Education Blog Archaeology: Alex Geurds on an integrated Bachelor in Archaeology
In this series the Vice-Dean and portfolio holder of education in the board of the Faculty of Archaeology will reflect on the state of education. Posts can range from shedding light on current national shifts in the university landscape to arguments as to why it’s important to be timely with designing your classes. Some blogs will be aspirational, others will be more informative, or indeed also inviting. The opinions found here are personal but will also not be disconnected from Faculty Board policymaking.
Why we need an integrated Bachelor in Archaeology
'In this world where global crises are seemingly ocurring at rapid pace, from climate change to cultural conflict, archaeology as a field is uniquely positioned at the intersection of deep time and pressing contemporary issues. How to have this be reflected in our bachelor programme, however, is not straightforward. We want a lot from our three-year degree here at Leiden: We aspire to provide our students with grounded, regional archaeological expertise; they should be aware of the basic approaches to retrieving and analysing a broad range of materials; and we also find it important they be familiarized with the broader world of archaeological heritage management, including the changing roles of museum collections. All are essential, so many of us say, in helping students become well-rounded, critically-aware decisionmakers and also for ensuring a future where archaeology remains responsive to society's evolving needs.
Finding the right balance is a delicate matter though. A bachelor in archaeology that leans heavily toward traditional, region-specific archaeological content risks training students to become technically informed but socially less attuned. Conversely, a curriculum that leans heavily on teaching about heritage management and museum archaeology may neglect to show students the expertise that goes into the archaeological practice: the learned approaches by way archaeological knowledge is produced and made to contribute to the stories of the human past.
The key lies in integrating all this and to remember that to see them as utterly distinct is no less than an act of ‘purifying’ the understanding of the human past. Regional archaeological knowledge anchors students in the scientific and historical depth of the discipline but also shows them how the past was mobilised in certain ways across, for example, Middle America or indeed the wider Mediterranean. Alongside attention to how the archaeology of the provincial Roman Empire is done, students will hear about why Rome is still echoeing in society today. The field of archaeological heritage, meanwhile, teaches students how the past is received, protected, and contested in the contemporary but this also often links back directly to how that past was produced in the first place. In other words, the making and remaking of the human past is a connected process, rather than two isolated phenomena.
Crafting a bachelor programme that is both intellectually rigorous and socially responsive is needed to remain attuned to changes both in the Netherlands and worldwide. Ideally, courses should seek combinations of what archaeological sites and materials tell us about the past, but also how such places and collections are entangled in present-day political, ethical, and economic debates. This matters a great deal. Soon, important decisions will need to be made about what to priortize, and that requires a solid argumentation on why and how to go about this. Equally, in various national contexts, museums are facing a curation crisis: space is running out. So, what to do? The only people who will be able to come up with answers to such questions are our students. Our teaching programmes need to equip them for this professional world through academic skills, practical training, and critical awareness.
These are reasons to restructure our current bachelor programme to no longer consist of two specialisations, one centered on regional expertise and technical field training and the other focused on learning about heritage debates and museum work. This should result in a single, fully integrated, bachelor in Archaeology that connects how knowledge of the past is created to when and where that is happening.
What will this accomplish? It will educate students to engage with archaeologies that are not floating in isolation. It will help them to understand that field schools do not engage with surrounding stakeholders because it is a requirement but why that need is there in the first place. Whether they go to Cyprus, Baarlo or Guatemala, they will know what to expect in terms of materials and archaeological frameworks, and also have the needed heritage literacy to recognise, and thereby avoid, extractive or insensitive ways of engagement.
Preparing students for the labour market also demands it. Students are likely to find employment in a wide range of professions in the Netherlands or indeed where they might have come from before arriving at Leiden. Heritage consultancy, commercial and museum work, or governmental policy-making, as well as academic research are destinations. Employers look to employ those that have knowledge of materials and approaches and posess the needed skills in communication and stakeholder engagement. A bachelor in Archaeology should prepare students not just for fieldwork, but for a career.
Many students are also calling for this change. More and more, students show a sense of global urgency and social justice. They want to understand how archaeology intersects with issues such as climate change, contested pasts, and migration. An integrated curriculum responds to this call.
This is not to say that I think every bachelor must look the same everywhere. Just that this is how we would like it to be at Leiden, where we cater to the context of the Netherlands as well as a global classroom. I teach the first-year introduction to the Archaeology of the Americas and have done so since the year 2000. This year was the first time that I noted students from Mexico in the class; students who have traveled to Leiden to do this bachelor. It’s important we keep it that way. Diversity in curriculum and the lecture hall reflects the richness of archaeological practice. But the principle of balance is non-negotiable.
In sum, to build a discipline that matters academically and societally we will train students who can read both the stratigraphy of a Bronze Age burial mound and a policy brief of a UNESCO convention.'
Alex
Vice-Dean and portfolio holder for Education
Exchange ideas with Alex Geurds
Would you like to exchange ideas with Alex Geurds? Please send him an email or walk by his office (A2.07).