IfA to be abolished and replaced by......

[Tool]

Out of interest how do you think that having a degree potentially make you a better digger? In my experience the only part of my degree that actually taught me anything about digging was pushing wheelbarrows for three weeks for the MSC team that were actually excavating the site.

Agree completely about writing up.

Many of the newer field archaeologists I know would echo that sentiment. I've been shocked how little of a disadvantage me not having an archaeology degree has been.

[Sikelgaita]

Many of the newer field archaeologists I know would echo that sentiment. I've been shocked how little of a disadvantage me not having an archaeology degree has been.

I have met several people who have come into archaeology from a background in construction. Without exception they are at least as good or better diggers than those who have graduated.

IMO the primary skill required to be a digger is the ability to recognise and appreciate differences in soils by colour, composition and texture etc. Some people have a instinctive eye for it and all improve with experience. Not having a degree is no barrier to this.

[Tool]

I have met several people who have come into archaeology from a background in construction. Without exception they are at least as good or better diggers than those who have graduated.

IMO the primary skill required to be a digger is the ability to recognise and appreciate differences in soils by colour, composition and texture etc. Some people have a instinctive eye for it and all improve with experience. Not having a degree is no barrier to this.

I'm flattered...
It's an interesting point though. I think that my construction background has helped me, in that I'm used to viewing things in the sequence they were formed (it's how you build/dismantle things, after all), and used to seeing the difference between that which is naturally formed and that which has had human influence. Still get it wrong occasionally mind... [edited to add] It also gives you a certain work ethic that can be missing from the student life...

I'm wondering again if there is a call for a widely available, widely recognised and regarded vocational education route in archaeology. In construction there were (dunno if they're still done) HNCs and HNDs, which were much more practically based.

[archaeologyexile]

Out of interest how do you think that having a degree potentially make you a better digger? In my experience the only part of my degree that actually taught me anything about digging was pushing wheelbarrows for three weeks for the MSC team that were actually excavating the site.

Agree completely about writing up.

i think the best diggers understand the broader context of what they dig, and I think a degree can though not necessarily always help with that!

[kevin wooldridge]

I'm actually more than a little concerned how little an archaeology degree does prepare people for commercial fieldwork. I'm not sure that academia has caught up with the harsh reality that if you want to dig, you'll most likely have to take the construction industry shilling. But that's also one of my complaints about the IfA...

Don't quite see how the IfA get dragged into this. From its inception the IfA has recognized 'experience' as a valid criteria for accredited membership. It is not and never has been an exclusively graduate based institute. My disagreement with the 'Archaeologist formerly Known As' in this thread, is his assertion that the IfA should become an exclusively graduate based organisation. I think that would be a bad idea....

[archaeologyexile]

I'm actually more than a little concerned how little an archaeology degree does prepare people for commercial fieldwork. I'm not sure that academia has caught up with the harsh reality that if you want to dig, you'll most likely have to take the construction industry shilling. But that's also one of my complaints about the IfA... But I would grant you that studying at that level will certainly help you to be able to write clearly, concisely, logically without going off into flights of fancy. Although I have read reports from Masters graduates that, to be blunt, leave a lot to be desired. But any degree that requires the sorting, organising and writing up of information should serve the purpose.

No argument there, when I went to uni I had to 18 weeks minimum for the degree, now it's 2. One of my colleagues who just started and who has two degrees, had never compared soil colour ect by placing wee bits of soil in their hand. Digging has to be learnt on the job but as I've said I think the best diggers will have an academic context for what they dig. Archaeology should not simply become a technical exercise, mind you I suspect that's why wages are so low, because it's increasingly has become so!

[Tool]

I think we're both saying much the same thing, but from different backgrounds. Archaeology in general does need to be approached with academic rigour, and the best way probably is via university. But for fieldwork, as long as the individual has enough interest in the subject to do their own background reading, and keeps asking the right questions, a lack of an archaeology degree is not, and shouldn't be, any barrier. So, to keep Kevin happy, I'm also agreeing with him re. degrees and membership of the IfA too.

My argument centres around this: when I first got seriously interested in archaeology a few years ago, I asked various people what books would give me a good grounding. The Renfrew and Bahn tome was recommended. I bought it and read it and was surprised how little of it was actually applicable to 'doing' British archaeology. Being someone who prefers to 'do' rather than just read and write about a subject (it's why I prefer archaeology to history), I was and am concerned that archaeology degrees in general are teaching the wrong stuff for people who actually want to practice archaeology in this country, as opposed to those who want to stay within the academic environment. After all, and no apologies for repeating this, the majority of employment opportunities are within commercial archaeology, where the focus is on doing.

[archaeologyexile]

I think the key is that the degree is in general an arts based degree in a subject, in which most people traditionally did not become archaeologists, just as most people who do history or english language don't necessarily become jobbing historians, etc. The universities are generally guilty of misrepresenting their qualifications and being vast money making machines. Recent graduates have to do far more to be qualified to work in the profession and the only way to get this is to volunteer over the Summer, though many don't get this and expect to walk straight into a position. Of course degrees are expensive now, so how can afford to volunteer over the Summer! Though thats anothe can of worms!

[Tool]

Think you've got it spot on there. Not that I have a problem with degrees like that per se. I studied history, and loved it, and studying at that level does encourage a way of thinking and understanding the world which is valuable To my way of thinking should be being made more accessible rather than less so, but that's a political problem, not an archaeological one!. The problem lies in recognising exactly what a degree (of any kind) does actually provide, and whether that is essential, desirable or relevant to particular aspects of our industry. So, it looks like to be a field archaeologist a degree (although not necessarily an archaeology degree) is desirable but by no means essential, and therefore having one should never be an absolute requirement to work in the industry, and so by extension should not be essential for being a member of the IfA.

I would add that I do wonder if not having experienced studying the subject at uni may allow a certain degree of open-mindedness, an ability to look at a problem from different directions, that may be missing if you've been subjected to the biases of whichever uni you've attended?

[GnomeKing]

lots of interesting points there;

but my concern is the blurred boundary between 'poacher and gamekeeper' that is created by executive IFA figures also being directors of comercial consultancies, particuarly in regard of setting 'standards'

am i the only one?