To continue my thoughts on #freearchaeology from my last post, I would like to explore the topic of #freearchaeology and expectations of new graduates. To be fair to all that has been written about #freearchaeology the topic is wide and encompassing. However, I would like to focus on the catalyst that started #freearchaeology, Emily’s post The problematic topic of the volunteer culture in archaeology and heritage in Britain, more specifically the need for experience to obtain a job. As Emily said,
“In the past few months it has become apparent to me that the subject of voluntary work, in heritage in general and archaeology in particular, is a really rather difficult one. I’ve decided to write this post because the topic has been raised more and more as my classmates and I reach the final stretch of our studies in Cultural Heritage Management and Other Wonderful Archaeological Topics.
It has only become more apparent as I begin to search out jobs and complete application forms from employers who expect a huge amount of experience (both voluntary and paid) from successful candidates. All too often, it is impossible to gain experience in a paid position until you have really rather substantial voluntary experience. Personally I have around 700 hours of voluntary experience, most of which is in field archaeology, and some of which is curatorial or journalistic. But still this does not feel like enough to get the jobs which I have spent the last 6 months qualifying myself to do.”
What I feel has been missing from the conversation of #freearchaeology is the lack of consideration given to new graduates expectations and universities. In the start of #freearchaeology Emily briefly touches on the topic-
“So one of the issues that comes straight to mind is what exactly qualifies someone to do a job – is it experience or is it a piece of paper? Universities are churning out hundreds of gifted and enthusiastic graduates and postgraduates who are inexperienced but who have all demonstrated an ability to learn and apply themselves to various tasks with which they might be confronted with in the working environment (as far as I can gather teaching transferable skills has become extremely important in most university curricula), but their lack of experience hinders them significantly.”
On this last point I am going to respectively disagree as universities are NOT churning out hundreds of gifted and enthusiastic graduates and postgraduates who are inexperienced but who have all demonstrated an ability to learn and apply themselves to various tasks with which they might be confronted with in the working environment.
Ask any new graduate and they will say I have a degree and I am qualified to be an archaeologists. Emily said something similar herself,
‘But still this does not feel like enough to get the jobs which I have spent the last 6 months qualifying myself to do.’
To be fair this is true but only in the most narrow of terms. A archaeology degree actually gives a person a fair amount experience. Unfortunately, it is not the sort of experience that will get someone a job with the vast majority of archaeology employment, unless your looking for an academic job. The vast majority of experience that one obtains at university is how to write essays, debate topics in very narrow terms, etc. etc. etc. with many notable exceptions. Yet, even those notable exceptions are too little. For example, lets say a student in the US took a three credit hour course on GIS. That is three hours of training a week for roughly sixteen weeks (some variation between universities) which is roughly 40 hours of experience (48 but minus a few for intro days, tests, etc.). Maybe with homework you might double or triple this time which comes out to a whopping two to three weeks of experience in GIS (full time work in US). In the UK this might only be 40 hours (10 weeks x 4 hours).
Students or people with newly minted degrees have the expectation that their degree will qualify them for a job but the math proves otherwise. Moreover, looking at the numbers is quite depressing. Lets assume you need 360 credits to get an English (as in a degree from a University in England) archaeology undergraduate degree and 10 credits roughly equals 1 hour of contact time with an instructor a week and maybe 2-3 hours of study. That comes out to roughly 1080 hours of work or 27 weeks of experience or roughly 6 months of #freearchaeology (2 ten week terms per year, not counting exam time). Maybe, it is more with a particular student or with a specific course but the numbers are not going to be that great. At an average of £9000 a year that comes out to roughly £27 per hour of “experience”, the majority of it being self study. That does not count the time lost to being employed, even at minimum wage, which could triple that amount. #freearchaeology is actually £50+ per hour of “experience” at university.
Back to great expectations, students believe that a degree has given them the tools needed to be an archaeologists, the math says otherwise. In fact, chances are they may only have a few weeks of relevant experience. Relevant experience being key as how many of those hours actually are applicable to most archaeology jobs? Heck, most essays do not even give a student the experience needed to write a peer reviewed article. A student might, MIGHT, have a few weeks of relevant experience. Moreover, what you might think is relevant experience might not be what an employer thinks is relevant. Essentially, most new graduates have zero or only a few weeks of relevant experience but the belief that they are qualified.
On that note I will end this post and in the future discuss more on the quantity of #freearchaeology needed to get a job, what employers are actually looking for (hint- experience has very little to do with it), and other issues on the topic.
Bill White
August 16, 2013
You are totally right about “experience” being the deciding factor in who does and does not get an archaeology job. Companies hire people they know because they understand that the chasm between college and the actual job of archaeology is so wide that the employer will spend at least a year teaching every new hire how to do their job.
I feel for Emily and all the other people out there that are graduating with the expectation that their hard-earned degree entitles them to a job. Across the board, diplomas are giving diminishing returns when it comes to the job market. The sooner students learn this, the better.
I have several suggestions for Emily. They mostly focus on working to create a job for herself BEFORE its posted on the Internet. By the time the job hits the Internet, you’ve got to compete against all the other archaeos in your area which is why job posts have such ridiculously high experience levels for an entry level job. She should get keyed into the local market and get to know every single person that has the potential to hire her. Then, stay on their minds by periodically emailing and calling to see if there’s anything available. It’s tough work, but that’s how it’s done in archaeology.
Sarah May (@Sarah_May1)
August 16, 2013
Interesting post, and of course an Archaeology degree is not designed to be a professional qualification in archaeology, that’s one of the reasons we need to apply the National Occupation standards when we’re thinking of hiring. But the ‘maths’ you use here is faulty because formal education should be more effective than experience – otherwise why would anyone depend upon it for any field. As you suggest at the end of your post – experience may be a sift criteria, but it isn’t a hire criteria.
as for Bill’s comment above, this situation is corrosive for archaeology. If you hire who you know, rather than advertising, not only are you unjustly excluding good candidates, you are depriving yourself of good candidates – archaeology is at serious risk of becoming an old boys club again. Which is a matter of concern not just for archaeologists but for the publics we serve.
We need to encourage a healthy, transparent and socially/economically accessible career path to make sure that we don’t become a hobby and a plaything of the rich again.
Doug Rocks-Macqueen
August 16, 2013
Hey Sarah
While I appreciate the idea that ‘formal education’ should be more effective I am going to have to respectively disagree on that point. If I am understanding what you are saying correctly e.g. experience = sift (sorry if I misinterpret that) then degree = sift as well. The whole idea of university is sifting- universities sift through students they want and let them in. Then employers can use their sifting to limit who they hire. Though I completely agree that there are different levels of quality to experience and education (my personal view is formal education is still pretty low but that is debatable). That is my next post so if you wait I will address that issue in more detail.
Also- I will touch on the ‘old boys club’ as well. It is very much alive and kicking and to be fair it does have its advantages- assuming it is used to screen the best candidates and not just people’s friends- again, will discuss in the future.
Hey Bill
That is my next post- several links to your stuff as well.
Cheers
Doug
Sarah May (@Sarah_May1)
August 19, 2013
Absolutely agree that degree is only sift criteria (and only as an equivalent/alternative to experience at that, once you’ve decent experience the degree doesn’t matter. And I know there are things that degrees don’t go near providing (and couldn’t), just think that your numbers aren’t quite right. Its good to see an honest appraisal of this whole issue.
Doug Rocks-Macqueen
August 20, 2013
Sorry, still haven’t answered the question in my last post (too much to say and too little time but I will get to it). Could you elaborate on what you find off about my numbers? Is it the calculations e.g. should be more hours of work, or is it the quality e.g. school is a very valuable experience? I would love feedback on this, cheers.
Donna
August 18, 2013
Just a quick reply from my own life: in 2001 when I was 18 I was given a paid temporary archaeology GIS job with no GIS experience (ironic since you chose that as an example). I learned before and on the job and they got great value out of me. From that point on I both worked towards and received 3 archaeology degrees AND engaged in only paid archaeological work through all of it.
I truly don’t understand why we feel that we don’t need to pay for entry level positions, be they GIS positions or anything else. No, a university degree doesn’t qualify you for a mid level job, but it should more than qualify you for an entry level job. Furthermore, being allowed to perform PAID entry-level archaeo/heritage/museum jobs while you are studying should put you in a fine position for solid employment post degree.
It is upsetting that we seem to be losing the idea that students and recent grads should be paid for entry-level work. I am only 31 and it seems like my work+study experience happened in another era. The problem here isn’t with university degrees not prepping students for employment, it is that there are a dwindling number of paid, workable entry level jobs for students to gain experience in while studying. It is a summer working, as I did, doing archaeological GIS or a summer working at Starbucks because they will pay your rent… while richer students take unpaid internships.
Doug Rocks-Macqueen
August 18, 2013
Hey Donna
You touch on a very interesting topic that I hope to address in my next post. As others have said- 6 months of experience is not a realistic requirement, it is a way to weed out applicants. A degree probably qualifies a person as much as not having one. Tenn. Arch. said it best quoting someone else, “It is not the most qualified person that gets the job. The person who gets the job is the person who knows the most about HOW to get the job.”
The problem, in my opinion and hopefully will demonstrate in my next post, is not a lack of experience but a lack of jobs. Unpaid internships are a complete and utter scam (in most cases). What is a worse scam is that people believe they need them. Again, hope to cover it all if you hand in there with me for a few more days.
Cheers
Doug
Donna
August 18, 2013
Doug: You know I am an avid reader 🙂 I will hang how long it takes.