It is important to note that nothing that archaeologists do to "police
themselves" has anything to do with the public's notion of professionalism.
SOPA certification means nothing to a contractor who needs to sub-out mandated
crm work.  All that he or she cares about is if the person is qualified under
local, state and federal law to conduct the necessary work that will keep the
regulators off of his/her back (and of course, if they're cheap enough).
 
The only meaningful certification is one that is forced upon practitioners by
legislation and where work is followed up by inspection (e.g., local codes for
plumbing, electrical, etc.), or where individuals must pass a  proficiency exam
to obtain a license (e.g, law).
 
As we all should know, true competence is never demonstrated by a degree, SOPA
certification, or amount of field experience.  For every Ivory Tower
academician with no field experience there is a CRM archaeologist  who thinks
that just because he's bulldozed his way through dozens of sites, he's proven
himself as competent.  Most of us know examples of both kinds.
 
For for federally mandated CRM projects, we have vague and minimalist
requirements of the Secretary of Interior Standards (and some states and
agencies apparently require you to "register" yourself by sending the SHPO your
vita). In any case, sending in a vita and copies of site reports is no
subsitute for actual evaluation.  I've read many reports that looked much,
much, better than the quality of field and/or lab work warranted. If SHPOs or
responsible agencies are in charge of seeing that quality work is done, then
they need to be in the field and in the labs to inspect work--not just read
reports.  That of course takes time and money.  Only when the public demands
that government spend the money for true inspections of work done to well-
defined codes will we see quality archaeology done consistently.  That won't
happen soon.
Sorry for rambling so much.
Bob
 
Robert J. Jeske
Indiana Purdue University
Fort Wayne
[log in to unmask]