Why has there has been no comment on the relation of research term papers
and real research, which is the more appropriate analogy, rather than with
medical and engineering students.  Perhaps it can be noted that I asked a
question, and did not give a position.  The idea was to elicit some
commentary, not make a statement.  I have worked many times with students
as they learn on real sites and have not seen any  damage if supervised
properly. However, perhaps we could consider that working on a mock site is
not inappropriate, as a practice research paper is not incorrect. I put the
statement about medical and engineering students in because I know that
they do the real thing, but they practice first in non-damaging situations.
 J.P. McCarthy's statement about doing "it" was a good comment, once you've
had some training and background.  Jenning's approach sounds quite
interesting, and provides the training for doing "it" on real sites.  The
jist of the matter is that it is not incorrect for beginners to learn on
mock sites.
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
At 10:49 AM 07-09-97 -0700, you wrote:
>Christian Gerike wrote:
>>
>> When an instructor assigns a research term paper, there is seldom real
>> research involved, i.e., there is no specific research question that needs
>> to be answered. The paper is an exercise to acquaint a student with the
>> process (could you trust the results if you were really trying to address
>> an issue?); an engineering student doesn't build a bridge; and a medical
>> student doesn't; etc... .
>>
>> Why then, is it alright for archaeology students to practice on real sites?
>>