History and Approaches to Heritage Studies, Pedagogy and Practice in Heritage Studies

Abstract

History and Approaches to Heritage Studies and Pedagogy and Practice in Heritage Studies are companion volumes originating out of two symposia presented at the 77th annual meeting of the Society for American Archaeology (SAA) in Memphis, Tennessee, chaired by Phyllis Mauch Messenger and Susan Bender. These symposia, “Lessons from the Trenches: The Pedagogy of Archaeology and Heritage,” provided a forum for participants to discuss their efforts to integrate their teaching into the broader heritage field. This conversation continued the following year at the 78th annual SAA meeting in Honolulu, Hawaii, with a second symposium: “Lessons from the Trenches II: New Pedagogies of Archaeology and Heritage.” These dual volumes, published by the University Press of Florida in 2019, compile many of these symposia’s presentations as well as subsequent discussion generated by them. They reflect an effort to define “heritage” as well as to reclaim the word itself, which comes with decades of baggage, especially when the term has been thrown around to justify hate and bigotry. As Alicia Ebbitt McGill states,But while the word “heritage” has been long tainted by misuse and abuse, these authors demonstrate how the word is being reclaimed and implemented to shape a new cohort of young professionals into action-oriented individuals focused on social justice.History and Approaches to Heritage Studies focuses on the need to develop Heritage Studies programs within academic institutions, arguing that universities and colleges should add, or at least transition toward, degrees in multidisciplined heritage studies. The chapters range from general issues related to heritage studies, to more focused discussions of feminist, African American, and Indigenous pedagogies. Many of the volume’s thirteen chapters highlight case studies from academic programs in both the New and Old Worlds, but primarily from North America where—as Eleanor King notes in chapter 5—heritage studies programs are in their infancy. Several noteworthy themes occur throughout the volume. First, the term “heritage” can be defined in many ways, but ultimately it refers to both discipline-based content and a pedagogical approach to teaching about the past (Elaine Franklin, 33). At its simplest, Kate Clark (150) defines it as examining who owns the past, who can talk about the past, and asking why the past matters today. Second, heritage studies are an inherently interdisciplinary, “inquiry-based approach to learning about the past that employs multiple sources of information including documents, material culture, oral accounts, and the human and built environment as primary resources” (Franklin, 33). Third, heritage studies forefront the idea that heritage is central to identity, daily life, and a community’s shared values; as such, many of the authors discuss at length the critical voices of multiple stakeholders, the role of human rights, democratization of the past, and the importance of community engagement (Messenger and Bender, 1).Readers may legitimately ask why the authors suggest moving from traditional archaeological and CRM programs to Heritage Studies programs, rather than revising our current programming to include the ideas raised in this volume. In fact, many readers may initially feel offended by this proposal, as several applied archaeology and CRM programs in the United States have begun to incorporate these issues into their curriculums in both formal and informal settings. Indeed, many of the authors acknowledge that CRM programs often do encompass many of the aspects of heritage studies (e.g., Paul Shackel, Elizabeth Chilton, and Robert MacDonald). Several reasons are proposed for why heritage studies should be its own academic discipline, decoupled from archaeology and CRM. For example, Larry Zimmerman (chapter 13) notes that while people almost universally identify with heritage, they do not see how archaeology fits into their daily lives (216) once “the hype of the oldest, biggest, and most mysterious wears off” (Messenger and Mauch, 4). This disconnect results in the public’s low interest in (and therefore low support of) archaeology in general. Shackel (chapter 1) argues that the Section 106 process as currently implemented (and, by extension, taught in CRM programs) has failed to develop long-term community heritage programs. Instead, it has been project-oriented, with public involvement ending with project completion (9). King argues that because traditional archaeology and CRM programs are dominated by white, Euro-American practitioners, ideas, and values, they are vulnerable to investigating questions about heritage in ways that privileges one group over another. While the Section 106 process theoretically mandates public consultation in the hope of avoiding this pitfall, in practice, consultation usually ceases when the project is deemed “complete.” And while the National Historic Preservation Act mandates the dissemination of information from archaeological sites in the name of public benefit, the contribution of the CRM sector to the public on the development of heritage programs has not reached its full potential (Shackel, 9). Through heritage studies, Messenger (chapter 4) suggests that stakeholders would have a shared ownership of heritage and be positioned to identify what is important in the eyes of the community over the long term.Like History and Approaches to Heritage Studies, Pedagogy and Practice in Heritage Studies seeks to equip archaeologists with collaborative, community-based, and activist approaches to the past, but focuses on specific strategies for integrating heritage studies into secondary and post-secondary archaeology curricula. This book is a collection of eleven chapters covering methods for teaching archaeology in K-12 through postsecondary-level instruction, heritage research ethics, and public and activist archaeology. The first two chapters address archaeological education at the K-12 level and the difficulties that educators face in the classroom. Chapter 1 evaluates Cali Letts and Jeanne Moe’s 2009 Project Archaeology: Investigating Shelter, an educational program for grades 3 through 5 using the human universal need for shelter as a common denominator for teaching core archaeological concepts such as observation, evidence, context, inference, and classification. Investigating Shelter has also helped students understand why protecting archaeological sites is important, and this is achieved most successfully by connecting sites to living descendants, especially communities where their daily lives are intertwined with their heritage and the past. Similarly, chapter 2 addresses how to make archaeology a meaningful part of primary and secondary social studies curricula while still fulfilling national, local, and state curricular requirements, noting that first and foremost archaeologists must properly connect with individual teachers—who are not experts in the content area—and provide them with the support they need to be successful. Second, they must make the content kinesthetically engaging for students, such as by visiting archaeological sites that are child-friendly and where children can hold physical artifacts. According to Charles White, effective educational outreach “encourages young people to see themselves in the material culture that surrounds them. [. . .] It fosters a commitment to preserve the past and their own stories for future generations” (43).Chapters 3 through 11 focus on undergraduate and graduate education, including the ethical aspects of heritage research that instill in students the need to “examine and consider multiple viewpoints” in order to help them “better understand and articulate ideas and practices of people who are different from them” (McGill, 53). Several chapters are case studies of specific classes designed to achieve this goal. For example, Elizabeth Kryder-Reid (chapter 7) describes her “Issues in Cultural Heritage” seminar at Indiana University–Purdue University Indianapolis, created to provide students with an opportunity to connect with their local community and raise awareness of the inequalities deeply ingrained in American society, specifically homelessness. Her seminar is inspired by Larry Zimmerman’s (Indiana University–Purdue University Indianapolis) Archaeology of Homelessness project in which students interviewed members of the homeless community to identify and inventory different types of homeless sites and material culture. Not only do students learn about and apply their knowledge of cultural heritage, but more important, they use self-reflection to think critically about their own privilege. In Frances M. Hayashida’s (chapter 11) Food, Foraging, and Farming course at the University of New Mexico at Albuquerque, students keep a “food chain diary” in which they record everything they eat in twenty-four hours, including where the food was grown and the ingredients, a process that students find to be much more difficult than they expect. This exercise highlights past cultures’ close connection with the land, helps students understand how many food acquisition practices have been lost due to colonialism and imperialism, and addresses the efforts underway to revive these practices through UNESCO’s Convention for the Safeguarding of Intangible Cultural Heritage. This chapter affectively captures how food—and the foraging and production of food—are entwined with people’s identity and heritage.Other chapters grapple with logistical challenges impeding heritage studies. For example, Thomas Pluckhahn (chapter 4) highlights the difficulty recent PhDs have finding positions in academia and the underpreparedness they feel when entering the public archaeology and CRM worlds (73), arguing that anthropology programs need to adapt to this reality. Ricardo Elia et al. (chapter 5) discuss the challenge of training students in ethics, heritage management, and stewardship as well as fieldwork. By way of example, the authors describe the Boston University Field School in Archaeology and Heritage Management, which is centered on stewardship training and working with Indigenous peoples on the island of Menorca, Spain. Through field trips, heritage lectures, and development of archaeological management plans for the island, the BU field school seeks to impress on students the benefits of working with local communities, and the value of being not just field technicians but effective stewards of the past as well. Gwynn Henderson and Nicolas Laracuente (chapter 8) note the challenge of working with the public, a critical aspect of heritage that for a long time has not been prioritized by archaeologists because it is largely “outside of our discipline’s comfort zone” (149). Finally, Messenger (chapter 10) discusses the need to focus on teaching the social relevance of archaeology in connection with contemporary social issues, including climate change, sustainability, and inequality.In sum, these two volumes are an effective call for change within the field of archaeology, change tailored to the ever-shifting social, economic, and political landscape of the twenty-first century. Staying relevant involves structural change within the institutions that are producing the next generation of cultural resources and heritage professionals. This is not necessarily a new concept; Jeremy Sabloff also raised some of these ideas in his 2008 edited volume, Archaeology Matters: Action Archaeology in the Modern World. But unlike Sabloff’s volume, the chapters in Phyllis Mauch Messenger and Susan Bender’s two volumes are written by archaeologists with extensive and diverse teaching backgrounds. Their case studies are timely examples of how archaeological research can meaningfully contribute to conversations about social and political issues and provide practical and useful tools to equip archaeologists and heritage professionals with collaborative, hands-on, and community-based approaches to the past.