Posts: 0
Threads: 0
Joined: Jul 2005
19th September 2005, 01:40 PM
I think that the quote was from an individual, and certainly did not represent the views of the IFA as an institution. However, it would be useful to get some comment from Peter Hinton on this.
1man1desk
to let, fully furnished
Posts: 0
Threads: 0
Joined: Jun 2004
19th September 2005, 07:35 PM
Any chance of a name?
Posts: 0
Threads: 0
Joined: Jun 2005
19th September 2005, 09:07 PM
Hmmmm..well, back on the subject of the thread.. As an "un-qualified old hack" who's just been forced to endure 6 weeks of a university training excavation as part of the course I'm on, my observation has been that the people that did well were those that were genuinely enthusiastic and not afraid of hard work and a bit of discomfort. A distressingly large majority of the students seemed to consider the whole business of digging to be a chore to be endured in pursuit of their degree, rather than a skill fundamental to their desired profession.
The former group would probably do well on site with, or without, a degree. The latter seem to think the're going step straight into supervisory roles..
As for graduates who can't draw sections (one of the previous postings) I'm not really surprised if this dig is anything to go by: Four students per drawing...even better, a cardboard dummy section with the "Layers" drawn on.
Rant,Rant,Whinge,Whinge..sorry..
When the going gets weird...
Posts: 0
Threads: 0
Joined: Jan 2005
19th September 2005, 10:09 PM
well, I have to say I didn't learn a single thing about the practical side of field archaeology on my student training digs. They were just a load of students who knew nothing supervising a younger load of students who knew even less. I've learnt everything about digging since I finished my undergrad degree and have worked with some fantastic people who have never been near a university and have taught me an awful lot.
++ i spend my days rummaging around in dead people ++
Posts: 0
Threads: 0
Joined: Jul 2005
19th September 2005, 10:10 PM
I'd say that if the students are sent on a 'training' excavation as described by leg11aug, they have a good cause for complaint. They are not likely to get a decent training, and they all pay through the nose nowadays. There are complaints procedures available nowadays.
The university really is responsible for ensuring that their training digs have sufficient archaeology on them to provide the necessary training and experience.
1man1desk
to let, fully furnished
Posts: 0
Threads: 0
Joined: May 2005
19th September 2005, 10:13 PM
Quote:quote:As for graduates who can't draw sections (one of the previous postings) I'm not really surprised if this dig is anything to go by: Four students per drawing...even better, a cardboard dummy section with the "Layers" drawn on.
Bloody Hell! It's worse than I thought.[xx(] The amateur community group that I work with gets better training than that. This is where our future workforce is coming from? I'd rather have the amateurs, at least the enthusiasm is there.
Posts: 0
Threads: 0
Joined: Jul 2005
19th September 2005, 10:35 PM
Quote:quote:A former county archaeologist was frequently heard to say that they didn't agree with long term contracts! To keep diggers on short term work was to keep them keen and eager to please Although no longer a county mountie, they are still active within the professional body...- originally posted by Muddy
To get a more authoritative (and encouraging) idea of the IFA's corporate thinking on this topic, look at their website and open the 2004 AGM report on 'Archaeological Pay and Conditions'. The link to Peter Hinton's talk in that debate is also interesting.
It's mostly about pay and other benefits - doesn't deal much with job security - but it looks like their heart is in the right place. The only 'slow-down - don't hope for too much' type comments actually come from Prospect.
1man1desk
to let, fully furnished
Posts: 0
Threads: 0
Joined: Jul 2005
19th September 2005, 10:41 PM
To go back to Leg11aug's comments about training digs, there is some interesting stuff on the IFA website about training. Look for the bits about 'Workplace learning bursaries' (which seem to be aimed at non-graduate archaeologists) and 'Training the trainers' (which is about ensuring that the people giving on-the-job training on site are competent to do it).
1man1desk
to let, fully furnished
Posts: 0
Threads: 0
Joined: Jun 2005
20th September 2005, 02:13 AM
further to the previous. A sense of fairness compels me to add that the uni didn't PLAN the excavation that way.
The intention was to have 11 trenches divided between 80-odd students, a late harvest however meant that, only 2 trenches were possible.
The resultant over-manning was difficult to deal with.
My point though is sound, I think, insofar as a whole year of graduates think they've "done" a dig. When in fact they were mostly occupied in "Makework"
I'll shut up now.
When the going gets weird...
Posts: 0
Threads: 0
Joined: May 2004
21st September 2005, 03:37 PM
I agree entirely with leg11aug's comments that
Quote:quote:
the people that did well were those that were genuinely enthusiastic and not afraid of hard work and a bit of discomfort. A distressingly large majority of the students seemed to consider the whole business of digging to be a chore to be endured in pursuit of their degree, rather than a skill fundamental to their desired profession.
The former group would probably do well on site with, or without, a degree. The latter seem to think the're going step straight into supervisory roles..
We have taken on a number of such enthusiastic, hardworking if inexperienced people and found them to be very good. Attitude is key. We have provided 6-week traineeships (paid), and all three such posts over the last two years have subsequently evolved into 6-month contracts as site assistants.
