Abstract:OverviewWith an ever-growing range of computational tools and applications now available for archaeological practice, the potential of digital archaeology is greater than ever before. Yet, archaeological curricula have not always followed suit, and many archaeologists are not up-to-date with the necessary digital skills. To fill this gap, online tutorials and learning platforms are being developed to familiarize archaeologists and students with the potential of digital media for archaeological research practic… Show more
“…Some have advocated for centralized archaeological information infrastructure, whereas guiding principles such as FAIR (Findable, Accessible, Interoperable, Reusable; Wilkinson et al 2016) and CARE (Collective benefit, Authority to control, Responsibility, and Ethics; Carroll et al 2020) have received heightened attention recently. In addition, concepts such as para- and metadata can make data more useful, and there has been a continuous push to increase digital and data literacy among archaeologists (Cobb et al 2019; Daems 2020; Kansa and Kansa 2021). FIGURE 3.Illustration of how the implementation of FAIR and CARE curation practices enables practitioners and partners to better gauge what kinds of data are important, need to be prioritized, and documented to help balance the system.…”
OverviewArchaeology in the United States is caught in a “curation crisis” (Childs 1995; Childs and Warner 2019; Marquardt et al. 1982; SAA Advisory Committee on Curation 2003; Trimble and Marino 2003) and a “digital data crisis” (or “deluge”) more specifically (Bevan 2015; Clarke 2015; Kansa and Kansa 2021; Katsianis et al. 2022; Kersel 2015; McManamon et al. 2017:239–240; Rivers Cofield et al. 2024). Recent estimates suggest that, collectively, over 1.4 billion dollars are spent annually to support archaeological work that is mandated by federal law (SRI Foundation 2020). Although substantial efforts are underway to generate and provide mechanisms for managing, curating, and sharing the resultant digital data, we suggest that a critical step that has yet to be taken is to describe and visualize the components, connections, and causal dynamics of the US digital data system as it currently functions. Here, we specifically apply a “systems thinking” approach to produce such a high-level model of this system. We argue that understanding and visualizing this system will help us all “think bigger” (Heilen and Manney 2023); identify sources of knowledge, opportunities for critical analysis, collaboration, and capacity building; and increase much-needed archaeological digital literacy (Kansa and Kansa 2022). We conceptualize this as bringing “equilibrium” to the system, and in this article, we make several suggestions on how to bring this about. These insights can enable practitioners to better understand their roles in and contributions to the overall system and to evaluate efforts to improve data sharing, management, and curation practices not only within their organizations and departments but beyond.
“…Some have advocated for centralized archaeological information infrastructure, whereas guiding principles such as FAIR (Findable, Accessible, Interoperable, Reusable; Wilkinson et al 2016) and CARE (Collective benefit, Authority to control, Responsibility, and Ethics; Carroll et al 2020) have received heightened attention recently. In addition, concepts such as para- and metadata can make data more useful, and there has been a continuous push to increase digital and data literacy among archaeologists (Cobb et al 2019; Daems 2020; Kansa and Kansa 2021). FIGURE 3.Illustration of how the implementation of FAIR and CARE curation practices enables practitioners and partners to better gauge what kinds of data are important, need to be prioritized, and documented to help balance the system.…”
OverviewArchaeology in the United States is caught in a “curation crisis” (Childs 1995; Childs and Warner 2019; Marquardt et al. 1982; SAA Advisory Committee on Curation 2003; Trimble and Marino 2003) and a “digital data crisis” (or “deluge”) more specifically (Bevan 2015; Clarke 2015; Kansa and Kansa 2021; Katsianis et al. 2022; Kersel 2015; McManamon et al. 2017:239–240; Rivers Cofield et al. 2024). Recent estimates suggest that, collectively, over 1.4 billion dollars are spent annually to support archaeological work that is mandated by federal law (SRI Foundation 2020). Although substantial efforts are underway to generate and provide mechanisms for managing, curating, and sharing the resultant digital data, we suggest that a critical step that has yet to be taken is to describe and visualize the components, connections, and causal dynamics of the US digital data system as it currently functions. Here, we specifically apply a “systems thinking” approach to produce such a high-level model of this system. We argue that understanding and visualizing this system will help us all “think bigger” (Heilen and Manney 2023); identify sources of knowledge, opportunities for critical analysis, collaboration, and capacity building; and increase much-needed archaeological digital literacy (Kansa and Kansa 2022). We conceptualize this as bringing “equilibrium” to the system, and in this article, we make several suggestions on how to bring this about. These insights can enable practitioners to better understand their roles in and contributions to the overall system and to evaluate efforts to improve data sharing, management, and curation practices not only within their organizations and departments but beyond.
“…Archaeologists and other researchers interested in studying how the human past is viewed, studied, and commercialized increasingly rely on web scraping and similar computational tools as the method of gathering data (Daems 2020;Graham et al 2020;Hashemi and Waddell 2022;Kintigh 2015;Marwick 2014;Richardson 2019;Wilson et al 2022). Many of these approaches focus on studying how issues relating to archaeological practice are discussed on social media platforms (Marwick 2014;Richardson 2019), while others focus on investigating the online trade of illicit antiquities (Hashemi and Waddell 2022).…”
Section: What Scraping Is and How To Do Itmentioning
Web scraping, the practice of automating the collection of data from websites, is a key part of how the internet functions, and it is an increasingly important part of the research tool kit for scientists, cultural resources professionals, and journalists. There are few resources intended to train archaeologists in how to develop web scrapers. Perhaps more importantly, there are also few resources that outline the normative, ethical, and legal frameworks within which scraping of archaeological data is situated. This article is intended to introduce archaeologists to web scraping as a research method, as well as to outline the norms concerning scraping that have evolved since the 1990s, and the current state of US legal frameworks that touch on the practice. These norms and legal frameworks continue to evolve, representing an opportunity for archaeologists to become more involved in how scraping is practiced and how it should be regulated in the future.
“…One of the best resources including activities and tutorials for learning digital tools is The Open Digital Archaeology Textbook (ODATE; Graham et al 2019). ODATE is a digital textbook and web-based environment that integrates background on digital archaeology (broadly conceived), introductions to digital tools, and embedded exercises to learn these tools (see recent overview, Daems 2020). In addition to its readability and clear instruction, ODATE situates the tools in broader discussions in the field.…”
Section: Educational Approaches To Digital and Data Literacy In Archa...mentioning
This article outlines a model for teaching undergraduate and graduate archaeology students the skills for working with open-access archaeological data and using digital tools for analysis. Due to the often limited opportunities for students to learn methods directly for data reuse, large archaeological datasets remain stagnant and unused in digital archives. The bloat of unused data stands as a major ethical hurdle in heritage fields. This article explores an approach for addressing this issue, which is to incorporate data and digital literacy training into standard archaeological curricula. This approach consists of covering a wide range of topics that contribute to digital and data fluency that include both practical digital skills and discussions aimed at contextualizing the tools into larger, ethical, and sociopolitical frameworks. This article offers summaries of the activities and tutorials developed for this project and provides open access to all of the resources for future use.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
