scholarly journals Public Archaeology 2015: Letting public engagement with archaeology 'speak for itself'

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lorna-Jane Richardson ◽  
◽  
James Dixon ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Public Engagement ◽  
Public Archaeology

Co-Creation’s Role in Digital Public Archaeology

2015 ◽  
Vol 3 (3) ◽  
pp. 223-234 ◽  
Author(s):  
Elizabeth Bollwerk
Keyword(s):  
Open Access ◽  
Cultural Heritage ◽  
Public Engagement ◽  
Local Community ◽  
Public Archaeology ◽  
Community Members ◽  
Creative Methods ◽  
Community Projects ◽  
Digital Engagement ◽  
Proper Context

AbstractSimon (2010:187) notes that the purpose of co-creative community projects is “to give voice and be responsive to the needs and interests of local community members; to provide a place for community engagement and dialogue; and to help participants develop skills that will support their own individual and community goals.” This paper explores the role that co-creation currently plays in digital public archaeology and discusses how co-creative methods can inform broader archaeological digital engagement efforts. It begins by placing co-creation in its proper context in order to demonstrate its unique characteristics, its value, and how it complicates approaches used in other types of archaeological engagement projects, such as Open Access initiatives. The discussion then turns to evaluating its impact and the broader need to measure success in digital public engagement projects. A discussion of research from the archaeology and the cultural heritage sectors provides examples of evaluation metrics and methods for assessing digital public archaeology projects. The paper concludes by suggesting that all digital engagement projects can benefit from incorporating some of the principles that are inherently part of co-creative methods but that not all archaeological digital engagement projects should strive to be completely co-creative.

Public Archaeology, Archaeology and the Public

2020 ◽  
pp. 17-33
Author(s):  
Jeannette Papadopoulos ◽  
Rosario Maria Anzalone
Keyword(s):  
Public Engagement ◽  
Public Interest ◽  
Public Archaeology ◽  
Archaeological Heritage ◽  
The Public ◽  
Mass Tourism ◽  
Public Property ◽  
Evolution Of Communication ◽  
New Challenges ◽  
Italian Constitution

Public archaeology is a flexible notion with several meanings: public engagement in protecting archaeological heritage, public interest in the results of research, and archaeology as a public service offered by qualified staff. Such a broad range of purposes and approaches involves various professionals and includes new disciplines supporting archaeology and advertising its achievements. Archaeology in Italy has always been public, since 1909 laws establish that underground and underwater finds are State property. The Italian Constitution also includes protection of landscape and cultural heritage among its fundamental principles. Nevertheless, public property of archaeological heritage seems no longer sufficient to make the communities feel as legitimate owner and involve them in archaeological enhancement projects. The increase of protection and promotion activities, the rise of mass tourism, and the evolution of communication strategies are forcing archaeology to face new challenges. In order to be roundly public, archaeology should not lose of sight its present-day public.

scholarly journals Reflecting on evaluation in public archaeology

2019 ◽  
Vol 8 (1) ◽  
pp. 65 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kate Ellenberger ◽  
Lorna-Jane Richardson
Keyword(s):  
Cultural Heritage ◽  
Community Engagement ◽  
Public Engagement ◽  
Educational Needs ◽  
Public Archaeology ◽  
Cultural Value ◽  
Formal Evaluation ◽  
Work Done ◽  
Formal Procedures

As heritage professionals, our community-facing projects are embedded in the politics of cultural heritage, and reverberate throughout the communities where we work. The only way to know if archaeological outreach and community engagement are working is to ask stakeholders. Yet undertaking formal evaluation is difficult, with differing expectations and definitions of success, depending on the requirements of funders, the willingness of the participants, and the needs of the practitioners. What do we mean when we discuss successful progress and outcomes for public engagement with archaeology, and how do we analyse these? Are we working towards assessments of our own satisfaction with work done, the satisfaction of the dominant political forms of cultural value, the formal procedures of our funding streams, or the experiential and educational needs of the non-professional with whom we engage?

Intellectual activism: Using social media to share research and promote public engagement on employee health

2013 ◽  
Author(s):  
David C. Yamada ◽  
Heidi Hudson ◽  
Garrett Burnett ◽  
David W. Ballard ◽  
Jennifer Hall ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Social Media ◽  
Public Engagement ◽  
Employee Health ◽  
Intellectual Activism

Open Budgetary Meetings Amid a Pandemic: Assessing Connecticut’s Various Pathways to Public Engagement During COVID-19

2020 ◽  
Vol 2 (4) ◽  
pp. 55-76
Author(s):  
Jodie Gil ◽  
Jonathan L Wharton
Keyword(s):  
Qualitative Analysis ◽  
Public Participation ◽  
Public Engagement ◽  
Multiple Perspectives ◽  
Public Meetings ◽  
Open Meeting

This qualitative analysis of public participation in Connecticut open meetings highlights how Connecticut communities adjusted when the state’s open meeting law was temporarily revised under emergency order during COVID-19. A survey of officials in 95 municipalities found a majority had the same or more participation in budget deliberations during that time. Only about a quarter saw decreased public participation. A closer look at four communities highlights specific challenges and successes during the sudden shift in public meetings. Connecticut’s varied forms of government give multiple perspectives, which can provide insight for other communities looking to expand virtual access to open meetings.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document