Post grads...

[disheartened]

There is recently much discussion about post grad degrees on here. I was reading in one of the Sunday papers this morning about MBA's and whether or not they are worth the time and (extremely serious) money that goes into them. One commentator made the point that everyone has a degree, to be taken seriously you need two.

Do you think archaeology post grads are good or not? (in terms of helping you become fully trained excavating all singing all dancing archaeologists)

[deepdigger]

I think that the truth is, no one really takes you seriousley unless you have a phd. a second degree is often the only route into a phd.
many good archaeologists don't have degrees of any kind.

deep

[Beki]

It really depends on what masters you decided to do...there's not much point doing a masters in something unless its in a subject that you want to persue in later life..beciase thats no use to anyone

[sandy clay]

Thats all very well Beki, but what if you go off and do a masters and cant get a job in it, an all too common problem I suspect. Its nice to do something you are interested in as well as something that will move you up the career ladder. Nothing wrong with education for its own sake. Having said that some employers dont seem to look to well on taking a year out of archaeology to go and do some 'theoretical' course. On another note, has anyone ever actually got a job through postin their cv on bajr?

[disheartened]

OK, bit more specific then, are Masters worth it? From my experience, over here, the vast vast majority of people do have degrees, and of them, the vast majority have MA.s. (Though I have a feeling that this is down to archaeology being a joint arts degree rather than the stand alone degree that it is in the UK). Anyway, my point is: are they so common that they mean nothing, and are you better off to do your degree then work your way up? [?]

[achingknees]

I've worked at some units where there was a ceiling on some positions i.e. senior supervisors required to have degrees. That said there were some who had achieved that position without said degree, through merit (or getting there before it was made a requirement?).

I don't think that I've seen an advert for an archaeologist requiring a masters degree. If you have ambitions to follow an academic career a PhD is absolutely essential.

[sniper]

well, the job that I do, I couldn't have done it without the MSc that I have. It gave me the knowledge that I needed, and I am now building up the experience by working with human remains on a daily basis. I just wouldn't have had the confidence in my subject without doing the Masters. I kind of ended up in my current job by accident (right place, right time) but I wouldn't have ended up here without a MSc.

++ i spend my days rummaging around in dead people ++

[the invisible man]

So, are we saying that a PhD is the min for an academic career, a masters is the min for a specialist, and for general commercial work, well, it sort of all depends?

PS Mr/Ms Sandy Clay, do you have a sibling, Silty?

Today, Bradford. Tomorrow, well, Bradford probably.

[disheartened]

[quote]Originally posted by the invisible man

for general commercial work, well, it sort of all depends?

Are we not defeating ourselves if this is what you all agree with? A digger doesn't need any academic qualifications? How professional is that? Since we are trying to make ourselves professional...

[drpeterwardle]

An MBA is worthwhile even in archaeology - I think there is only one and he is head a very large Unit.

It has to be said that Masters degrees are becoming a normal qualification. As for a PhD in many respects it was a hiderance on my early career. It was however an entry level qualification for a consultant in the late 80s and is a big plus for me. The trouble (value)with a PhD is that you become specialised which is fine if that is what you want to do.

Peter