New name for the IFA...

[andy.bicket]

quote:Originally posted by RedEarth

quote:

The term I particularly dislike is 'Heritage Manager'. You can't manage the heritage, it is inanimate.

Heritage Prodders? Heritage Pokers? Heritage Botherers? Perhaps a new series on the BBC...

If it does happen, how much of it will revolve around drama in the gift shop?

[Gog]

Will they also change the acronym. Will MIFAs become MIAs - if so, they'll inherit hundreds of new American members, all currently 'somewhere' in Vietnam.
I think the only people who actually benefit from rebranding exercises are the printers.

[oldgirl]

quote:Originally posted by Gog


I think the only people who actually benefit from rebranding exercises are the printers.

I agree! However, this debate has gone on for many years, and I seem to remember of number of threads here on BAJR in recent times where people called for this change. I'd rather a change that kept 'archaeologists' in the title than one that changed to 'heritage'. Let alone 'heritage professional'.

Last time this change was mooted, I seem to remember that it was turned down at AGM because it was argued there that all archaologists deal with information that ultimately comes from the 'field' and so therefore the change was unneccesary. If you can't make the AGM (and if you are a member at any grade!) you can vote on the form in the latest mailing.

[oldgirl]

PS all the forms are also here

http://www.archaeologists.net/modules/ne...toryid=321

[Gog]

If they really intend to waste limited resources of time and money on such a pointless matter (like they haven't got anything else to do), they could keep the acronym - Institute for F***ing About

[monty]

..........mmmmm ...why not change it to FAFI.... i.e. we do FA for field archeologists ...... has anyone ever actually benefited from IFA membership [?]

[oldgirl]

quote:Originally posted by Gog

If they really intend to waste limited resources of time and money on such a pointless matter (like they haven't got anything else to do), they could keep the acronym - Institute for F***ing About

Be fair, loads of people even here on BAJR have had a go at them for having 'Field' in the name but having archaeologists who aren't in the field. This raises its head practically every year, but Council tend to limit the number times they'll put it to the membership exactly because it takes up time and money. I think 2003 or 2004 was the last time it came up. By the way, the registered name won't change, this is the proposed adoption of a trading name. It doesn't take a lot of time. Either tick the box yes or no!

In answer to Monty, there are lots of benefits to IFA membership, whether personal or as a profession. Many of the advances in professionalism and having a 'career' in archaeology from the last 20+ years have their basis in the IFA. However, they're a professional institute, not a trade union and so their remit is usually associated with strategic, professional issues rather than personal or contractual ones.

[1man1desk]

Posted by Monty:

quote:mmmmm ...why not change it to FAFI.... i.e. we do FA for field archeologists ...... has anyone ever actually benefited from IFA membership

Well, if you want an organisation whose aim is to support employees in negotiations or disputes with their employers, you are probably better off with a trade union. The IFA is a professional institute, and as such it is intended represent all archaeologists - including those in management positions - so its remit in relation to employment matters is very limited.

However, I feel that I, and other archaeologists that I work with, have benefited from our IFA membership in other ways.

For a start, the simple fact that we are members of a professional institute has helped us gain recognition as professionals from members of other professions. When I started out as a professional archaeologist, all archaeologists were assumed (by other professionals) to be a bunch of eccentric amateurs, and all site staff were assumed to be students doing it for fun on their holidays.

The only reason why that works in the long run, however, is that the IFA has done a great deal to promote the development of professional attitudes and to improve the standard of professional practice over the years.

The pace of IFA-promoted change may have slowed in recent years, but that is at least partly because they already made most of the readily-achieveable improvements that they could in their current set-up. Reform and change to the institute itself is required to put them in a stronger position to make further, and larger, improvements to the profession. That is why they are trying to make reforms and changes for exactly that purpose.

1man1desk

to let, fully furnished

[oldgirl]

Looking at the actual proposal, I don't have a problem with it. I am more concerned with the strap line however. I still think that 'historic environment' is an unneccesary blurring of what we all do. I think archaeology and archaeologist are a perfectly clear and sensible definition of what we do that is understood by everyone else. You can look up archaeologist (OED online 'the study of human history and prehistory through the excavation of sites and the analysis of physical remains.')and get a sensible answer. Most non-'heritage professionals' I know think that 'historic environment' means looking at what the natural environment was like in the past....

Good answer 1 man, I agree!

[monty]

quote:....all archaeologists were assumed(by other professionals) to be a bunch of eccentric amateurs, and all site staff were assumed to be students doing it for fun in their holidays....it is still the same today !!