15th February 2014, 02:45 PM
Dinosaur Wrote:A number of years ago I received an email from the co-author (an office-based specialist) of a paper we'd written for a journal asking me where I'd got my doctorate from...errr...what doctorate???...they seemed quite upset when I pointed out that I'm a shovel-operative (injuries permitting)... says it all, really... you don't need all those fancy letters after your name to produce equally valid work, so Tool, don't let anyone fool you into thinking you're any the less for being a 'digger'
This highlights one of the problems I have with the IfA - they seem (and I'll emphasise seem) intent on perpetuating this them and us view. Now I don't have an archaeology degree and I have no intention of paying for IfA letters after my name if I can possibly help it, because in the world I work in they are an irrelevance. Does this mean I can never be called an archaeologist in the eyes of some? Even though I can dig, record and yes interpret with increasing competence month on month, as well as, and in some cases better than, those with similar or more experience and also a degree?