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

[Tool]

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?

I guess that depends on whether you believe working in the commercial sector precludes caring about the archaeology. Another way to look at it would be that working within the pressures of a commercial environment forces you to reexamine methods and practices, and refine the way things are done down to the most efficient way to achieve the best results, whilst doing away with outdated processes that don't actually contribute to the best end result. The best scenario though is to have people from all areas of archaeology working together.

[kevin wooldridge]

... 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?

... Not sure if you are the only one....but you misunderstand the IfA. There are no 'executive IfA figures' able to create/amend standards off their own back. All standards are subject to verification by the whole membership, normally though a motion to the AGM and very occasionally through a motion at an Extraordinary General Meeting (EGM)....

[Marc Berger]

"I've been shocked how little of a disadvantage me not having an archaeology degree has been." "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."

try this http://www.archaeologyuk.org/education/conted/certdip note the use of the word accredited

My disagreement with Marc Berger in this thread, is his assertion that the IfA should become an exclusively graduate based organisation. I think that would be a bad idea....

I have never said that the ifa should become an exclusively graduate based organisation. It is noticible in allmost all the other Chartered construction industry organisations that have membership qualifications based on degrees also have practical routes to membership.

What I have said is that the ifa does not recognise nor accredit any archaeology degree courses. Now they have establised themselves as Chartered, based on non degree membership qualification, it is very unlikely that they will be able(?) to accredit any university courses for part of their membership qualifications.

"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."

Possibly that is because there is a difference between a science degree and an arts degree.

"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."

do I deduce a minimum equivalent three arts degrees?

[P Prentice]

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.

but arnt you describing a 'digger' rather than an an archaeologist?

[Sikelgaita]

but arnt you describing a 'digger' rather than an an archaeologist?

They are on site digging archaeology, in my book this makes them archaeologists.

[Tool]

Are there many people employed just to dig? It's sad that the term 'digger' is still used in such a derogatory way to exert authority over field staff. Not surprising so many feel so despondent!

[kevin wooldridge]

There are plenty of folk who express a preference just to work on site (I would guess carrying out all site tasks and not just digging holes) and they provide a valuable resource...but it is a fact that the hierarchy of UK archaeology bases its wage structure on people moving away from field work either to office based jobs or worse moving to the dark side. Some employers provide training that enables field staff (diggers) to widen their career potential, but to be truthful many exploit staff who express a preference to stay close to the section face....Would be interested to hear any suggestions as to how that situation could be remedied.....

[Wax]

Why is there this tendency to denigrate those archaeologist that prefer to work on site in the field? Is it because the degree route is not currently the best way to qualify someone for this part of the job? Do those who have worked hard to gain a degree then find it does not give them automatic entry to one of the more interesting areas of the profession and that they have to compete with people who do not have the same. "qualification" level that the new graduate thinks they have?. I suspect a bit of resentment.

As for exploitation of the field workers that is pure commercial pressures and unscrupulous employers. (no serious enforcement of employment standards within the profession). Field workers are exploited because it makes commercial sense for the employer and they can get away with it.

[Marc Berger]

I am with you on that Wax. I would say that unfortunately the denigration of degree covers the fact that there are no accredited degrees for field based archaeology. As archexile said a little while ago

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!

In reply to kev

would be interested to hear any suggestions as to how that situation could be remedied.....

The real problem could be that the ifa might be hard pushed to find a course that it would credit. The issues often motted on this forum like

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.

might only be solved if the courses were science based and subsequently the A level base more science orientated.

[P Prentice]

They are on site digging archaeology, in my book this makes them archaeologists.

but that could equally describe a child undertaking work experience, a wounded soldier doing therapy, any hobbyist dabbler who does a mere day a year, etc etc