Communities of Knowledge: Teaching and Learning in Maritime Archaeology

Abstract

This paper explores the points of contact and divergence between education, training and experience in maritime archaeology. In particular, it is proposed that whilst it is worth developing McGrail's (Studies in maritime archaeology. British Archaeological Reports, Oxford, 1997) discussion of what should be included when we teach Maritime archaeology, more might be gained from moving beyond individual opinions of instructors. As such, this paper includes an exploration of both my own answers to the questions offered in the call for papers and those of past and present Southampton students. What emerges from this comparison is that by focusing too closely on the specifics of what is (or should be) taught, we miss out on what students actually gain from courses and more broadly what we gain as a community.

Finnish Maritime Archaeology through its Publications

“…Any form of discourse analysis falls outside the scope of this article, but it is safe to say that the writing style in much of Finnish archaeology has been distinctively descriptive and therefore aimed at a distancing of the researcher from the epistemological problematics concerning knowledge production (Marila 2018;Lucas 2019). Descriptive accounts of research material often find their audience from within the national rather than the international arena, and their epistemological merits should be weighed against the knowledge needs of the local scientific community in question (Sturt 2008). On a related note, much of the published scientific research in Finnish maritime archaeology has been carried out by FHA personnel whose main responsibilities are in heritage management rather than scientific publishing.…”

Work-Integrated Learning in Maritime Archaeology: An Australian Approach

“…T HE MARITIME ARCHAEOLOGY Program (MAP) in the Department of Archaeology at Flinders University is the largest sustained and only fully integrated program teaching maritime archaeology in Australia and, arguably, in the Asia-Pacific region. This is unlike the situation in Europe and North America where maritime archaeology is taught at both undergraduate and postgraduate level at quite a number of universities (Jasinski & Soreide 2008;Khalil 2008;Maarleveld & Auer 2008;Morozova & Zelenko 2008;Parham & Palma 2008;Ransley 2008;Stamirov 2008;Sturt 2008). This has also resulted in a more extensive discussion about education in maritime archaeology in recent years which will clearly be further expanded as a result of the bringing into force of the UNESCO Convention on the Protection of Underwater Cultural Heritage (2001) on 2 Jan 2009 (Pydyn & Flatman 2008;Radic Rossi et al 2008).…”