| Title |
Personal, Political, Pedagogic: Challenging the Binary Bind in Archaeological Teaching, Learning and Fieldwork
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory, August 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s10816-016-9292-0 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Hannah Cobb, Karina Croucher |
| Abstract |
In this paper, we consider how we can undercut the various binaries of gender and sexuality in archaeological practice and particularly in our teaching. We argue that taking an assemblage theory approach enables us to look at the multiplicity of identities of those practicing archaeology as different and intersecting assemblages that bring one another into being through their connections at different scales. In particular, we examine how this approach can be applied to archaeological pedagogy and how this in turn enables us to move away from modern binary distinctions about sex and gender identities from the 'bottom up', fostering an approach in our students that will then go on to be developed in professional practice. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 2 | 33% |
| Comoros | 1 | 17% |
| Unknown | 3 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 3 | 50% |
| Scientists | 2 | 33% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 17% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 46 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 46 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 9 | 20% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 8 | 17% |
| Researcher | 6 | 13% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 4 | 9% |
| Student > Bachelor | 4 | 9% |
| Other | 8 | 17% |
| Unknown | 7 | 15% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Social Sciences | 14 | 30% |
| Arts and Humanities | 11 | 24% |
| Psychology | 6 | 13% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 4 | 9% |
| Engineering | 3 | 7% |
| Other | 3 | 7% |
| Unknown | 5 | 11% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 27 November 2017.
All research outputs
#7,617,368
of 24,667,989 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory
#165
of 349 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#112,797
of 348,453 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory
#6
of 12 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,667,989 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 68th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 349 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 15.8. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 52% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 348,453 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 67% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 12 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 58% of its contemporaries.