List price
EUR €135.00USD $162.00
Abstract
Walled fortresses set atop rock outcrops and hills are the dominant settlement type documented in archaeological investigations of late second/early first millennium B.C. southern Transcaucasia. These sites arose as centers of the emerging complex polities in the region, marking not only the expansion of social inequalities but the formalization of a governmental apparatus. However, there have been few systematic attempts to understand the morphology of Late Bronze/Early Iron Age fortresses and assess dimensions of formal variation. This article proposes a typology of these early southern Transcaucasian fortresses based upon qualitative dimensions of a corpus of fortress sites from the Ararat and Shirak plains of the Republic of Armenia. Variation in these qualitative dimensions is then assessed in reference to quantitative elements of settlement.
Abstract
Walled fortresses set atop rock outcrops and hills are the dominant settlement type documented in archaeological investigations of late second/early first millennium B.C. southern Transcaucasia. These sites arose as centers of the emerging complex polities in the region, marking not only the expansion of social inequalities but the formalization of a governmental apparatus. However, there have been few systematic attempts to understand the morphology of Late Bronze/Early Iron Age fortresses and assess dimensions of formal variation. This article proposes a typology of these early southern Transcaucasian fortresses based upon qualitative dimensions of a corpus of fortress sites from the Ararat and Shirak plains of the Republic of Armenia. Variation in these qualitative dimensions is then assessed in reference to quantitative elements of settlement.
Fitful Histories and Unruly Publics re-examines the relationship between Eurasia’s past and its present by interrogating the social construction of time and the archaeological production of culture. Traditionally, archaeological research in Eurasia has focused on assembling normative descriptions of monolithic cultures that endure for millennia, largely immune to the forces of historical change. The papers in this volume seek to document forces of difference and contestation in the past that were produced in the perceptible engagements of peoples, things, and places. The research gathered here convincingly demonstrates that these forces made social life in ancient Eurasia rather more fitful and its publics considerably more unruly than archaeological research has traditionally allowed.
Contributors are Mikheil Abramishvili, Paula N. Doumani Dupuy, Magnus Fiskesjö, Hilary Gopnik, Emma Hite, Jean-Luc Houle, Erik G. Johannesson, James A. Johnson, Lori Khatchadourian, Ian Lindsay, Maureen E. Marshall, Mitchell S. Rothman, Irina Shingiray, Adam T. Smith, Kathryn O. Weber and Xin Wu.
Contributors are Mikheil Abramishvili, Paula N. Doumani Dupuy, Magnus Fiskesjö, Hilary Gopnik, Emma Hite, Jean-Luc Houle, Erik G. Johannesson, James A. Johnson, Lori Khatchadourian, Ian Lindsay, Maureen E. Marshall, Mitchell S. Rothman, Irina Shingiray, Adam T. Smith, Kathryn O. Weber and Xin Wu.
Fitful Histories and Unruly Publics re-examines the relationship between Eurasia’s past and its present by interrogating the social construction of time and the archaeological production of culture. Traditionally, archaeological research in Eurasia has focused on assembling normative descriptions of monolithic cultures that endure for millennia, largely immune to the forces of historical change. The papers in this volume seek to document forces of difference and contestation in the past that were produced in the perceptible engagements of peoples, things, and places. The research gathered here convincingly demonstrates that these forces made social life in ancient Eurasia rather more fitful and its publics considerably more unruly than archaeological research has traditionally allowed.
Contributors are Mikheil Abramishvili, Paula N. Doumani Dupuy, Magnus Fiskesjö, Hilary Gopnik, Emma Hite, Jean-Luc Houle, Erik G. Johannesson, James A. Johnson, Lori Khatchadourian, Ian Lindsay, Maureen E. Marshall, Mitchell S. Rothman, Irina Shingiray, Adam T. Smith, Kathryn O. Weber and Xin Wu.
Contributors are Mikheil Abramishvili, Paula N. Doumani Dupuy, Magnus Fiskesjö, Hilary Gopnik, Emma Hite, Jean-Luc Houle, Erik G. Johannesson, James A. Johnson, Lori Khatchadourian, Ian Lindsay, Maureen E. Marshall, Mitchell S. Rothman, Irina Shingiray, Adam T. Smith, Kathryn O. Weber and Xin Wu.
Cognitive science research focuses on how the mind works, including topics such as thinking, problem solving, learning and transfer. Much of this research remains unknown in science education circles, yet is relevant for the design of instructional strategies in the sciences. We outline some difficulties in learning science, along with a discussion of some relevant cognitive science research. We then present a cognitive science-based intervention in physics education aimed at promoting conceptual understanding within a problem solving context. In addition, we present assessments of problem solving and conceptual understanding to better examine the differences between knowledge learned from this approach compared to traditional instruction. Finally, we present some pilot data on an initial implementation of the approach.