Figure 7. David Jearne (left) and Herschel Kitchens (right),
two past president of the Arkansas Archeological Society,
show off mastodon bones discovered in the eroding bank of

the Red River in southwest Arkansas. More than a dozen
volunteers helped Survey archeologist Frank Schambach
excavate these prehistoric remains.

The developers allowed 10 days for excavations, and
volunteers were there every day, working under the supervi-
sion of the Survey's historical archeologist. As members
progress through the program, the Survey has called upon
individuals to help with contract projects as well; one
National Park Service contract on a data recovery mitigation
project required the use of trained volunteers. In other
instances, people advanced in the program have been hired as
crew members. These people know the Survey's recordkeep-
ing system, and the Survey staff knows who has had what
kinds of experience and who can supervise the less experi
enced crew people or other volunteers, All the Survey's
Research Stations use the local members for lab work all year
long, and several avocational members with computer
backgrounds enter data into the Survey's computerized
cataloguing system.

An additional practical benefit of the Field Training Program
in general is that, with reduced State funding for hired crews,
the two-and-a-half week summer field program provides a
concentrated time during which one of the Survey
archeologists gets a lot of field testing done in support of his
or her research. For several years this Field Training Program

and projects using trained volunteers from the program have
provided the only opportunities for field work for the Survey
staff. The Survey has calculated that its fiscal commitment,
in terms of staff time alone, is equaled by the volunteers’
time, figuring the going hourly wage for crews.

For the Society members, the advantages of the program are
probably as diverse as the individuals themselves. One
Society member has written:

For the Society’s part, its members are wildly grateful for the
professional network they may draw upon, and are acutely aware that
the information and training they are getting is rarely available to
amateurs in such a comprehensive and inexpensive form ... Although
most participants come from Arkansas, there are those who travel
hundreds of miles to attend the Society dig. Frank Breunig, a retired
businessman from Atlanta, has been coming since 1972 when he
spotted an article about the program in the National Observer;
bassoonist Virginia Hourigan roars down from New York on her
motorcycle; Bill Jordan of Illinois arrives before anyone else and
stays until the last tent is packed and gone. Many are drawn because
they found public archeology programs lacking in their own states
(Newell 1988).

Keeping track of time and experience in a Log Book, and
periodically earning recognition for achievement provides
real satisfaction, whether (or not) an individual intends to
strive for the goal of Certified Field Archeologist.

Finally, compared to some other training programs, this one is
relatively inexpensive. ‘The annual registration fee for the
Field Training Program is graduated depending upon how
many days an individual stays, with a maximum charge at the
present time of $25. This pays for the large packet of
information participants receive upon registration and another
packet distributed at the site with field and laboratory
procedures specific to the site. Registration for the Certifica-
tion Program is a one-time fee of $12.50, which essentially
pays for the Log Book. The Society runs a camp for
members during the dig for which there is a small nightly fee.
Members must provide their own food and usually provide
their own transportation during the dig as well. This can add
up if the seminars are held at a local school 10 miles from the
site and camp. Large excavation equipment is provided by
the Survey, but each member must have his or her own
trowel, tape, and similar small equipment.

The Downside of

lor Some Less-Than-Good Things About] the Program

From the Survey’s point of view, the commitment of time and
personnel goes far beyond that of the Training Program itself;
in terms of staff time alone, this is an expensive program.
One staff member and her secretary spend at least a quarter of
their time maintaining copies of all certification records and
Log Books, preparing information for the Evaluation
Committee, and then, as registrations come in for the summer
program, assigning individuals to the seminars and other
experiences that they need to advance in the program.



We are often asked for information on the program, and the
next question is usually, "How can you do all that?” It is in
the context of the statewide, coordinated Survey program that
it is possible for 10 to 12 professional archeologists to
participate in the summer field program. No matter what
their own research, or in what part of the State the Field
Training Program is located, the Survey staff is expected to
help with supervision and in teaching seminars. It is a part of
their jobs. Even for those who receive no personal research
benefit from the field program, the friendships and fellowship
of the summer excavations are worth it!

Finally, what does it mean to an individual to be a Certified
Field Archeologist? To have taken 10 years to go through all
the steps, and to have tackled a full research project and have
the report published? Certainly, such a person has as much, if
not more, field and laboratory experience as most people who
go through a regular M.A. academic program in two or three
years. ‘The concentrated work is not there, and the depth of
the theoretical background may not be the same, but the
ability to take on a research project is equal, and her or his
Log Book attests to that training and experience. In addition,
these individuals have had the advantage of working under
supervision of a dozen archeologists, each with a different
approach to a site and to ways of interpreting data. This

breadth of experience is not equalled in the usual M.A.
program.

The program does not turn out "professional archeologists” in
any way that phrase is currently used. It is not designed to do
that. These individuals do not meet the Federal requirements
for a professional archeologist (National Park Service 1983)
and therefore normally do not qualify to undertake cultural
resource projects on their own. But the Survey would gladly
give any one of these individuals support for her or his own
research projects. The Survey hires individuals in the
program on its projects, it asks them to check on sites that are
reported to be disturbed, and the staff is ready and willing to
answer all questions, and provide supervision for individual
projects. The individual has the satisfaction of knowing that
by pursuing an enjoyable avocation, he or she is not only
helping in a truly scientific endeavor, but that this activity is
not destroying the very information and material that is
sought.

‘The Arkansas Archeological Society is neither as rich as its Texas
counterpart, which hires its own professional archeologists, nor as
highbrow as the Louisiana amateur group, whose recent annual
meeting featured wine, cheeses, and Ivor Noel Hume. But what the
down-home Arkansans lack in money and white tablecloths they seek
to make up in skill, and some would judge them the best trained
amateurs in the country (Newell 1988:1)

References Cited

Henderson, Gwynn
1989

The Kentucky Archaeological Registry: Landowner Participation in Site Preservation. Archeological Assistance

Program Technical Brief No. 6, U.S. Department of the Interior, National Park Service.

Hoffman, Teresa, and Lemer, Shereen
1988

Arizona Archaeology Week: Promoting the Past to the Public. Archeological Assistance Program Technical Brief

No. 2, U.S. Department of the Interior, National Park Service.

McGimsey, Charles R., III
1972 Public Archeology. Academic Press, New Yor

Newell, Leslie
1988
Survey.

National Park Service
1983
48(190):44716-44740,

White, Patsy
1987

rk.

Two Views of Archeology in Arkansas: The Amateur Viewpoint.

51.

Manuscript on file, Arkansas Archeological

“Archeology and Historic Preservation; Secretary of the Interior's Standards and Guidelines." Federal Register:

The Gordon Site: A Middle Coles Creek to Late Mississippi Period Occupation in Ashley County, Southeast
Arkansas, The Arkansas Archeologist 25/26:1



The
_ paras Archeologica Sung
én conjunction with he S Xo

Arkansas Archeatogical Society
corlifies thal

satisfactorily comploled the study and frold aclivitins vegusia
Provisional
trcheological: Yaboralory Technic

Figure 5. Anna Parks
(right) receives a certificate
from Ann Early, Survey
archeologist, who is
coordinator of the
Certification Program.

Figure 6. Members of the Kadohadacho Chapter of the Arkansas Archeological Society help Survey archeologist Frank
Schambach test a site to be affected by a small water supply lake.



Figure 8. The science classroom of the Sparkman High School converted into an archeological processing lab, June 1987.

The Survey archeologist, who is field director for the summer
program, spends at least a month full time prior to the field
program figuring out how to make best use of 120 to 140
people over a 2-week period to achieve the goals of the
research. At the time of the field program, 10 to 12 staff
members devote from 10 to 20 days full time to the program,
either teaching seminars or acting as supervisors in the field
or lab, or both. This takes archeologists away from their own
research, interrupting their own programs, which always need
attention.

Finally, there has never been a field session in which all the
excavated material was processed by the end of the two-and-
a-half weeks, despite having a half dozen people assigned to
the lab every day and scheduling several evening labs. This
is not unusual, of course, and during the following months
local Society members work in the Survey archeologist's lab
so that everything is at least cleaned and numbered before the
next field program. However, even when a different
archeologist is directing the program each summer, the ability
to do a final analysis and write a report on this work is often
curtailed by the Survey archeologist’s normal duties during
the year. Reports on several summer projects have been
published, but there are several that have not. There are few
wainees who are advanced enough in the program to provide
help at this stage, although one participant is writing up one

of the excavation projects as his final report for the category
of Certified Field Archeologist. The backlog of material to
analyze and write up puts some pressure on the Survey staff
when there is a commitment to have a training program every
summer,

From the individual participant’s viewpoint, the program
takes a long time to complete. Only one person has achieved
the "rank" of Certified Field Archeologist with the publication
of a report on personal research (White 1987). Two more are
in the throes of completing their final research projects.

Members want to work at sites where there are a Jot of things
to find, Sometimes the site an archeologist needs help with
doesn’t have lots of goodies; recording a feature isn’t half as
much fun as finding artifacts. Working in the field in
Arkansas in June or July can be brutally hot, and storms can
be destructively severe. Although all registrants receive Do's
and Don'ts and Guidelines for Conduct before the program
begins, some new members are disappointed that they cannot
work exactly where and when they want, that they must spend
some time in the lab, that they need to get up at 5:30 in the
morning in order to be ready for work at 6:30, and that they
can’t keep any of the artifacts they find. These people
generally don’t return for a second year.



ARCHEOLOGICAL ASS
Technical Brief No. 9, October 1990

TANCE PROGRAM

TRAINING and USING VOLUNTEERS in
ARCHEOLOGY: A Case Study from Arkansas

By Hester A. Davis
Arkansas Acheological Survey

In this age of rapid transformation of the earth’s
landscape, our only hope for recovery of any major
portion of this history [that is written in the soil] is by
nearly total involvement of the public (McGimsey
1972:6).

Introduction

Involvement of the public in archeology can and has taken
many forms. The quote from McGimsey above reflects the
philosophy of public archeology that he espouses, and which
has Jed many, both professional and — avocational
archeologists, into cooperative endeavors of mutual benefit,
There are pros and cons to such programs for both sides.
There are professional archeologists who condemn any
archeology done by anyone without an advanced academic
degree and several years of training. There are avocational
archeologists (and I use this term to mean people who do
scientific archeology as a hobby not as a profession) who
have met with the above mentioned kind of professional and
as a consequence think all professional archeologists are
mean spirited and want all the sites and artifacts for them-
selves. There are also people of all persuasions, all degrees of
training and experience, who wish to cooperate to record and
preserve information from the past in a way that will be
personally satisfying and rewarding, as well as scientifically
appropriate.

Until the millennium comes, there will be pothunters and
dealers in antiquities -- those who are more interested in the
artifacts as a commodity than in the inforr ation associated
with them. There also will be, as there always have been,
those interested in the past and in the techniques of archeol-
ogy who are not professionally trained but who wish to
contribute to the accumulation and the preservation of
information. Given the premise that prompted McGimsey’s
statements, that the land is being transformed and_ sites
destroyed at an accelerating rate, it behooves all who are
interested in archeological preservation to find some
satisfying and productive ways to achieve our goals of
personal satisfaction and scientific advancement.  Estab-
lishment of Archaeology Weeks (Hoffman and Lerner 1988)
is one way; partnerships with landowners is another
(Henderson 1989); training programs such as the one
described in this brief are yet another.

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
\ee/ NATIONAL PARK SERVICE

There have been and are archeological training programs in
many States. The Field School of the Texas Archeological
Society is the largest and perhaps the oldest formal program
for avocationals. It began two years before the Arkansas
program, it lasts nine days, and it attracts 400 participants al a
minimum.

The Arkansas Training Program for Avocational Archeolo-
gists was created in 1964 with two major goals: (1) providing
interested citizens with the opportunity to gain information on
how to do archeology “right,” and (2) multipling manyfold
the eyes and ears of the few professional archeologists in
efforts to preserve the state's past. The program was initially
a joint venture between the University of Arkansas Museum
and the Arkansas Archeological Society, and then, in 1967,
with the creation of the Arkansas Archeological Survey, that
agency assumed the coordinating and supervisory efforts
from the University Museum. In 1972 a formal Certification
Program was created. It does not replace the regular Field
and Laboratory Training Program but rather supplements it.

The Field and Laboratory Training Program

Field sessions for the Training Program are scheduled by the
Survey to coordinate with research and other obligations of
the professional staff. From 1964 to 1971, these sessions
lasted nine days -- a full week and the weekend on each side.
With the establishment of the Certification Program in 1972,
the field session was expanded to 19 days -- two weeks and
the weekend at each end -- in order to accommodate the
teaching of seminars, which are at the heart of the Certifica-
tion Program. All. participants must attend a four-hour
orientation program the first day of their first time in the
program. If they attend every year, thereafter they attend a
short orientation their first day at the site.

Before describing the Training Program in more detail, let me
say that in the course of 27 years, 23 different sites have been
tested, most of which would have seen no work but for this
program, Over 600 people have registered in the Certification
Program and have attended from 1 to 18 years, about 100 are
actually actively pursuing certification goals (see below), and
1 has achieved certification as a Field Archeologist.
Attendance at the field sessions since 1972 has ranged from a
low of around 80 in the heat-record year of 1980 to a high



Logistles

Aside from the pros and cons, the logistics of providing for
the summer field program are complex, although no more so,
perhaps, than those of the Texas Archeological Society’s
Field School and not much more so than many other field
schools and certain overseas projects.

The site chosen for an excavation must be part of one of the
Survey archeologist’s research programs, it must be
accessible, and there must be space for a minimum of a dozen
cars and trucks, There must be room to accommodate a
maximum of 60 people at any one time, and, preferably, it
should have artifacts and features so that members will learn
how to excavate and record them. It should not be too deep
or too small. All these circumstances present the problem of
accommodating lots of people for a short period of time.

The Society makes all arrangements for a camp site for its
members, which must be close to the excavation site -- al
least within reasonable driving distance. The campsite must
be able to accommodate a maximum of SO tents, campers,
and an equivalent number of cars at any one time; portable
toilets and potable water must be available; swimming or
shower facilities must be found; ice and food supplies must be
within reasonable driving distance; also, sites with shade trees
are prefered. A local school is usually sought as the place for
holding the seminars and for setting up the lab (Figure 8), so
both site and camp should be within reasonable driving
distance of a school. Sometimes this is a small rural school;
sometimes a larger modern school. This past summer the
Survey was able to borrow a high school’s VCR for
supplemental instruction in several of the seminars. There
must be space for two seminars and an orientation program to
be given at one time -- three classrooms at a minimum. We
have made do sometimes in abandoned houses with no
electricity and with the lab set up in a surplus army cook tent
at the site,

A quirk in the State’s geography and climate means that
choices are somewhat limited. There are many sites in
eastern Arkansas that need testing, but it simply is not
possible to camp out in that part of the State after about June
15, because the mosquitoes will carry you away. In any
event, there are very few places to camp in the easter half of
the State, which is largely under cultivation.

The Survey and the Society must work closely together in
planning where the program will be held each summer and in
arranging for all the appropriate accommodations. Basic
decisions on where the program will be held and when must
be made by early fall, so that all these arrangements can be
made before March, when notices go out for registration, and
so that Society members can plan their vacation time.

Several times we have held the program at the same site for
two or three years in a row. The advantages are obvious;
once the logistics are arranged for, the following year is
simple, and the archeologist is able to retrieve a much better
sample of information from the site. In addition, a multiple
year commitment usually means a greater scientific return.

On the other hand, moving the program around the State
exposes more of the public to archeology, gives the par-
ticipants a wider range of experience in different kinds of
sites, and gives the field director a break from responsibility
for the program every summer.

Summary

The Training Program in general and the Certification
Program in particular, as developed in Arkansas, have taken
great amounts of time, energy, and commitment on the part of
the Arkansas Archeological Survey staff, but it has been more
than worth it. There is now a trained core of individuals, with
known skills, who are ready and willing to help at a
moment's call. We can see, especially in those who return for
several years, a definite shift in perception of and attitude
toward archeological resources. The idea of ethics in
archeology is evident in work and deed. Almost all of the
field and laboratory research that Survey archeologists do
involves some of these individuals to some extent. Usually
more than 6000 volunteer hours are given by Society
members to the Survey programs during the course of a year,
more than half of them during the summer field program.

“Wall, here Jam I"

"The Arkansas Archeologist," an artist’s conception, based
upon detailed instructions provided to volunteers on what to
expect and what to bring to the Training program.
(Drawing by the University of Arkansas Museum’s artist,
1964.)



-2-

LEVELS and AREAS of CERTIFICATION

LEVELS AREAS of SPECIALIZATION
W. Certified Field Archeologist
Mi. Certified Archeological Technician
NW. Certified Crew Member Lab Technician Site Surveyor
|. Provisional Crew Member Lab Technician Site Surveyor

Figure 1. Chart indicating the levels and categories of the Certification Program.

of 141, which is considered a maximum, in 1990, An effort is
made to keep a supervisor/trainee ratio of 1 to 6.

The Training Program provides an opportunity for avoca-
tional archeologists to gain experience in all phases of
archeological work -- excavation, site survey, laboratory
processing, and analysis, under professional supervision. The
only prerequisites are: (1) membership in the Arkansas
Archeological Society; (2) payment of an annual registration
free; and (3) agreement to abide by the rules and procedures
for research set by the Survey. Anyone can take part in the
Training Program, do field and lab work, and attend seminars
provided he or she registers ahead of time.

The Certification Program

The Certification Program is an option within the Training
Program. It provides Society members with a means of: (1)
obtaining extended training, which includes formal seminars,
in various aspects of archeology; (2) having their experience
and training recognized through achieving "provisional" and
then “certified” levels of performance; and (3) keeping a
running log of these achievements, which is formally
reviewed by a joint Survey/Sociely committee prior to
awarding of certificates of achievement.

The program is organized in a series of eight categories on
four levels (Figure 1). The basic level, Provisional, has three
categories: Crew Member, Lab Technician, and Site
Surveyor. The training and experience on this level are
minimal -- one 20-hour seminar and 40 hours of supervised
experience for Provisional Crew Member and Lab Tech-
nician, and one seminar and reporting three new sites on
completed State site forms for the Provisional Site Surveyor.

The second level, Certified Crew Member, Lab Technician,
and Site Surveyor, provides considerably more training in the
field or lab, requires demonstrated skills in various field and
laboratory techniques, and includes satisfactory completion of
a series of topical seminars. By the time each of these six
categories is completed, the individual is expected to be able

to work under loose guidance and is also expected to be able
to supervise other workers. At this level, the individual
should understand how and why decisions are made in the
field, and how these decisions influence the interpretation and
analysis of data.

The third level is a single category, Certified Archeological
Technician. This is attained when all six previous categories
have been completed and a formal academic course on the
archeology of eastern North America, or its equivalent, has
been taken.

The fourth level, Certified Field Archeologist, is attained
when the individual has completed all previous categories and
has designed, carried out, and published a research project
under the supervision of a professional archeologist.

Figure 2. Ed Jackson, Survey archeologist, instructs David
Fuller and Jean Adams in the intricacies of identifying
small pieces of animal bone during the Identification and
Analysis seminar. (All photos in this technical brief are
courtesy of Hester A. Davis.)



Some Particulars.

‘There are two aspects of this Certification Program that make
it unique: one is the seminars, and the other is the Log Book.
At least these were unique when the program was initiated in
1972; since that time some other programs have adopted, and
adapted, some of these ideas.

‘Twelve seminars are offered, each lasting approximately 20
hours (Figure 2). During any one field training session,
usually eight or nine seminars are given, and every seminar is
offered at least once every two years. These seminars are:

Basic Site Surveying Techniqu
Basic Field Excavation Techniques;

Basic Laboratory Techniques;

Lithic Description and Analysi

Ceramic Description and Analysis;
Identification and Analysis of Animal Bone;
Identification and Analysis of Human Bone;
Establishing Time in Prehistory;
Field and Laboratory Photography;
Mapping Techniques;

Research Design;

Arkansas Archeology.

Figure 3.
Joyce Drennen in the fine points of sorting artifacts by raw
material.

Marvin Jeter, Survey archeologist, instructs

wom ocr
sede | sarin of tty (te ey, tan
NUS [comic aetiraces Flam Teu0 bu
wie | com ts ebm gan)
Swe | canner <aenegces ream soe ae BE) a7
3c, yep s08 ste rhon sire. see Uf,
EEE ase | RED TE BI eon, tmeiono| Mf L
ENE, [o Serine two
BEL ned pues to
Tauri 0 Bhvce Ml
dekteel epaaty ME OE ao
rE eer ow ts uate LLL
sessde ne | ngs“ ae
deca sya) LeveL Oe adres |
BEES ose 0 " -
Bese Sayed ress Mei aise Bony Pm ay]

Figure 4. Actual page from a participant’s Log Book.

During the summer field session, each seminar is taught four
hours a day over a five-day period; the other half of the day is
spent in the field or in the lab (Figure 3). The Basic
Excavation Techniques seminar is considered a full day
course, with half a day in the field and half a day in lectures.
Since many people have now taken all 12 seminars, often one
special seminar is offered each field session. Historic
Archeology, Historic Indians in Arkansas, and Cultural
Resource Management have been offered in the past.
Sometimes one of the seminars is taught at other times during
the year at one of the Arkansas Archeological Survey
Research Stations, at various locations throughout the State.

The Log Book is based on the same principle as a Navy
ship's log. On a daily basis, each individual can keep a
tunning accounting of experience and time devoted to
different activities (Figure 4). In the front there is a summary
sheet requiring supervisors’ signatures as the various
requirements for a particular category are met.

The Log Book, which is the responsibility of the individual,
and evaluation sheets prepared by each supervisor or seminar
teacher, are used by the Evaluation Committee to review a
person’s achievements. The Committee then makes a
recommendation to the Survey Director that a certificate be
awarded. The Evaluation Committee consists of three
Society members and two Survey staff members, with the
State Archeologist serving ex officio. Both the Survey
director and the Society president sign the certificates
(Figures 5).

The Upside of tor Good Things About] the Program

There are, of course, two ways to look at this program, one
from the Survey staff and one from the Society participants.
From the Survey’s viewpoint, the program as a whole has
produced an avocational work force with known expertise,
upon which it can, and does, call for help (Figures 6 and 7).
In one emergency situation, 60 people showed up to work on
3 consecutive weekends, from dawn until dusk, helping
rescue a landleveled prehistoric cemetery area. Another
emergency involved the discovery of a large cellar in
downtown Little Rock, which had been part of the mansion of
a major figure in early 19th century Arkansas politics.