27th July 2013, 12:28 PM
Unitof1 Wrote:Out of interest...have you got any science "A" levels.
Interesting question, love it when Unit throws in a curved-ball :face-approve:
Are there any figures out there on 'science' qualifications amongst the non-academic archaeological profession? Anecdotally (and in large part based on what gets written on context sheets) there seems to be a general lack of understanding of even quite basic concepts at a site level (think I've commented on here before about one person who seemed to have missed the obvious fact that water generally flows downhill), and hardly anyone these days seems capable of reducing a level if their mobile phone is flat (doing it in yer head's a lot quicker!)...and I seem to spend my life explaining to people what a C14 calibration curve represents (no, it's not a squiggly line, it's the margin of a probability distribution plot, the important bit's the area under the line - o-level stuff). I'm still dealing with the aftermath of a PO who didn't see the point of soil-samples...
Is it just me or does there seem to be a rather low level of usage of 'archaeological science' at a site level these days? Almost all the published stuff seems to come from 'academic' projects. If this is so, is it due to ignorance of what is possible (at a PO level) or cost-cutting?
Discuss
[until BAJR notices and sticks up a :face-topic:
]