Cultural Strategies in England database

For an introduction and context for the database, please access the Introduction to the Cultural Strategies in England database https://eprints.soton.ac.uk/479450/. This introduction includes information on: Creating and updating the Cultural Strategies in England overview database; The Cultural Strategies in England overview spreadsheet which is an overview of the strategies included in the database; How the search was conducted; Overview of search results

Evaluation tool for multiple stakeholders

One of two evaluation tools resulting from Makanani Bell's PhD research. This evaluation tool is for projects that involve multiple stakeholders (i.e. archaeologists, community members, non profit organizations, governments) involved in community archaeology projects. The first two pages is the Introduction and Reference sheet, which introduces the evaluation tool and how it can be used. The evaluation itself consists of three mini evaluations (Starting Evaluation, In-Progress Evaluation, and the Post-Project Evaluation) and a Reflection.The evaluation tool is attached to this record in two formats. The first contains the entire evaluation tool in one word document. The second format is each of the aforementioned components in a stand alone document. Users may find the individual documents easier to use, particularly when comparing answers across the different evaluations.Feel free to download the evaluation in either format, tailor the evaluation tool to suit your needs, and evaluate your community archaeology project.Have two stakeholders involved in your project? You may find the Evaluation Tool for Two Stakeholders more useful. See the record here: https://doi.org/10.5258/SOTON/P1167. See the thesis (doi: https://doi.org/10.5258/SOTON/T0069) for more information about the creation of this evaluation tool, how it can be used, and additional information on evaluating community engageme

Spectrum of collaboration

Archaeologists define community archaeology differently across time periods, geographic regions, and between researchers themselves. They use a broad, sometimes confusing array of terms and definitions. Several scholars have created collaborative continuums to describe the range of methods through their essential components. The Spectrum of Collaboration presented here builds off this work and describes the range of engagement and collaboration possible in archaeology. The spectrum consists of five columns: archaeologist-only, participation with community, co-creation and collaboration, community-led, and community-only .Each category represents a different kind of archaeology working alongside or engaging with communities. The rows under each heading explain the distinguishing and important features of each level: needs, power, goals, information, involvement, and voice. Common methods of community engagement in archaeology fall along this spectrum. Individual projects may not fall neatly into one of the five categories. As such, projects may fall anywhere along the spectrum. Although the spectrum is written for archaeology, the diagram can be used for other disciplines that work alongside or engage with communities.</p

Power, Trust, and Respect: Evaluating community engagement in archaeology and heritage management

Archaeologists hold tremendous power and voice in the present through their abilities to produce knowledge about people who came before. Their interpretations of the past affect societies today, and future generations, through impacting place-based understandings, validating or disputing knowledge, and more. Involving non-archaeologists in the research process through community engagement amplifies the potential effects. Heritage management and archaeology have long espoused the benefits of community engagement. However, practitioners on few occasions have paused to evaluate their work in a rigorous manner and shared these results with others. Without reflection and assessment, archaeologists limit themselves as negative consequences potentially go unnoticed, and errors can be repeated. This research presents an evaluation tool grounded in the perspectives and ideas of primary stakeholders: funders, practitioners, and community members. Alongside the tangible outcome of the evaluation tool, this thesis offers insight into three important themes running throughout community archaeology and evaluation: power, trust, and respect. It also shares general guidance on evaluations and five changes in practice. Keeping power, trust, and respect at the heart of all actions in community archaeology and evaluation will lead to stronger, more successful projects. The evaluation tool presented in this thesis will not be the only answer to the challenge of evaluation but contributes to a much-needed conversation

Evaluation tool for two stakeholders

One of two evaluation tools resulting from Makanani Bell's PhD research. This evaluation tool is for projects that involve two stakeholders (archaeologists and community members) involved in community archaeology projects. The first two pages is the Introduction and Reference Sheet, which introduces the evaluation tool and how it can be used. The evaluation itself consists of three mini evaluations (Starting Evaluation, In-Progress Evaluation, and the Post-Project Evaluation) and a Reflection.The evaluation tool is attached to this record in two formats. The first contains the entire evaluation tool in one word document. The second format is each of the aforementioned components in a stand alone document. Users may find the individual documents easier to use, particularly when comparing answers across the different evaluations.Feel free to download the evaluation in either format, tailor the evaluation tool to suit your needs, and evaluate your community archaeology project.Have multiple stakeholders involved in your project? You may find the Evaluation Tool for Multiple Stakeholders more useful. See the record here: https://doi.org/10.5258/SOTON/P1168. See the thesis (doi: https://doi.org/10.5258/SOTON/T0069) for more information about the creation of this evaluation tool, how it can be used, and additional information on evaluating community engagement

Cultural strategies and futures

This report outlines findings and makes recommendations from the Public Policy Southampton funded project, Cultural strategies, compacts and futures: The role of local government in connecting culture with place, health and the environment. The project team of Professor Dan Ashton and Makanani Bell were based in the Faculty of Arts and Humanities at the University of Southampton. The project was developed in partnership with the Southern Policy Centre and ran from January to June 2023 (project identification number: 86272). The findings are available on the project website hosted by the University of Southampto

A conversation on cultural strategies programme: Friday 5th May 2023 Sir James Matthew Building, Southampton

This event introduces emerging findings from the project ‘Cultural strategies, compacts and futures: The role of local government in connecting culture with place, health and the environment’ to inform and facilitate a conversation on cultural strategies. This project explores how cultural strategies and compacts are both deeply embedded in the specifics of an area and address common and widely identified (inter)national issues. Whilst issues of place, health and the environment often feature within cultural strategies and compacts, there is not a clear understanding of how local authorities do this differently. This project addresses this through identifying and thematically analysing cultural strategies and compacts in England. The resulting policy brief will offer critical reflections and new directions as cultural strategies are created for the first time by local authorities and renewed by others. This project and event are in partnership with the Southern Policy Centre and funded by Public Policy Southampton at the University of Southampton