Will the study of archaeology soon become a thing of the past?

[Unitof1]

well its just to reiterate the point that I dont think that there were ever many part time archaeology students apart from possibly extra mureal. Surprised that thats what made this pro vice chandler get all excited his lost extra mureals. And as you say they never worried that any archaeology undergrads had the slightest intention of doing any archaeology (not as stupid as they look).

[Kel]

And let that be a lesson to the rest of you younger diggers out there, even a few quid a week adds up over forty-odd years

Just make sure you save it somewhere you can get to it and don't put it into a pension plan. If I hit pension age tomorrow, I'd not live long enough to get back the thousands I put into mine.

[AcademiaTrowl]

Doug your numbers include Forensics Science students,according to UCAs there are around 500 Undergrads doing single hons BA in archaeologyand about 250 BSc, but that does not include duel Hon’s students (the bread andbutter of many departments). But your right the numbers has not been affectedby fees. One of the problems facing archaeology departments as nicelyillustrated in this piece posted by BAJR is that elite Universities are puttingpressure on recruiters to up entry grades so they can move up the national and internationalleague tables, then attract better students, more endowments, more researchmoney, and better staff... in theory.
Now with a fixed pool of let’s say 750 single honsstudents only about 200 or so of these are AAB students in any given year, andso departments in elite universities who are forced to put their grades up to aroundABB or AAB are in fiercer competition for the same small group. Those in the middlethe BBB students can no longer find a home unless they want to go to newerinstitutions asking for BCC, and many will do other subjects instead so theycan go to the ‘best’ institution their results will allow. These means some Russellgroup universities are ok – Oxford, Cambridge, Durham because of reputation theywill always attract good students and ironically at least two of these institutionsdon’t need undergraduate to survive – but places like Nottingham, Manchester, Sheffield,Bristol and Exeter are going to struggle under this system, unless archaeologycan acquire what the author describes as a protected status and so they can continueto recruit from the usual pool without affecting the overall university rankings.
Red Brick or new universities are in a slightly betterposition, but may be less attractive to the particular set of middle class studentsthat you find in the class room but rarely in the field. These universities nowhave a bigger pool of students to recruit from but less access to researchmonies to fund projects like excavation, and they tend to be aspirational placeslooking to move up into the Russell group by putting a lot of pressure on theirstaff (they also have to spend more time with their students to get the same results).
In the past the most ingenuity has come from the metaphoricalbottom of the pile, those who have to work harder to recruit students and keeptheir jobs/courses open. That will have to change and more ingenuity will needto be brought in at the top of the landscape – more stuff like Richard III - orRussell group institutions will close departments or streamline them and mergethem into mixed subject faculties and other larger less flexible units, – all thingsbeing equal we may simply see a more even spread of archaeology courses acrossthe variety of universities and the loss though retirement and forced retirementof many very expensive professors.
Oddly this change might actually be good for archaeology asa whole, as the newer institutions tend to put more emphasis on practicalskills ect, but none the less Universities are places of education, training shouldbe done in the workplace.

[Unitof1]

begs the question that if the university rankings were based on who went into digging how well would the russell AABs world fair compared to the CCD sheffield world?

[Oxbeast]

Sheffield is a member of the Russell Group and they ask for ABB.

[Dinosaur]

Durham used to let people in for archaeology with a couple of Bs, a C and a D thrown in for good measure ....or so I've heard...... :0

[kevin wooldridge]

It is, as Professor Braddock says, the 'core and margin' conundrum that is most likely to hit archaeology course in UK academia. A professorial friend tells me that they estimate there might be approximately 100 archaeological applicants each year who attain ABB. If you accept that Oxbridge and London are probably going to take 75 or so of those, it doesn't leave many for the rest of academia to share out, certainly not more than an average of 1 or 2 each for the remainder of the UK institutes hosting archaeology courses. How long a university is willing to host a course that would rank so low in all government measures is open to question.....

[Unitof1]

to paraphrase doug "lol"

Sheffield is a member of the Russell Group and they ask for ABB.

so you believe everything the russel group tell you. lol if this Braddock walla thought he was a russel he would not be squeelling like a ccd. according to the people that I know in ppe there,s oxbrige and solely due to geo position one or two london colledges. Sheffield isnt that a depression in a moor where pidgens live for want a word that has nothing to do with trap.

[Wax]

Perhaps the whole system does need an overhaul. It has long been accepted that a university degree does not qualify you for a job on the first rungs of commercial archaeology. For too long now degrees have lost the status they use to have being now a standard requirement for almost every employer. There is nothing wrong with learning for its own sake but now that seems to have gone. It's all about the Universities providing courses that generate cash.
Though recently speaking to a young person jut about to do a degree in archaeology when I asked them if they Knew how hard it would be to get a job in archaeology? They replied that it was going to be difficult to get a decent job of any sort so they might as well do a degree in a subject they loved.
Cannot help thinking that there is a generation coming up who are going to have problems getting good long term jobs in any field. Far more worrying than a drop in archaeology degree courses.

[pdurdin]

Durham used to let people in for archaeology with a couple of Bs, a C and a D thrown in for good measure ....or so I've heard......

I've got nothing at all, and they made me an unconditional offer!

@Wax: Quite! One of the problems is that university no longer prepares people to fill useful roles in society, it's just "study whatever interests you". On top of this, it's almost an automatic follow on from school and most new uni students have no idea about the "real world" or what they want to do with their life. They're funnelled into degree programmes that either they have been judged a good fit for, they regard as "easy", or because at that moment (before ever living outside their family home) they have an interest in. This results in hundreds of graduates with no useful life/work skills, with useless degrees, that then clamour to be valued just because they have degrees. Those that do get jobs in their degree field often end up having mid-life crises a few years down the track when they realise that their career isn't what they really want to be doing.

On the other hand, degrees have become such an automatic/standard thing that most employers now require a degree just to tick off a checkbox. It's an easy way to cut down on the number of applicants to interview, that's for sure.

Hm, I haven't had my breakfast cuppa yet.