The scope of the paper is narrower than the title implies. It addresses two questions: what should British archaeology undergraduates be taught about computers and how can computers enhance the undergraduate teaching of archaeology? Then, for both questions, current British sources and resources are cited. Because the paper is well thought out and well written, it should be of interest to educators in fields other than archaeology as well.

In answer to the first question, minimum knowledge requirements are stated. These are prefaced by and related to possible careers for undergraduates who study archaeology and by a brief sketch of current computer use by British archaeologists. The answer to the second question is grounded in a brief and general description of the content of an undergraduate archaeology program. Numerous good ideas are put forth, including simulation of excavation strategies that, in reality, are destructive processes, experimentation with alternative typologies of artifacts, and cautious use of expert systems. The reliance on visual information and the need to transform things into data are noted but seen as technological rather than representational problems.

In his enthusiasm for computer utilization, the author also suggests wider use of multiple choice questions. Noting that this would probably meet with resistance, he supports it, in part, as following United States practice. Some reasons given for the resistance are the increase in emphasis on factual knowledge and the divorce of data from theory. I support the resisters and caution that computer involvement per se does not enhance the quality of education.

Increased attention to United States and French archaeological sources would benefit the proposals.