Training at Uni debate

[kevin wooldridge]

I don't disagree with a single word that 1M1D says....and his idea of a three-year graduate training programme seems a great way both to deliver and monitor skills acquisition. But where was the last time that anyone saw a 3-year contract dangled in front of an archaeologist of the 'old lag' variety let alone a newly-graduated field archaeologist. Present ciumstances suggest that even some graduates who are on schemes such as 1M1D outlines may be in for a difficult time (although of course in a multi-task environment, they are perhaps luckier to have access to other work options).

In the real world of commercial archaeology, we all know that 3 year contracts with a single employer, especially 3 year contracts with a significant training provision are like turkey-teeth. So maybe what the industry needs is some kind of scheme that commits the industry as whole to keep newly graduated staff employed, to gain the experience needed to acquire the skills needed. A kind of apprenticeship if you like with indentured committment from both the individual and the industry. Such schemes are not impossible, although it seems unlikely that they could manage to employ even the small percentage of archaeology graduates that actually want archaeology as a carreer. So would that mean quotas? Probably.....