Archaeology at Glasgow University to be merged?

[BAJR]

History, archaeology and classics could be merged and anthropology and social work axed, under management proposals.

Is this just the way things are going to go?

http://www.heraldscotland.com/news/educa...-1.1084111

[Kel]

With humanities funding slashed, yes, I reckon this will be the first of many. I doubt archaeology will continue at all in some universities, apart from those with courses that bring in a high proportion of non-EU full-whack up-front fee-paying overseas students (are there any archaeology courses which do that?).

The best chance of survival (still by no means a guarantee) was probably to position archaeology as a subject within a science faculty and excise as many BA/MA courses as possible from the prospectus, whilst bumping up the BSc/MSc count. Sadly it's a bit late to start now.

[kevin wooldridge]

The government have of course only guaranteed to maintain science funding at universities, in effect freezing expenditure at its previous level. I am guessing therefore that if an archaeology department was already included in a funded programme, they can look forward to that funding continuing....However as Kel says, for others it is probably a little late to start now... I think the problem that many universities will have (Glasgow a case in point) is that the size of the savings that need to me made (I think Glasgow are looking at ?20m), probably can't be achieved just by tinkering with the structure.

Only last week a report stated that even with the increase of tutiion fees to a maximum of ?9000 pa and maintaining current student numbers (neither of which is a certainty), a large number of universities will still fall 10-15% short of being financially viable....it's frightening to think as to how that 10-15% shortfall might be made-up

[Sith]

Sadly it's a bit late to start now.

Ah, the University of Bradford Department of Archaeological Science est. 1974.

[Kel]

Yep, similar at Bournemouth. My point being that if a uni suddenly decides that their previously humanities-based archaeology department is now a science one, a dim view might be taken. It's not a strategy that would work any more... Or would it?

[rossclark]

With humanities funding slashed, yes, I reckon this will be the first of many. I doubt archaeology will continue at all in some universities, apart from those with courses that bring in a high proportion of non-EU full-whack up-front fee-paying overseas students (are there any archaeology courses which do that?).

The best chance of survival (still by no means a guarantee) was probably to position archaeology as a subject within a science faculty and excise as many BA/MA courses as possible from the prospectus, whilst bumping up the BSc/MSc count. Sadly it's a bit late to start now.

You may well be right with this. At Glasgow (which I graduated from last year with an MA(hons)) the vast majority of students graduating in archaeology do so in the faculty of arts (now the College of Arts). Because of the course structure in Scottish universities, the majority choose to do it this way as it allows them to undertake other arts and humanities subjects allied or complementary to archaeology during the first two years, before proceeding to the third and fourth honours years (subjects such as Celtic Civilisation, Classics, History of Art, Theology, Ancient or Modern Languages). Those taking the BSc (which I believe is generally about 10% of the graduating class) are in the Faculty of Science (now the College of Science and Engineering), and really that's generally only chosen so that a student could take subjects like Earth Science/Geology, either in the first two years or as a combined honours programme.

I think my year group had only one (possibly two) BSc (Hons) graduates, whilst the other twenty (or so) students graduated with an MA (Hons).

[rossclark]

Glasgow has had massive restructuring over the last year, moving from a system with nine faculties to one with four colleges. The administration for individual departments has been massively reduced and centralised, with many administrators now working across a range of subjects. Must say that I found the admin staff in the archaeology department to be fabulous. Everyone knows that academic staff couldn't organise a piss-up in a brewery, and really the department specific admin staff were life savers on various occasions. They really held things together in a lot of ways. My graduating year was the final year to experience this level of individual support for the department.

?20m is certainly the figure they're quoting as needing to save. The ?9000 fee issue doesn't directly affect Glasgow, however, as it's not in England. It does of course have the potential for a lot of indirect effects.

[kevin wooldridge]

I post a copy of a mail that Dr Jeremy Hugget sent to the Britarch website. It gives backgound and an update of the current situation at Glasgow Uni and seemed to me worth reproducing here:

'Following the restructuring at Glasgow University last year, Archaeology has been a member of the School of Humanities - one of six subjects alongside History, Classics, Philosophy, Celtic & Gaelic, and the Humanities Advanced Technology and Information Institute (HATII). GUARD was, for a time, the seventh member of the School. Within the School, Archaeology has somewhat less independence than when it was a Department, but remains responsible for the delivery of Archaeology degrees at undergraduate and postgraduate level. As Trevor says, a situation not that dissimilar to that of many other Archaeology 'departments' across the UK.

The proposals on the table are to merge Archaeology with History (not Classics, despite the news stories) within the School of Humanities. Merger of subjects within Schools seems (to us) to make little sense: the advantages of maintaining discrete subjects associated with degree programmes within a collegial School structure are numerous. However, in a climate at Glasgow where the University is requiring the College of Arts to make ?2.4 million cuts and the School's share of those is ?750k, merger of Archaeology and History does not represent any savings in itself, and so associated with the merger proposal is the redundancy of an unspecified number of Archaeology staff. Indeed, these redundancies are threatened regardless of whether or not the merger goes ahead. A consultation phase is about to commence, and the outcome will be communicated to the University Court in May for the final decision to be made.

Trevor also asked if Archaeology is being singled out for this treatment at Glasgow, and the answer is no - Classics is to undergo a review of its research sustainability, for example, and other areas such as Modern Languages and Adult Continuing Education are being more severely affected: a proposed withdrawal from many language areas, and the closing down of Adult Education, for example. In none of this is Glasgow especially unique - what is perhaps unusual is the somewhat gung-ho approach to the cuts being adopted at this point in time in the absence of any hard information about HE funding in Scotland, a position most recently criticised by the Scottish First Minister who commented that "Glasgow University seems to believe that it is under more [financial] pressure than other institutions".

Archaeology in Glasgow believes its future is as a discrete subject within the School of Humanities and does not support a merger with History - and the historians are not enthusiastic about the proposal either. So we will be seeking to overturn the proposals and fight off the redundancies, and the support expressed here on Britarch and through the Facebook site set up by our postgraduates and flagged in an earlier message to the list by Alison Kyle (http://www.facebook.com/pages/Love-Archaeology-at-Glasgow-University/174134129300125) is extremely valuable and greatly appreciated.

Dr Jeremy Huggett
Head of Archaeology
School of Humanities
College of Arts
University of Glasgow

[rossclark]

Just to say that Jeremy makes perfect sense. There is nobody who prioritises the interests of the department, staff, students and administrators alike, as highly as he does. I'm sure everyone associated with the department would absolutely support the position as laid out in Jeremy's statement. I certainly do.

Thanks for posting that, Kevin.

[Wesh Andy]

Hi folks, I'm an undergrad in the department and just thought I would bump this thread and let you know that, for those of you that use it, there is a Facebook (CLICKY CLICK) page set up to highlight the work that the department has done over the years. I am also collecting messages of support for the department and against the proposed merger to publish on a webpage, messages can be sent to glasgowlovesarchaeology@gmail.com
I would also like to second Ross in saying that Jeremy Huggett is a star!
Thanks in advance!

Andy