ANTH 3:
First Essay: Site Review Project
For the first essay assignment, you will introduce, analyze, and review a notable archaeological
site related to world prehistory covered during the first five weeks of the course (through
colonization of the Americas). This project is designed to explore how archaeologists approach
field research and associated laboratory analysis. You will be expected to articulate why your
site is important, where your site’s period of occupation is situated, and how it fits within the
context of world prehistory. Your site review must include the following sections:
General Introduction
What site are you writing about and why? Introduce the subject of
your paper and make sure to include a robust thesis statement: what
are your goals in the paper? What are you setting out to
accomplish? Why is your site important to understanding world
prehistory?
Geographical and
Historical Background
Introduce the geographical and historical setting. Where is your site
located? What is the landscape like? To what period in world
prehistory does your site belong?
Site Description and
Excavation Analysis
Describe the site and excavation work undertaken at the site, both
past and present. Who excavated it? Where were they from? How
was it surveyed and excavated?
Discussion: Results
and Significance of
Excavations
What was found? Describe the artifact and ecofact assemblages
recovered from your site and/or the architecture that makes up the
site structure. What does this information tell you about the site?
What does it tell you about the people who lived or worked there?
What significant results did the authors of the studies you read
about your sites point out and why? What were the most significant
laboratory studies that were carried out on recovered materials.
Conclusion
Discuss the importance of your site and the excavation work that
was done. Why is it significant? Situate the excavations and
analysis of recovered materials from your site in overall world
prehistory. What important information did your site analysis
reveal? Consider broader impacts and relevance. Why is it
important to continue to research, study, and/or share information
about your site today?
Your site review must be six [6] pages, double spaced and approximately 1500 words. It
must be well researched using scholarly sources. Examples of these types of sources include the
following: articles published in an academic journal, books, book chapters, recordings of
lectures/talks of research presentations given by professionals in the field. Written sources must
be peer reviewed. Google Scholar (scholar.google.com) is an excellent place to start looking for
information about your site. You must include five [5] external sources outside of courseprovided material. These sources can come from the same author (ex: you may cite two
different pieces written by the same author discussing your site). All information from these
sources must be properly cited according to Chicago Author/Date format.
Archaeology is a highly visual, material field. Maps and images, from the publications you read
or from your general research, are encouraged to help illustrate your arguments. Inclusion of
maps or images will not be considered to count toward your page minimum, nor will they be
graded as part of your assignment.
You may pick from the following list of sites to review, or you may instead choose a site not
included on this list. All sites not listed must be approved. You may choose to cover a site that
was interesting to you that was not explored in depth in class (with prior approval). Please
contact your TA with your idea before you begin your project.
Suggested Sites for Review:
Blombos Cave
(South Africa)
Shanidar
(Iraq)
Jebel Irhoud
(Morocco)
Boxgrove
(UK)
Mezhirich
(Ukraine)
Madjedbebe
(Australia)
Swan Point
(Alaska, USA)
Gault
(Texas, USA)
Monte Verde
(Chile)
Kebara Cave
(Israel)
Combe Grenal
(France)
‘Ubeidiya
(Israel)
Zhoukoudian
(China)
Olorgesaillie
(Kenya)
Santa Isabel Iztapan
(Mexico)
Blackwater Draw
(New Mexico, USA)
Fell’s Cave
(Chile)
Denisova Cave
(Russia)
La Madeleine
(France)
Arcy sur Cure
(France)
Gran Dolina
(Spain)
Ambrona
(Spain)
Diuktai Cave
(Siberia, Russia)
Murray Springs
(Arizona, USA)
Huaca Prieta
(Peru
Krapina
(Croatia)
Mal’ta
(Siberia)
Klasies River
(South Africa)
Konso Gardula
(Ethiopia)
Willandra Lakes
(Australia)
Yana
(Siberia, Russia)
Paisley Cave
(Oregon, USA)
Quebrada Jaguay
(Peru)
Assignment Rubric
Grading Criteria
Content
Score
Quality: content accuracy, specificity, citations to
support arguments, depth of argument,
persuasiveness.
Quantity: adequacy (length; is it well developed?),
compactness (does it contain unnecessary filler?),
definitions of terms used, provides details, provides
examples to illustrate points, comparisons used
when appropriate.
60
Style: Organization
Structure: includes all listed sections. Includes
robust introduction and conclusions. Includes thesis
statement. Sequence (rational flow, logical
organization – doesn’t ramble), appearance (correct
margins and headings, neatness, etc.), pagination,
correct citation format (Chicago Author/Date).
10
Style: Clarity
Sentences: clarity, relevance (on-topic), fluency, no
use of clichés, no use of unknown referents.
Paragraphs: structure (topic sentences,
development), length (not too short or too long –
minimum paragraph size is 3 sentences; a paragraph
should not extend longer than the full length of a
single page), coherence.
20
Diction: conciseness, no overuse of the passive
voice and weak verbs, no repetitive phrasing, does
not use exaggeration, no overuse of modifiers or
misplaced modifiers.
Vocabulary: correct word choice, no repetition of
words, no use of colloquialisms.
Style: Grammar
Use of correct spelling, grammar, and punctuation.
Appropriate sentence length (complete sentences; no
run-on sentences).
10
Total Score:
100
ANTH 3:
Coyote Wash Pueblo Chronology Construction Project
For this project, you are presented with a set of data from the Coyote Wash Pueblo, a
hypothetical Ancestral Pueblo site from the American Southwest. Using the information
provided (e.g. site plan, provided dates, ceramic information) on the course project GauchoSpace
page, write up a chronological report analyzing the history of the site. Including an introduction
and conclusion, your project report must address the following:
1
Reconstruct the relative chronology of the construction and expansion of
the pueblo. Using the information on the site plan (e.g., architecture, wall
alignments, presence of subfloor deposits) identify the set of rooms first
constructed. Next, determine the blocks of rooms that were apparently
added to the initial construction, and the sequence in which they were
added. Include a figure that indicates the sequence of construction,
accompanied by a written justification. You may find a color-coded
approach using the provided maps to be best suited for this.
2
Using the tree-ring and radiocarbon dates, offer your best interpretation
of the absolute dates associated with each construction phase or room
addition. Include a figure that indicates your best interpretation of
the chronological phases. Again, a color-coded approach may be well
suited for this.
3
How do you interpret the differences in the total number of pottery sherds
found on the floor's surface in each room versus the sherds found in
excavation (i.e., total fill sherds)? Include a graphical representation of
the pottery fill sequence alongside your written explanation.
The text of the Pueblo Construction Chronology Project must be approximately two [2]
pages in length or approximately 500-750 words. It must include graphs, data, and images
included in the project handout to provide support for your arguments. No sources aside from
course resources are required for this assignment. You must properly cite, in text, any resources
you do use from the class to defend your arguments. All information from these sources must
be properly cited according to Chicago Author/Date format.
Each posted question must include an associated graph/figure visualizing how you are
interpreting the relative chronology for a minimum of three [3] included figures. Each
paragraph must directly reference and explain your figures and each graph must come
with a key. Plot out and explain the patterns you observed in the archaeological record – why
did you come to the conclusions you reached given the data provided to you?
Assignment Rubric
Grading Criteria
Content
Score
Quality: content accuracy, specificity, citations to
support arguments, depth of argument,
persuasiveness.
Quantity: adequacy (length), compactness.
definitions of terms used, provides details, provides
examples to illustrate points, comparisons used
when appropriate.
30
Graphical Representation
30
Visualization: use of graphs to visualize data.
Style: Organization
Structure: includes all listed sections. Includes
robust introduction and conclusions. Includes thesis
statement. Sequence (rational flow, logical
organization – doesn’t ramble), appearance (correct
margins and headings, neatness, etc.), pagination,
correct citation format (Chicago Author/Date).
10
Style: Clarity
Sentences: clarity, relevance (on-topic), fluency, no
use of clichés, no use of unknown referents.
Paragraphs: structure (topic sentences,
development), length (not too short or too long –
minimum paragraph size is 3 sentences; a paragraph
should not extend longer than the full length of a
single page), coherence.
20
Diction: conciseness, no overuse of the passive
voice and weak verbs, no repetitive phrasing, does
not use exaggeration, no overuse of modifiers or
misplaced modifiers.
Vocabulary: correct word choice, no repetition of
words, no use of colloquialisms.
Style: Grammar
Use of correct spelling, grammar, and punctuation.
Appropriate sentence length.
10
Total Score:
100
Purchase answer to see full
attachment
