7th September 2005, 10:00 AM
I'm with destroyer on this one. Some of the best diggers I have ever met came to it from the MSC scheme. Many went on to do degrees in archaeology, but that is not where they started. I do not see a degree as essential to excavate sites. Rather, enthusiasm, graft and a bit of common sense is more important. A degree becomes important when you rise through the ranks, as has previously been stated on other threads.
There have been comparisons with engineering on other threads. One difference between archaeology and engineering is that engineering is a vocational degree that is aimed at getting the graduate into the wider world, and provides them with a year's experience in the industry. Most archaeology degrees are academic and not vocational, so there can really be little comparison there as it is not comparing like with like. If ever all archaeology degrees become vocational then I may be inclined to agree that a degree in archaeology should be the entry point. On the other hand, as DrPeterWardle pointed out, there are many eminent archaeologists who do not / did not have degrees in archaeology, so what does that tell you about the nature of the work? And where would archaeology be without these people, who, by some people's lights, should never have been allowed to work in archaeology in the first place?
Cheers,
Eggbasket
Eggy by name, eggy by nature
There have been comparisons with engineering on other threads. One difference between archaeology and engineering is that engineering is a vocational degree that is aimed at getting the graduate into the wider world, and provides them with a year's experience in the industry. Most archaeology degrees are academic and not vocational, so there can really be little comparison there as it is not comparing like with like. If ever all archaeology degrees become vocational then I may be inclined to agree that a degree in archaeology should be the entry point. On the other hand, as DrPeterWardle pointed out, there are many eminent archaeologists who do not / did not have degrees in archaeology, so what does that tell you about the nature of the work? And where would archaeology be without these people, who, by some people's lights, should never have been allowed to work in archaeology in the first place?
Cheers,
Eggbasket
Eggy by name, eggy by nature