+- 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: Training requirements for diggers (/showthread.php?tid=1203)
Pages:
1
2
Training requirements for diggers - Hal Dalwood - 14th November 2008
Hi Bob,
As you say, the NVQ in Archaeological Practice sets out a framework to which specific learning and development can be related, and assessed as contributing towards a qualification. But I think what I am getting in asking this question stems from the observation that sometimes training for field archaeologists is discussed in terms of acquiring technical skills, e.g. using an EDM competently, compiling a site matrix.
Of course those skills are important. But I think that sometimes there is too narrow a concept of training and development for field archaeologists, which needs to include the development of academic skills. Experienced field archaeologists, with degrees in archaeology, need opportunities to study the broader academic context of the sites they have spent a lot of time excavating. As you suggest Bob, this type of training could be delivered effectively by universities, but it isn't much at the moment.
I believe that training for archaeologists at all stages of the profession should include more than technical and generic managerial skills, and perhaps that opinion is hard to disagree with. I am interested in how strongly people agree.
Hal Dalwood
Bad archaeologist, worse husband
Training requirements for diggers - oldgirl - 14th November 2008
Quote:quote:Originally posted by Hal Dalwood
Hi Bob,
As you say, the NVQ in Archaeological Practice sets out a framework to which specific learning and development can be related, and assessed as contributing towards a qualification. But I think what I am getting in asking this question stems from the observation that sometimes training for field archaeologists is discussed in terms of acquiring technical skills, e.g. using an EDM competently, compiling a site matrix.
Of course those skills are important. But I think that sometimes there is too narrow a concept of training and development for field archaeologists, which needs to include the development of academic skills. Experienced field archaeologists, with degrees in archaeology, need opportunities to study the broader academic context of the sites they have spent a lot of time excavating. As you suggest Bob, this type of training could be delivered effectively by universities, but it isn't much at the moment.
I believe that training for archaeologists at all stages of the profession should include more than technical and generic managerial skills, and perhaps that opinion is hard to disagree with. I am interested in how strongly people agree.
Hal Dalwood
Bad archaeologist, worse husband
I think that archaeologists should be 'jack of all trades'. I think it's impossible to teach everyone everything they would ever need to know on site, we need to teach ourselves (and each other) to be interested in everything, able to learn quickly and able to identify the right questions to ask when we don't know.
The NVQ, and the skills tables that sit behind it, are a good framework for helping people identify skills that they don't know are even out there that would be of use to them. It is worth mentioning, however, that they were put together some years ago. I'm sure they will be updated as the schemes get going.
And for Unit, the christmas pudding sounds interesting, personally I'm putting up shelves. (Ensuring my manual skills don't go rusty?) and cursing flat pack producers who seem to think that you can identify which of the 6 different types of screw you need from a picture that is less than 1mm in size! B)
Training requirements for diggers - chiz - 14th November 2008
Hal, yes, I agree, but you've got to know the basics first, or at least, as I said, have an awareness of the basics even if you go into conservation. You were talking after all about diggers. I remain to be contacted by the IFA with any detail on the NVQ so can't comment on it any more than I did on a previous post, but I hope that the developing yourself (!) bits may include some of what you are talking about.
Training in the units I have worked in (a few) has been dire, and ineffective, but then promoting people to supervise deep strat sites when they don't even know what a plan matrix is, and then asking them to train new staff isn't very clever either.
What specifically do you mean be the 'extra' stuff, do you mean for diggers, or just supervisors? Do you mean the kind of stuff i used to address with on-site talks, handouts and seminars, or more detailed study? I don't see units doing a lot more than they do unfortunately for the average grunt, its the constraint of the site boundary again.
I hope the IFA will get in touch with me so I can see how the NVQ will actually work, or that someone who is doing it joins in the topic, do you have any details on the scheme? Its rather tricky not wanting to criticise the NVQ without knowing more about it, whilst not being able to find out any more...