From Myth to Cultural Memory: A Meaning-Making Perspective of Students’ Understanding of Megalithic Heritage

Technical Summary: From Myth to Cultural Memory: A Meaning-Making Perspective of Students' Understanding of Megalithic Heritage

Problem Statement
The paper identifies a critical gap in higher education regarding the teaching of megalithic heritage. Current pedagogical approaches are predominantly oriented toward the transmission of historical facts, artifact classification, and prehistoric periodization. Consequently, students' understanding remains fragmentary, often viewing megalithic sites merely as archaeological relics or objects associated with mystical narratives and supernatural beliefs, frequently reinforced by sensationalized digital content. This factual and descriptive focus fails to provide students with adequate opportunities to interpret the cultural meanings, collective identities, and value systems embedded within these heritage sites. The study posits that without a shift toward interpretive learning, students cannot connect megalithic heritage to contemporary cultural identity or cultural sustainability.

Methodology
The research employs a qualitative approach utilizing an interpretive case study design. The study was conducted across two distinct cultural and geographical contexts in Indonesia: the State University of Malang (East Java) and the University of Muhammadiyah Palembang (South Sumatra).

• Participants: The study involved 60 undergraduate students (30 from History Education programs and 30 from non-History Education programs). Following initial data collection, 12 students were selected for deeper semi-structured interviews based on the diversity of their perspectives.
• Data Collection: Data were gathered through three complementary sources:
  1. Focus Group Discussions (FGDs) to observe dialogue, perspective exchange, and meaning negotiation.
  2. Semi-structured interviews to explore individual experiences and shifts in understanding.
  3. Written reflections to document personal interpretations and the internalization of meaning.
• Data Analysis: The researchers utilized thematic analysis following the stages of open coding, axial coding, and selective coding. The analysis was iterative, employing a constant comparative method to identify patterns across academic backgrounds and geographical locations. The conceptual framework of "From Myth to Memory" guided the interpretation of how perceptions evolve from descriptive/mythological to reflective/cultural memory.

Key Results
The study reveals a distinct trajectory in the evolution of student understanding, moving from fragmented initial perceptions to a reconstructed understanding of cultural memory.

1. Initial Understanding (Fragmented and Myth-Based): Prior to the intervention, students' knowledge was largely descriptive or mythological. They identified megaliths physically (large stones, dolmens, menhirs) but lacked connection to the social or cultural lives of the people who created them. Non-history students often relied on local folklore and digital media, associating sites with supernatural powers. Even history students, despite knowing terminology, focused on classification and chronology rather than cultural values.
2. Influencing Factors: The initial framework for understanding was shaped by limited field experience, an educational focus on factual transfer, and the influence of digital media which often prioritizes visual sensationalism over historical context.
3. The Role of Dialogue: The FGDs served as a catalyst for transformation. Through social interaction and the exchange of diverse perspectives, students experienced cognitive conflicts that challenged their initial assumptions (e.g., the shift from viewing sites as "mystical" to viewing them as evidence of social organization). Dialogue allowed for the negotiation of meaning, moving students from passive reception to active construction of knowledge.
4. Reflection and Reconstruction: Following dialogue, the reflection process enabled students to internalize new perspectives. They began to reconstruct the meaning of megalithic heritage, connecting it to cultural identity, collective memory, and the sustainability of values.
5. Formation of Cultural Memory: The final stage of the meaning-making process resulted in a fundamental shift. Students no longer viewed megaliths as isolated relics but as media for collective experience. They recognized that preservation involves maintaining the stories, values, and identities embedded in the heritage, not just the physical stones. This transformation was observed in both history and non-history students, though the pathways to this understanding varied based on their academic and socio-cultural backgrounds.

Key Contributions

• Pedagogical Mechanism: The study establishes "meaning-making" as a critical pedagogical mechanism in heritage education. It demonstrates that the success of cultural heritage education depends more on the interpretive process (dialogue and reflection) than on the mastery of factual information.
• Conceptual Framework: It contributes to the field by applying the "From Myth to Memory" framework, illustrating how students transition from superficial or mystical perceptions to a deep understanding of cultural memory and identity.
• Curriculum Implications: The findings suggest that heritage education curricula must shift from artifact classification to interpretive learning that emphasizes critical thinking, dialogue, and the connection between historical experiences and contemporary social realities.

Significance and Claims
The paper claims that the meaning-making process acts as a bridge between learning experiences and the formation of cultural memory in higher education. By facilitating dialogue and reflection, educators can help students reconstruct their understanding of heritage, transforming it from a static collection of facts into a dynamic component of cultural identity and social responsibility. The study concludes that fostering this interpretive capacity is essential for developing cultural awareness and ensuring the sustainability of cultural values in the face of modernization and digital information overload. The research does not claim to solve all heritage education challenges but provides evidence that interpretive, student-centered approaches are necessary to move beyond descriptive learning toward meaningful cultural engagement.