Overview
In the current digital age, misinformation travels faster than truth1. It is now more important than ever that citizens make informed decisions about what information is reliable, and discern hypotheses from proven facts. Pleistocene archaeologists play a key role in helping inform the public about our species’ deep history.
For this activity students will read about a recent announcement regarding a Pleistocene-aged mastodon site in Southern California. Students will then read published critiques of the evidence, and establish their own view on the material. Finally, students will evaluate how the popular press covered the discovery, and will determine the extent to which popular science promoted accurate or inaccurate information.
Instructions:
Download this file to your computer. Save it as a format that you can edit in a word processor (e.g., .doc, .docx). When you are finished, upload your file to Assignment #3 in Canvas.
- Read the original article by Holen et al 2017.
- What are the main conclusions of the paper? Respond in 200 words or more.
- What lines of evidence do the authors use? Name at least 3 kinds of evidence.
- What are the methods that were used? Name at least 3 methods.
- Read at least two critiques, or more, from any of the following:
Optional: read for a theoretical perspective: Eren and Bebber 2019
Optional: read Holen et al’s response to critiques: Holen et al reply
- What are the main criticisms proposed by critique paper 1? Respond in 200 words or more.
- What are the main criticisms proposed by critique paper 2? Respond in 200 words or more.
- Now that you have read the original paper, and at least two or more criticisms of the paper, what is your opinion of the Cerutti mastodon evidence? Respond in 200 words or more.
- Next you will read popular press articles from the internet about the Cerutti mastodon. These are NOT peer-reviewed journal articles. I have pasted some below into two groups. Please read at least one from each and feel free to search around the internet for more examples:
- Group A
- Group B
- What is the date of the first popular press article you read from Group A? What does it state about the Cerutti mastodon find. Respond in 200 words or more.
- What is the date of the popular press article you read from Group B? What does it state about the Cerutti mastodon find. Respond in 200 words or more.
- What do you think are the differences between Group A and Group B? Using examples from the text, describe which group you think is more reliable. Explain your answer in 200 words or more.
- Congratulations! You have now read an original journal article, analyzed the archaeological evidence, considered diverse perspectives, and evaluated how the science has been reported in the press. In closing, reflect on what you learned from these readings. How would you describe the evidence to someone in your family who has very little experience with archaeology? What do you think is the role of archaeologists in helping the public interpret finds such as these? Respond in 500 words or more.Assignment 3 Rubric - Interpreting a Pleistocene Archaeological Site for the Public
Assignment 3 Rubric - Interpreting a Pleistocene Archaeological Site for the Public Criteria Ratings Pts This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeCompletion 15 to >0.0 ptsFull MarksThe short responses answer the questions, meet the required word count, and meet any other guidelines described in the question (e.g. providing at least 3 examples from the text.)0 ptsNo MarksThe responses do not meet the required word count. Answers are off topic and do not relate to the question. 15 pts This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeLevel of engagement with readings and course material 15 to >0.0 ptsFull MarksThe responses cite examples from the related readings in the assignment. The short answers bring together multiple concepts from the class. Answers are well organized and use multiple lines of evidence.0 ptsNo MarksNo examples from the readings are cited. The answers do not demonstrate any engagement with the course content. Answers are vague. Responses are short, focusing on only one example. No attempt to integrate the information from the assigned readings. Little to no critical thought demonstrated. 15 pts This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeLanguage, grammar, spelling, organization 10 to >0.0 ptsFull MarksNo typos. No spelling errors. Sentences are easy to read. The paragraphs have a cohesive theme. No run on sentences.0 ptsNo MarksSentences are run-on with little to no punctuation. Grammar and spelling errors are common. Paragraphs do not have a theme or direction. 10 pts