well herein lies the question: are university departments producing archaeologists or graduates who have majored in archaeology?
i would say that the majority of people who study law, medicine, music, sciences, engineering or computer studies do it with the intention of practicing the subject or a branch of it
there is no issue as far as i am concerned with people majoring in archaeology, but then recent graduates cannot come on site and tell my supervisors whatfor; they have to learn to do the job, which means a lot of digging and shovelling shit in order to get to the heady heights of assistant supervisor
just cos they've done a dissertation on a subject does not mean that they will recognise it in the flesh - not that i will deny them their academic knowledge - just that i have run sites where recent grads were arguing from a point of ignorance with the supervisor about what was and was not an archaeological structure, it was only after i had gone back to the office and got a load of literature for the supervisor to demonstrate to this individual that they accepted the structure
an isolated case? i don't believe so - although this guy was unique in his conviction
insofar as working in commercial archaeology - i didn't say that - academics who work in the field need a good skill base too
rather, there is a real need for the Bournemouth course for field archaeologists - perhaps into which one could transfer after time doing the more general majoring in archaeology period?
i would say that the majority of people who study law, medicine, music, sciences, engineering or computer studies do it with the intention of practicing the subject or a branch of it
there is no issue as far as i am concerned with people majoring in archaeology, but then recent graduates cannot come on site and tell my supervisors whatfor; they have to learn to do the job, which means a lot of digging and shovelling shit in order to get to the heady heights of assistant supervisor
just cos they've done a dissertation on a subject does not mean that they will recognise it in the flesh - not that i will deny them their academic knowledge - just that i have run sites where recent grads were arguing from a point of ignorance with the supervisor about what was and was not an archaeological structure, it was only after i had gone back to the office and got a load of literature for the supervisor to demonstrate to this individual that they accepted the structure
an isolated case? i don't believe so - although this guy was unique in his conviction
insofar as working in commercial archaeology - i didn't say that - academics who work in the field need a good skill base too
rather, there is a real need for the Bournemouth course for field archaeologists - perhaps into which one could transfer after time doing the more general majoring in archaeology period?
Your Courage Your Cheerfulness Your Resolution
Will Bring US Victory
Will Bring US Victory