14th May 2009, 06:56 PM
Quote:quote:Originally posted by 1man1desk
Now, I think it is accepted on this forum that one or more degrees in archaeology are useful, but not essential, to work as an archaeologist on excavations or field projects, at any level of responsibility. The majority of people doing such work do have degrees, but there are many very good archaeologists who don't.
However, my own view is that a high level of academic knowledge and understanding is required to analyse, interpret and report on the results of archaeological projects, and a high level of professional expertise is required to adequately design and manage or oversee archaeological projects. The best way to obtain those academic and professional abilities is to study for at least one academic degree and to obtain professional training, and to combine both with a substantial requirement for field experience.
There already is an informal divide in archaeology between career diggers on one hand, and those who want to move into jobs that require the academic and professional skills that I mentioned above. Would it be a good idea to formalise that in a similar way to the architects, with different specified levels of qualificaiton required for each of the two career paths?
Good points here, that outline how the problem lies with how the commercial sector is structured.
Although 'Shovel Time' is crucial in understanding how all the bits join up, it is a luxury many can't afford, especially those who enter archaeology later in life, and who have greater financial obligations. Some would like to stay in the field, but simply can't afford the salary and the impact on their personal lives from constant moving and short term contracts.
Many choose to specialise from the off, and this is compounded by a lack of suitable career out-points allowing archaeologists to move between roles. I'm thinking particularly about development control/consultant/contractor pathways. Recruiters will inevitably plumb for the safe option, selecting people with direct experience rather than import talent from the other side of the coin.
This is problematic in British Archaeology, where the process is specification led. There are obviously exceptions, but I have worked with some consultants and development control archaeologists who are less than comfortable interpreting a trench. Formalising this division with separate qualifications will surely only add to this problem, and make it increasingly difficult for fully rounded archaeologists - expert generalists - to move into decision making roles.
http://www.diggingthedirt.com