+- 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: Digger Article (/showthread.php?tid=1794)
Digger Article - troll - 3rd February 2005
Think David is on holiday Alfie- Could`nt agree more sir, think changes need to happen as a result of people like yourselves at the helm in the sense that us trenchies seem to find a deaf ear with the IFA and anyone else for that matter....
Digger Article - Sparky - 8th February 2005
A licensing system is an excellent idea and maybe the Irish system has a lot to teach us such as when people pass the licensing interview who can't actually dig or organise excavations, let alone write them up. Lessons to learn from the Irish system, prehaps.
Digger Article - troll - 8th February 2005
Agree Sparky-would be a way forward. I certainly agree that the IFA should not become the licensing body-any more than Prospect could claim to represent archaeologists. In the main analysis, the IFA simply IS the root of the problem. The Irish system does seem to filter out the crud however, people do fall through the cracks.How do we licence archaeologists? Who would be the examining body? Why do developers assume that the IFA are respectable and have any impact on anything at all?[?]If developers are convinced that IFA membership is some sort of a guaruntee of ability and professionalism, I think it`s time we got a bit louder...
Digger Article - disheartened - 9th February 2005
Irish directors apply to be examined as to their fitness and ability to conduct an excavation, and they then become licence - eligible, they are then allowed to apply for licences for archaeological investigations. To get an interview, you apply with your CV, and if your CV is deemed to show enough experience, you are invited to an interview. The interview panel is made up of 3-4 people, representative of Irish academia, the Dept of the Environment, and the National Museum. YOu are asked about legislation, what-if scenarios, finds recognition, and anything else they can think of to throw at you. Two to three weeks later, you are informed of your result, and if you pass, you have then become a licenced director, who is then tracked through the licencing system. It's not perfect, but it's a damn sight better than nothing.
Digger Article - Alfie - 9th February 2005
An interesting paralell in this country is the licence required to bother bats and badgers etc by environmental specialists. These are hard earned and have a knock on effect with wages and conditions. In France an archaeological licence is required and you have to go in front of a local commitee, including the Mayor, and prove your qualifications.I believe the French system is regional, so for example you could have a licence for Dieppe but not for Avignon. In my opinion a licence system in this country is the only way foward.Rise up citizen Troll!
Digger Article - Digger - 9th February 2005
Irish system also has a knock on affect. Wages are higher and licensed directs are in demand and usually held on to by companies. Screw up on site and say good bye to license, further contracts etc. Granting a license to excavate also carries responsibilities with deadlines for publications. Again- no further licenses to excavate if conditions on post-ex not met.
Digger Article - BAJR Host - 9th February 2005
[8D] back from Safari!!
Alfie (et al) ..... I agree... licencing is the only way forward... when anyone who watched Temple of Doom a couple of times can claim to be an archaeologist and there is no safeguard to stop them then we will forever have a problem. I would have been happy to see the IFA take on this issue.. where the person in charge of an excavation/investigation had to be licenced ... and this licence would have a list of all the work carried out and the standard carried out to.. etc etc like the Irish System. A curator/academic/peer review system could operate to allow a licence to be approved and a central body kept the current details of all licenced archaeolgoists... No licence ... no digging!
I also agree with Digger about the changes that this system presents.. from better wages to better arcaheology... if there is something to lose then the quality goes up. As the Irish System is not perfect... what would make it perfect? we have a chance to build upon the irish system and create something which benifits all but the muppet class of manager.
Nice to be back [:p]
Digger Article - disheartened - 9th February 2005
What would make the Irish system better? where to start! Yes, there is meant to be a guilt system built into it, so that if you don't get your post-ex done & licence criteria filled, you don't get another licence. It rarely works. A couple of years ago, Oxford were commissioned to carry out a survey of unfinished licences. Take a guess at who the main culprits were, that's right, not the licenced private archaeologists, but the Museum and Duchas (govt. agency). The State archaeologists responsible for licences, overseeing archaeology and all that, are hopelessly overworked and under-resourced. (Sounding familiar yet...?) Also, there are so few licenced archaeologists, and so much demand, that quite simply, there's no option other than to grant the licence. The archaeology does get dug, and generally to a fairly decent standard, it's the post-ex and publication that suffers. That's what needs to be addressed if you were to start from scratch, find some way to follow the whole process through.
Digger Article - Alfie - 9th February 2005
Nice to see you back David. I agree that it would have been good for the IFA to address this issue, but they havent. I think that they are now seriously beginning to hamper change by inaction. Another reason that the IFA should not be the licensing authority is a potential conflict of interests i.e. how could they explain a MIFA or AIFA not getting a licence?
Licensing should apply to all archaeologists, it would rationalize a clear career progression from Site Assitant (i.e. provisional,earning your stage 1 licence)to supervisor (stage 2) to director and/or specialisms(licensed to excvate human remains, maritime archaeology etc)to Regional Archaeologists (licence would show you have the correct specilasims to curate the particular historic environment you are responsible for) That way at least when you are starting out and putting up all that being a digger entails you would be building something for the future, something worth having.
Digger Article - Digger - 9th February 2005
If the licensing system can be applied to the excavation process over here, combined with the IFA's standards for post-ex (Something that Ireland does not have the equivalent of( I think?)), wouldn't that make a good start?