1st July 2008, 01:10 PM
Remember that the IFA do not monitor standards, they only react to complaints about members and RAOs ( I have my own feelings on that) Curators are the ones who enforce standards (cue comments of variable implementation - with one example being where a similar project in one county will elicit a different response, a complaint often raised by contractors, who must know what each area will want, rather than a standardised approach....which is tricky in itself!) And lets not even get started on who can call themselves an archaeologist ... and why they can?
I do agree that the basis is training... from university onwards.. verifiable, trusted and a benefit to the individual and the sector. a mark of a professional (or amateur) - a solid record of ability and skill... a skills passport for example.
Something that is recognised as a sign of competence in skills, from excavation to survey from ceramic analysis to dendro-work.
The question keeps returning... who to complain to who is truely independent of any group? Simplify the system, not complicate it.
"No job worth doing was ever done on time or under budget.."
Khufu
I do agree that the basis is training... from university onwards.. verifiable, trusted and a benefit to the individual and the sector. a mark of a professional (or amateur) - a solid record of ability and skill... a skills passport for example.
Something that is recognised as a sign of competence in skills, from excavation to survey from ceramic analysis to dendro-work.
The question keeps returning... who to complain to who is truely independent of any group? Simplify the system, not complicate it.
"No job worth doing was ever done on time or under budget.."
Khufu