Politics, Bureaucracy, and Arctic Archaeology in Canada, 1910-39

Until the post-World War II period most of Canada's professional archaeologists and ethnologists were attached to the Anthropological Division of the National Museum in Ottawa, originally founded in 1910 as a branch of the Geological Survey. As they were federal employees, their scientific work was largely dependent on, and ultimately limited by, what politicians and senior bureaucrats deemed to be in the public interest. This paper considers some implications of this arrangement for one aspect of Anthropological Division activity before World War II - its involvement in arctic archaeology. While government personnel made a number of substantive contributions to what was then a developing field of research and scholarship, archival sources suggest that prevailing political and institutional conditions weighed against the division's continuing participation in northern fieldwork during these years. Instead, its role was effectively limited to encouraging and, on occasion, coordinating the research of American, British, and European archaeologists working on problems pertaining to the prehistory of the Canadian Arctic.Key words: arctic archaeology, history of Canadian archaeology; National Museum of CanadaJusqu'à la période qui a suivi la Deuxième Guerre mondiale, la plupart des archéologues et ethnologues professionnels du Canada étaient rattachés au service d'anthropologie du Musée national du Canada à Ottawa, fondé à l'origine, en 1910, comme une branche de la Commission géologique du Canada. Vu leur statut d'employés fédéraux, leurs travaux scientifiques dépendaient largement de ce que les politiciens et les principaux bureaucrates jugeaient être d'intérêt public, et se trouvaient par conséquent limités. Cet article examine certaines retombées de cet état de fait en ce qui touche un aspect des activités du service d'anthropologie avant la Deuxième Guerre mondiale, soit son engagement dans l'archéologie arctique. Bien que le personnel du gouvernement ait contribué de nombreuses fois et de façon appréciable à ce domaine de recherche et du savoir alors en développement, les sources d'archives suggèrent que la conjoncture politique et institutionnelle était défavorable, à cette époque, à la poursuite de la participation du service aux travaux de recherche sur le terrain dans le grand Nord. Son rôle se trouvait en fait plutôt limité à encourager et, à l'occasion, à coordonner la recherche des archéologues américains, britanniques et européens travaillant sur des questions traitant de la préhistoire de l'Arctique canadien.Mots clés: archéologie arctique, histoire de l’archéologie canadienne, Musée national du Canad

On Common Ground: Nunavik Inuit in Nunatsiavut, 1763–1942

“On Common Ground” presents findings of research commissioned by Makivik Corporation in support of Nunavik Inuit claims to rights and interests in neighbouring Nunatsiavut, claims recognized in the 2006 Nunavik Inuit Land Claim Agreement. The original study ex-amined Nunavimmiut patterns of use and occupation in Labrador during the pre- and post-contact eras. Here, the scope is limited to the period after 1763 and focuses on an area spanning eastern Ungava Bay and the Torngat coast. The paper argues that these patterns encompass linked social and economic dimensions of a centuries-deep adaptation to the different subsistence potentials found across the area and are not simply consequences of the rise of colonial institutions

A Comparison of the Effects of Differing Mastery Criteria on Maintenance of Acquisition Skills

The demonstration of behavioral acquisition and the maintenance of performance following treatment is fundamental within the fields of behavior analysis and education (Baer, Wolf, & Risley, 1968; Freeland & Noell, 2002; Pererira & Winton, 1991; Stokes & Baer, 1977). The acquisition of skills for individuals with intellectual disabilities and autism has historically focused on the attainment of a certain mastery criterion (Luiselli, Russo, Christian, & Wilczynski, 2008). Love, Carr, Almason, and Ingebor Petursdottir (2009) reported that 62% of respondents functioning as professional supervisors of early and intensive behavioral interventions indicated that a certain percentage of correct trials across multiple sessions are required to determine if mastery has been achieved. However, there is a surprising lack of research evaluating and validating the use of specific mastery criterion rules within clinical practice. The current study (Phase I) conducted a survey of clinical practices of Board Certified Behavior Analysts® (BCBA’s®) and Doctoral Board Certified Behavior Analysts® (BCBA-D’s®). Survey results indicated that the most commonly reported mastery criterion was 80% accuracy for three consecutive sessions. Based upon these results, the current study conducted an empirical evaluation of the extent to which the adoption of this mastery criterion rule (as well as a 90% accuracy rule) resulted in skill maintenance for 8 individuals diagnosed with intellectual disabilities and autism (Phase III). Results are presented below

Frederick W. Waugh (1872–1924)

Largely forgotten today, especially in the annals of northern science, Frederick Wilkerson Waugh was one of the very few Canadians to bridge the gap between amateur and professional anthropology during the discipline’s transitional period in the early 20th century. Waugh was a self-taught ethnologist and natural historian, and his career with the Anthropological Division of the Geological Survey of Canada, founded in 1910, lasted a mere 11 years. Yet over that brief span, he made several original contributions to disciplinary knowledge of indigenous peoples and cultures, including research in Labrador among the northern Innu (Naskapi) and their Inuit neighbours

Diamond Jenness and 'Useful Anthropology' in Canada 1930-1950

Diamond Jenness ( 1886-1969) was a New Zealand Anthropologist who conducted research in Canada among Indians and Inuit. Towards the end of his career he devoted himself to research with policy implications. The Anthropology Department at Victoria University of Wellington is named after Jenness