26th March 2014, 11:48 AM
(This post was last modified: 13th April 2014, 01:26 AM by John Wells.)
OK, I will add my two pennyworth again.
'Should a graduate archaeologist take them seriously?' Yes!
The point that Marc raises is a good one. Many professional bodies started by offering membership to those without degrees but who were working professionally within the remit of their discipline. It is a standard approach not to destabilize the profession and effectively discredit established workers. Often these professional bodies started as leaned societies, or incorporated such societies into their membership.
Furthermore, it is not unusual to offer chartered status automatically to the main grade of membership on obtaining the Royal Charter. This is often referred to as the grandfather rule or clause.
Professional bodies evolve. Membership requirements become more stringent, but membership grades more stratified to maximise membership and representation, but most of all income. With time, those without the more formal qualifications become more of a minority. At the top of the evolutionary scale, continued membership/accreditation/Chartership often requires proof of continuing education to ensure that members are keeping up to date right through their career.
The Society for Radiological Protection is a good example of a very small chartered body with considerable influence: http://www.srp-uk.org/membership/how-to-join
See the note for Mature Candidates: file:///C:/Users/HOME/Downloads/Application%20Guidance%20(1).pdf
Rules need to be flexible. I would not have been able to do biological research from my early 20s, if all the institutions that I applied to had insisted on my having studied the subject beyond the age of 13 at school. Most expected a relevant degree. In this respect, I am particularly indepted to the University of Oxford. My training and research, from the outset, involved seeing patients in clinics and excising tumour samples from freshly removed lobes of lungs, in the operating theatre. On the job training (albeit trial by fire) was a wonderful crash course into the field. I had dissected a rat in my first year at school, but I suppose that is not allowed any more.
Consequently, I have a great admiration for those who are successful in a field for which they have no formal qualifications.
Institutions are never perfect.
At one point, the Institute of Physics described me as a biologist, and the Institution of Biology described me as a physicist. How wonderful it was working in a field that the core disciplines disowned.
'Should a graduate archaeologist take them seriously?' Yes!
The point that Marc raises is a good one. Many professional bodies started by offering membership to those without degrees but who were working professionally within the remit of their discipline. It is a standard approach not to destabilize the profession and effectively discredit established workers. Often these professional bodies started as leaned societies, or incorporated such societies into their membership.
Furthermore, it is not unusual to offer chartered status automatically to the main grade of membership on obtaining the Royal Charter. This is often referred to as the grandfather rule or clause.
Professional bodies evolve. Membership requirements become more stringent, but membership grades more stratified to maximise membership and representation, but most of all income. With time, those without the more formal qualifications become more of a minority. At the top of the evolutionary scale, continued membership/accreditation/Chartership often requires proof of continuing education to ensure that members are keeping up to date right through their career.
The Society for Radiological Protection is a good example of a very small chartered body with considerable influence: http://www.srp-uk.org/membership/how-to-join
See the note for Mature Candidates: file:///C:/Users/HOME/Downloads/Application%20Guidance%20(1).pdf
Rules need to be flexible. I would not have been able to do biological research from my early 20s, if all the institutions that I applied to had insisted on my having studied the subject beyond the age of 13 at school. Most expected a relevant degree. In this respect, I am particularly indepted to the University of Oxford. My training and research, from the outset, involved seeing patients in clinics and excising tumour samples from freshly removed lobes of lungs, in the operating theatre. On the job training (albeit trial by fire) was a wonderful crash course into the field. I had dissected a rat in my first year at school, but I suppose that is not allowed any more.
Consequently, I have a great admiration for those who are successful in a field for which they have no formal qualifications.
Institutions are never perfect.
At one point, the Institute of Physics described me as a biologist, and the Institution of Biology described me as a physicist. How wonderful it was working in a field that the core disciplines disowned.