FAME Conference

[P Prentice]

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?

surely as a digging spa - that's your job

[P Prentice]

Unit, do you believe in the Peter Principle, or the Dilbert Principle?

clearly unit is trying to prove parkinsons law
and i'm not referring to her verbal parkinsons

[Unitof1]

[INDENT] Originally Posted by Dinosaur
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?



surely as a digging spa - that's your job

and thats all the training that digging muppets need so what "training" is chiz going on about oh nothing to do with getting spoil in a wheelbarrow.
[/INDENT]

[Wax]

A site newbie is going to need some basic training even if it is in how to lift a barrow with out permanently damaging their back. Training site supervisors to be able to provide basic level training for the new guys may be cost effective. Long term training is another issue until there is a drastic skills shortage I cannot see cash strapped units bothering. Though CBA IFA and EH have all contributed to to training the commercial set ups have a poor track record. As for individuals I know from personal experience that getting your self trained up to a high level when there are no jobs or prospects of promotion is pretty soul destroying.

[P Prentice]

and thats all the training that digging muppets need so what "training" is chiz going on about oh nothing to do with getting spoil in a wheelbarrow.

its a question of context unit

[P Prentice]

@ chiz
your contention that only a select few get properly trained and the remainder get disenfranchised is probably true but is it to the detriment of the profession as a whole? many of us can teach a squaddie, or a student, or a retiree to proficiently

[chiz]

I'd agree on one level that not training everyone may not be an issue, but are we selecting the right individuals to train up currently? Or just those with the sharpest elbows and loudest voices?:face-stir:

Some sites may appear to be straightforward, but are they really straightforward? Or is it just that the deskilling/mechanisation process makes it easy for such sites to be dug 'simply', whilst actually missing a lot of data? Creating a kind of simplistic, drop-down interpretation, 'Lego brick' archaeology, rather than a nuanced record full of fuzzy data and questions. You may well be able to train someone to 'dig' and do basic recording in a few days, but you't miss an awful lot of data, and have to hand hold a hell of a lot. Fancy running a site with 20 such 'diggers' and comparing the results to one with a good balance of experience?

Yes, training should be the individual's responsibility as much as the employers, and there needs to be a way of validating skills and experience. I've suggested a form of skills passport linked to the National Occupational Standards for archaeology, and linked to the individual's CPD log and PDP. This would plug into individual employer's appraisal etc schemes but 'belong' to the employee.

BTW, my presentation is now up on the FAME website: http://www.famearchaeology.co.uk/2012/07.../#more-618

[Unitof1]

I've suggested a form of skills passport linked to the National Occupational Standards for archaeology, and linked to the individual's CPD log and PDP. This would plug into individual employer's appraisal etc schemes but 'belong' to the employee.

I've suggested a form of skills passport linked
=this is a wheel barrow

to the National Occupational Standards for archaeology,

=this a shovel

and linked to the individual's CPD log and PDP.
this is your spoil

This would plug into individual employer's appraisal etc schemes but 'belong' to the employee.

=clean your spoil up before you take a break as in put your spoil in the wheelbarrow

now if you want to call yourself an archaeologist, you will find that thats never going to happen in a month of sundays

[Dinosaur]

Chiz - spot on :face-approve:

PP - dunno how you do it, but round here supervisors/POs are expected to get their hands dirty too when on site - at the end of the day we get paid more cos we're the good diggers, not cos we know how a keyboard works - if I'm spending all day teaching someone to do a (probably mediocre) job on something I could have done in 5 minutes then another job ain't getting done, ie in cost-effectiveness terms its better to have just not employed them in the first place. That really isn't the solution is it?

[Oxbeast]

in cost-effectiveness terms its better to have just not employed them in the first place.

Well, there's a great argument for not spending fifty grand getting a degree...