My comments are most relevant to prehistoric Native American
archaeology, but it sounds as if the project that Julie describes is all
encompassing. 

The pace of compliance related archaeology, at least in the Northeast,
seems to be outstripping any one individual's ability to keep up with
it, recognize significant new data or interpretations, and synthesize
these nuggets into existing frameworks. For a while, various states
compiled annual collections of the abstracts of CRM projects with
archaeological components as a way of alerting the larger community to
what was going on - a lot of work, and many abstracts proved too vague
to really alert folks to the treasure that might lurk inside of the
larger reports. What I found very useful was an approach taken at the
2006 meeting of the Eastern States Archaeological Federation. There was
a day-long session during which reps from various SHPOs presented the
highlights of what they identified as significant compliance work
completed over the past year, and its impact on current understandings
of issues, cultural history, etc. It would great if sessions like this
could become a standard part of any regional or state-based conference. 

In recent years I've informally discussed the idea of states providing
grant monies to individuals who would review CRM/archaeology reports,
find the "nuggets", and create reports or a series of papers that would
blend the new findings into existing frameworks. One problem with such
an approach is that the review/synthesis project would be competing for
the same funds as research projects whose result/product might be more
well defined and predictable. If the review/synthesis approach is to
work, it seems that a separate source of funds is necessary.

Michael Stewart
Department of Anthropology
Temple University
Philadelphia, PA 19122
215-204-6188
[log in to unmask] OR
[log in to unmask] 
 

-----Original Message-----
From: HISTORICAL ARCHAEOLOGY [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of
King, Julia
Sent: Tuesday, March 20, 2007 10:30 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Challenges of Creating Access to Archaeological Information

Dear HISTARCHers,
 
I am working on a project, part of a larger project organized by Lynne
Sebastian, that is attempting to measure the nature of the dissemination
of "what we have learned" about the past.  
 
For my particular focus, I am interested in two related topics: (1) the
challenges of creating access to archaeological data and reports and (2)
the challenges of producing usable synthetic studies.  
 
I think I know the challenges in my little corner of the world, but I
wonder if my experiences and perceptions are typical.  I turn to you for
your expertise and help.
 
What would you recommend for meeting the challenges of creating access?
What exactly do you see as the challenges for creating accessibility to
both information (data) and interpretation (the larger findings promised
by synthetic or comparative studies)?  Have you seen great successes?
miserable failures?  Are there structural impediments to such efforts?
How does the digital delivery of information play into this, and what
specific challenges exist with electronic delivery?  Are there other
related questions that need to be posed?
 
I will take what I learn from these responses and from colleagues on
other listserves to prepare a paper about these two topics and all
assistance will be acknowledged.
 
Please feel free to respond either on or off list.  My direct email is
[log in to unmask]
 
Thanks!

Julie King