Posts: 0
Threads: 0
Joined: Oct 2009
Chiz
I completed an undergraduate course in 1984. The University was explicit ........ I was being educated not given vocational training. I believe that was the position with the vast majority of undergraduate archaeology course then and has remained the case since, barring perhaps a few who might claim otherwise (although I can think of no courses that have offered experience that might prepare students for employment in the commercial sector).
So to be fair, when it comes to the universities, the profession has no grounds for complaint. It is dissapointing that many aspiring field archaeologist now find it difficult to gain voluntary experience, as that was a means for the more self-motivated to improve skills and prepare for employment. So it does come down to employers. If they want employees to meet business requirements they have to take responsibility to provide the training and stop looking for someone else to subsidise their costs.
Posts: 1
Threads: 0
Joined: Apr 2010
chiz Wrote:....its up to the commercial contractors to either pay enough to keep established and experienced staff, or set aside the time and resources to train, mentor and develop new entrants.
Explain that to the clients! As it stands at present if we cost in training people how to dig we dont get the work and go bust. Client's aren't interested in people learning on the job, they want it done ASAP as cheaply as possible with as few people as possible, which fundamentally results in the ratty old gits like myself (and a few of you guys I suspect) getting older and rattier rather than having an opportunity to train people up (=2 people the client has to pay for rather than just the one) - but suppose it'll all have to be re-thought once we're all wheel-chair bound or pushing up daisies, sooner would be better!
Your right about some modern surveying - was much better before the push-button stuff, if you didn't understand the basics on a theodolite, and how to work the results out yourself, Goodnight!
Posts: 0
Threads: 0
Joined: Feb 2008
It's easy to assume that training = down time + external courses + cost; as long as the occasions when someone is working and needs advice are seen as an opportunity rather than a distraction then it is possible to upskill the staff over time without a major interruption.
Posts: 0
Threads: 0
Joined: Jun 2007
Quote:Explain that to the clients! As it stands at present if we cost in training people how to dig we dont get the work and go bust. Client's aren't interested in people learning on the job, they want it done ASAP as cheaply as possible with as few people as possible
How does every other industry manage it then?
Posts: 0
Threads: 0
Joined: Nov 2011
I remember working with someone once, who just went aroundrecording things as a 1m by 1m by 1m slot.
Don’t know if it ever had any rationale behind it, but italmost becomes quite nihilistic, where content becomes residual to any pointlessexercise.
However, whenever it comes to individualistic delivery, its’unfair to expect an ability to expect, when life is a rather busy place.
Literal box slots, day by day to literal box slot objections.
Almost too difficult, to isolate that kind of work placelearning.
Posts: 1
Threads: 0
Joined: Apr 2010
Kel Wrote:How does every other industry manage it then?
I've got a mate who works in IT (worryingly, for a bank) who complains about the same thing, over time its the older crew (who've seen it all before) who wind up having to sort out more and more of the problems, mostly caused by the bright young managers....
Posts: 0
Threads: 0
Joined: Oct 2006
What bodger is trying to say is that ?this? was never an industry nor an industry with a management. If you look at those at fame all you see is academic hanger ons and a rather desperate bunch of chancers at that. All that is going on right now is that the management of the units who were the main were established in the 1990s are either being killed off by redundancy or coming to their pensions. Finding ?diggers? has never been a problem as no qualification is needed. Taking about standards and training is the last refuge of the left wing mug who discovered that they were doing all the field work but were still not the boss. The sharp ones start this prattle after about one year on the job but if they hang about for another few years you have the ultimate sheep. You then get a variation of the peter principle which is the management that you deserve.
After you have described the feature as a one by one by one I like to sort the fills out as: top, middle and bottom. Simples eh.
Reason: your past is my past
Posts: 0
Threads: 0
Joined: Jun 2007
Quote:mostly caused by the bright young managers
Ah yes, I think all of us propellorheads suffered from the IT FastTrack Graduate Management Programme in our time. Doubtful any equivalent exists in archaeology though. We're talking about entry-level diggers - like entry-level programmers. You won't find many fresh graduates heading up departments in archaeology. They're lucky if they get to shove a barrow.
In my IT organisations, degree or not, these were mentored and trained up on the job for 6 months before being allowed to work solo or considered "job ready". There was a structured induction programme which formed their probationary period. Sometimes these were offered as formal apprenticeships, but more often they were just considered beginners who needed TLC until the 6 months was up. The newbies were never left unsupervised long enough to create a mess that other people had to undo. The clients were never informed about them because it was just part of the way their contract was completed and the way the world worked. No big deal was made about something which was considered routine and in the industry's best interest. Nobody whinged that the new girls & boys came out of university unable to, for example, maintain an insurance company's core sales system. They were taught how to do it by the company that took them on.
Archaeology's not a special case. And getting back on :face-topic: it sounds like that's the conclusion that the FAME conference reached, ahead of the commercial side.
Posts: 0
Threads: 0
Joined: Sep 2004
Martin Locock Wrote:It's easy to assume that training = down time + external courses + cost; as long as the occasions when someone is working and needs advice are seen as an opportunity rather than a distraction then it is possible to upskill the staff over time without a major interruption.
Nicely put, and that's exactly what I was talking about at both FAME Forum and the DF/Prospect conference. The paper is a 'part 2' to my article in The Archaeologist and sets out how to achieve this on site at minimal cost, it will be published later in the year.
Employers do need to give the commitment to include time for mentoring and training, although this needn't be much, and should be able to be mostly done on the job. You need to support those that have to provide training (whether supervisors or site assistants, or 'specialists') and give them the time to develop the skills they will need. They will benefit from giving training/mentoring as well as those being trained. Employers need to explicitly support the 'trainers', in time and resources and in a changed culture on site and in the office, this isn't really being addressed at the moment in many units. What I aimed to do with my handouts, training sessions, toolbox talks, specialist talks and the like was to semi-formally embed learning and discussion within the working week, and to create resources for training so that 'trainers' had more structured resources to use in sessions, and there was an evolving and expanding manual/encyclopaedia for all staff to refer to and add to.
A key use of on-site training can be to allow staff to get an insight into the Big Picture, and into What Happens Next, and to therefore prepare them for any career progression they might choose to pursue. Training people up in advance of any progression so that they have an awareness of where they might want to progress to.
Unit, do you believe in the Peter Principle, or the Dilbert Principle?
Posts: 1
Threads: 0
Joined: Apr 2010
chiz Wrote:A key use of on-site training can be to allow staff to get an insight into the Big Picture, and into What Happens Next, and to therefore prepare them for any career progression they might choose to pursue.
Couldn't you use the time more fruitfully teaching them how to use a trowel properly? And maybe get some of the spoil in the wheelbarrow 9 times out of 10?
|
