14th May 2010, 09:51 PM
I have read the report and concentrated on where it relates to how community archaeology needs to progress, especially training. The other comments have missed the point. I, as a freelance community archaeologist, do not want field archaeologists to be burdened with training members of the public. They have enough to do just to survive on low wages and the constant threat of being laid off. Nor do I want field archaeologists working for units to be forced to give up any time extra to their already full duties. I want properly trained professional community archaeologists working with the public and developing the enthusiasm for the past that is obviously already there but frustrated at not being able to express that interest, because commercial archaeology has to chase the bucks. The demand to get involved, in whatever capacity, is there we need to address it. We need public support, because it is their heritage after all! The CBA will hopefully now get its act together and train those who wish to specialise in this vital work and not let it drift into 'amateurism' even more than it is already [as field archaeology was 40 years ago]. That is why the IfA needed to change its name so as to include all archaeologists and not just field workers. Why do CAs need training? I will give that up to other comments...