15th June 2008, 02:17 PM
Apologies for double posting but I wanted this to be seperate from the one above.
'Sparky' at least thinks an independent regulatory body would be a good idea ('Offarch?'). I do not see how the IFA or it's members could object to this as they, presumably, back there own self appointed remit. A regulatory body would serve simply to ensure transparency and fairness in all aspects of the profession and would probably actually help to enhance the IFAs image as there would be less reason to distrust them and their procedures.
As an archaeologist for over twenty years and an ex Fieldwork and General Director I can say that the standards we employed were different to but no less effective than those required by the IFA. I think that, regretfully, there is a way of thinking within certain parts of the IFA that their way is the only way and i find this both disrespectful to archaeologists outside the organisation and a little blinkered.
Would it really be that difficult to set up the regulatory board consisting of the 'great and the good' (or at least the 'moderately successful and the ok') which would allow the profession to take a huge leap forward in perceived fairness and ethical enhancement both inside and out both the profession and internal organisations such as the IFA?
'Sparky' at least thinks an independent regulatory body would be a good idea ('Offarch?'). I do not see how the IFA or it's members could object to this as they, presumably, back there own self appointed remit. A regulatory body would serve simply to ensure transparency and fairness in all aspects of the profession and would probably actually help to enhance the IFAs image as there would be less reason to distrust them and their procedures.
As an archaeologist for over twenty years and an ex Fieldwork and General Director I can say that the standards we employed were different to but no less effective than those required by the IFA. I think that, regretfully, there is a way of thinking within certain parts of the IFA that their way is the only way and i find this both disrespectful to archaeologists outside the organisation and a little blinkered.
Would it really be that difficult to set up the regulatory board consisting of the 'great and the good' (or at least the 'moderately successful and the ok') which would allow the profession to take a huge leap forward in perceived fairness and ethical enhancement both inside and out both the profession and internal organisations such as the IFA?