So for my first true blog I will talk about some of my most recent research. Long story short, I went through the job postings on archaeology job site, Shovebums, and calculated out the wages for Field Techs (entry level position in archaeology) for the last couple of years. I even turned the data into a video which you should see below
I suggest looking at the section on historic trends, very grim. So the question I have to ask, is being an archaeologists a labor of love or exploitation, cause it’s not for the money?
One view is that no is making anyone become a archaeologists and that is their choice to have a low paying job. Fair enough, I understand that argument and for the most part support it. Yet, at the same time universities are churning out thousands of archaeologists every year and not informing them of these grim prospects other than the occasional “archaeology doesn’t pay well”. That tells students nothing, doesn’t pay well compared to what? Doesn’t pay well compared to CEO’s, what does? Doesn’t pay well compared to McDonalds, now that is saying something.
What I am getting at is a labor of love really a labor of love if you do not know what you are getting into? I would argue no it is not, its exploitation of people because they are not making informed decisions.
“Fair enough, but isn’t it the fault of the archaeologists that they did not check into this detail before they went to University”- devils advocate
That is a little more complex. For one, most of the data out there is completely miss-leading. Type in “archaeology pay” into google and you’ll come across a series of websites, most trying to advertise universities and colleges, giving some pay data. Of course information is ether based off, who knows where it came from, data or government statistics. The problem with government statistics is it is ether an average of all archaeology jobs (not entry-level) or/and it includes a few government or academic positions that completely throw off the results (see this post for an in-depth explanation of why government statistics are off). That is because the majority of archaeology jobs are not in academia or the government and most of the ones that are government based do not pay well ether but are not included. Basically, even if you did go and search out the information you would still be miss-informed.
“But wait, did you not just say you published accurate pay data on the internet so shouldn’t they be able to find it now” – devils advocate
This is true, so I guess the real questions that needs to be asked is whose responsibility is it to informing the thousands of students coming out of Universities (most archaeologists need at least a BA see this post on job requirements), the University or the students?
My thoughts are that it should be the students. I think no one is going to be there later in life to clean up after their mistakes so they should learn to be informed. But- at the same time students are paying universities for a service e.g. training to be a better person. Should the students not expect that service to include information on how to make informed decisions/practical experience in finding information for informed decisions? I decidedly say yes, universities should be offering that service but that is just my opinion. What are your thoughts? (please leave me a comment)
John
March 21, 2011
I wouldn’t just look at the undergrads being churned out to serve as shovelbums/ temporary field technicians. When one considers the contraction in Anthropology and Archaeology departments across the United States, a lot of PhDs are going to people who will never be able to find an academic archaeology job. There are an awful lot of professors in their early 50s, who will likely produce a dozen or more PhD students before they turn over their own position.
In Texas, there are a number of very highly-educated people working at jobs that require only a Master’s degree, both in CRM firms and in public agencies.
Also, a brief comment on the historic trends: the downturns in the pay scale coincide with recessions in the American economy. Recession means reduced development and reduction in federal, state, and local budgets. It’s not just that there’s a surplus of field technicians being churned out by colleges into a saturated market. It’s that the overall demand for field technicians is down, resulting in wage deflation. I can also tell you that during the last two years a number of firms have downsized their full-time staffs, and some small companies have completely folded, further reducing opportunities and adding to the labor pool. I think you’ll find a leveling off or slight uptick for the remainder of 2010, due to stimulus money, energy development, a slight increase in private development.
drocks13
March 21, 2011
Thanks for being the first to comment John. This is part of wider side-project that I am working on that will include a view of MA’s and PhD’s. Something I hope to have done soon. But I agree with you that the market is saturate through and through which means that lots of people are working down a few levels. The last project I worked on half the field techs had MA’s and two of us were working on our PhD’s.
On Historic tends I could not agree with you more. At some point I would like to do a qualitative view of jobs too. Right before the bubble burst people would included in their job postings messages like “desperate for workers” my personal favourite was “this position will become permanent because of the volume of work we have” (2 months before the bust). For the last two years half of the messages posted are “please close the job posting we put out yesterday. We already have over a hundred applications for 2 positions.” I wish I was exaggerating on that last quote.
Eden Hemming
February 22, 2012
There is also the aspect that we can be as informed as possible about what is happening now, but we cannot predict the future. When I returned to school in 2003 in order to try to get a Bachelor’s degree in Anthropology (knowing that I wanted to do Archaeology), I had no way of knowing how bad the economy would get in the later 00s. Now I have a Master’s and fewer prospects in Archaeology than I might have had in 2003 with no degrees.
Thanks for this post. I hope a lot of future students find this and realize that spending all of that money might not be worth it.