+- BAJR Federation Archaeology (http://www.bajrfed.co.uk)
+-- Forum: BAJR Federation Forums (http://www.bajrfed.co.uk/forumdisplay.php?fid=3)
+--- Forum: The Site Hut (http://www.bajrfed.co.uk/forumdisplay.php?fid=7)
+--- Thread: The School of Jack Yr2 (/showthread.php?tid=5079)
The School of Jack Yr2 - RedEarth - 17th October 2013
Well, that's a bit of an improvement.
'What does the BAJR say?'
The School of Jack Yr2 - Dinosaur - 17th October 2013
Jack Wrote:The important relationships exist.
Sadly frequently not the case, particularly when 'outside' units unfamiliar with the local natural have taken the spec from the county at its word and targeted all the critical intersections for over-machining at the evaluation stage :face-crying:
And any curators reading this, why the **** do you keep writing phrases in trial trenching specs about targeting intersections and the like, they are the bit that should be absolutely left for subsequent area excavation, site phasing is not a requirement of evaluation (which is primarily for determining presence, extent and condition, and broad period), you can rarely tell what's actually going on in a stupid little 2x2 trench as it is (or even often in a 50x5, for that matter) and it's b****y annoying later on to discover all the critical relationships have been trashed
!
The School of Jack Yr2 - P Prentice - 18th October 2013
Jack Wrote:As to the issue of an important archaeological relationship existing or not someone is obviously missing the point of supervising a dig.one of yours maybe.
The School of Jack Yr2 - Tool - 18th October 2013
RedEarth Wrote:I agree, but it was the general tone of negativity in Jack's previous post that got to me. How many times are the words 'mistake', 'fault' etc used in it? Where's the positivity, the encouragement, the sense of worth rather than the sense of blame? If we can't instil this in each other then why should anyone else take us seriously (and pay accordingly)? It's very depressing to see it trotted out as normal. Are all other industries/work places really like this?I guess my natural cynicism coupled with too many years in the construction industry made me recognise precisely what Jack was saying. Thankfully, from what I've seen and heard in my brief career in archaeology to date, although there is a fundamental truth in what Jack says, in reality it ain't that bad. Which is nice. I have to confess though that I do get a wee bit annoyed by the admittedly few, and it's usually (but not exclusively) those young and fresh from uni, that can't grasp the concept that they are being paid to do a job, not just to turn up. I must add though that this does not apply to all young 'uns fresh from uni.
It struck me as being a little like this (and apologies to Irvine Welsh): 'Choose life. Choose a job. Choose a career. Choose training. Choose progression. Choose good pay. Choose a contract. Choose fair working hours. Choose decent working conditions. Choose a sense of worth. Choose purpose and direction. Choose prospects. But why would I want to do a thing like that? I chose archaeology.'
The School of Jack Yr2 - Wax - 19th October 2013
So School of Jack Which are the more important skills for the supervisor?
The ability to ensure the archaeology is properly recorded and understood
The ability to manage and motivate people (clients and staff)
Do not cope out and say they're equally important, remember this is commercial archaeology where the client is paying for " Temporal Contamination Clearance"
The School of Jack Yr2 - RedEarth - 21st October 2013
Tool Wrote:I have to confess though that I do get a wee bit annoyed by the admittedly few, and it's usually (but not exclusively) those young and fresh from uni, that can't grasp the concept that they are being paid to do a job, not just to turn up. I must add though that this does not apply to all young 'uns fresh from uni.
Unfortunately they aren't helped a great deal by the way archaeology is taught at most unis, but the spirit of unprofessionalness is pretty much endemic in archaeology.
The School of Jack Yr2 - Jack - 22nd October 2013
P Prentice Wrote:one of yours maybe.
Don't get it? Elucidate please, unit....I mean PP
The School of Jack Yr2 - P Prentice - 22nd October 2013
i ws alluding to the nepotistic traji-comedy that permeates commercial archaeology. when do we get sleeping your way to supervisor?
The School of Jack Yr2 - Jack - 22nd October 2013
Wax Wrote:So School of Jack Which are the more important skills for the supervisor?
The ability to ensure the archaeology is properly recorded and understood
The ability to manage and motivate people (clients and staff)
Do not cope out and say they're equally important, remember this is commercial archaeology where the client is paying for " Temporal Contamination Clearance"
Very good question!
The School of Jack has mixed views on this dichotomy.
On one hand 'The ability to ensure the archaeology is properly recorded and understood' is fundamental to preserving archaeological information.........without this whats the point, other than to make money.
On the other hand, 'The ability to manage and motivate people (clients and staff)' is vital for the smooth running of a project, and hence the smooth and efficient excavation and recording of the archaeology.
However, there is a clear answer.........The ability to successfully plan and delegate to those capable to perform the tasks (though being more a management tool) is often a way of ensuring both are accomplished.
So in short............they're equally important...........but the School would add the word 'efficiently' to each and insert the phrase 'in order that' between the second and the first.
The School of Jack Yr2 - kevin wooldridge - 22nd October 2013
P Prentice Wrote:when do we get sleeping your way to supervisor?Urban myth!! Bet you cannot get one person on this forum to admit that they personally slept their way to supervisor....I remember hearing in a pub once an archaeologist slagging off a well known lady digger who he claimed on a certain site back in the early 80s had slept with everyone on the project. 'Including you?' I asked. '...er well not with me, but with every other guy on the project...'