Dinosaur Wrote:All the supervisor-this and supervisor-that is merely symptomatic of the [pointless] upgrading of everyone's job titles (or downgrading of the titles?), bit like all the diggers being called site assistants these days when back then it was actually a more senior post (meaning assistant to the supervisor/director)

Glad someone else has noticed how c**p the whole concept of PO is, the old fashioned supervisor and director roles were poles apart and in general suited completely different groups of people with very different approaches and skills/knowledge sets (I'm definitely in the supervisor camp), bodging them together to save money seems to me to be the root-cause of much of the decline in excavation standards over the last couple of decades, POs don't have time to supervise properly and by-and-large are diggers rather than management-minded, and the more junior ones don't have anyone looking over their shoulders and keeping control of standards [old-school directors tended to be aiming for a shiny monograph with their name (and only their name) on the front, so had some incentive, as opposed to the modern often badly-written and badly produced grey-lit productions that no one cares much about]


...oh, :face-stir:

Jack Wrote:Well done! Go to the top of the class.

kevin wooldridge Wrote:Everyone should have the opportunity to supervise, but clearly some folk are less capable than others. Some folk, despite countless opportunities, are clearly not up to supervising. My questions to the tutor are 'How many chances' 'When should enough be enough' and 'Is it right to dob-in someone clearly not up to the task and what is the 'kindest' way to go about it'.....

Jack Wrote:Very good question, seems like a question that budding supervisors should ask themselves.
This course is targeted at helping to prepare the practitioner to survive being a supervisor in the commercial archaeological world; that question is more relevant to learning how to supervise your supervisors as a SPO or manager.

It is, however, important for those starting out in supervising to be aware of this issue. As a supervisor you will be, at some level, responsible for mess ups. Usually this is just part of 'learning the job' (see later lessons), sometimes disciplinary procedures may ensue. But more and more The School is seeing clauses in contracts stating that the practitioner will be made financially responsible for any gross mistakes.
It seems that in the commercial world, companies are having to financially protect themselves from major mess-ups by their staff.

To err is human.
But to not learn from your mistakes is diabolical.

So, in answer to your questions, the school of Jack would say, the practitioner is responsible for their own mistakes. If they make amends and learn from their mistakes, the number of mistakes allowed is unlimited.
If however, the practitioner cannot fulfill the job they are required to do and they are unprepared/unable to learn then they are not fit for the job and will find themselves (immediately or eventually) doing something else.
Furthermore, The School of Jack does not condone 'dobbing in,' but the truth should point to itself. Facts are facts.

A supervisor should be judged by: the comments the management receive from the client and/or county/national parks archaeologists, EH representatives etc; the results of the excavation; the accuracy and cross-referencing of the archive produced; the site report produced; any research carried out and finally the quality of the publication.

To those in the know, a badly-dug site is plain as the nose on your face.

The School of Jack does not recognise kindness, nor does it enter into the philosophies of the bleeding hearts.

If someone makes an error, they should be told straight and promptly where they have gone wrong, though there is no need to hang them from the yard arm.
If they learn their mistake. Fine, lesson learned. Move on.
If they can't or wont learn, they should be given a simpler task to perform.

RedEarth Wrote:Once again you've managed to make it sound like a right barrel of laughs. I assume this is just an attempt to stop anyone from ever wanting to be a supervisor.

Andrew Hoaen Wrote:I sense the beginning of a fine course of higher learning, but I wonder what has happened to the all important field trip, and where is the reading list for the inevitable interminable tutorial. Also I'm not convinced that you would get that modular assessment past the external. Facts are facts is just asking for a post modern punch up.

Jack Wrote:As site supervisor (PO etc), if some important archaeology is destroyed without recording, or an important relationship is mangled beyond understanding it is your fault!