Outline

Overview

For most of human history, hunting and gathering was the dominant economic strategy employed. This unit explores the archaeological evidence for hunter-gatherer activity, from early hominins in Africa to recent populations, placing the significance of Australian prehistory within a global context.

Unit details and rules

Academic unit	Archaeology
Credit points	6
Prerequisites ?	12 credit points at 2000 level in Archaeology or 6 Junior credit points of ARCA and (ANHS1600 or ANHS1601 or ANTH1001 or ARTH1001 or HSTY1089)
Corequisites ?	None
Prohibitions ?	ARCA2640
Assumed knowledge ?	None
Available to study abroad and exchange students	Yes

Teaching staff

Coordinator	Patrick Faulkner, patrick.faulkner@sydney.edu.au
Lecturer(s)	Patrick Faulkner, patrick.faulkner@sydney.edu.au

Type	Description	Weight	Due	Length
Presentation	Presentation Presentation	15%	Ongoing	1000wd
Outcomes assessed:
Assignment	Tutorial paper Tutorial paper	35%	Ongoing	1500wd
Outcomes assessed:
Assignment	Essay Essay	50%	Week 12 Due date: 20 Nov 2020 at 23:59	3500wd
Outcomes assessed:

Assessment summary

Students will choose a specific topic for the first two assessments, e.g. intensification, site catchment analysis, population demographies and mobility, first presenting in tutorials on key aspects of the issue and directing a discussion with their fellow students.
Students will then submit a tutorial paper on the issue one week after the presentation to include issues raised and explored in the tutorial discussion. This paper should provide an evaluation of the different models proposed within that theme and critically discuss the nature of the available evidence.
Essay topics will be chosen in consultation with the course coordinator, choosing a location and time period to explore in relation to key themes and issues discussed throughout the semester. There are numerous themes that contribute to understanding palaeoeconomic structures in hunter-gatherer societies (e.g. location and environment, technology, resource use, mobility, land use, population density/size). The relative importance of these themes and the theoretical/methodological approach taken varies between across regions and time periods. Choose one region, and critically discuss a major aspect of hunter-gatherer archaeology in that region within a certain approach or relative to specific problems/themes.

Assessment criteria

Result Name	Mark Range	Description
High Distinction	85-100%	Work of exceptional standard. An authoritative and highly effective response that engages with the full implications of the question. The issues and methodology are set out clearly, critical arguments are exceptionally well-developed, and there is a clear and complete understanding of the material and terminology. Written work demonstrates initiative and ingenuity in research and reading, pointed and critical analysis of subject matter, innovative interpretation of evidence, and makes an insightful contribution to current debate. Persuasive use of case studies to drive home arguments, and unpack or challenge issues of archaeological context and interpretation. A considerable degree of independent thought and interpretation is demonstrated, as is an understanding of the full nature and complexity of archaeological data, methodologies and interpretation. Evidence is provided of wide-ranging and insightful use of relevant literature, with demonstrated ability to widen the scope of research in pursuit of specific evidence or debate. The conclusion expresses the candidate''s independent judgment in a mature way; writing will be scholarly and elegant. Expression is efficient and lucid, without unnecessary complication. Faultless presentation of citations and bibliography; judicious use of academic conventions.
Distinction	75-84%	Work of a superior standard. A sharply-focussed answer that engages with many implications of the question and maintains a sophisticated level of analysis throughout. Case studies will relate clearly to the question, and employed persuasively to demonstrate key points or arguments. A considerable degree of independent thought is demonstrated, and a strong understanding of the nature and complexity of archaeological data, methodologies and interpretation. Clear outline of issues and method of approach; differing arguments are presented critically, with a strong understanding of the material and vocabulary. The assignment concludes with a synthesis rather than a summary, showing some independence of view. Lucid writing characterised by style, clarity and creativity, with rare errors of form or style. Fully and consistently documented, with rare errors in referencing style or omissions. Referencing demonstrates: initiative in research; engagement with pivotal and current academic publications on the topic; and the ability to pursue archaeological debate across several sources. Makes good comparisons between different interpretations, linking these clearly to the data or issues of context, theory and/or method. ''Gets behind'' the evidence to engage with underlying issues of archaeological context, processes, and/or biases in the evidence. Takes an interrogative stance in relation to assumptions, argument and interpretation, shows critical understanding of the principles and values underlying the unit.
High Credit	70-74%	Highly competent work, demonstrating clear capacity to complete Honours successfully. Engages critically and creatively with the question, with evidence of research-initiative and extensive reading; solid grasp of subject matter and appreciation of key issues and context. Use of case studies will be extensive, with evidence employed effectively in support of key arguments. Has a strong essay structure that reinforces central arguments consistently; concluding paragraph employed deftly to drive these points home. Attempts an analytical evaluation of material, with solid understanding of the complexity of archaeological data, methodologies and interpretation. Use of relevant literature demonstrates some intellectual independence and an ability to weigh up different interpretations, perhaps drawing on ideas from outside the course. Makes a good attempt to critique alternate archaeological interpretations or issues of context, and offers a pointed and thoughtful contribution to an existing archaeological debate. Some evidence of ability to think theoretically as well as empirically, and to conceptualise and problematise issues in archaeological terms. Concisely and articulately written, with few errors of form or style. All sources for evidence, arguments, or interpretation cited appropriately, with a strong and consistent bibliography that extends well beyond the initial readings.
Low Credit	65-69%	Competent work, demonstrating potential to complete Honours work, though further development needed to do so successfully. Written work that engages with the question effectively, with a clear essay structure of the essay that builds and reinforces a critical argument, using an appropriate range of vocabulary. Case studies employed effectively to critically and consistently reinforce an argument. Offers synthesis and critical evaluation of material on its own terms, and takes a position in relation to various interpretations. In addition, it shows some extra spark of insight or analysis. Well written and documented with appropriate use of citations and evidence of comprehensive reading; has a strong bibliography that expands well beyond the recommended readings and is only minimally reliant on internet searches. Demonstrates understanding of broad archaeological context and methodologies, good selection of evidence, coherent and sustainable argument, some evidence of independent thought, grasp of relevant archaeological theory and debate.
Medium Pass	55-59%	Work of a satisfactory standard. Competent written work, with broad and reasonably accurate command of the subject matter and some sense of its broader significance; clearly understands the question. Case studies will be relevant, and used critically to support core argumentation. Offers synthesis and some evaluation of material, demonstrates an effort to go beyond the essential reading, although still reliant on basic search skills; bibliography may perhaps remain shallow or undeveloped. Clear essay structure with a coherent argument and consistent focus on the principal issues. Articulate, properly documented, with room for improvement in matters of style and/or grammar and punctuation. Demonstrates understanding of relevant scholarship and diverse interpretations, with a solid awareness of archaeological context and complexities. There may be some weaknesses of clarity or structure.
Low Pass	50-54%	Work of an acceptable standard. Written work contains evidence of minimal reading and some understanding of subject matter, offers descriptive summary of case-studies and material relevant to the question, but may have a tendency to paraphrase; makes a reasonable attempt to organise material logically and comprehensibly and to provide scholarly documentation but demonstrates little initiative in research and/or over-reliance on internet searches. Demonstrates rudimentary awareness of the nature and complexity of archaeological data, methodologies and interpretation. Language is clear and bibliography is adequate but limited; possibly some errors of form or style. There may be gaps in any or all of these areas.
Fail	0-49%	Work not of an acceptable standard. Work may fail for any or all of the following reasons: lack of sufficient research using appropriate sources; irrelevance of content; failure to answer the specific question or treat the specified theme; wholesale lack of analysis or interpretation; unacceptable levels of paraphrasing; direct copying of work from other students or sources; presentation, grammar or structure so poor that work cannot be understood; partial or incomplete work; very late submission without an extension; non-submission.

For more information see guide to grades.

Late submission

In accordance with University policy, these penalties apply when written work is submitted after 11:59pm on the due date:

Deduction of 5% of the maximum mark for each calendar day after the due date.
After ten calendar days late, a mark of zero will be awarded.

Academic integrity

The Current Student website provides information on academic integrity and the resources available to all students. The University expects students and staff to act ethically and honestly and will treat all allegations of academic integrity breaches seriously.

We use similarity detection software to detect potential instances of plagiarism or other forms of academic integrity breach. If such matches indicate evidence of plagiarism or other forms of academic integrity breaches, your teacher is required to report your work for further investigation.

Use of generative artificial intelligence (AI) and automated writing tools

You may only use generative AI and automated writing tools in assessment tasks if you are permitted to by your unit coordinator. If you do use these tools, you must acknowledge this in your work, either in a footnote or an acknowledgement section. The assessment instructions or unit outline will give guidance of the types of tools that are permitted and how the tools should be used.

Your final submitted work must be your own, original work. You must acknowledge any use of generative AI tools that have been used in the assessment, and any material that forms part of your submission must be appropriately referenced. For guidance on how to acknowledge the use of AI, please refer to the AI in Education Canvas site.

The unapproved use of these tools or unacknowledged use will be considered a breach of the Academic Integrity Policy and penalties may apply.

Studiosity is permitted unless otherwise indicated by the unit coordinator. The use of this service must be acknowledged in your submission as detailed on the Learning Hub’s Canvas page.

Outside assessment tasks, generative AI tools may be used to support your learning. The AI in Education Canvas site contains a number of productive ways that students are using AI to improve their learning.

Learning support

Simple extensions

If you encounter a problem submitting your work on time, you may be able to apply for an extension of five calendar days through a simple extension.  The application process will be different depending on the type of assessment and extensions cannot be granted for some assessment types like exams.

Special consideration

If exceptional circumstances mean you can’t complete an assessment, you need consideration for a longer period of time, or if you have essential commitments which impact your performance in an assessment, you may be eligible for special consideration or special arrangements.

Special consideration applications will not be affected by a simple extension application.

Using AI responsibly

Co-created with students, AI in Education includes lots of helpful examples of how students use generative AI tools to support their learning. It explains how generative AI works, the different tools available and how to use them responsibly and productively.

Weekly schedule

WK	Topic	Learning activity
Week 01	Themes in hunter-gatherer research	Seminar (3 hr)
Week 02	Early approaches to hunter-gatherers; Ethnography and ethnoarchaeology	Seminar (3 hr)
Week 03	Behavioural and historical ecology; Diet breadth and patch choice	Seminar (3 hr)
Week 04	Origins of hunting and gathering economies; Early foraging and behavioural complexity	Seminar (3 hr)
Week 05	Coastal economies in human evolution and dispersal; Importance of maritime economies	Seminar (3 hr)
Week 06	A broad spectrum revolution?; Economic diversity and intensification	Seminar (3 hr)
Week 07	Resource procurement and subsistence; The original affluent society	Seminar (3 hr)
Week 08	Hunting, foraging and technology; Megafaunal extinctions	Seminar (3 hr)
Week 09	Logistical organisation, settlement and mobility; Demography, mobility and recent approaches	Seminar (3 hr)
Week 10	Models of territoriality; Site catchments and use of landscape	Seminar (3 hr)
Week 11	Hunter-gatherers and environmental interactions; The pristine myth	Seminar (3 hr)
Week 12	Complexity and change?; Hunter-gatherers and food production	Seminar (3 hr)

Study commitment

Typically, there is a minimum expectation of 1.5-2 hours of student effort per week per credit point for units of study offered over a full semester. For a 6 credit point unit, this equates to roughly 120-150 hours of student effort in total.

Required readings

All readings for this unit can be accessed through the Library eReserve, available on Canvas.

Learning outcomes

Learning outcomes are what students know, understand and are able to do on completion of a unit of study. They are aligned with the University's graduate qualities and are assessed as part of the curriculum.

Outcomes
Graduate qualities

At the completion of this unit, you should be able to:

LO1. Demonstrate expertise in the archaeological study of hunter-gatherer economies globally, with particular knowledge of the diversity and complexity of Australian forager economies
LO2. Demonstrate the ability to independently construct and comprehend research designs addressing aspects of and issues relating to hunter-gatherer economies
LO3. Function as independent learners and researchers, presenting and facilitating discussion amongst classmates on chosen issues
LO4. Read and critically evaluate relevant scholarship to produce a sophisticated essay

Graduate qualities

The graduate qualities are the qualities and skills that all University of Sydney graduates must demonstrate on successful completion of an award course. As a future Sydney graduate, the set of qualities have been designed to equip you for the contemporary world.

GQ1	Depth of disciplinary expertise Deep disciplinary expertise is the ability to integrate and rigorously apply knowledge, understanding and skills of a recognised discipline defined by scholarly activity, as well as familiarity with evolving practice of the discipline.
GQ2	Critical thinking and problem solving Critical thinking and problem solving are the questioning of ideas, evidence and assumptions in order to propose and evaluate hypotheses or alternative arguments before formulating a conclusion or a solution to an identified problem.
GQ3	Oral and written communication Effective communication, in both oral and written form, is the clear exchange of meaning in a manner that is appropriate to audience and context.
GQ4	Information and digital literacy Information and digital literacy is the ability to locate, interpret, evaluate, manage, adapt, integrate, create and convey information using appropriate resources, tools and strategies.
GQ5	Inventiveness Generating novel ideas and solutions.
GQ6	Cultural competence Cultural Competence is the ability to actively, ethically, respectfully, and successfully engage across and between cultures. In the Australian context, this includes and celebrates Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander cultures, knowledge systems, and a mature understanding of contemporary issues.
GQ7	Interdisciplinary effectiveness Interdisciplinary effectiveness is the integration and synthesis of multiple viewpoints and practices, working effectively across disciplinary boundaries.
GQ8	Integrated professional, ethical, and personal identity An integrated professional, ethical and personal identity is understanding the interaction between one’s personal and professional selves in an ethical context.
GQ9	Influence Engaging others in a process, idea or vision.

Outcome map

Learning outcomes	Graduate qualities
Learning outcomes

Responding to student feedback

This section outlines changes made to this unit following staff and student reviews.

No changes have been made since this unit was last offered.

Disclaimer

Important: the University of Sydney regularly reviews units of study and reserves the right to change the units of study available annually. To stay up to date on available study options, including unit of study details and availability, refer to the relevant handbook.

To help you understand common terms that we use at the University, we offer an online glossary.

Current students

Overview

Overview

Unit details and rules

Teaching staff

Assessment

Assessment

Assessment summary

Assessment criteria

Late submission

Academic integrity

Learning support

Learning support

Simple extensions

Special consideration

Using AI responsibly

Weekly schedule

Weekly schedule

Study commitment

Required readings

Learning outcomes

Learning outcomes

Graduate qualities

Outcome map

Responding to student feedback

Responding to student feedback

Disclaimer

On this page

Useful links

ARCO3002: Australian Forager Economies

Semester 2, 2020 [Normal day] - Camperdown/Darlington, Sydney

Overview

Overview

Unit details and rules

Teaching staff

Assessment

Assessment

Assessment summary

Assessment criteria

Late submission

Academic integrity

Learning support

Learning support

Simple extensions

Special consideration

Using AI responsibly

Weekly schedule

Weekly schedule

Study commitment

Required readings

Learning outcomes

Learning outcomes

Graduate qualities

Outcome map

Responding to student feedback

Responding to student feedback

Disclaimer

On this page

Useful links