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

[GnomeKing]

problem is PP (my darling), taht i have been working for many years in the field > not only do i see a depressing lack of research quality work, but when do i get to present My Results?

anyway....
you misunderstand academic timescales, timetables and requirments -- + you may be some what out of touch with Researchers, for whome most (not all) comic-mercial reports/field work is minimally tempting (even with barge pole in hand)

Yes, there was an imbalance, (and in many ways still is) whereby very good (non-academic) field archaeolgoist were not given enough respect or value in teaching situations...this is not really the case now, and the pendulum is swinging too far the other way, with some academics fawning over 'Profesionals' who 'know it like it is', when in fact many of them simply know how bullshit clients/curators, fill in risk-assesments, and abuse thier staff to hack-away at site ever faster and faster (sorry, 'efficiently').

It nearly is slave labour anyway...lets not go down the 'intern' route just yet eh?
Instead, lets see some senior academics providing real critiscism (+ve and -Ve) to 'profesional' field archaeology, then lets get it up to 'research' standards, and then maybe we can think about 'interns'.....

[P Prentice]

i'm not sure it is me that is out of date. i work in research. i publish my work, i am a commercial archaeologist, i even teach.
there are places to present research, try tag for starters or even your own blog.
you deride commercial for not being in touch with research and yet you refuse to combine the two to make both better. so unhappy

[GnomeKing]

i was derided on a daily basis for trying to combine research and development fieldwork...i was regarded as an anachromism...
research needs data...i watched data thoughtlessly destroyed 'because this not research'

i honestly wish you well.

[archaeologyexile]

I think an interesting point in any debate on research v commercial.....is the use of Commercial Techniques to meet research aims. I am very keen on minimal rapid interventions, over a large number of sites accumulating a larger volume of data at minimal cost. University research often seems to me to be simply a question of how many students one can cramb into trowlling a trench!

[Marc Berger]

i even teach

But that would not be teaching professional archaeology because no academic qualification are required to be a professional archaeologist in this country. Cant see the point. Anybody taking out a student loan to do archaeology needs their head examining. The ifa by becoming chartered has established for the present any need for a connection to academia. Well actually that's a lie, try reading this for academic qualifications: http://www.archaeologists.net/sites/defa...ide-V6.pdf and you will find that you might be eligible to submit extracts from your phd...I am sorry but what with the ifas 50 hours cpd the ifa are an embarrassing joke. We haven't heard much from hosty on the consequences of Scottish independence. I imagine that if Scotland were to go independent that it would show the ifa up for the petty little nationalists that they are because I imagine that Scotland would on having to have their own definition of an archaeologist would follow Europe and cater for graduate qualifications.

[kevin wooldridge]

I have no idea how Scottish archaeology will be organized after independence, but note that other 'newly' independent nations have often made heritage and cultural legislation one of their first priorities. I guess for 2 reasons. One it is cheap, two it helps to provide legalistic identity for the new nation.

I can however chip in with some knowledge on how qualifications and archaeological work in other places in Europe. Some countries insist upon a minimum of a Master's degree, specifically in an archaeology related subject, as a pre-requisite for archaeological employment at supervisor level or above. The same countries often require a minimum of a Bachelor degree to work at any level of professional archaeology, with special arrangements for undergraduate students to gain excavation experience. In some places 'permanent' jobs are restricted to those with PhD level qualifications. It is often difficult to cross over subject divisions however highly qualified one might be e.g a geologist with a Masters would find it as difficult to find work in archaeology unless involved in a specifically designed interdisciplinary project. I mention this because it should be a factor for UK archaeology students when considering their career prospects. You might well get a job in the UK on the basis of a BA/BSc or less, but not find it so easy to get work outside these shores. I don't whole heartedly support support the supposition in these countries that academic qualification 'maketh the archaeologist', but the reality is that if you want to work in these countries, you are expected to toe the line regarding the rules of employment.

As has been pointed out the Valletta convention does commit signatories to only allowing excavation by qualified and authorised persons. The UK government seems to shy around this elephant in the room, although it could be/should be argued that the IfA levels of competence satisfy both criteria. And that doesn't necessarily, at least within the UK, require compulsory academic qualification.

[Marc Berger]

here here. Totally agree particularly with

the supposition in these countries that academic qualification 'maketh the archaeologist'

but which makes the ifa qualification criteria somewhat illogical:

[SIZE=3]The list below gives some examples of the kinds of documents that are sought, but is not exhaustive:
[/SIZE][SIZE=3]
[/SIZE]

1. [SIZE=3]briefs and specifications[/SIZE][SIZE=3]
   [/SIZE]
   
2. [SIZE=3]HER audit[/SIZE][SIZE=3]
   [/SIZE]
   
3. [SIZE=3]environmental assessments[/SIZE][SIZE=3]
   [/SIZE]
   
4. [SIZE=3]condition surveys, management plans[/SIZE][SIZE=3]
   [/SIZE]
   
5. [SIZE=3]finds/environmental strategies, post[/SIZE][SIZE=3]‐[/SIZE][SIZE=3]excavation assessments[/SIZE][SIZE=3]
   [/SIZE]
   
6. [SIZE=3]finds reports[/SIZE][SIZE=3]
   [/SIZE]
   
7. [SIZE=3]service plans[/SIZE][SIZE=3]
   [/SIZE]
   
8. [SIZE=3]project design, HLF bid[/SIZE][SIZE=2]
   [/SIZE]
   
9. [SIZE=3]outlines of archaeological or other relevant courses which you have taught[/SIZE][SIZE=3]
   [/SIZE]
   
10. [SIZE=3]illustrations or other graphics work with context[/SIZE][SIZE=3]
    [/SIZE]
    
11. [SIZE=3]fieldwork reports (geophysics, landscape survey, building/survey recording, excavation,[/SIZE] [SIZE=3]
    [/SIZE]
    
12. [SIZE=3] evaluation, characterisation) [/SIZE][SIZE=3]
    [/SIZE]
    
13. [SIZE=3]PhD thesis (or extracts of), where applicable to your level of competence[/SIZE]
    

[SIZE=3]
We recognise that some roles do not generate substantial pieces of written work. Please let us know if this is so, in which case comprehensive accounts in your statement of competence, your referees’ reports, job descriptions and other documents will be critical.
[/SIZE]

If you have already done any of those things, you have done them without being qualified and therefore why do you need to bother becoming a member apart from possibly getting European work if being a member of the ifa is the only way of being recognised as an archaeologist in Europe (when Europe recognises graduate degrees and obviously future Scotland)...

[P Prentice]

it is illogical. chartering members needs to be a different kettle of fish

[Tool]

I think an interesting point in any debate on research v commercial.....is the use of Commercial Techniques to meet research aims. I am very keen on minimal rapid interventions, over a large number of sites accumulating a larger volume of data at minimal cost. University research often seems to me to be simply a question of how many students one can cramb into trowlling a trench!

Isn't all archaeology, by definition, research?

[archaeologyexile]

Isn't all archaeology, by definition, research?

No.....the vast majority is fulfilling a planning condition and the majority of that has negative results!