Public education in archaeology today is at a crossroads. Over the last 30 years, it has grown exponentially and is now widely recognized as one of the most effective ways to preserve the past for the future. However, it remains a loose conglomeration of approaches lacking coherence and consistency. There is little discussion of the best practices to use in specific situations and little assessment of effectiveness. One result is that practitioners often reinvent the wheel; another is that we are not reaching the diverse audiences we need to engage to assure archaeology’s future. As a profession, we are losing ground to the continued encroachment of looting and vandalism—the very activities education seeks to forestall. We can either keep doing what we are doing and hope for the best, or we can begin to systematize our efforts. This article introduces a special issue of Advances in Archaeological Practice dedicated to systematizing public education in archaeology by contextualizing and assessing contemporary practices. The article provides a framework for thinking about the issues and proposes solutions, while discussing the contributions of the issue’s authors. Its purpose is to initiate discussion, not to provide the final word on the problem.

To know where we are going, we need to know where we have been, so it seems only fitting that, to produce a special issue on designing and assessing public education programs in archaeology, we need to look back to the establishment of public outreach and archaeological education in the United States and, specifically, within the Society for American Archaeology. Archaeological education, as a subfield of archaeology, can trace its roots to individual efforts at sharing archaeology with the public, but especially to the first Save the Past for the Future Conference in Taos, New Mexico. It was here that the idea took root that, to stem vandalism and looting, we need to educate people about archaeology. This meeting was the springboard for federal initiatives like Project Archaeology and Passport in Time, and it was also the birthplace for the SAA Public Education Committee. For more than 25 years, archaeologists have been creating public outreach programs, students have graduated college thinking of public outreach as a career path, and TV shows have sensationalized our profession, but what do we really know about what we’ve done, whether we’ve made a difference, and how it can propel ourselves and future generations of archaeological educators forward?

In the past 30 years, archaeologists have taught children and youth about the processes of archaeological inquiry and the results of archaeological research. Hundreds, if not thousands, of education programs have sprouted up over the last 30 years; some have endured, while others have faded away. Some efforts and programs are aimed at formal learning in school classrooms, while many others are based in informal settings, such as museums, outdoor learning centers, after-school programs, and many others. A few of these programs have been assessed for learning outcomes, but many others have not. For example, all Project Archaeology education materials are intensively assessed in classrooms and peer reviewed prior to release for their efficacy in teaching predetermined goals or enduring understandings. Additionally, the Project Archaeology curriculum was assessed for its efficacy in teaching conceptual understanding of science inquiry. Program assessment is critical for the long-term success and sustainability of archaeology education.

Swede Hollow Park, in St. Paul, Minnesota, was originally inhabited by immigrants to St. Paul. Despite an engaged surrounding neighborhood, the park and its history are not widely known. The park was recently the site of a public archaeology project, providing an opportunity to explicitly examine who participated and why, as a means of assessing the success of public education. The project team used surveys and informal interviews as assessment tools for analyzing the demographics and motivations of the participating public. Understanding demographics and motivations is an understudied aspect of public archaeology and yet is crucially important in influencing how archaeologists interact with the public, frame their research questions, and create learning objectives. This information has the potential to help create more inclusive public archaeology projects (for example, drawing in more recent immigrant communities as well as descendants) and to indicate where more work needs to be done to accommodate diversity (in our case, understanding the homeless as stakeholders). It also can help clarify whether archaeologists can, or should, prioritize site, method, or narrative when engaging with the public, or whether the public should choose.

Since hosting its first archaeology fair in 2001, the Archaeological Institute of America (AIA) has organized 23 more fairs and informed thousands of people through this popular outreach activity. The AIA fair model brings together independent archaeological organizations representing a rich array of archaeological subfields to present their programs and resources to a local community in an interactive and engaging manner. The goals of AIA archaeology fairs are to promote a greater public understanding of archaeology, raise awareness of local archaeological resources, and bring together proximate archaeological groups with a shared outreach goal. In this article, the authors discuss how the AIA fair model was developed through feedback cycles that include evaluation, data analysis, reflection, and trial and error; how it evolved; and how it is spreading to other groups around the world. To date, 26 AIA local societies have hosted fairs, and the popularity of this program as an outreach event is increasing among other archaeological groups across the United States, as well as in Belize, Canada, Colombia, the Czech Republic, Iran, and Myanmar. This growth in popularity and implementation presents us with unique opportunities to collect and reflect upon data essential to conducting archaeological outreach around the globe.

Place-based education is a method of teaching that uses exploration of a local environment or community through hands-on, real-world learning to foster a strong connection to community. This model emphasizes co-creation of knowledge throughout the learning process and has been applied to a variety of disciplines, including social and natural sciences. Taught through place-based approaches in both the classroom and in the field, archaeology can provide a curriculum that connects students to their environment and local heritage. The Mercill Archaeology Center in Jackson, Wyoming, seeks to address an “educational resources gap” in the local community by offering place-based programming for students. The programs focused on the archaeology of the Linn Site and operated in two formats: a short (five-day) camp for elementary-age students and a more intensive (semester-long) course with gifted and talented students from the local middle school. Students participated in introductory cultural history and archaeological classes before joining archaeologists in active research. By highlighting these programs as case studies, this article will explore the successes and challenges of place-based field programming as part of active archaeological research. It is hoped that these models will provide guidance for other community-oriented archaeological projects seeking to implement a place-based approach.

Archaeologists are in a unique position to promote heritage and preservation through environmental education, the fundamentals of which have overlapping and parallel themes in archaeology education and outreach. Recently, successful community-based collaborative research and archaeology fieldwork initiatives between archaeologists and Native American/First Nations communities have prompted tribal leaders to pursue ways for youth in their communities to engage in contemporary cultural and natural resources work, thus inspiring future stewardship and introducing youth to professional pathways. With the guidance of archaeologists and tribal community educators, youth can participate in authentic, hands-on archaeological activities that place them into the roles of scientists and researchers and allow them to interpret their own archaeological heritage. A July 2015 partnership between archaeologists and the Ho-Chunk Nation in Wisconsin provided a place-based archaeological learning experience at a site area that was personally relevant to the student participants. A solid and collaborative planning process between archaeologists and tribal staff contributed to a successful workshop where all parties met their goals of strengthening partnerships and providing an enriching experience for the students. The integration of science-based archaeology with a traditional cultural learning environment provided a comfortable setting that resulted in noticeable engagement and enthusiasm.

Object-based, experiential learning/evidence-based inquiry engages young minds and models how research is conducted. It is clear that this kind of authentic experience stays with students long afterward. Our research investigated 74 fifth-grade public school students’ conceptions of evidence, of the provisional nature of archaeological and historical interpretations, and of the purposes for using archaeology to study the past. Three and four years later, we conducted follow-up interviews with 29 of the students to investigate what they remembered about their archaeological experience, including classroom instruction, excavation/labwork, and concepts related to archaeological processes and historical information. Our study shows that in-depth archaeological study has considerable sticking power. It also provides important insights into how students think about archaeology, history, and the past, and how they relate “things” to the past and to past cultures. In particular, it shows that the materiality of archaeology offers students opportunities to create multiple, evidence-based interpretations when they are taught to understand culture in material ways. Our study also offers concrete suggestions for anyone considering using objects to teach about the past: use an inquiry-based approach, take students’ prior knowledge into account, use metaphors carefully with younger children, and make the human-object connection explicit for all.

Museum educators and graduate students at Brown University’s Haffenreffer Museum of Anthropology and the Joukowsky Institute for Archaeology and the Ancient World, along with the RISD Museum at the Rhode Island School of Design, are entering their eighth year of partnering with sixth-grade social studies teachers in Providence Public Schools in a five-session classroom and museumbased archaeology program called Think Like an Archaeologist. This experiential program uses the study of archaeological methods to address state and national social studies standards and bridges social studies content with the literacy standards of Common Core State Standards (CCSS) that aim at moving students toward twenty-first-century skill building. Students not only understand the science behind the content in their textbooks but also learn how to use museum objects and archaeological artifacts as primary resources. Students also learn to “read” artifacts, express their ideas in spoken and written language as historians, and use academic vocabulary as required by CCSS while thinking like archaeologists. Through teacher feedback and student evaluations, we know this program to be a successful example of the benefits of teaching archaeological skills in middle school curricula—so much so that it has now been re-created at additional schools in other regions.

Brown University is home to several seldom-used study collections of broken and unprovenienced ancient Egyptian objects. In a new exhibition focused on the research process and the people who make it happen, these items feature as keys to the behind-the-scenes world of archaeological study. In this article, we demonstrate how educators can mobilize fragmentary artifacts as new tools for handson education. Each section of the exhibition focuses on an active research project that employs a modern investigative technology (e.g., XRF Analysis) and introduces visitors to researchers at all levels of study. This not only humanizes the archaeological process but also invites the viewer to participate actively in the interpretation of museum research. Two hands-on elements further cultivate an environment of accessibility to archaeology: an iPad interface updated regularly based on visitor feedback, which welcomes visitors to explore the exhibition’s objects and research technologies in greater depth; and a preexisting experiential learning program, CultureLab, where visitors can handle objects from the collection and be researchers themselves. Visitor feedback suggests that openly presenting the realities of archaeological research and subsequently encouraging visitors to assume the role of researcher is a highly effective model for visitors and educators alike.

Archaeologists are regularly asked to present public programs. The audiences are varied, as are the settings. Often, the programs are one-time events, and archaeologists usually talk about current or favorite projects. However, public programs may run into unexpected problems because they take archaeologists into unfamiliar situations. In addition, not all programs, including some that seem successful, leave the audience with the message the archaeologist intended to convey; occasionally, the audience will even receive the opposite message. This article is designed to help anyone preparing public programs to avoid some common problems. The lessons fit into three groups. The first group consists of knowledge lessons: know your audience, know their interests, and know their community. The second group consists of logistical lessons: how many programs or classes should be involved? How long should each program last, and what facilities should be used? The third group consists of development lessons for both you and your audience, including building goals and objectives into the program and using appropriate assessment methods. It also includes creating networks that support your program. Can you develop the individual encounters into a coherent approach? Whether a program is designed for a single school class of 30 fourth graders or for a booth at a county fair visited by 4,000 fairgoers, each one should be designed to provide a coherent message to the audience.

Maintaining the public’s interest in the past has long been a major concern among archaeologists, and practitioners since Mortimer Wheeler have appreciated the value of reporting their finds through mass media outlets (Moshenska and Schadla-Hall 2011). While teaching the honors module Archaeology in Contemporary Society at the University of Chester in 2015, I wanted to assess the portrayal of our discipline in the news. I put together a computer lab session that collated headlines into word clouds and found some peculiarities of reporting across news sources. Yet when it came time to producing essays, few students chose to write about this subject. While there have been some great studies of archaeology in the media, they are aging fast and new work has yet to catch up with the digital world of online news.