18th November 2013, 02:45 PM
(This post was last modified: 18th November 2013, 05:12 PM by Doug.)
Just a couple of quick comments on some of the profession numbers.
Age, archaeologists are older. There are a couple of things to take into account. One, the UK average age, as in everyone, is 40ish. So archaeology is pretty close to the average age and it is not surprising we would be around that age. Two, archaeology is a relatively young profession. Early 1990s is basically when it started. Now before anyone jumps on me yes- lots of people from the Man Power days did and still do archaeology. However, looking at the numbers in really jumped about 20 years ago. Lots of people got in on the ground floor and they have been aging. It is not surprising to see the rapid ageing of the profession as we grow older and come more inline with the UK average. We are just becoming more like everyone else.
Three, we lost 30% of the workforce which pretty much mean that we lost people with little experience ( some with lots) but the youngest got hit the hardest.
20 years is really not enough time to get rid of all the generational wrinkles. Also, some generations are larger than others, babyboomers are more numerous than generation X. Millennials are the first generation to be the same size as baby boomers. So we are never going to have perfect distribution of ages across the workforce.
In my personal opinion a health mix of all ages are great. 30 years of experience is always a nice compliment to exuberance of youth.
The simple truth is that there are not many jobs available for new archaeologists. Also, because we are a relative young profession in the UK, retirement has not really caught up with many of us. In fact a much older workfoce would be great as we would have a more steady turnover. But we really have to wait for the glut of people who came in the 20 years to move out. We are looking at a few more generations before archaeology gets a more normal aging distribution. Even then the math is against us.
4500 archaeologists if it was distributed over 30 year careers is 150 archaeologists in each year. That means that at best we would see about 150 new positions open up a year as the oldest cohort retires. Of course it does not work that way as most diggers leave after five years. People leave for other reasons, health, family, etc.
However, it really does not matter that much- maybe 200? 300? 400? 500? (as in 1/9th of all the profession) leave a year. We have 1000+ probably closer to 1200-1300 new masters students a year in archaeology. I am not talking about those oxbridge/Scottish universities lets call a BA an MA. I am talking actual taught masters in Archaeology.
As people have rightly pointed out that not everyone is going into an archaeology degree for a job as an undergrad. Probably not everyone going for a MA will want a career either but it will be significantly more. We also put out 150-200 PhDs a year. That is enough PhDs to replace all of that natural turnover I was talking about if everything was perfect. Again, not every PhD is going to find a job in archaeology but I would be willing to bet 95% are going to try.
I hate to say it but to be a professional archaeologists you need a degree- http://dougsarchaeology.wordpress.com/20...-and-less/
Ok not 100% true but read the link first before arguing that point.
Needing a degree has some serious implications for bringing in people to the profession.
Age, archaeologists are older. There are a couple of things to take into account. One, the UK average age, as in everyone, is 40ish. So archaeology is pretty close to the average age and it is not surprising we would be around that age. Two, archaeology is a relatively young profession. Early 1990s is basically when it started. Now before anyone jumps on me yes- lots of people from the Man Power days did and still do archaeology. However, looking at the numbers in really jumped about 20 years ago. Lots of people got in on the ground floor and they have been aging. It is not surprising to see the rapid ageing of the profession as we grow older and come more inline with the UK average. We are just becoming more like everyone else.
Three, we lost 30% of the workforce which pretty much mean that we lost people with little experience ( some with lots) but the youngest got hit the hardest.
20 years is really not enough time to get rid of all the generational wrinkles. Also, some generations are larger than others, babyboomers are more numerous than generation X. Millennials are the first generation to be the same size as baby boomers. So we are never going to have perfect distribution of ages across the workforce.
In my personal opinion a health mix of all ages are great. 30 years of experience is always a nice compliment to exuberance of youth.
The simple truth is that there are not many jobs available for new archaeologists. Also, because we are a relative young profession in the UK, retirement has not really caught up with many of us. In fact a much older workfoce would be great as we would have a more steady turnover. But we really have to wait for the glut of people who came in the 20 years to move out. We are looking at a few more generations before archaeology gets a more normal aging distribution. Even then the math is against us.
4500 archaeologists if it was distributed over 30 year careers is 150 archaeologists in each year. That means that at best we would see about 150 new positions open up a year as the oldest cohort retires. Of course it does not work that way as most diggers leave after five years. People leave for other reasons, health, family, etc.
However, it really does not matter that much- maybe 200? 300? 400? 500? (as in 1/9th of all the profession) leave a year. We have 1000+ probably closer to 1200-1300 new masters students a year in archaeology. I am not talking about those oxbridge/Scottish universities lets call a BA an MA. I am talking actual taught masters in Archaeology.
As people have rightly pointed out that not everyone is going into an archaeology degree for a job as an undergrad. Probably not everyone going for a MA will want a career either but it will be significantly more. We also put out 150-200 PhDs a year. That is enough PhDs to replace all of that natural turnover I was talking about if everything was perfect. Again, not every PhD is going to find a job in archaeology but I would be willing to bet 95% are going to try.
I hate to say it but to be a professional archaeologists you need a degree- http://dougsarchaeology.wordpress.com/20...-and-less/
Ok not 100% true but read the link first before arguing that point.
Needing a degree has some serious implications for bringing in people to the profession.