21st April 2009, 12:50 PM
Quote:quote:Originally posted by bob
BUT there is the real problem here which is that merely being MIFA does not automatically mean that the holder has relevant skills to the task. I could apply for a standing building job as MIFA, but my career might have been as a pottery specialist. This is why a NVQ scheme may be useful to indicate that the individual has skills at a suitable level and in the right area of expertise. I'm not knocking the need to set appropriate skills levels for jobs, just that we need to think about what they are, how they are judged, and how they are applied.
I agree, but as I said, at least if you're a member (not Member- any corporate grade) and you did the job when you shouldn't have done there is some come-back!
And yes, there is a problem with some people who got the letters some time ago - especially the self-validated ones! But short of going back and re-validating people there's not much any of us can do about that. Personally, in an ideal world I think we should re-validate every two years. But IfA doesn't have the resources to do that at the moment. (they probably would, however, if membership was compulsary..... can of worms again.... }
) And of course, that would mean that someone such as me, who has worked in most aspects of archaeology over the last 25+ years and has a lot of field experience - but has just got a 2 year contract to do something that isn't archaeology (although I reckon I stretch it if I put my mind to it....)- probably wouldn't get re-validated.....Just as an updated point, the new VC criteria were based on the skills infromation developed for the NVQ. I agree that we need to think about "what they are, how they are judged, and how they are applied". You are clearly thinking about this, so perhaps you should ask to join the Validation Committee? There's nothing like the experience..... (I'm not saying good or bad, mind....)