Archaeology... it's the future!

[Dirty Dave Lincoln]

Judging from the "essential field skills" topic I was right to point out that lack of site skills for digging will count against folks trying to get fieldwork.

[Unitof1]

quote:I'm also hoping that NVQ appears soon. I'm not sure how many assessors there are already qualified

what are you worried about. Go get a spade and dig a hole, enjoy what you find.

[Dirty Dave Lincoln]

"go get a spade and dig a hole"
Sounds good to me! anywhere in particular?:face-approve:

[shovelnomore]

Anybody else told, when they started digging: 'we're archaeologists, we don't dig holes'?

[Unitof1]

no, what are you talking about, maybe you have not started yet,
:
get spade dig.......joy
.....dont tell anyone

[Dirty Dave Lincoln]

"were archaeologists,we dont dig holes"
No, we'er supposed to dig sections through features-but looking at what some people consider as being vertical makes me laugh,especially when you can see ants skiing down the section![:p]

[Kathryn Whittington]

quote:Originally posted by gorilla
Just one thought this morning. I was wondering... when was the last time when a [u]non</u>-IfA member was invited to talk/discuss with the IfA comittee regarding IfA membership, structure and operation? Was there ever a time? Has or does the IfA take on board the views of non-members (the good majority of archaeologists?)

Perhaps if they actually talked to non-members about just why they haven't joined (or won't join), the IfA would be better informed. It's no good preaching to the already converted.

The IfA regularly consult with or talk to non-IfA members on a broad range of matters. We also work with non-members on many projects or as part of the joint working committees we are involved with. Talking to non-members is an important part of our recruitment strategy and we regularly have the opportunity to hear their views.

If anybody would like to discuss anything with us or would like to ask us questions directly we are always happy to hear from both members and non-members alike.

admin@archaeologists.net

Institute for Archaeologists
SHES, University of Reading
Whiteknights, PO BOX 227
RG6 6AB

[BAJR Host]

Thanks Kathryn,

I think what gorilla was asking though was more specific...

quote:The IfA regularly consult with or talk to non-IfA members on a broad range of matters. We also work with non-members on many projects or as part of the joint working committees we are involved with. Talking to non-members is an important part of our recruitment strategy and we regularly have the opportunity to hear their views.

We recently had a consultation here on BAJR... is one example I can think of.(but this included IFA and non-IFA members... and so is a mixed bag... as is any consultation where statistically some 60% (ish) should be non-members.

quote:Talking to non-members is an important part of our recruitment strategy and we regularly have the opportunity to hear their views.

I think this is where the question lies.. in where and who and when? When will be the next time and where.. etc


I think it is good of you and a sign of the openess that you are inviting comment. I'll send you q question just now.. :face-approve:
I think this is more open to interpretation



"I don't have an archaeological imagination.."
Borekickers

[gorilla]

Thanks Kathyrn for entering the debate. Firstly, I am not an IfA basher... I'm going through the process of joining. Secondly, it is, I hope, evident from previous posts of mine here that I am actually pro-IfA.

But I'd like to see it in a form in which it is transparent, structured and, above-all, assertive (ie. chartered). Yet, being my old contradictory self, I'd also like to see it in a form where every archaeologists wants to join it, rather than feel they have to.

I'd like it to be representative of all archaeologists... 100% (not the just the 34% that are in it at the moment). I'd like it to be an organisation where everyone has an equal voice and vote... from digger to director, PIfA to MIfA (or whatever the new membership moniker will be).

Lastly, I want it to be an organisation that everyone can afford to join and actually feel (see?) some benefit in being a member.

...and yes, there is a specific question. Although I know the IfA talks to non-members (and members alike), I'd like to know in what form, where exactly and what about?

[voice of reason]

I'd like it to be an organisation where everyone has an equal voice and vote... from digger to director, PIfA to MIfA (or whatever the new membership moniker will be).


erm, every member in the IfA has an equal vote, or was that changed as well in the constutional changes? and as for voice - anyone can raise an issue privately or publicly, stand for Council, participate in Committees, etc etc.