14th November 2010, 11:39 AM
I agree Kevin, and once again it comes down to what the person expects to do with their life - we should also promote and respect those that take a different pathway. In my life, a lack of degree has never been a barrier, as the type of employment I have undertaken has valued practical skill first, and also, to be truthful, I am better off as a self employed person 
Where I am quite happy in employing myself.
The idea that degree is essential for field archaeology in a way detracts from exactly what a degree is about. And would companies stop knee jerking that a degree is essential...for a digging position
When you phone up and say...
Why? There is a long pause and then
"er...... um... because it er shows... er... something "
But surely you would rather know if they can set up a total station? or half section a pit? or take a level? know what settings are needed to take a sensible record photograph?
"Well....er......yes....."
and does a degree teach any of these things?
" um...er....no"
I rest my case.
It is not the intent of an archaeology degree to create a practical field archaeologist... so perhaps it is time to stop kidding that it is. Now the benefits of critical thinking, study, research etc... these are useful in other aspects, and perhaps in getting other jobs. But my reasoning is that degrees should not be seen as a mark of competence in field archaeology, they are a mark of competence in study and research and structured learning. Therefore support in creating training and practical skills would be a good step for govt... which also has transferable benefits. as would be the companies recognising that a person with x y z skills is worth more than a person with x skills. and stop lumping a 20 year lag who can plan with their feet while excavating with one hand and taking levels with the other. with a person who is just starting out and although able to trowel well, has yet to master all the other skills.
Where I am quite happy in employing myself.The idea that degree is essential for field archaeology in a way detracts from exactly what a degree is about. And would companies stop knee jerking that a degree is essential...for a digging position
When you phone up and say...
Why? There is a long pause and then
"er...... um... because it er shows... er... something "
But surely you would rather know if they can set up a total station? or half section a pit? or take a level? know what settings are needed to take a sensible record photograph?
"Well....er......yes....."
and does a degree teach any of these things?
" um...er....no"
I rest my case.
It is not the intent of an archaeology degree to create a practical field archaeologist... so perhaps it is time to stop kidding that it is. Now the benefits of critical thinking, study, research etc... these are useful in other aspects, and perhaps in getting other jobs. But my reasoning is that degrees should not be seen as a mark of competence in field archaeology, they are a mark of competence in study and research and structured learning. Therefore support in creating training and practical skills would be a good step for govt... which also has transferable benefits. as would be the companies recognising that a person with x y z skills is worth more than a person with x skills. and stop lumping a 20 year lag who can plan with their feet while excavating with one hand and taking levels with the other. with a person who is just starting out and although able to trowel well, has yet to master all the other skills.