Training and Volunteers

[Unitof1]

quoteavid Miles, Chief Archaeologist for English Heritage, fully endorsing all the efforts being made towards progress on pay and conditions, outlined some initiatives English Heritage were considering as a result of the Valletta Convention and its requirements for maintaining standards. It would become possible for example to insist that any organisation applying for English Heritage funds or to work on scheduled monuments should either be an RAO or should satisfy an accreditation scheme with similar criteria. Other curators would also be encouraged to demand these standards be met. This enforcement of standards would provide one of the crucial legs of the three-legged stool.

No I am a chief archaeologist, no I am a chief... is eh an RAO, whats its vouleenteers charter

[monty]

In my experience RAO status is definitely no guarantee of good standards or ethics..........

[oldgirl]

quote:Originally posted by monty

In my experience RAO status is definitely no guarantee of good standards or ethics..........

It isn't a guarantee, but (as I believe was said earlier) - at least it's an attempt to sign up to a code and standards. Doesn't always work, but there you go.

But, that's not what I said. I didn't point to R(A)O as a guarantee, in fact the point i was trying to make was - this scheme is an attempt to have a basic standard of work in archaeology. It is almost overwhelmingly populated by commercial bodies, but it was not set up just for them. Perhaps if would be educational and useful for other types of organisation to be involved.

[Austin Ainsworth]

quote:Originally posted by oldgirl

quote:Originally posted by Austin Ainsworth

quote:Originally posted by oldgirl

Hey Oz, maybe you should apply to be an RO!

It'll be a cold day in hell before that happens. }

Hmmm, why? What better way to demonstrate that community projects can easily meet the standards required? If you guys want to convince the 'commercial' sector that standards can be maintained and bettered within community projects (which is what you've all been saying) what better way than to show people?

Firstly, why does the voluntary sector have to convince the commercial sector of anything? Does anybody ask the academic sector to benchmark their fieldwork against commercial standards? 'Amateur' as well as academic archaeologists are already allowed to join the IfA and therefore accept the standards required; some 'professional' archaeologists are IfA members but work for non-RO companies who may or may not adhere to IfA standards and guidance. If there is no requirement for academics to benchmark the quality of their work against IfA standards why should there be that expectation for the voluntary sector? How many academic departments are RO's?

As I've mentioned before on this forum many local groups are involved in community heritage projects where archaeology is only one part of what they do and quite often only a small part at that. There are already national organisations where community groups can go for help and advice, the CBA has dedicated webpages for community activities, http://www.britarch.ac.uk/caf/wikka.php?wakka=HomePage and EH has Our Place, http://www.ourplacenetwork.org.uk/ ; what purpose would be served for community groups by becoming an RO when there are already so many other options open to them?

As part of my work with community groups in Gloucester I work with many diverse groups and as a result must have a firm grasp of issues relating to diversity, inclusivity and equalities; which IfA document could you point me towards that contains its policy on these issues? Does it have one?

[RedEarth]

[/quote]
Firstly, why does the voluntary sector have to convince the commercial sector of anything? Does anybody ask the academic sector to benchmark their fieldwork against commercial standards? 'Amateur' as well as academic archaeologists are already allowed to join the IfA and therefore accept the standards required; some 'professional' archaeologists are IfA members but work for non-RO companies who may or may not adhere to IfA standards and guidance. If there is no requirement for academics to benchmark the quality of their work against IfA standards why should there be that expectation for the voluntary sector? How many academic departments are RO's?

As I've mentioned before on this forum many local groups are involved in community heritage projects where archaeology is only one part of what they do and quite often only a small part at that. There are already national organisations where community groups can go for help and advice, the CBA has dedicated webpages for community activities, http://www.britarch.ac.uk/caf/wikka.php?wakka=HomePage and EH has Our Place, http://www.ourplacenetwork.org.uk/ ; what purpose would be served for community groups by becoming an RO when there are already so many other options open to them?

As part of my work with community groups in Gloucester I work with many diverse groups and as a result must have a firm grasp of issues relating to diversity, inclusivity and equalities; which IfA document could you point me towards that contains its policy on these issues? Does it have one?


[/quote]


Why does anyone have to convince anyone of anything? Why can't we all just go out digging holes willy-nilly and not leaving any record? Why can't we just undercut each other by using volunteers/poor employment terms and conditions? Why do any of us bother?

Everyone involved in archaeology needs some means of demonstrating their competance to everyone else, otherwise there is little point. That competance might be as basic as personal knowledge or prior reputation. Commercial work has attempted to set up schemes to make it a bit more organised hence things like RAOs. It's a start, and it's probably not very appropriate to volunteers/academics. Perhaps they should have their own system.

As for equality etc, I'm assuming employment law would cover this for the commercial sector (and there must be similar for academia) so why would the IfA need anything additional? (although they probably do anyway)

[matthew.law]

>How many academic departments are RO's?

I was curious, and bored, so I looked on the big list of ROs.
The answer is Birmingham and Winchester.
ASE, ULAS and CAU, based at UCL, Leicester and Cambridge respectively are also ROs

[Austin Ainsworth]

quote:Originally posted by matthew.law

>How many academic departments are RO's?

I was curious, and bored, so I looked on the big list of ROs.
The answer is Birmingham and Winchester.
ASE, ULAS and CAU, based at UCL, Leicester and Cambridge respectively are also ROs

Thanks Matthew,

so the answer is two, with three university affiliated commercial field units.

Next question, how many community groups are members?

[YellowPete]

very interesting indeed.

it does appear that the sounds eminating from there are much the same as those eminating from employment.



txt is
Mike

[BAJR Host]

We find ourselves spinning round ... Archaeology is open to all / Archaeology has to be done properly. Archaeologists are trained professionals / ANyone can call themselves an archaeologist. The IfA set the Standards for Archaeology we should adhere to / The IfA represent over 1/3 of commercial archaeologists but not academic, curatorial, amateur etc... On it goes.

The CBA and Archaeology SCotland can help societies - but do they represent them? vett them? ensure quality. I am looking at one group just now, which seems to have several legal and ethical issues - not to mention the age old, anyone can call themselves a Site Director (hell it took me over 10 years before I felt I had the ability, knowledge, publication background before I ever thought I could run a site)

So where to go? More Control? Who COntrols? How? standards? Standards only work if people agree to them and there is a stick as wel as a carrot? Perhaps the first step is the requirement for those that 'train' or set up 'field schools' must show measurable and recognisable standards, which everyone is clear about, and everyone sees as a minimum. If you go to be trained... you better come away trained in archaeology, rather than learn that the director has a wandering eye, or the trainers could do with training themselves.

Constant development is the law of life, and a man who always tries to maintain his dogmas in order to appear consistent drives himself into a false position.
Mohandas Gandhi

[oldgirl]

quote:Originally posted by Austin Ainsworth

quote:Originally posted by matthew.law

>How many academic departments are RO's?

I was curious, and bored, so I looked on the big list of ROs.
The answer is Birmingham and Winchester.
ASE, ULAS and CAU, based at UCL, Leicester and Cambridge respectively are also ROs

Thanks Matthew,

so the answer is two, with three university affiliated commercial field units.

Next question, how many community groups are members?

Actually, this sort of makes my point for me... if there aren't very many non-commercial organisations, then you get a commercial bias in the system.

And also, I wasn't saying that non-commercial projects/organisations need to JUSTIFY themselves to the commercial ones, I was saying that if they don't get TALK to other types of project they're not getting their point of view across (i.e. that their ways of working are just as valid). If you believe (and who wouldn't) that the issues such as inclusivitey are important, write to the committee and suggest they put those sorts of policies in the rules.

And agreeing with BAJR hosts last post - I'd suggested R(A)O because I don't know of any other system promoting standards. I do know that IfA have always tried to promote the scheme to non-commercial organisations.

Anyway, back to my non-archaeological job. Starting to wonder why I bother.....