Reading Summary – Students What liked about fieldwork 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 they 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 with a sense of achievement in being able to see that they had physically done something.

Archaeology as a career 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 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. This overall pattern was reflected in the responses to the questionnaire. Questionnaire: Q 9. Do you intend to follow a career in archaeology?

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 the case with the 1

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.

Student expectations 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 had 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. This generally positive feeling about met and exceeded expectations was reflected in the responses to the questionnaire. Questionnaire: Q 1. How has participating in fieldwork training lived up to your expectations?

n = 21 A – very low E – above average

B – low F – high

C – below average G – very high

D – average

1st Year Modules Some students good see little relationship between the Field School and the Field School; others felt that the modules on Practising Archaeology and Rome to Reformation had given them a basic background to what was involved with fieldwork and a general overview of the archaeological period, although much of the practical information was related to the before and after of excavation. The seminars and assignments on Samian Ware and stratigraphy were felt to have been of great use. The

2

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. 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 it 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. To start off, the student would often be given an area to clean and, although 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. This not standing over the students whilst they worked was appreciated 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 get 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. This overall positive feeling about the effectiveness of the teaching was reflected in the questionnaires.

3

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

n = 19 A – very low E – above average

B – low F – high

C – below average G – very high

D – average

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 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

4

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 what gave purpose to the fieldwork module and that it would be pointless if it was not assessed and that this was an essential part of their degree. The important factors included the constructive criticism of feedback showing areas of strengths and weaknesses; some students even felt reassured by the fact that they were being assessed. It 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. This attitude towards the importance of assessment was reflected in the responses to the questionnaires. Questionnaire: Q 5. Please rate how important you think it is that your performance of fieldwork is assessed:

n = 21 A – very low E – above average

B – low F – high

C – below average G – very high

D – average

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 areas of the work involved. 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 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 5

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, a evidence for the possession of a range of abilities could be shown to future employers. The importance of assessment to future career prospects was also reflected in the responses to the questionnaires. 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 = 21 A – very low E – above average

B – low F – high

C – below average G – very high

D – average

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.

6

PDP 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 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 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.

Residential/non-residential Field School The majority of students were very keen on it 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.

7