sign in sign up
<<
Home , Digital archaeology

Anthropology 4495G/9112B “i”-ing the Past: Digital and Digital Heritage Course Outline 2014-2015, Winter term

Mondays 9:30-12:30, Rm: SSC 3315

Instructor: Dr. Neal Ferris Office: SSC 3331 Email: [email protected] Office Hours: Mondays 1-4:30 Please note that I am cross appointed with the of Ontario Archaeology, and work over at Sustainable Archaeology other days during the week (1600 Attawandaron Road off of Wonderland near Fanshawe Park Road). So if you need to meet with me other than Mondays after class or during afternoon office hours, please email me to see if we can schedule a time to meet at the Museum, or, if mutually convenient, in the department.

Welcome… an Introduction This course will explore the methodological and conceptual implications of digitizing the practice of archaeology, and interacting with the past digitally. What are the possibilities and issues when a material, tangible past can be interacted with and “handled” intangibly and online? What does it mean for archaeological datasets to be “borne digitally”? How does this digital world change methodologies, analyses, and even how we interpret the archaeological heritage? Also, presumably a digital archaeology is accessible more broadly. What are the implications for understanding the past and making the archaeological heritage accessible beyond archaeology, as it becomes engaged with, challenged, and re- imagined online and within social media and a global digital community?

The intent of this course is to understand the implications of a digital archaeology, and of a digital heritage arising from that archaeology. It is NOT a how-to course for using digital equipment, designing webpages, an introduction to database schema, a of the internet, or digital and online methodologies... though we will likely be tripping over those subjects throughout the course. As well, I do want to give you the chance to use digital equipment, or in engage with a digital community of archaeologists and the public, so there will be hands on experiences you can have as a part of this course. So a first task we need to decide will be just how much we make the course hands-on.

PLEASE NOTE: This is a cross listed, graduate/undergraduate course. To reflect that difference, graduate students will be expected to undertake additional assignments, and the value of some assignments will

Page 1 of 11

differ. As this is both a graduate student course and advanced topics course for undergraduates, the course will operate as a discussion seminar, combined with presentations and an open conversation.... i.e., I have no intention of being a talking head. So your participation in discussions, questions you ask of me or whoever is presenting that day, etc., will all contribute to your participation mark. But also, keep in mind that a course on Digital archaeology is rather open ended... easier to define what it is not than what it is. So I’d much rather explore with you interesting dimensions of this topic, than lecture you about relative database ontologies, Dublin Core, vector vs raster mapping, or what Tim Berners-Lee thinks is important about the Semantic Web. But to make this work you need to come to class prepared with questions and observations about the day’s focus. It’ll make the class much more dynamic, and end up being reflected back to you in the final mark you receive!

The specific objectives of this course are that students:

1) Are provided with an overview of the range of digital archaeologies and technologies that have emerged in practice and in interpreting the archaeological record, and the unique challenges and opportunities they pose for archaeological research and the archaeological heritage;

2) Understand the implications of archaeology made digital, as a science, as a social media, and as a heritage consumed online, through a passing familiarity with what making archaeology and heritage digital entails;

3) Develop an understanding of key issues and debates inherent in digitizing archaeology, from issues of accuracy, authenticity, and authority in presentation, challenges of making meaning from “big data”, negotiating cultural intellectual property issues inherent in 3D models, immersive environments, and 3D printing; potential of serious gaming as learning and empathy; and alternate archaeologies arising from digital archaeology.

4) Understand the limitations and real risks involved in embracing an archaeological heritage that is so transitory and so quickly obsolete in a profession whose aim in part is to preserve the record of the past.

Course Evaluation: Final grades will be based on your participation in class, you contributions to a class blog, to presentations in class, to a couple of projects, and to a final project/paper. There is NO final exam in this course.

Relevant dates and the weighting of each assessed component are as follows:

Page 2 of 11

Assessed Page Page Due Date Percent of Final Percent of Component of Length/# Length/# Grade Final Grade Final Grade Under- Graduates Undergraduate Graduate graduates Class Participation na na throughout 10% 5% Contributions to Min. 2 Minimum throughout 15% 10% Class blog blogs 3 blogs Min. 3 Min. 3 comments comments Webpage review – 3-4 3-4 throughout 15% 10% Digital or (selections due Fantastical Jan 19) archaeology pages Leading Class in na Add’l Ongoing na 20% Readings readings Discussion due 2 weeks before Digital 5-6 5-6 Topic chosen 25% 25% Archaeology and discussed Project Details TBA Jan 26; due March 16th Final Paper/Project Outline: Feb 2; 35% 30% Deadline: Apr 12 (undergraduate); Apr 30 graduate)

Submitting Assignments: My preference is NOT to receive hard copies of your assignments. I will accept assignments emailed to me as Word (.doc or docx) or Google docs files.

1. Class Participation (10% undergraduate, 5% graduate): This mark will be based on your engagement in the class discussion, and in discussions around presentations by others in the class. I will expect your ability to participate and help shape the direction we follow in class to reflect whether you are an undergraduate, Ma, or PhD student.

2. Blogging Digital Archaeology (15% undergraduate, 10% graduate): I have a blog page set up for this course. All undergraduate students are expected to contribute at least two blogs, and graduate students at least 3 blogs, based on the subject of the most recent class, readings for an upcoming class, in-class presentations, preparing for a presentation, something you tripped across while googling a topic, something from another course you want to raise as relevant, my tendencies and foibles or those of classmates, or whatever happens to be on

Page 3 of 11

your mind and can fall somewhere, somehow within the box of a “digital archaeology/heritage.” You need to discuss the topic in a fairly coherent, reflexive way. Others are expected to comment on the blog posts (at least 3 times by each student over the duration of the course). These don’t have to be long, don’t have to follow formal paper or citation requirements, but should be written to either convey opinion or information, or share, link, or comment on something you found of relevance. I will remind everyone a couple of times over the duration of the course to participate in the blog, but I expect you to make it a regular part of your course prep, in part because I will include course announcements in the blog!

The address for the blog is: http://i-ingthepastarch.blogspot.ca/ I will need your email addresses in order to make each of you contributors to the blog.

3. Assignment: Website review (Undergraduate students – Digital Archaeology – 15%; Graduate students – Fantastical Archaeology – 10%): The one certainty in the topic of digital archaeology is that there is an endless supply of web pages, blogs, twitter feeds, etc., from which to explore the topic. In this assignment, undergraduate students will review two web sites that share a common theme under a broader digital archaeology paradigm. This can consist of digital archaeology databases; site reconstructions/virtual environments; GIS/mapping sites; social media, crowd sourcing, fundraising, or image pages; archaeology blogs, diaries, wikis, or project reports; etc. For graduate students, the other certainty is that any opinion, no matter how fantastical, is accommodated online with its own one or many webpages. Likewise, there is a blog post or page devoted to debunking those opinions. In this assignment, graduate students will review three web sites that share a common theme under a broader, fantastical archaeology framework. These can be relatively benign viewpoints, such as metal detectors or looters, and their assertion that they are legitimate researchers, to the much more problematic pages devoted beliefs of aliens, giants, or alternative explanations of archaeological phenomenon or heritage values.

The idea of the assignment for all students is to look at how these pages engage with the online world, who their key audiences are, what their messaging is, and whether they actually enable research/ debate, or just provide interesting/promotional pages. Please take note: I am looking for a critical analysis of content and messages here, within the context of what we are talking about in class discussions. I am NOT looking for you to evaluate the general usability or appearance of the web pages. So you are less analysing the content, and more the intent behind the content. More importantly, you need to select web pages that will best serve your critical analysis, so thinking through what pages to use is an important part of the assignment.

Page 4 of 11

Everyone will need to research and select the pages they will be presenting on, and inform me of their choices, by January 19th, explaining what it is about the pages you want to focus on. I will start asking people, to schedule their presentations starting the following class.

People will then be scheduled into classes for their presentations over the remainder of the course. The presentation will be 20 minutes long, followed by a class discussion. You will need to generate a PowerPoint/Prezi presentation of the pages and points you wish to highlight (you can go “live” to the page as well, but embed the URLs into the presentation, to help order your presentation, rather than working solely from the web browser). Following your presentation, you will need to submit a short written exercise (3-4 pages) by the following Monday. The written component MUST not summarise your presentation. Rather it should evaluate the main issues that came to light in your review AND in the class discussion, and provide your assessment of these issues.

4. Leading Class Discussion On Readings (20% graduate students ONLY): Over the duration of the course, graduate students will be expected to each choose a scheduled topic for a week’s class discussion, provide the class with additional course readings selected to explore dimensions of the topic, and present on the readings/lead the class discussion. You will be expected generate a presentation (Powerpoint, Prezi, video, etc.) on the key themes related to the topic that have arisen from the readings, in order to start the class discussion off from there. Your introduction to the readings cannot be a summary of the articles themselves... rather you are expected to draw out key themes the readings collectively raise. Your introductory presentation should be no more than about 30 minutes long. Feel free to bring in additional information, case studies, video clips, structure your presentation as a debate, etc., to beef up your discussion of the topic. You’ll be marked on your presentation, your ability to flag key issues and generate discussion, and your ability to help lead in that class discussion. Much of the literature for these topics is available, not surprisingly, online. I have also listed a couple of suggested readings for each topic, though feel free to replace them.

The only way for your discussion to be effective is if everyone reads the assigned readings for the class. That means you must have those readings posted and available (either because they are accessible online, or you have uploaded pdfs to a Dropbox folder I have set up for the course) two weeks BEFORE your class. Students will begin leading class discussions beginning at the end of January.

5. Digital Project (25% undergraduate; 25% graduate): This project will consist of students doing “something” digital archaeology related. I want to shape this as much as possible around your interests and abilities, and resources available to us. We will discuss the options in the first class. Options include: a) Conducting managing a dataset through use of graph database (e.g., using the Sylva project at the Cultureplex with their support and training; http://sylvadb.com/), which is a great way to learn how to manage, and thing about data differently. b) Developing an app concept for a

Page 5 of 11

smart phone or tablet that delivers a digital archaeology need (e.g., for inspiration see http://arch- pad.blogspot.ca/). There are several apps for making mock-ups, such as the free POP app (https://popapp.in/), to more complex design programs that provide working wireframes, such as Balsamiq (http://www.balsamiq.com/). c) Working at Sustainable Archaeology using our equipment to create a 3D model of an artifact and then print off a to-scale or scaled up version of the item (www.sustainablearchaeology.org), or work with SA’s online access system to provide access to 3D models over a phone or tablet. I’m also open to other options (e.g., creating a crowd-source webpage, applications, GIS platform, drone application, or other such project). Depending on your interest, I can certainly bring in people who can help train you in the topic you would like to do. Or you may have the required skillsets already, in which case the sky is the limit!

I want to explore with you your particular interests and what you want to do. We would then set up either some in class training sessions with folks brought in to help us out, or training sessions at Sustainable Archaeology. Over the duration of the course you would be reporting in class your progress on the project, and present your end result. You would also be submitting at the end of the project a 5-6 page report reviewing your experiences and challenges. Final projects to be completed by March 16th (reported on in class and written component handed in).

6. Final Paper or Project (35% undergraduate, 30% graduate): You have a lot of latitude for the final assignment. Broadly speaking, you can write a paper, or you can undertake a digital archaeology project. For the former, you will need to write a paper of 1500-2000 words long (undergraduate), or 3000-4000 words long (graduate) on a topic broadly related to digital archaeology/digital heritage, that is a critical assessment of practice and/or contemporary issues facing archaeology (whose access, who’s past, who owns the right to replicate the past, collections or information crises, is immersive environments/3D modelling “accurate” or “authentic” a lot or a little, is social media inclusive, what information is “significant” information, legacy collections/legacy data, virtual repatriation, intellectual property rights of 3D models, etc.). You have wide latitude here, but you need to pick a topic that you can easily cover off in a short essay, and you need to know that there is enough literature out there to help you get a handle on the topic. By February 2nd I will want you to hand in a one page statement of your topic for your paper, stating what you hope to explore, and include 6-7 references (at least 4 of which will be scholarly publications, not blogs or online pages).

If you wish to do a digital project, I want you to meet with me during office hours in January to talk about what you would like to do (we can kick around some ideas and I can point you to possibilities). You will then need to submit a one page proposal on February 2nd. The project you do can be anything that fits digital archaeology, and is either ti ed to your in class digital project, or a new one. The project is yours to conceive of and design, but I expect your one page proposal to have been well developed by the time you submit it. That will include laying out what the project goals are, what

Page 6 of 11

resources or digital data you will need, what anticipated challenges you face in making it happen (e.g., what kind of software or equipment will you need to develop skills on), who is going to help you, and what the final product will be for me to evaluate. Basically, you have to convince me that what you are going to do is do-able within the constraints of term work, other courses, etc. If I think it needs some revising, I’ll ask you to do so. If it looks too unorganized or challenging to accomplish by early February, I’ll suggest you shift to writing a paper.

The paper/project will need to be completed for undergraduates on April 12th (NO extensions possible – marks need to be in the next day!). For graduates, it will need to be completed by April 30th.

COURSE SCHEDULE AND READINGS

Readings will generally be accessible online, or made available through Dropbox. Note: Readings after the start of February will be augmented by students leading the class discussion, or me, as required

1. January 5th: Introduction to Course - Identifying Preferences, Defining Digital Archaeology... sort of We will go over the course outline, discuss course expectations, and review assignments. We will review the various options people may wish to pursue their digital project on. We will also discuss just what “Digital archaeology & a Digital heritage” might mean to each of us.

2. January 12th: Some Context – Readings: Beale, Garth and Paul Reilly 2014 Additive Archaeology: Towards a virtual archaeology reprinted? Paper presented at CAA . Available online at: http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/364455/1/Additive%20Archaeology%20CAA14%20GR%20P%20Reilly. pdf Dallas, C. 2009 From Artefact Typologies to Cultural Heritage Ontologies: Or, an Account Of the Lasting Impact of Archaeological Computing. Archeologia e Calcolatori 20: 205-221. Available online at: http://soi.cnr.it/archcalc/indice/PDF20/17_Dallas.pdf Huggett, Jeremy 2013 Disciplinary Issues: Challenging the Research and Practice of Computer Applications in Archaeology. In Archaeology in the Digital Era Papers from the 40th Annual Conference of Computer Applications and Quantitative Methods in Archaeology (CAA), Southampton, 26-29 March 2012. pp. 14-24. Available Online at: http://dare.uva.nl/cgi/arno/show.cgi?fid=516092#page=1 Kansa, Eric 2011 Introduction: New Directions for the Digital Past. In Archaeology 2.0: New Approaches to Communication and Collaboration, edited by E Kansa, S. Kansa and E. Watrall, pp. 1-26. Costen Institute of Archaeology at UCLA. NOTE: Feel Free to skip over the chapter summaries. Available online at: http://www.escholarship.org/uc/item/1r6137tb Shanks, Michael, and Christopher Witmore 2012 Archaeology 2.0? Review of Archaeology 2.0: New Approaches to Communication and Collaboration. Internet Archaeology, Issue 32. Available online at:

Page 7 of 11

http://intarch.ac.uk/journal/issue32/index.html. Scroll down to reviews.. Thwaites, Harold 2013 Digital Heritage: What Happens When We Digitize Everything? In: Visual Heritage in the Digital Age, pp. 327-348. Available through Western Libraries electronic catalogue

3. January 19th: Digital Technologies and Open Access - NOTE: Your Internet Review Proposal Due Beck, Anthony 2013 Open Access to Heritage Resources – Risk, Opportunity, or Paradigm Shift? Archäologie und Informationssysteme pp. 40-48. Available online at: http://www.landesarchaeologen.de/fileadmin/Dokumente/News/NI_Archaeologie_und_Inform ationssysteme_Arbeitsheft42.pdf#page=40 Huggett, J. 2012 Promise and Paradox: Accessing Open Data in Archaeology. Proceedings of the Digital Congress 2012 (more a blog post than a paper). Available online at: http://www.hrionline.ac.uk/openbook/chapter/dhc2012-huggett Lu, Dongming, and Unhe Pan 2010 for Heritages: Technologies and Applications, Springer. Read Chapters 2, 3 and 4. Note: I am not interested in you getting the mathematical formulae and technical specs, just skim these chapters for an overview of the technologies they review. Available through Western Libraries electronic catalogue Mauthner, Natasha, and Odette Parry 2013 Open Access Digital Data Sharing: Principles, Policies and Practices. Social Epistemology 27(1): 47-67. Available online through Western Libraries electronic catalogue McCoy, Mark, and Thegn Ladefoged 2009 New Developments in the Use of Spatial Technology in Archaeology. Journal of Archaeological Research 17: 263-295. Available through Western Libraries electronic catalogue Morgan, Colleen, and Stuart Eve 2012 DIY and Digital Archaeology: What are You Doing to Participate? World Archaeology Vol 44, no 4. Available online through Western Libraries electronic catalogue

4. January 26th: Archaeological Databases, Big Data, Informatics and Beyond Note: 5 minute “elevator pitch” of digital project Eiteljorg, Harrison II 2012 Digital Data in Archaeology: The Database. The CSA Newsletter 25(2). Available Online at: http://csanet.org/newsletter/fall12/nlf1203.html Huggett, Jeremy 2012 Lost in information? Ways of knowing and modes of representation in e-archaeology. World Archaeology 44(4): 538-552. Available through Western Libraries electronic catalogue Kintigh, K. and J. Altschul 2010 Forum: Sustaining the Digital Archaeological Record. Heritage Management 3(2): 264-274. Available through Western Libraries electronic catalogue Labrador, Angela 2012 Ontologies of the Future and Interfaces for All: Archaeological Databases for the Twenty-First Century. Archaeologies 8(3): 236-249. Available through Western Libraries electronic catalogue Niccolucci, Franco, and Julian Richards 2013 ARIADNE: Advanced Research Infrastructures for Archaeological Dataset Networking in Europe. International Journal of Humanities and Arts Computing 7(1-2): 70-88. Available online at: http://www.euppublishing.com/doi/pdfplus/10.3366/ijhac.2013.0082

Page 8 of 11

5. February 2nd: Archaeological Visualization/3D Modelling NOTE: Final Project/Paper Proposal Due Ahmed, Namir, Michael Carter and Neal Ferris 2013 Sustainable Archaeology through Progressive Assembly 3D Digitization. World Archaeology 46(1):137-154. Available through Western Libraries electronic catalogue Forte, Mauirizio 2014 3D Archaeology: New Perspectives and Challenges – The Example of Catalhoyuk. Journal of Eastern Mediterranean Archaeology and Heritage Studies. 2(1): 1-29. Available through Western Libraries electronic catalogue Gilboa, Ayelet, Ayellet Tal, Ilan Shimshoni, Michael Kolomenkin 2012 Computer-based, automatic recording and illustration of complex archaeological artifacts. Journal of 40: 1329-1339. Available through Western Libraries electronic catalogue Richards, Julian, Kieron Niven and Stuart Jeffrey 2013 Preserving our Digital Heritage: Information Systems for Data Management and Preservation. In: Visual Heritage in the Digital Age, pp. 311-326. Available through Western Libraries electronic catalogue Limp, W., A. Payne, S. Winters, A. Barnes and J. Cothren 2010 Approaching 3D Digital Heritage Data from a Multitechnology, Lifecycle Perspective. In CAA'2010 Fusion of Cultures, edited by F. Contreras and F.J. Melero. Available Online at: http://www.cast.uark.edu/assets/files/PDF/CAA_2010_proceedings_Limp_et_al.pdf

6. February 9th: Sustainable Archaeology, 3D Scanning and Digital CT This week’s class will be held at Sustainable Archaeology, which is at the Museum of Ontario Archaeology (1600 Attawandaron Road). Students will get a tour of the facility and imaging equipment, and have short sessions 3D scanning artifacts, modeling those scans, and/or scanning on the facility MicroCT scanner. This is intended to be a hands on class to give you a taste for using this equipment and working through the software challenges of the equipment. For those who think they might like to do a final project using this equipment, this will be an opportunity for you to become familiar with, and ask about, your projects with SA staff.

7. February 23rd: Visualization and Printing Deufemia, V, Paolino, L. G. Tortora, et al 2012 Investigative Analysis Across Documents and Drawings: Visual Analytics for Archaeologists. Proceedings of the International Working Conference on Advanced Visual Interfaces: pp. 539- 546. http://www.dmi.unisa.it/people/deufemia/www/Papers/Deufemia-AVI2012.pdf Llobera, Marcos 2011 Archaeological Visualization: Towards an Archaeological (AISc). In Journal of and Method 18: 193-223. Available through Western Libraries Olsen, Brandon, Jody Gordon, Curtis Runnels, Steve Chomyszak 2014 Experimental Three Dimensional Printing of a Lower Paleolithic Handaxe: An Assessment of the Technology and Analytical Value. Lithic Technology 39(3): 162-172. Available through Western Libraries Richter, Ashley, V. Petrovic, D. Vanoni, Steve Parish and F. Kuester 2014 Digital Archaeological Landscapes and Replicated Artifacts. In Digital heritage International Conference volume 2. Pp. 569-572. Accessible online at https://www.academia.edu/5781033/Digital_Archaeological_Landscapes_and_Replicated_Artifac ts_Questions_of_Analytical_and_Phenomenological_Authenticity_and_Ethical_Policies_in_Cyber Archaeology

Page 9 of 11

8. March 2nd: Games in Archaeology – Virtual and Immersive Environments Anderson, E., L. McLoughlin, F. Liarokapis, C. Peters, P. Petridis, S. de Freitas 2010 Developing Serious Games for Cultural Heritage: A State of the Art Review. 14(4): 255-275. Available through Western Libraries electronic catalogue González-Tennant, Edward 2010 Virtual Archaeology and Digital Storytelling: A Report from Rosewood, Florida. The African Diaspora Archaeology Network, September 2010 Newsletter. Available online at: http://www.diaspora.illinois.edu/news0910/news0910-1.pdf Rua, Helena, and Redro Alvito 2011 Living the Past: 3D models, virtual reality, and game engines as tools for supporting archaeology and the reconstruction of cultural heritage – the case study of the Roman Villa of Casal de Freiria Journal of Archaeological Science 38: 3296-3308. Available through Western Libraries electronic catalogue

9. March 9th: Landscapes, Modelling and GIS OR, DEDICATED TO FINISHING DIGITAL PROJECTS! Hu, Di 2011 Advancing Theory? and Geographical Information Systems. Papers from the Institute of Archaeology, UCL 21. Available Online at: http://pia-journal.co.uk/article/view/pia.381/446 Llobera, Marcos 2012 Augmenting Phenomenology: Using Augmented Reality to Aid Archaeological Phenomenology in the Landscape. Journal of Archaeological Theory and Method 19(4): 582-600. Available through Western Libraries electronic catalogue Verhagen, Philip, and Thomas G. Whitley 2012 Integrating Archaeological Theory and Predictive Modelling: A Live Report from the Scene. Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory 19: 49-100. Available through Western Libraries

10. March 16th: Presentations on Digital Projects

11. March 23rd: Digital Archaeology and Communities, Part 1 Engagement Beyond Boast, Robin, and Peter Biehl 2011 Archaeological Knowledge Production and Dissemination in the Digital Age. In Archaeology 2.0: New Approaches to Communication and Collaboration, edited by E Kansa, S. Kansa and E. Watrall, pp. 119-156. Costen Institute of Archaeology at UCLA. Available online at: http://www.escholarship.org/uc/item/1r6137tb Laracuente, N. 2012 Public Archaeology 2.0: Facilitating Engagement with Twitter AP: Online Journal in Public Archaeology. Vol. 2: 81-99. Pdf in Dropbox McDavid, C. 2004 Towards a More Democratic Archaeology? The Internet and Public Archaeological Practise. In: N. Merriman (ed.) Public Archaeology. Routledge, London. 159–187. Pdf in Dropbox

12. March 30th: Digital Archaeology and Communities, Part 2 Challenges Brown, Deidre, and George Nicholas 2012 Protecting Indigenous in the Age of Digital Democracy: Institutional and Communal Responses to Canadian First Nations And Māori Heritage Concerns. Journal of Material Culture 17: 307-324. Available through Western Libraries electronic catalogue

Page 10 of 11

Issac, Gwyneira 2011 Whose Idea was This? , Replicas, and the Reproduction of Knowledge. Current 55: 211-233. Richardson, Lorna 2014 Understanding Archaeological Authority in a Digital Context. Internet Archaeology 38. Available Online at: http://intarch.ac.uk/journal/issue38/richardson_index.html

13: April 6thth: Other Ways of Knowing in a Digitized Archaeological Heritage? Boast, Robin, and Jim Enote 2013 Virtual Repatriation: It is Neither Virtual nor Repatriation. In Heritage in the Context of Globalization, edited by P. Biehl and C. Prescott, pp. 103-116. Dawson, Peter, Richard Levy and Natasha Lyons 2011 ‘Breaking the Fourth Wall’: 3D Virtual Worlds as tools for Knowledge Repatriation in Archaeology. Journal of Social Archaeology 11: 387-402. Available online Western Libraries electronic catalogue Ngata, Wayne, Hera Ngata-Gibson, and Amiria Salmond 2012 Te Ataakura: Digital Taonga and Cultural Innovation. Journal of Material Culture 17: 229-244. Available online Western Libraries electronic catalogue

Western Standard Course Policies

Accessibility at Western - Please contact the course instructor if you require material in an alternate format or if you require any other arrangements to make this course more accessible to you. Western’s commitment to Accessibility, visit: http://wss.uwo.ca/Student%20Services%20Organizational%20Units/Accessibility%20at%20Western/index.html

Student Development Services http://www.sdc.uwo.ca/ssd/ has staff members who specialize in assisting students with various disabilities to adjust to the university environment. These disabilities include, but are not limited to, vision, hearing and mobility impairments, learning disabilities, chronic illnesses, chronic pain, and attention deficit/hyperactivity disorders. Students who require special accommodations for disabilities should make a formal request through Student Development Services as early in the semester as possible.

Accommodation for Medical Illness - Western’s Policy on Accommodation for Medical Illness: https://studentservices.uwo.ca/secure/index.cfm

If documentation is required for either medical or non-medical academic accommodation, then such documentation must be submitted by the student directly to their Academic Counseling Office and not the instructor, from where it will be determined if accommodation is warranted.

Student Support Services - A range of student services is available at: https://studentservices.uwo.ca/secure/index.cfm Other resources include Student Support Services: http://westernusc.ca/services Students who are in emotional/mental distress should refer to Mental Health@Western http://www.uwo.ca/uwocom/mentalhealth for a complete list of options about how to obtain help.

Plagiarism and Scholastic Offences - Scholastic offences are taken seriously and students are directed to read the appropriate policy, specifically, the definition of what constitutes a Scholastic Offence, at the following website: http://www.uwo.ca/univsec/pdf/academic_policies/appeals/scholastic_discipline_undergrad.pdf

Students must write their essays and assignments in their own words. Whenever students take an idea, or a passage from another author, they must acknowledge their debt both by using quotation marks where appropriate and by proper referencing such as footnotes or citations. Plagiarism is a major academic offense.

Written work - All required papers may be subject to submission for textual similarity review to the commercial plagiarism detection software under license to the University for the detection of plagiarism. All papers submitted for such checking will be included as source documents in the reference database for the purpose of detecting plagiarism of papers subsequently submitted to the system. Use of the service is subject to the licensing agreement, currently between The University of Western Ontario and Turnitin.com (http://www.turnitin.com).

Evidence of suspected plagiarism will be reported to the Department Chair, who will give the student an opportunity to respond to the allegation. Where a determination of plagiarism has been made, the Chair shall assess appropriate penalties up to and including a zero on the assignment and failure in the course. The case will be reported to the Dean, who may assess additional penalties.

Page 11 of 11