t know the right

ways to do any of it. In my position I find it rather frustrating because I know how I would like to

do it, but it’s no longer my role. Some of my assistant supervisors don’t have a massive

experience in professional archaeology, although they’ve usually risen through the ranks here.

You could say that this makes them good teachers because they’re quite close to the students

because they’ve recently come through it themselves, but they might struggle with the

archaeology. It’s been suggested that I get a more experienced team, but I think the best way for

the teaching and learning is to have people who’ve been through the process themselves. The

ideal person is someone who’s both a brilliant teacher and a brilliant field archaeologist, but they

are rare. There is an issue of actually training the supervisors to teach and assess students because

they have a crucial role in that process. I think that is one of the ways we need to go, as well as

the students.

Skills:

I believe they are getting life skills, particularly confidence. One of the things I really enjoy is

seeing them arrive timid and unsure compared to a week later when they have colour in their

cheeks, in groups that they’ve formed and bantering; very, very different young people. Being on

an excavation teaches self-awareness, confidence, recognition that they’re an integral part of a

big project and that they play an important role in that. There’s also team work, communication

and social skills; but they also get a sense of belonging and they can find a place for themselves.

Tensions:

There is a very real tension between achieving the research and teaching aims. Here, the money

relies on the research and it’s very important that we achieve our aims each season. I feel that

tension and pressure and I know that it can transmit down to the supervisors. There has to be a

balance. The ideal on any team is that you would have, in addition to beginners, a backbone of

experienced people who could keep the archaeology rolling. The reality is that we can’t afford to

pay the wages of that many experienced people. I try to get Second and Third Years back to give

me a core team of people who can keep the archaeology going. The way to deal with it is to be

aware of the tension. I recognise that some supervisors are better at teaching and, as part of being

a manager, I’ll put them on a part of the site where we’re well ahead and I’ll give them more

students. Where something needs to be pushed on quickly, I’ll have less students. As they get

more experienced they can be circulated into these other areas. You have to find the balance

within your own teams to get both research and training out of it.

Assessment:

It is vital that they are assessed. If you’re putting energy and time into something, you want that

recognised. If you assess fieldwork you will also get much better results. There’s no one answer

to how you can assess it, and I don’t think there should be because an excavation is made of so

215

many different skills there are as many ways to assess those skills. I don’t think you be looking

for one answer. You need to devise an assessment that takes into account the different skills

being learnt and recognises that students have differing abilities. They may have an aptitude for

some aspects, but not so much for others. This needs to be recognised. Somebody who’s not so

interested in trowelling may be more interested in finds. So the assessment has to be broad and

varied. You need to look at the skills that they gain and think of ways of assessing those skills.

You’ve got to find a way of assessing student’s ability to see the process, understand it and

explain it and then how they go about doing something about it. It’s a whole range of

developmental skills. I quite like the idea of presentations and getting students to talk about what

they’re doing, that can show what they actually know, their enthusiasm and understanding.

However, you can’t expect an individual presentation from 100 students. That’s why I’m

developing this thing of waking round site and I try and get the students to describe and explain

aspects of it to me. The assessment as it stands is a work in progress.


I think this is very useful, and that’s coming from someone who’s never done it. It’s a fantastic

tool for the students. If they can be convinced to use it and start tracking their development and

the skills that they’re acquiring, that would be great. I would love to have my finger tips a record

of everything I’ve done since I started in archaeology. Apart from having it there, it gives you an

awareness of the type of working person you are, that must surely help when you’re going for

jobs. If you know what you’re good at and can articulate it, that is such a useful thing. What I

don’t know how to do is how to integrate it into the Field School module. Students hate doing

CVs and they hate looking at professional skills, there’s not a lot of interest. I don’t know how

you make the link between what they’re doing now and their employment which most of them

think is not going to happen soon. The fieldwork diary can get into the mindset of thinking about

what they’re doing and writing it down. The problem is that most of us telling them about it must

seem ancient to them, you need someone from nearer their age group who’ve been through it to

tell them about it. You need that kind of trigger. I’m thinking of using some of the site trainees in

the sessions about employment.


The experience of a residential Field School is much more rounded because you have all the team

building, the rotas and the feeling that you’re all part of a big family. That’s hugely positive,

energizing and motivating. The down-side is that people get pretty tired and the mental pressures

of living away from home with a group of people that you periodically fall out with is tough. For

the teaching and learning, maybe being residential is a motivating factor. The ones who do

commute in can be a bit isolated as well and that can have an effect on the teaching and learning

experience because that is a communal thing. I have very little experience of non-residential Field

Schools.

Date post:	01-Apr-2021
Category:	Documents
Upload:	others
View:	0 times
Download:	0 times

Assessing, Teaching, Learning...of questions from a teaching and learning perspective: ... How can...

Documents