You are so right Iain

I set up my consulting firm towards the end of my Ph.D studies so I had more
experience in archaeological fieldwork and thesis writing then your average
honours graduate.

But no experience or teaching in running a business (insurances, tax,
business record keeping, occupational health & safety etc etc) marketing
myself as an archaeologist and especially not in costing jobs and addressing
job briefs.

I actually went through the New Enterprise Scheme course for new businesses
to learn all the things they did not teach me at UNI.

And none of that actually helps with writing CRM reports which is a very
different writing style to thesis writing or conference papers.  That I
picked up by working with heritage consultants from other disciplines. In
the eastern states I guess new archaeologists would pick that up by working
for the various archaeological consulting firms.

Gaye

----- Original Message -----
From: "Iain Stuart" <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Saturday, 18 September 2004 12:40 PM
Subject: What is an archaeologist?


This discussion has covered quite a few of my pet topics.

In Australia the basic qualification is a BA (Hons) which means that you
have completed undergraduate courses and spent a year undertaking an
independent research project, done some advanced courses and tried to look
alert through all the Departments weekly seminars. In my experience working
with graduates from the USA this equates to being an MA.

However the real issue is what is taught. My experience is that the teaching
is orientated to the students progressing to higher degrees rather than the
majority of students who will go on to work either in Government or in CRM.
There is little attempt to teach professional practice or other relevant
skills (such as report writing). Requirements for field work experience are
minimal and often orientated around supplying slaves for University digs
rather than making sure students have experience in a broad a set of skills
(eg learning to take photos, section drawing, field walking, site
recording).

The Universities claim not to teach vocations and in any case are being
dummed down and strangled for funds. Moreover students are left in no doubt
that not being in the "academic" stream means they are in some way second
best.

Thus armed with their piece of paper, many students then set up shop as
professional archaeologists with no idea of how to cost jobs, their O.H. &
S. obligations, the legislation they are working under, let alone having as
set professional skills and experience that would satisfy enquiry under the
Trade Practices Act. This is often not the fault of the archaeologist they
genuinely don't know these things.

For those who survive there is often little incentive for continuing
professional education such as a professional engineer would have to do. In
fact there are distressingly few opportunities for professional education.
There are MA's in Heritage which at least would help the new graduate to
broaden their horizons.

There are consulting companies that take their reasonability's for
professional education, practice and OH & S  seriously. These are at the top
end of the market because all these things cost money. In a market where
there is a real imperative to cut costs, the "backyard" archaeologist will
prevail because they are cheaper, don't complain about working conditions,
are easily intimidated and will be left wearing the costs (financial and
often in health terms) if something goes wrong.

Perhaps in order to understand why this occurs, we should turn to one of
Paul Courtney's German academics, albeit a British resident whose life's
work far from being irrelevant or disproven offers interesting insights into
the world of capitalism.

Iain Stuart

[log in to unmask]