IfA to be abolished and replaced by......

[P Prentice]

My word, trying to distance yourself from lowly MIFAs already? }

frankly - yes

[Mike.T.]

so do i but i also want to see a clear distinction between hobbyist dabblers/amateurs/charlatans/inexperienced/ill-trained professionals and proper professionals which is why i joined ifa and look forward to being a cifa.

Of course being a member of the IfA is cast iron proof that you're not a hobbyist/ dabbler/ amateur/ charlatan / inexperienced or ill trained.

[P Prentice]

Of course being a member of the IfA is cast iron proof that you're not a hobbyist/ dabbler/ amateur/ charlatan / inexperienced or ill trained.

obviously not but hopefully being a chartered archaeologist will be

[Dinosaur]

How's that going to be different then?

[P Prentice]

i fully hope that mifa status will not ensure immediate cifa status but that a rigourus application and acreditation scheme will be developed which takes fully into account skills and experience as much as academic and publication credentials

[Wax]

i fully hope that mifa status will not ensure immediate cifa status but that a rigourus application and acreditation scheme will be developed which takes fully into account skills and experience as much as academic and publication credentials

Oh my, PP is the last one I would have down as being that niave. Still it is something to aim for

[kevin wooldridge]

I am guessing that the membership of the IfA will be involved in voting in the measures that define a chartered member. My preference would be for a probationary period (irrespective of your IfA grade) of at least 3 years (so no-one can go from nothing to Chartered in one membership leap), testified achievement for that period, and a formally constructed dissertation/exam at the end of the period and before Chartered membership is bestowed.

[ken_whittaker]

Kev

You may need to revisit Tim Howard's original briefing note.

1. It is the Institute that is Chartered, enhancing the profile, prestige and authority of the officials perhaps, but not members:
"A distinction has to be drawn here between the chartering of a body (such as the IfA) and the ability of a chartered body to confer chartered status on its members. In the first instance, we are considering whether to prepare an application to the Privy Council to seek chartered status for the Institute. This would not, without more, confer the ability to grant chartered status (as a Chartered Archaeologist) to members, but this is something which could subsequently be pursued, for instance, by an application to amend the Charter to grant such powers. Although some may see chartering the Institute primarily as a stepping stone to the introduction of Chartered Archaeologist status for practitioners, there are clear benefits in chartering the Institute in terms of increased profile, prestige and authority."

2. In another post you question how a Chartered IFA could impede any archaeologist from practicing. Actually it is set out in the Strategic Plan:

Objective 4 By 2020 we aim to make IfA membership and registration essential demonstrations of fitness to practise.

Also, since the IfA has been 'accrediting professional competence' since its foundation, I can only assume Tim's further reference in his briefing note to a "longstanding campaign" is actually the IfA's executive's ambition with regards barriers to entry (a phrase, but not an intent, that appears to have been dropped recently):

"public endorsement of this nature is likely to strengthen the Institute’s hand in its longstanding campaign for the accreditation of professional competence in archaeology."

3. I don't know about you but I'm also far from comfortable that my professional competence gained through personal educational achievement, experience and commitment should be rendered second to a corporate branding exercise. As Tim suscintly puts it, the:

“‘public ranks Chartered number one in terms of confidence in professionalism, over other designations like Fellowship and degree.”

It’s not that I fail to appreciate the benefits of a collective voice representing the profession. My concern is that IfA has sought to advance it authority on commercial practice whilst ignoring the reforms needed within the commercial sector. In promoting the RO scheme, as a mechanism for imposing barriers,it has institutionalised business practices that contribute to the professional malaise, allows corporate interests to prevail over those of the membership, and now creates an institution that lacks transparency and has none of the quality systems necessary to expose poor professional practice.

[kevin wooldridge]

2. In another post you question how a Chartered IFA could impede any archaeologist from practicing. Actually it is set out in the Strategic Plan: Objective 4 By 2020 we aim to make IfA membership and registration essential demonstrations of fitness to practise.

Also, since the IfA has been 'accrediting professional competence' since its foundation, I can only assume Tim's further reference in his briefin

My point Ken was (ignoring the long term unspecific aims of the former IfA) that a Chartered body by itself was unable to impose or engineer a closed shop on the profession. If the CIfA wish to make membership essential by 2020 (and they are fast running out of time) they will need to promote a bill to Parliament that introduces either the concept of licencing, or compulsory membership or effectively a ban on all forms of archaeological activity other than that undertaken by members, In my opinion they have as much chance as the TUC would have in promoting a bill calling on compulsory Trade Union membership. That doesn't mean I think its a bad idea, but in the real world and in our profession I don't think it will happen. Could happen in an independent Scotland though ! So theres another cause for David Bowie to get his teeth stuck into:face-stir:

As for the point regarding Chartered members, I recognise that the Chartered institute and members are separate entities, hence my post suggesting that this (Chartered membership) is a proposal that still needs to be put to the members to designate the form and attestment that membership will entail. Probably not before 2020 either as I think we are due another economic downturn once Scotland turns off access to cheap energy after 2015....

[monty]

I do not think that RIBA, RICS or any other chartered organisation would expect that it's members would work on short term contracts of a few months here, a month over there, living out of B & B's or cheap hotels. I think they would be horrified if one of their registered member organisations was actually asking its staff to pay a contribution towards that accommodation, but this seems to be something that is OK in archaeology and not a murmur from the IfA about this exploitative practice.

Absolutely correct !

IfA was formed as an old boys club ( I remember the inception) and has done nothing for those who toil in the mud and earn the money to keep the old boys fat arses warm and dry, I cannot see how this will put up wages or improve conditions as it has not changed in the 20 odd years they have been fleecing me for subs !

Archaeologists working on site are still the laughing stock of any construction project due to the awful conditions and diabolically poor pay.... and probably always will be unfortunately......