+- BAJR Federation Archaeology (http://www.bajrfed.co.uk)
+-- Forum: BAJR Federation Forums (http://www.bajrfed.co.uk/forumdisplay.php?fid=3)
+--- Forum: The Site Hut (http://www.bajrfed.co.uk/forumdisplay.php?fid=7)
+--- Thread: I'll vote for that! Duty of the New IFA. (/showthread.php?tid=1153)
I'll vote for that! Duty of the New IFA. - Oxbeast - 27th October 2008
"Beat me to it Sparky old bean!"
...and me.
I'll vote for that! Duty of the New IFA. - Hal Dalwood - 27th October 2008
The IfA's suggested time commitment is 50 hours over two years, so that's rather less than RIBA's 35 hours per year. I'm going to have to say this again, but CPD is not just a jargon word for 'all the training you get in a year', it's a bit more focused than that. So your employer may require you to attend some training course, but if the topic is not part of your Personal Development Plan, then it's not part of your CPD.
gorilla wrote:
Quote:quote:One question I've asked myself is... just how many units / organisations actually want an fully-empowered, fully-trained, fully-geared up workforce? If you give someone too much information (education), they'll start to ask questions.That's a good question. But for what it's worth, I believe that a fully-empowered (etc.) workforce is highly desirable for a field archaeology unit/organisation, because of the essentially unpredicatable and ultimately unique nature of all archaeological sites. More broadly, I would say it is in the DNA of archaeology to be asking questions all the time. Archaeologists need the tools to frame better questions, and that's why everyone should continue to develop their own knowledge and understanding throughout their careers.
Oxbeast wrote:
Quote:quote: I am sceptical about Local authority CPD schemes in general I'm afraid Hal.Fair enough. Employers are bound to be interested in employees undertaking training that they will put into practice in that organisation in the futre. So a local authority in the midlands without a coastline would probably not be supportive about funding a training course in maritime archaeology. But a local authority employer would not just be focused on their employees getting trained in skills that relate to their present posts: they should support training for an excavator (for example) whose goal is to work as an HER officer.
Hal Dalwood
Bad archaeologist, worse husband
I'll vote for that! Duty of the New IFA. - BAJR Host - 27th October 2008
What I am seeing is the (as I thought) attitude that CPD is a good thing.. however.. at the moment as it is not a requirement then why bother.. even if its quite good to do... etc.. now you have to ask the question... I can feel my genetic DNA fizz in anticipation
--- If Hal, in a council unit, knows the worth of CPD, is in an enviroment where you can't move for CPD courses, who advocates the trainging of excavators into HER officers via the schemes of training... if with all these resources, he is not implementing it... then why not? Surely you would not need to wait to be told by the IfA.. the IfA already have a scheme ready.. just go for it.........."I don't have an archaeological imagination.."
Borekickers
I'll vote for that! Duty of the New IFA. - Hal Dalwood - 27th October 2008
BAJR wrote:
Quote:quote:If Hal, in a council unit, knows the worth of CPD, is in an enviroment where you can't move for CPD courses, who advocates the trainging of excavators into HER officers via the schemes of training... if with all these resources, he is not implementing it... then why not? Surely you would not need to wait to be told by the IfA.. the IfA already have a scheme ready.. just go for it..........
I think a misunderstanding has arisen. My employer (a local authority) does have an established and compulsory management procedure called the Staff Review and Development scheme (SRD), in which employees identify their training and development needs (including their long-term career aspirations) at annual SRD reviews, and their line manager agrees with them a personal development plan with a set of goals for the subsequent year. Their are shorter update meetings during the year. This scheme has been in place for over 10 years in the local authority, and is absolutely a key element of policy and strategy - it is funded. I received training in how to conduct SRD reviews and I've been conducting SRD interviews with staff for years. You'd have to ask a colleague if they thought that their SRD reviews had delivered any of the training they wanted.
But a SRD scheme is not the same thing as CPD. CPD is the responsibility of the individual professional, not their employer (if they have one that is - self-employed professionals are required to undertake CPD just as much as employed ones).
Is that enough info. about my employer? Let's get back to talking about the general issue in the profession as a whole.
(Now determined to shut up for a bit....)
Hal Dalwood
Bad archaeologist, worse husband
I'll vote for that! Duty of the New IFA. - drpeterwardle - 27th October 2008
Have to say I am all in favour of CPD/Training but as an employer my view is a simple one. The purpose of training is to make a bigger profit or in the current climate to help keep people in jobs. My firm is not an educational charity.
The notion of paying people to train to do things which would only be of use if they work for somebody else is not something I support.
I would ask the following question about architects. Who pays for the CPD of unemployed architects? If they dont do CPD when they are unemployed are they allowed to continue practising?
Peter Wardle
I'll vote for that! Duty of the New IFA. - BAJR Host - 27th October 2008
Nah, you know you are sucked in...
It is good to get these things out, and clear up misunderstandings (especially ones that emanate from me)
The general aspect of this is that CPD can take many forms... and it is an individvuals responsibility. What would be handy (and to some extent exists with the NVQ modules) is a chart through arcaheology... ie I want to be X... therefore the skills I need to by X are a, d, f, and g. focussed training ... Companies can have inhouse skill and training opportunities... or support outsourced.. the point being is that a skilled and motivated workforce is good... CPD is good, if.. if it has a point... the point is....... I hope anyway... ability to move in a particular direction and be valued for it. To keep up with the latest in your field.... and be valued for it. Otherwise I may as well put down reading a book (oh... hold on actually that is CPD...
) )"I don't have an archaeological imagination.."
Borekickers
I'll vote for that! Duty of the New IFA. - Sparky - 27th October 2008
No one here is identifying the investment in our industry rather than the benefits to individuals and companies. Engineering and the building/construction industry have spent many years investing in their industry and with the emphasis on that. It benefits everyone as a whole though I would imagine the profession would only see the effects in the long term. The *****-footing around with this issue makes me believe that some business owners and managers are not prepared to wait that long.
I'll vote for that! Duty of the New IFA. - BAJR Host - 27th October 2008
You have now though
and very good point.
"I don't have an archaeological imagination.."
Borekickers
I'll vote for that! Duty of the New IFA. - Hal Dalwood - 30th October 2008
Posted by Sparky:
Quote:quote: No one here is identifying the investment in our industry rather than the benefits to individuals and companies.The benefits to the profession of having a well-trained workforce are immense. This goal of a better-trained workforce is the justification for the funding of training schemes such as EPPIC and the IfA Workplace Learning Bursaries, although those schemes are extensive training for a relatively small number of people. The real challenge will be to establish 'training' within the day-to-day ongoing activities of archaeological employers. Employers need to invest more heavily in training their own staff, and for archaeological contracting organisations that is going to add to the cost of projects, and will have to be paid for by clients (as in every other industry).
But I would argue that more and better training is necessary, in order to cope with the demands of actually undertaking archaeology. Training should provide not just technical skills and personal skills, but the knowledge and understanding of the bigger picture of Archaeology (capital A).
Hal Dalwood
Bad archaeologist, worse husband
I'll vote for that! Duty of the New IFA. - BAJR Host - 30th October 2008
Quote:quote:But I would argue that more and better training is necessary, in order to cope with the demands of actually undertaking archaeology. Training should provide not just technical skills and personal skills, but the knowledge and understanding of the bigger picture of Archaeology (capital A).
Now I will vote for that.!
"I don't have an archaeological imagination.."
Borekickers