Sender: |
|
X-To: |
|
Date: |
Tue, 14 Sep 2004 21:44:21 -0400 |
MIME-version: |
1.0 |
Reply-To: |
|
Content-type: |
text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 |
Subject: |
|
From: |
|
In-Reply-To: |
<00c401c49a9d$0f44b300$26f4fea9@Office> |
Content-transfer-encoding: |
8bit |
Parts/Attachments: |
|
|
This has been a very interesting thread. When I got out of undergrad with
a BA in Anthro focusing on archaeology, I got a job with a CRM company in
the Midwest. They advertised the job for a "field archaeologist", and I
fit the bill. I worked full time as an archaeologist for a year before
beginning my MA and PhD work. Does that mean that I wasn't really an
archaeologist before I got my MA, even though I was paid to be one, and
performed all the activities of a field archaeologist (not to mention had
met required class and field work from my undergraduate department and
been to 2 field schools)?
To me, anyway, there are many different ways to be an archaeologist,
that fit many different requirements of the field. Maybe you need a MA to
be a PI on a CRM project, or a PhD to teach a class, get bit grant monies.
I think that saying you are not a "real" archaeologist if you don't have a
MA or are a member of ROPA excludes an awful lot of good, "real"
archaeologists in the field.
Just my thoughts,
Elizabeth Hoag
|
|
|