Proposed AAI&S and IfA merger

[Unitof1]

[SIZE=3]The system is supposed to work by accrediting only those who are competent. Its a problem for the IFA, which will have to be resolved but this is a different subject.

[/SIZE]

Oh no its not.

It’s the very core of the problem with ify and therefore its “amalgamation” of people who think there is such a thing as “archaeological” illustration. Ify seem to want there to be such a thing as an archaeologist but also one that satisfies the “original concept of MIFA as defined was

"a person judged to have expertise and years of experience, capable of managing all aspects of complex projects”.

Is this like having somebody trained as a doctor who is not allowed to qualify until they have run a hospital. Mifa and ify are civil servant constructs based on civil servant organised archaeological projects that attempted to concentrate the authority of archaeology in a management/consultant structure.

The amalgamation of archaeologists who mostly ply their trade through illustration which a bunch of …(Cant go on trying to think of the right term for a mifa) will expose this discrepancy. Presumably if they give the lowly illustrators mifa on the grounds that drawing something, exhibits the “experience, capable of managing all aspects of complex projects”, it will undermine mifa pedastool (sic) and if they don’t give mifa status it will show the inherent contempt of fellow archaeologists which the ridiculous construct that the mifa position creates.

-of to draw a redundant church tower using a digi camera and small B&Q tape on a project which should have had listed buildings consent but hay like me its briefless

Enjoy your breakfast.

[Julie]

a person judged to have expertise and years of experience, capable of managing all aspects of complex projects

I have always taken the above to mean, within their specific expertise. I and some colleagues/friends work in post ex and within that capacity often manage all aspects of that area of the post ex process, from processing the finds/enviro to assessment, to report, or contacting relevant specialists, costings etc. Similarly I know surveyors and illustrators who manage all aspects of their work, from dealing with the client, whether in house or externally, to creating the product. To me 'all aspects' applies here. I would not expect a manager in fieldwork to be able to manage the often complex ins and outs of the post ex process just as I wouldn’t wade in to organise machine hire.

This is the only way it can currently be interpreted to make room for all the non-fieldwork staff who have held these grades for years! I do not think that prospective employers only look at the IFA grade and comment to themselves 'well...they have MIFA so they can manage putting in all these trenches, the post-ex management and survey the whole site'. That is ludicrous, they look at where their relevant experience lies and within that experience they have achieved competence to whichever IFA level (Mifa Aifa Pifa etc...). This is certainly my experiences from when I have applied for jobs but understand that others may have different experiences.

.....Yes it isn’t ideal BUT surely the issues here (in this specific discussion) are not about the unsuitability of IFA grades in general. They are about the proposed AAI&S merger. I can understand why people are worried about an already confused grade being combined with a completely different set up. For my part I am more worried about the difference between MIFA level in the IFA and Member level of the AAI&S. It is very easy to build a portfolio up in a year or two, I have myself done illustration work (and considered applying for membership!! Just to get the MIFA when they switch! And I can tell you that a lot of other illustrators, many fieldwork staff with part time experience, have implied the same to me because they know they have no chance of getting MIFA otherwise).

As I said above, to my mind the ‘all aspects’ applies specifically within YOUR area of work. So to me a MIFA illustrator would be a graphics person with experience doing costings/dealing with clients/using adobe CS/autocad/whichever other programmes to create illustrations/managing timetables/managing staff etc……ALL aspects involved in a graphics department. Granted many illustrators are freelance but this would still involve personal management/dealing with clients/costings along with the actual illustration expertise. This is what I would expect and this is not going to be the case!!! If the proposed goes ahead there will be some very low level staff with a decent amount of illustration expertise but no higher level responsibilities holding MIFA over much higher level colleagues in other specialities (including fieldwork) who are mostly at Aifa grade.

Hope all that makes sense written in a bit of a rush!

[Unitof1]

Why do you think that it is important that a MIFA illustrator

[SIZE=3]would be a graphics person with experience doing costings/dealing with clients/using adobe CS/autocad/whichever other programmes to create illustrations/managing timetables/managing staff etc??ALL aspects involved in a graphics department. ?

[/SIZE]

Surely that person being an archaeologist is far more important. Seems to me that anybody wanting to show competance at "costings/dealings/managing" should do a mba and that?s whats wrong about mifa, is it?s some contrived junk unaccredited mba with no benefit for archaeology except to maintain the civil service status quo of commercial archaeology.

Truth is that the AAI&S is also pretty micky mouse and does not stand for much as well

http://www.aais.org.uk/join.html

are they archaeologists that draw or drawers of objects/subjects directed by some other archaeologist?

[ShadowJack]

Unit - your 'truth' about the AAI&S is personal opinion..and I suggest you keep it as such.

As a graphic's manager - I both draw and commision other illustrators to draw objects/artefacts/maps etc under the direction/guidance of other archaeologists.

You seem to imply that, as an illustrator, involved in all aspects of running a graphics team, I have less value than that of an archaeologist.

...and where excactly does the civil service come into this

[Unitof1]

do you consider yourself an archaeologist first?

[ArcServ]

All very interesting but I am waiting for somebody to explain, how, if or why, AAI&S merger with IFA will benifit us more than reorganising and making more effective the AAI&S.

[Noddy]

I've got to say I find the whole (s)he shouldn't be a MiFA cos they can't manage a site argument completely ridiculous Mr Hosty. The IfA already contains and represents numerous sub-disciplines within the heritage industry including Academics, Consultants, Project Managers, DC and HER officers, Site Staff (occasionally), Post-excavation Managers, Finds/Environmental Specialists and I'm sure I missed many others. Just because someone's an illustrator why shouldn't they be a MiFA? Why doesn't MiFA status illustrate what they've achieved in their career? (no pun intended). I also point out the the RICS has 17 specialisms ranging from 'Art & Antiques' to 'Dispute Resolution' but they all end up with the same AssocRICS, MRICS or FRICS after their names.

[BAJR]

The trouble is.... The IfA don't have specialism built in.... you are either a MIfA or not... how you got your MIfAdom is not explained... representing sub disciplines is not the same as what it all means... Colin talks about what MIFA was supposed to mean at the start... back when it was Field Archaeology... I agree it could mean you are at teh top of your chosen branch... but has that yet been codified... ? not that I can see.

The concept is that us illustrators will become instant MIFAs whoo hooo... but I can also do other things, indeed when I first went for membership I was offered PIFA... as I was an illustrator... and only published archs could get MIFA... showing they were competant at producing a written report... not a pretty pic... which I was good at... Later I became a MIFA... but still not because of my illustration or survey skills... but becasue I could whop some reports on the table wot I had wrote.

Now it seems that if you are good at anything in archaeology this equals MIFA... ? confused!

I still believe in either Associate or Member Grades... simples... but with some idea of what skills you have... (back to the skills passport here!)

Could it benefit Illustrators... not really... I note there are lots of specialist groups who have SIGs in teh IfA but don't need to merge with it. IS it about members? :face-huh:

ps... Julie... I know exactly what you mean... and good post...

Unit... illustration and its place in archaeology and importance is a long discussion... every book and report is enhanced by good ones... supported by useful ones and is only part of what it could be without them... I am both an illustrator and an archaeologist... I am what I am when I need to be. sometimes at the same time

[kevin wooldridge]

Putting aside the difficulties facing Illustrators and Surveyors in deciding whether they want to amalgamate with the IfA.......

.....I suggested on this forum a few months back (can't remember where right now) that the IfA could both simplify and enhance its MIFA grading if it introduced a system where MIFA grading was only issued after a candidate had served an appropriate length of time as an AIFA (i.e no direct MIFA entry level). In doing so the IfA could satisfy itself that MIFA grading was only given to persons who satisified the aims of the Institute rather than based on potentially spurious assessment of a set of ill and widely defined external conditions....but you know simple is never easy!!

[Sith]

The trouble is.... The IfA don't have specialism built in.... you are either a MIfA or not... how you got your MIfAdom is not explained...

Very interesting, particularly for those of us aged enough to remember the old system of IFA (not IfA) application for Membership, which did take your specific experience into account. I seem to recall that applicants had to provide evidence and references to back up claims for expertise in a variety of specialisms.