April 1999
Hawkshead Archaeology & Conservation
Hawkshead Home Farm
Highfield Lane
Bolton Le Sands
Carnforth, Lancashire LA5 8AE.
Tel. 01524 733492
Fax 01524 730246
Email gchitty@compuserve.com
1. The Archaeology Training Forum
2. Context, aims and approach
3. Definitions
4. Previous studies and surveys
5. Archaeology in Education
6. Training Provision and Qualifications in
Archaeology
7. The survey interviews
8. The survey sample profile
9. Training in archaeological organisations
10. Individual education and training at entry level
11. Current trends in training provision
12. Future training needs
13. Access to training
14. Principal issues
15. Structure for professional qualification and
development
16. Entry routes to work in archaeology
17. Interdisciplinary and sector-wide working
18. Organisations and training
19. Continuing Professional Development
20. Skill shortages
21. Co-ordinating body
22. Standards
23. Professional qualification
24. Information and access to training
25. Work experience
26. Training policies and plans in organisations
27. Skills base
28. Independent and voluntary sector
Appendix 1: Specification for
Rapid Preliminary Review of Training
Appendix 2: Methodology for
survey of training in archaeology
Appendix 3: Summary of
responses to training survey questionnaire
Figure 1 Undergraduate enrolment in archaeology
Figure 2 Table of growth in undergraduate &
postgraduate courses in archaeology 1979-99
Figure 3 University teaching in archaeology
Figure 4 Distribution of respondents across sectors
Figure 5 Career duration of respondents
Figure 6 Training policies and support for career
development in organisations
Figure 7 Education and training in entry routes to the
profession
Figure 8 Provision of in house training and external
training procurement in organisations
Figure 9 Current training delivery and valuation by
respondents
Figure 10 Identified future training needs
Figure 11 Perceived obstacles in access to training
This review has drawn on the experience and knowledge of many organisations and individuals. I am grateful to all the members of the Archaeology Training Forum and particularly to John Collis, Mike Heyworth, Peter Hinton, and David Stocker for their assistance and advice. The Council for British Archaeology gave permission for the use of unpublished information from its database of archaeological education and training courses and Don Henson in the CBA secretariat provided much help with this. Brian Ayers, Evelyn Baker, Mike Bishop, Kate Clark, Jane Fears, John Gleeson, Jane Grenville, Robin Holgate, Robert Hook, Helen Maclagan, John Preston, Julian Richards, John Walker, and John Wood contributed to valuable exchanges on particular issues.
Special thanks are due to the dozens of other archaeologists across the UK who found time not only to participate in a telephone survey but also to contribute to thoughtful discussion about the future of professional training and career development in archaeology. Finally, I am especially grateful to Bridget Turnbull Brown who assisted with data processing of the survey results, production of charts and much valued clear thinking. Any errors or shortcomings remain my own.
Gill Chitty
April 1999
1.1 A preliminary review of training in professional archaeology was commissioned by English Heritage on behalf of the Archaeology Training Forum (ATF) in November 1998.
1.2 The ATF is a delegate body comprised of representatives of UK and national organisations which have an interest in the issues of training and career development in archaeology. The review has been conducted in the context of the ATF's terms of reference which are:
2.1 The ATF is working towards a co-ordinated training provision for archaeology and its integration with a framework for professional archaeological development. It wishes to build on consensus among those working in archaeology on the direction and form in which training should be developed. The rapid preliminary review is one of the initial stages of this process.
2.2 An important context for the review is the recognition that archaeology can provide the best value, in research, conservation, and education, as part of an integrated approach to understanding, managing and accessing the historic environment. Such an approach requires an awareness of principles and practices across a wide range of interdependent and related disciplines. The archaeological sector has a unique breadth and diversity, both in the range of technical practice encompassed in the workplace and in the multi-disciplinary academic backgrounds on which archaeologists draw in practice. This diversity is one of the distinctive characteristics of archaeological work and one of its particular strengths. It fits individuals well for interaction with adjacent areas of environmental and cultural heritage management. Maintaining this diversity in the face of intensifying specialisation and sectorisation is one of the challenges for future training.
2.3 The review is based on the premise that training is essential to sustain a healthy, developing profession. Within the archaeological community, there is a general perception that training delivery is poorly organised and that current provision does not meet the developing needs of organisations and individuals in the archaeological workplace.
2.4 The aims of the review are:
2.5 The approach adopted for the review has been through a staged programme of information gathering across the profession. The Council for British Archaeology's database of archaeology education courses, maintained over twenty years, provides an essential starting point for mapping the growth in the breadth and volume of the education provision which underpins vocational training. The CBA is the only body which maintains a UK wide information resource for archaeological learning and training although, given the limited resources available for this work, it is reliant for the quality of its coverage on voluntary notification of changing course and event details to the CBA secretariat.
2.7 Preliminary interviews with representatives of key organisations formed part of the orientation in the initial stages, followed by in depth interviews with selected bodies These included training providers and educators in archaeology and adjacent sectors, employing organisations and professional bodies concerned with practice and management in archaeology and organisations in the wider cultural heritage conservation sector. These interviews were designed to gather overviews of the current situation in training from the standpoint of individual organisations, and to collect strategic views on desirable future options, the scope for change to improve provision and the mechanisms for training delivery. The principal issues identified are discussed in Section IV.
2.8 The 'top down' data gathering described above was complemented by short, questionnaire-based, telephone interviews with a small, randomly selected group drawn from the professional archaeological community. This survey, described in detail Section III below, provided a mechanism for checking opinions and the anecdotal evidence that has sometimes characterised discussions about training. A body of new data, to substantiate general perceptions and to help focus views on the options for the future, was judged to be an important element in this review and the telephone poll formed a significant part of the data gathering.
3. Definitions
3.1 Work in archaeology is defined for the purposes of this review as the application of archaeological skills in conservation, education, fieldwork, collection management, interpretation, presentation, research, and the overall management of historic environment resources.
3.2 The archaeology sector is defined as including those who work in archaeology in historic environment services in a local, regional or national authority, in an independent or a commercial archaeological practice, in specialist consultancy, in a research or teaching body, in museums, heritage centres and historic places, in archaeological societies and interest groups.
4. Previous studies and surveys
There have been a number of relevant surveys, studies and policy statements during the last four years which have been concerned, either directly or indirectly, with matters related to current training provision in archaeology. These are summarised below.
4.1 English Heritage's 'Frameworks for Our Past' (Olivier 1996) articulated the widely expressed need for initiatives to provide a structure for career development linked to training which would overcome the trend towards sectorisation across the profession. Addressing the perceived divergence between academic approaches and commercial practice in archaeological work, and functional divides between sectors caused 'by increasing specialisation and combined with the competitive pressure of market forces', the report identified three mechanisms to overcome these problems:
4.2 In English Heritage's 'Archaeology Division Research Agenda' (1997, 37), training is identified in one of the primary goals - 'Supporting the development of professional infrastructure and skills' - and as an underpinning activity for all the other research goals. 'Maintain and develop an appropriate skills base' is one of the key mechanisms for achieving the goal. A five-fold programme is outlined which includes collaborative training activities to encourage inter-action between curatorial, contracting and academic institutions; initiatives to support specific areas of concern (conservation, ceramics, dendrochronology and building recording are specified); the inclusion of training as a specific element in funding submissions.
4.3 A survey of training of field workers (Hardy 1997) examined attitudes to the education and training provided by universities and colleges, and by field units. It indicated the extent to which individuals in the sample recognised that university-based education and training must be complemented by work experience and further field training (66% felt university training excavations did not 'provide relevant practical experience for future professional field workers'). A large group (83%) also identified a need for training in management skills for field officers and site supervisors. The majority of respondents agreed on the need for properly structured and relevant field training and that it should be provided both by academic institutions (70%) and by professional units (90%).
4.4 The IFA 'Practitioner Survey 1997' (Moloney 1998) confirmed that among those IFA members just entering the profession, training is perceived as one of the most important areas in which the IFA can advance the development of careers. It also showed that only 58% of the respondents thought it certain or probable that their employers would support attendance on IFA training courses.
4.5 The IFA published its statement of intent on training in archaeology in February 1998, supported by a discussion paper in The Archaeologist (Collis and Hinton 1998). It identifies the main issues as an underdeveloped professional structure, lack of formal practical training, inadequate documentation of practice skills and insufficient value placed on training. The IFA advocates the development of a co-ordinated training structure in archaeology which connects skills across a range of disciplines with formally recognised qualifications and defined professional roles. It envisages that this structure should be related to IFA membership and that, with the potential for a link with pay and conditions, it could lead to the development of a stronger career structure in professional archaeological work. It is considering the adoption of a CPD requirement as part of the entry route to IFA membership and as a career long commitment to maintain membership status. The IFA identifies the delivery of entry level training as an urgent need together with the development of accredited vocational courses.
4.6 'Profiling the Profession' (Aitchison 1998) reported on a survey of archaeological jobs and job profiles in the UK. While it did not aim to gather specific information about training needs or provision, a number of respondents to the survey 'identified training, or the lack of training, as a key issue'. The ten respondents (out of 349 organisations which returned questionnaires) who made comments relating to training identified areas of concern consistent with other studies. The principal issues are that the present lack of structure in archaeological employment is inimical to training and career development opportunities; and that available training courses do not provide skills relevant for particular workplaces.
4.7 'An Assessment of English Sites and Monuments Records' found that training provision for SMR staff was generally weak (Baker 1999, pp.13-14). Responses to a question about the availability of resources for training in SMR-related skills were 69% in the positive, 21% in the negative and 7% unknown. Responses to a question about quantification of resources showed wide variation in the allocation of financial support, with per person figures ranging from £1000 p.a. at best and less than £100 p.a. in teams sharing budgets. The report recommended that 'Managers should ensure that SMR staff receive appropriate training for skills and expertise in the areas of information technology generally, SMR software specifically, and approaches to presentation and outreach programmes' (p.4).
4.8 Archaeology Data Service's 'User Needs Workshop Report' (Condron and Wise, 1998) identified many areas where training and support should be improved for digital data users in archaeology and suggested that 'well-publicised support centres' accompanied by targeted workshops on specific areas are considered more preferable than formal training programmes'.
4.9 In 'Digital Data in Archaeology: A Survey of User Needs' (Condron et al. , forthcoming 1999) individuals and organisations were asked what training they would like in the use of digital data. A full survey report will be published in June 1999 but initial analysis of responses from individuals has shown that very few felt self-sufficient and most had training needs, either in a specific area (skills for use of the Internet, file transfer, in data analysis and use of databases were prominent) or, in the case of a small group, in all areas. Organisations indicated a requirement for training in similar areas. Organisations were also asked to state what current training in the use of digital data was provided for staff. A large number of organisations (40%) responded that they had no formal training for their archaeological staff in this area, although many appeared to have plans for it in the future. 14% of organisations claimed to provide training for everything for their staff . Another 14% provided training for use of the Internet but in other specific areas (e.g. word processing, GIS, data analysis, email, file transfer) less than 10% of organisations provided formal training.
Summary
4.10 The picture presented by studies carried out over the last three years supports the consensus view that training provision in archaeology is weak and poorly aligned with modern profession roles. There is a lack of structured vocational learning, particularly at entry level, and no clear career development path for individuals. Training is undervalued by organisations and by individuals and receives low investment, even in key areas such as information technology where new learning is essential for growth and development.
For the purposes of this review training has been defined as learning which provides relevant skills for the archaeological workplace and a distinction is made between education in archaeology (including undergraduate degrees) and training, recognising that the division is not a hard and fast one. Many undergraduate degree courses provide elements of basic training and a significant number of certificate, diploma and HND courses in practical archaeology (both pre- and postgraduate) are specifically designed as training for entry to the profession.
5. Archaeology in Education
5.1 Although archaeology education in general is not the primary concern of this review, there is clearly an important relationship between those who begin by learning about archaeology as part of their education, and those who continue with vocational training to develop a career as a professional in archaeological work or as an independent archaeologist. The statistics quoted in the discussion which follows are provided with kind permission of the Council for British Archaeology (CBA) and are based on the records maintained by the CBA which were made available for this review. While reliable detailed figures are not always easy to establish in this field, the statistics quoted can be regarded as indicative of the broad trends in the growth of different sectors in archaeology education over the last twenty years.
5.2 Pre-university education in archaeology, in terms of examined learning, is provided in secondary schools and colleges of further education at GCSE, AS and A level . Centres offering GCSE seem to have been numerically stable during the 1990s, while those offering A level Archaeology (about two thirds are further education colleges) rose from 36 in 1991 to 77 in 1996. An AS level in archaeology was offered at 22 centres in 1996. Current government policy and a revision of the A/AS level structure will encourage growth in this area of provision. The number of A level candidates for Archaeology has risen steadily from 20 in 1980 to 102 in 1990 with a sharp rise to 500 in 1998. Figures for GCSE show a similar sharp growth from 1980 (212 candidates) to 1990 (598), which seems to have levelled off during the 1990s (in 1995, there were 470 candidates, in 1998, 568).
5.3 The largest sector of archaeological education is in Continuing Education (CE), with over 1000 courses and dayschools for which it is estimated that between 10,000 and 15,000 adults register annually. There are two main groups of CE courses. Non-accredited liberal adult education courses are designed for individuals who wish to pursue a personal or leisure interest in archaeology. Those who wish to develop their knowledge and practical skills more seriously can follow accredited courses leading to the award of credits and specific qualifications, such as a certificate, diploma or degree. Most CE courses offered in higher education are now accredited. The WEA (Workers Educational Association) remains the main provider in liberal adult education.
5.4 Continuing Education is a growth area in the adult education sector and the CBA is currently undertaking a survey of this varied and rapidly changing educational field. An annual conference of those teaching in CE is convened through the CBA and the formation of a more formally constituted body is planned in the near future. The Standing Conference of Archaeology in Continuing Education (SCACE) will have a role for CE analogous to that performed by SCUPHA for university archaeology departments. There are currently some 31 institutions in CE, offering 88 accredited qualifications in archaeology. Many of these include training in practical and vocational skills and it is estimated that perhaps 500 - 750 individuals a year are currently completing CE courses successfully.
5.5 In Higher Education in 1999, 52 universities and colleges of higher education are offering archaeology degree courses, with 33 departments offering single honours archaeology in 69 courses (see Table 1 for growth 1979-1998). Current and past CBA statistics reveal a steady growth in the numbers of students enrolled for single honours archaeology. The figures are approximate, since not all departments send in figures, but show a similar trend in growth to that evident in secondary education. UCAS statistics for archaeology course acceptances suggest that the rise during the 1990s was principally in the first half of the decade and that numbers are currently relatively stable.
5.6 The growth in undergraduate education has outstripped the growth of employment in archaeology. It is currently estimated that, of approximately 1100 individuals graduating in archaeology annually, perhaps 10 or 15% (110-160) will emerge with a serious interest in pursuing a career in archaeology and further vocational training. This figure greatly exceeds the number of opportunities for entry level employment in the sector. There are no reliable statistics in this area but an analysis of advertised jobs in archaeology in 1998 (Turner 1999) shows c.250 posts advertised which might be appropriate for practitioners beginning a career in archaeology. The majority of these appointments (<200) were for periods of three months or less and there is vigorous competition for such limited opportunities from others in the first years of their professional lives. An optimistic estimate is that perhaps one in three career-oriented graduates might, after further training , succeed in securing professional work in archaeology.
Summary
5.7 The provision of archaeology education in Further and Higher Education serves a public with far wider interests than merely the professional. There is clearly a broad constituency of interested individuals for whom Continuing Education and undergraduate teaching in archaeology meet a growing need for personal development and learning through humanities or science-based study, without necessarily leading to a professional career in archaeology. It is now generally understood, in the context of Higher Education at least, that the undergraduate degree is not a vocational qualification, and that it provides training for students who want a general degree strong in transferable skills (Richards 1987, Hunter 1999). 5.8 Despite the trend towards the study of archaeology as a subject of general educational value, the proliferation of university courses and steady rise in numbers of archaeology graduates (see 5.5 above) remains an issue for the profession. Concerns about the quality of entry level training and investment must be viewed against the background of supply considerably outstripping demand in the labour market and a reduction in resources in universities for providing practical training for students.
Figure 1: Undergraduate enrolment in archaeology
Figure 2: Table of growth in undergraduate & postgraduate courses in archaeology 1979-99 *
| Undergraduate | 1979 | 1990 | 1999 |
| universities teaching undergraduate archaeology | 34 | 24 | 46 |
| universities teaching single honours archaeology | 15 | 19 | 28 |
| number of single honours courses | 31 | ? | 69 |
| approximate number of stuents enrolled on single honours courses | 275 | 600 | 1150 |
| Undergraduate and postgraduate | |||
| separate departments teaching archaeology | 35 | 26 | 73 |
| named archaeology departments ** | 24 | 21 | 26 |
*Based on statistics compiled for CBA guides to archaeology in education.
These figures offer a picture of overall trends during the last twenty years,
bearing in mind that there has been some variation in the method used to collect
data over that period.
** Nomenclature can be misleading as not all departments teaching archaeology
are named as such.
Figure 3: University teaching in archaeology
6. Training Provision and Qualifications in Archaeology
6.1 In broad terms entry-level training to equip individuals with specialist knowledge and technical skills for their chosen area of archaeological work is provided through Higher Education. Undergraduate education in archaeology is not designed to equip individuals to enter directly into the workplace without further training (see above 5.6), but provides an essential framework of knowledge and understanding as basis for vocational training and professional work in archaeology. The IFA, in conjunction with the Standing Committee of University Professors and Heads of Archaeology Departments (SCUPHA), has agreed and published a core syllabus for a 'relevant degree' in archaeology for the purposes of IFA membership validation (Richards 1987).
6.2 A significant element of practical work is nevertheless an essential part of many undergraduate archaeology courses. This can include a period of excavation or survey experience, of laboratory-based practical work, or a dissertation which involves fieldwork. The amount and type of practical experience offered to students, or required of them, varies widely from course to course. A small number of institutions include a mandatory or optional work placement of up to a year as part of their undergraduate courses. Others require only a few weeks of excavation in the field. Clearly some courses offer greater opportunities than others to gain a theoretical and practical understanding of the skills and expertise which are required in the workplace and thus undergraduate education may be more or less relevant for individuals who are contemplating a career as a practising archaeologist. This distinction is not well signposted in the educational marketplace and there is insufficient guidance for those selecting undergraduate degree courses appropriate to their career aims.
6.3 Courses designed specifically to provide vocational learning and training are provided at post graduate degree level and as certificates and diplomas (often through Continuing Education) and HND/C courses. The record of current courses maintained by the CBA lists 144 taught post graduate degree and diploma courses in archaeology and related subjects (offered through university or college departments) of which approximately half are professionally or vocationally oriented. Course subjects range from the general and theoretical, available at a relatively large number of centres, to specific period and cultural topics available at only one or two centres in the UK (e.g. early hominid, prehistoric, early British, Celtic, Roman, Viking, medieval, and post-medieval archaeology; archaeology of industry, landscape, buildings, numismatics). Courses in professional skills are reasonable numerous (e.g. 10 courses in practice and methods; 16 courses in heritage management and museum studies; 4 courses in archaeology and computer applications) and there is a diverse range of specialist technical training available at a small number of universities (e.g. archaeological conservation; archaeological materials; archaeological survey and prospection; biomolecular archaeology; environmental sciences; forensic, and wetland archaeology).
6.4 The IFA accredits post graduate degree and diploma courses as equivalent to work experience for the purposes of qualifying for membership of the Institute. The accreditation process involves an assessment of course content against the IFA's Areas of Competence. A list of accredited courses is regularly reviewed and published (Heyworth, ed., 1995, 72-89, Henson, ed., 1999).
6.5 National and Scottish National Vocational Qualifications (N/SVQs) are awarded on the basis of assessment of individuals' performance in the workplace and their ability to work to a specified standard for a defined range of tasks. They enable those who do not have relevant professional qualifications to demonstrate the level of their skills and competence in the workplace and in specific areas of work. N/SVQs are not currently available for archaeology, although Standards for levels 2, 3 and 4 in Environmental Conservation (Archaeology) were accredited in 1994. The Cultural Heritage National Training Organisation (CHNTO formerly the Museums Training Institute) has recently reviewed occupational standards for archaeology and will be developing new proposals for making these qualifications available. CHNTO plans to undertake more detailed work on occupational standards for archaeology during 1999-2000.
6.6 Previous experience has shown a limited take up for such qualifications in archaeology, although at least one vocational certificate in field archaeology (outside the N/SVQ system) is offered by CENTRA, as part of an environmental conservation qualification, through a number of centres and the British Trust for Conservation Volunteers. NVQ-equivalent, certificated units, if not the full award, may have a place to play as units for CPD to satisfy evolving professional needs and in equipping individuals to illustrate their qualification in new areas of professional competence as their careers develop and they move beyond the occupational area in which they initially qualified.
6.7 Provision for Continuing Professional Development (CPD) and update is currently delivered through Higher Education and through professional organisations. There is a small number of Higher Education bodies - typically archaeology departments, research centres and institutes or CE departments of universities - who offer specialist short courses and post graduate courses in specialist fields. Increasingly specialist taught courses are being designed in modular form so that individual units can be available as CPD or for those seeking targeted training in specific areas of professional practice. This type of availability is not yet widely established.
6.8 A significant part of training provision for work in archaeology is delivered by professional bodies and organisations. The Royal Commission on Historical Monuments for England, now merged with English Heritage, has developed a lead role in professional training for archaeological and historic building survey and recording, providing courses jointly with a number of partners in education. Courses and dayschools are also organised by the Institute of Field Archaeologists (now also on behalf of the AFT) and by some of its Regional Groups and Special Interest Groups to meet specific local and specialist requirements. Organisations representing groups within the professional sector, such as the Association of Local Government Archaeological Officers (ALGAO) and the Association of Regional and Islands Archaeologists (ARIA), serve their constituencies by workshops and seminars on subjects of topical interest and in areas of new professional developments. Specialist groups which organise similar professional update activities include the Archaeology Section of the United Kingdom Institute for Conservation of Historic and Artistic Works (UKIC), the Association of Archaeological Illustrators & Surveyors (AAIS) and Association for Environmental Archaeology (AEA). Local, regional and national societies provide a variety of short courses and conferences on current research, field practice and conservation. A number of research groups and independent study centres also provide a range of, often very specialised, courses and familiarisation sessions, e.g. Weald and Downland Museum, Association for Industrial Archaeology, Society for the Protection of Ancient Buildings, Vernacular Architecture Group, West Dean Conservation School.
6.9 National organisations, such as Cadw, English Heritage, Historic Scotland and the National Trust, and some of the larger independent archaeological consultancies and field units, organise their own training and update sessions for staff, which are occasionally advertised and available to individuals from outside. Technical training and update for science-based subjects is provided through English Heritage's Ancient Monuments Laboratory.
6.10 Some commercially based training, available through training consultancies, is also relevant. In general this is limited to generic skills in areas such business and organisational management and computing skills. Specialist technical training in, for example, land survey or geophysical survey is also available from businesses operating in these fields.
Vocational training in related sectors
6.11 For those working in archaeology in the museum sector, Area Museum Councils and the Museums Association provide a regionally and centrally co-ordinated programme of short courses and specialists dayschools. These are complemented by groups such as the Society for Museum Archaeologists with specialist dayschools, for example on object identification. The Museums Association recognises twelve postgraduate courses in museum studies as part of one of its entry routes to Associateship. Such courses have been validated on its behalf by the Museums Training Institute (now CHNTO). Entry routes to Associateship also include a requirement for the maintenance of a CPD diary, evidencing a quota of CPD attendance over a period of two years, and a commitment to continue career-long CPD.
6.12 For archaeologists working in the conservation of the built historic environment, the Institute of Historic Building Conservation (IHBC) maintains and publishes a register of approved building conservation courses for the purposes of membership entry. These courses have been examined as meeting the specific training requirements of its approved areas of competence (which include research, recording and analysis of buildings). IHBC is in the process of developing more detailed mechanisms for validating the content and coverage of building conservation courses and for quality assurance. Its regional groups provide a programme of seminars and dayschools on current policy and practice. N/SVQs in Conservation Control, developed by the Construction Industry Training Board (the NTO for this sector) in conjunction with IHBC, are currently being piloted.
Information
6.13 The only information base for archaeology education and training courses in Higher Education is maintained by the CBA. The Archaeology Data Service maintains a specialist 'Training Opportunities for Archaeologists' page on its Web site relating to skills and developments in digital data management. Outside Higher Education, the coverage and content of training provision is more difficult to map but the CBA also maintains information, where details are notified, about other short courses in archaeology.
Summary
6.14 Vocational training and professional development for those working in archaeology are delivered through a large range of courses offered principally through Higher Education institutions. Professional institutions and organisations also offer training and development courses but these are generally more specialist and of short duration. A few commercially based consultancies and business also offer training which is relevant for archaeologists.
6.15 Overall, vocational training provision in archaeology is unregulated, either for content or quality (apart from the system of Teaching Quality Assessment which operates in Higher Education). It is extremely diverse in subject and scope and is not related in any formal way to the requirements of different professional roles and training needs across the sector or in relation to the core competencies required for professional work. The exceptions in this general picture are the related sectors of museums services and historic building conservation (see 6.7 and 6.8). Training provision is unevenly distributed in relation to the market among professionals and access to it is hampered by a lack of good quality, comprehensive information about course availability and content. The publication of the CBA's Guide to Archaeology in Higher Education will go some way towards improving this situation.
7.1 As part of the information gathering for the review, a survey of individual experience of training in archaeology was undertaken to complement the views of organisational representatives. Questionnaire-based interviews were conducted with a randomly selected group of individuals working across the archaeological sector. A description of the method used for the survey and the resulting data are provided in the Appendices II and III. Although the results of the survey, summarised at the end of each section below, present a generalised picture of experience and views, the pattern of responses is indicative of trends from which it is possible to identify areas for future development.
7.2 The responses provide information in five areas:
8. The survey sample profile
8.1 Respondents were distributed unevenly across the archaeological community but reflect a representative profile of the sector. Those working in archaeological field services and consultancies were in a majority (45 individuals or 43% of respondents) and those in archaeological heritage management in the public sector, local and national, were well also represented (32 or 31%). Other significant groups were those in museum services (11%) and those in education or research (12%). A comparison with figures presented in Profiling the Profession shows broad comparability in distribution across organisational categories but suggests that those working in field units and consultancies, and in museum services, may be more highly represented in this sample.
Figure 4: Distribution of respondents across sectors
8.2 Most respondents (78 or 76.5%) had worked in archaeology for more than ten years. The largest single group (50 or 49%) were established professionals who have worked in archaeology for between 10 and 20 years. Only 13% of respondents had worked in archaeology for five years or less.
Figure 5: Career duration of respondents
8.3 Although there are no equivalent studies against which to compare these figures, it is probable that the latter group (less than five years) is under-represented in the sample. This section of the archaeological community tends not to be well represented in the memberships of the groups from which the sample was drawn (see Appendix II, and Moloney 1998). While this does not significantly devalue the results of this study for more general purposes, it does indicate the need for more specific consideration to be given to identifying the training experience and needs of this group.
9. Training in archaeological organisations
9.1 A series of questions were designed to gather information about the current provision of training by employing organisations in archaeology. 40 (39%) of respondents indicated that their organisation had no training policy or plan for its employees, and 15 (15%) did not know about their organisation's policy or thought it irrelevant. 57 (56%) said that there was a training policy of some kind in place. The majority of respondents in public sector organisations indicated that they had well developed policies (77%), while over 50% of other employing organisations apparently had none.
Figure 6: Training policies and support for career development in organisations
9.2 A similar picture emerged on the question of organisational support for career development and training needs, for example through annual appraisals or professional development reviews. 61 (60%) of respondents received some formal encouragement in this area, again predominantly those in the public sector, but many did not value it as effective or relevant. A significant proportion of respondents (solely from the public sector) noted that their employing organisation had been awarded, or was in the process of seeking an award in the Investors In People scheme and spoke highly of the benefits which this had brought to them as individuals and to the work of the organisation.
9.3 77% (79) of respondents said that they received some form of in-house or on the job training from colleagues, or through internally organised training sessions. A higher percentage (80%) received support from their organisation on an occasional basis to attend external training courses, dayschools and conferences or, in a very small number of cases, an extended course of learning towards a further degree or postgraduate qualification. Details of the type and frequency of training were not requested, but noted where volunteered. Significant numbers of respondents commented that the internal training provided tended to be in the area of transferable office or organisational skills (e.g. the use of corporate software packages, skills in business, personnel and self management); while externally procured training was mainly in specialist technical and archaeological skills or professional update relevant specifically to archaeological work. A number of respondents (divided between the commercial and the public sector) noted that their organisations either made a formal provision for training in trainee grade posts, or regularly accepted student placements, and regarded this an important commitment to investing in the skills base for the profession in the future.
Figure 7: Provision of in house training and external training procurement in organisations
9.4 Only a small number of archaeologists referred to the keeping of a CPD diary or personal action plan. Only one respondent noted that she had, following the model of her colleagues in a local authority planning department, appointed a professional mentor who provided her with regular professional guidance.
Summary
9.5 While there are no grounds for complacency, the general picture is of a professional sector in which there are the beginnings of basic provision on which more business-related training and professional update can be developed. The emerging impression of patchy and, in places, weak organisational provision compares with findings in other studies. The level of provision is higher in the public sector, but appears to be centred on generic or transferable management skills rather than on professional archaeological skills. Provision is significantly weaker in organisations providing archaeological field services and consultancy, and the size of organisations in this part of the sector appeared to be a significant factor in determining whether investment in training was sustained. The larger the organisation the more likely it will have a training strategy in place.
9.6 At an individual level, the majority of respondents were reasonably aware of organisational policy. Appraisals and other mechanisms to encourage the review of professional development were in place in a majority of organisations (60%) but, despite this, few individuals appeared to have a clear personal plan for their training needs. The concept of organisations and employees working together to identify how the business and the individual could both benefit from new skills and personal development was barely perceptible.
10. Individual education and training at entry level
10.1 Respondents were asked to outline the course of learning and training which they had followed on entry to the profession (i.e. their personal path through education and experience to a first responsible role in archaeological work) in order to map typical career entry routes.
10.2 The majority of respondents (93 or 91%) had a first degree in archaeology, or a first degree in another subject followed by a relevant post graduate degree in archaeology or heritage studies. 45 (44%) had a post graduate degree in addition to a first degree. 8 (8%) had a certificate or diploma in archaeology, and in one case an HND, but in all but one case these individuals had also gained a degree. A number of people (13 or 13%) included work on Manpower Services Commission schemes during the 1980s as an important element in their entry route to the profession.
10.3 While evening classes, dayschools and conferences did not feature significantly in the majority of cases, field work experience as a volunteer or in casual employment prior to undergraduate study was a common characteristic in the experience of the majority of respondents (71 or 70%). Despite general comments about the prevailing difficulty of gaining voluntary experience, this element in successful entry routes to professional work is typical among those who established themselves in the archaeological sector up to five years ago. This seems to point to the fact that access to this type of field experience, though increasingly difficult to achieve, is an important part of the entry route for those who are successful in establishing a professional career.
10.4 For individuals entering the profession in the last five years, however, this type of field experience appears to have been more difficult to obtain before and after undergraduate study. In this group (13 or 13%), a first degree in archaeology, commonly without any prior experience and often followed by a post graduate qualification, and a prolonged period on short term contracts (still continuing in a number of cases). In addition, six individuals were reported as having left the profession during recent years, after encountering difficulty in entering archaeological employment as untrained graduates and following a period of unemployment. These individuals were not available for interview as respondents and were not included in the analysis of entry routes but they provide an indication of a significant trend. If they are grouped with others who have entered the profession successfully in the last five years, it would appear that on average 30% fail to establish careers in archaeology and move into other sectors.
Figure 8: Education and training in entry routes to the profession
Summary
10.5 Analysis of the data on entry routes to the profession confirms the received view that archaeology is predominantly (91%) a graduate profession. The typical pattern for the established group (with more than five years work in archaeology) was one of volunteer experience followed by graduation with a first degree in archaeology and work experience on a series of short term contracts leading within a few years to a longer term post. A post graduate qualification, often acquired after some years of work experience, is common (44%). The availability of field experience, as a volunteer or in casual employment before or after undergraduate study, appears to be a significant factor for those who have been successful in entering the profession. There appears to be a substantial percentage of 'drop out' (30%) in the first few years amongst graduate entrants to the profession.
11. Current trends in training
11.1 The majority of respondents (74 or 73%) indicated that they relied on using their personal time, outside their employment, for professional development or for following a course of training or learning. Many commented that pressure of work (37 or 36%) and the limit on resources for training in employers' budgets (49 or 48%) were the principal reasons for this and that a personal commitment to professional development was essential in order to keep up with current research in their field or locality.
11.2 Respondents were asked to identify from a list of general topic areas the subjects in which they had recently (during the last three years) received or obtained training or professional update, for example by attending a conference, a formal course of study or training session.
11.3 The majority of respondents identified new archaeological research, largely through attendance at conferences and dayschools, and transferable skills as the two areas in which they had received recent training (85% and 72% respectively). Details of specific training in transferable skills were not requested but many respondents noted that training in the use of software for word processing, spreadsheets and databases, together with financial, project, and organisational management skills, were commonly available or regarded as essential basic training for the workplace. More particular examples of training in this general area included skills for fund raising, facilitation, public presentation, expert witness/public enquiries, adult education and languages.
Figure 9:Current training delivery and valuation by respondents
11.4 Other common areas of recent training were new developments in archaeological techniques or applications (49%), update in current statutory provisions, government policy and European matters (39%), and historic environment conservation (30%). A number of respondents commented that in the latter two areas, information and working experience were commonly disseminated through local and national specialist networks (e.g. ALGAO, IHBC, SCAUM, regional conservation groups) rather than through formal training sessions. Training in heritage management techniques (presentation, interpretation for the public, visitor services and facilities) was significant for 21%. Only 15% of respondents reported any recent training in archaeological field skills, and 44% had received health and safety training in the last three years. Some respondents noted that they were responsible for organising such training for others but did not expect to receive update in these areas themselves because of their managerial role.
11.5 A significant number of respondents (39%) had received training in specialist fields which spanned a very diverse range of subjects. A small group (6%) had trained for building archaeology and conservation and other specialist training areas included marine archaeology, museums collections management and object identification, forensic archaeology, and geology.
11.6 Respondents were asked to identify one specific area of recent training which they had found particularly relevant for their current role and work programme. Many remarked that this was an unhelpful simplification of training needs which span a range of different skill bases. The responses to this question showed that two areas were most highly valued: keeping up with new research (30%) and developing transferable skills (33% divided between project /business management and skills for use of computers and managing digital data). Update on new technical developments and current legislation and policy were identified by small groups (9% and 7%). The importance of specialist training was identified by a diverse group (14%) across the range described above in 11.5.
Summary
11.7 A large majority of respondents (73%) indicated that they relied on using a significant amount of personal time to obtain their professional training and update. 30% felt that the provision made by their employers for training was inadequate (see 13.6 below). Two areas clearly predominated in current provision - update in new archaeological research, and training in transferable skills, such as business/project management and digital data handling. New technical developments and legislation / policy update also featured prominently. Training in heath and safety matters received relatively modest provision (44%) and field skills were strikingly low on the training agenda (15%). The range of specialist training needs identified by a significantly large group (39%) reflects the diverse disciplines on which the professional sector draws and that there is a high proportion of individuals working in archaeology who have the need for training or update in a specialist area.
12. Future training needs
12.1 In an open question about future training needs, respondents were asked to identify a particular area or areas in which they thought they would benefit from update, or a course of new learning, for their current work and future development.
12.2 The largest single area identified for future training (33%) was the need for skills in computer applications and the use of digital data (specific topics were the use of GIS, digital archiving, use of the Internet, electronic media for public access, design and use of digital databases, virtual reality).
12.3 The second largest group (22%) identified technical developments in archaeology as a priority for new training (with some cross over into the area described above), including subjects as diverse as survey and digital mapping, computer aided drawing, soil science, osteoarchaeology, and forensic archaeology. The high degree of interest shown in this area appears to be linked to advances in the use of digital data, but is also spread across a range of specialisms which are not sufficiently well-defined in this survey to aid the prioritisation of training provision.
12.4 18% respondents selected training in management skills as desirable. Project management, management skills for personnel and financial matters; achieving best value, quality assessment and business excellence were mentioned. 14% identified keeping up with new research in archaeology, in general or in their particular field or region, as their overall priority.
12.5 Update in current statutory provision and government policy, and in European matters, were identified as desirable by a small group (both 8%). Modest numbers of respondents also identified heritage management (6%), historic environment conservation (5%), public presentation and writing and publishing skills (5%), and fund raising (4%) as areas for future professional development. Other specialist areas (16%) identified for training included subjects as varied as expert witness skills, oral history, finds identification, maritime archaeology, volunteer training, photography, and anthropological research.
Summary
12.7 Individual preferences for future training are focused primarily in the areas of information technology / computer skills and of management skills. New developments in technical applications are another area of keen interest, although spread across a diverse field which requires closer analysis than is possible here. New archaeological research, in general and in specific areas, also continue to be identified as a prime area for update. European matters, heritage legislation and policy, heritage management, and historic environment conservation all attracted a modest amount of interest.
12.8 While this profile of desirable future training may fairly reflect an ad hoc assessment by individuals, the results do not necessarily reflect accurately the needs and aspirations of organisations for their staff. The priorities of individuals might also be changed by more considered career development planning. Only a few respondents indicated that their preferred area for future training was one which had been identified as part of a personal action plan or through a job appraisal. Nevertheless, the general picture displayed here suggests broad trends in current training need and may be useful in targeting future training provision.
Figure 10: Identified future training needs
13. Access to training
13.1 Overall, the majority of respondents (57 or 56%) said that they had not faced serious difficulties in obtaining the training they felt they needed to develop their archaeological and professional skills. By contrast, 43 (42%) felt that they had encountered significant obstacles . Analysis of respondents according to career duration showed a broadly equal division in attitude on this question in those who had worked in the sector for less than 10 years. The perception of difficulty encountered diminished in the group who had worked in archaeology for over ten years (only 33 out of 78 identified a difficulty).
13.2 Finally, respondents were asked to identify the main obstacles that faced them in obtaining access to the kind of training and professional update which they felt was appropriate for their work in archaeology now and for their future development. Predictably, financial and time constraints were identified as the most common obstacles, but an equivalent number of respondents said that they experienced difficulty in finding the right training provision. Even where courses with suitable content were identified, they were often not available at times or in units of training that were compatible with their employment situations.
13.3 The commonest obstacles mentioned specifically in the 'other' category were the lack of a professional qualification; absence of structured career development path; commercial pressures in archaeology which reduced investment in training; the prevalence of short term contract work; and the suggestion that training is not valued as part of archaeological business.
13.4 Respondents in Scotland noted the particular difficulties of access for those in the northern part of the UK. The relative isolation of individual archaeologists, the small number of professionals and the large distances involved in travel between individual offices and centres of training are the main issues, and are also common to other areas of low population remote from large urban and university centres. This raises the legitimate question of alternatives to traditional mechanisms for providing professional update and training in archaeology. The development of new electronic media for interactive, distance learning will be an important contribution in this area. This is already being offered in CE for certificate courses in archaeology in Scotland (John Wood, pers. comm.). Other disciplines have successfully developed distance learning packages for post graduate vocational learning designed for those in full time employment, for example, the College of Estate Management, which is currently looking into the question of developing its building conservation courses into a broader based modular structure to include relevant archaeological training
Figure 11: Perceived obstacles in accss to training
Summary
13.6 As a community, archaeologists appear to be less than satisfied with their access to training. Inadequate employer provision (cited by 30% respondents) and a shortage of resources for training is only part of the picture. Lack of information about relevant training plays a part, as does the uneven distribution and quality of the existing provision. A shortage of appropriate courses, including distance learning opportunities, in a modular form suitable for those in full-time employment is also a significant factor.
13.7 At the end of the survey interview, there was an opportunity for respondents to move into a more general, open discussion of current training needs, perceptions about areas of difficulty, and possible future developments. These are summarised in the following section of the report and show a clearly defined range of views on a series of commonly recognised issues in training.
14. The range of general comments provided by respondents to the interview survey provided a useful focus for the perceived 'problem' areas in current delivery of archaeological training and professional development. These views matched closely the range of opinions that were expressed by organisational representatives. There appears to be a mature consensus among those working in archaeology on what needs remedying but less well developed views on the potential means for achieving solutions. The principal issues identified are grouped below in six sections. Recommendations arising from these issues are presented in Part V below.
15. Structure for professional qualification and development
15.1 The lack of a structured route from education into professional practice is repeatedly identified as a central issue, along with the lack of formal accreditation of the vocational element in post graduate (or undergraduate) courses or of a defined core syllabus for the content of taught courses against which individual courses could be accredited.
15.2 Overall the favoured model for a professional qualification is a well-signposted series of routes from further and higher education (with accredited elements) through a course of professional training which is fully integrated with work experience, designed to equip individuals with skills relevant both for particular archaeological sectors and a broad-based understanding of the profession skills required in the environmental conservation and heritage management process as a whole.
16. Entry routes to work in archaeology
16.1 Although archaeology is now established in universities as a valuable subject for non-vocational undergraduate learning (above 5.7), there remains a popular preconception that a first degree in archaeology provides a basic training which equips individuals to proceed directly into professional employment. Universities, careers services and professional bodies could work jointly to improve signposting to appropriate degree courses for the guidance of those with a vocational leaning.
16.2 There is general dissatisfaction with the quality of work experience being offered to those entering professional archaeological work and particularly those beginning on short term contracts as site assistants in field projects. It is observed that this group is comparatively poorly equipped with field practice skills and yet is being provided with least formal training in the workplace. There are limited opportunities to gain an understanding of the context for their professional work or its broader purpose, and individuals are offered no clear route to advance their career prospects and personal development. 16.3 Concern is centred on the loss of the broad-based 'apprenticeship' route, which many established archaeologists claimed to have benefited from; also the loss of opportunities for voluntary field experience as a prelude to professional working. Opportunities for directed work experience in a placement, as part of a training course or at 'trainee' level on entry to the profession, are also very limited and largely unregulated. Measures advocated by respondents included:
17. Interdisciplinary and sector-wide working
17.1 The diversity of professional roles in archaeology is recognised as one of its strengths and as advantageous for interdisciplinary working. An overview of the whole multi-disciplinary process of managing the historic environment is crucial to understanding why and how archaeological work fits into the bigger picture. Central to this issue is concern that in practice most professionals have become embedded in one part of the sector and are working within an increasingly narrow field with a limited appreciation of professional activities even in immediately adjacent parts of the sector.
17.2 Archaeological training is poorly integrated with adjacent professional sectors in environmental and heritage management and museums. Greater integration would facilitate effective joint working and more cross disciplinary movement.
17.3 The quality and breadth of British university research and teaching in archaeology is regarded as a major asset but would be strengthened by forging active links and reciprocal arrangements with practising units, consultancies and local authority services to facilitate the movement of teaching and research capabilities across the sector.
17.4 In complement to the above, additional opportunities are needed to encourage cross-sector professional movement in other areas, to resist the tendency towards partitioning of roles within the sector and to foster broader based understanding - for example, through shadowing, secondments, exchanges, and sponsored placements between local government, higher education and independent archaeological consultancies and field practices. A high level of interest and support has been expressed for a system of co-ordinated professional exchanges.
18. Organisations and training
18.1 Training policies, strategies and plans are poorly developed, if at all, in many archaeological organisations and, even in the better served public sector, the absence of a formal training or CPD requirement linked to professional qualification weakens the strategic argument for investment in training. The perception that commercially driven field practice and consultancy operate on margins that are too narrow to sustain investment in training is commonly encountered. Skills audits , professional mentoring, and other low cost but effective means to maximise the potential of individuals in the workplace are not being implemented.
18.2 The principle of investing in the profession for sound business and commercial reasons, as well as a matter of good practice, is not established. Equally the culture of personal development and planning for professional growth has not yet matured in archaeology and has not been sufficiently promoted by the sector's professional bodies.
19. Continuing Professional Development
19.1 CPD and mentoring as part of individual commitment to maintaining and improving professional standards is barely established in the sector (despite guidance reissued by the IFA in 1993) and requires active encouragement and integration into the professional qualification route and as part of good practice in the workplace.
19.2 There is not enough appropriate and flexibly delivered training and professional update available, either for individuals to build their own professional development routes, or for organisations to invest in targeted training to strengthen their corporate skills base.
20. Skill shortages
20.1 Digital data and computer applications : Despite the fact that a large proportion of the sector is receiving training in skills for this area of work, there is a substantial demand for further investment. Professionals in archaeology commonly view themselves as poorly equipped to take advantage of using digital data or to develop the full opportunities offered by new computer applications in their work.
20.2 Finds and other specialists : Outside the museums sector, only a few archaeological organisations can now justify the employment of full-time specialist staff. The gradual dispersal of accumulated knowledge and experience in highly specialist areas of material culture studies has been a result. A shortage of trained specialist professionals and serious loss to research scholarship is being anticipated by some. The specific training needs of this part of the sector and of other vulnerable specialist groups merit attention.
21. Co-ordinating body
21.1 The ATF has begun to establish itself as delegate body representing a range of key interests in training and career development in archaeological work. Although the majority of the Forum's members have a UK-wide role or represent more than one national group (e.g. SCUPHA, SCAUM, CBA, IFA, SMA, ALGAO), the ATF has yet to attract a representative national coverage across the UK.. Survey interviews with individuals working in archaeological organisations in Scotland, Wales, and Northern Ireland suggest that the principal issues identified in this review are of concern across the UK, but broadening of national representation in the Forum would aid the identification of particular regional and national needs. The strengthening of national interests represented in the Forum is highly desirable.
21.2 The ATF's independence of specialist interests within the archaeological sector and its overview of the whole sector is essential to the success of the proposals outlined here. The active participation of bodies representing museum archaeologists and building conservation professionals in the Forum is important for the alignment of new proposals in archaeological training with the established frameworks for professional qualification and training in these related sectors. Consideration should also be given to representation from other specialist professional groups within the archaeological sector which have their own training programmes and whose interests are not represented through other organisations. Possible candidates include the Association of Environmental Archaeologists, Association of Archaeological Illustrators and Surveyors, and Society for Nautical Archaeology.
21.3 The ATF can make an important contribution to awareness of training needs and skill shortages in archaeology as part of the wider heritage sector. The Heritage Lottery Fund has recently commissioned a research study to inform its future policy for funding training in heritage skills, including the voluntary sector. The study will provide HLF with a needs analysis of training in heritage skills to determine areas of skills shortages and lack of training provision. It is precisely in areas such as this that the ATF can operate most effectively in representing a comprehensive view of the training needs of whole archaeological community, both professional and independent.
Recommendation 1 :
That the ATF develop its profile and activities as a co-ordinating body for training, extending its membership accordingly, and continue to act as a leader in working towards a co-ordinated strategy for training and development across the archaeological sector.
22. Standards
22.1 National standards for good practice in training and development to achieve professional and business goals are being set by Government, for example through the Investors In People Standard. These and other standards related to performance in the workplace are central concerns for organisations that seek to manage their business in ways which demonstrate that they can ensure quality services for their stakeholders and clients. This is particularly relevant in the context of the Government's framework for 'Best Value' (DETR 1998). For professionals in archaeology the lack of a recognised structure for career entry, professional qualification and continuing professional development, together with absence of a related framework for training provision, are serious shortcomings which may hamper attempts to integrate the work of the sector with wider national strategies and initiatives.
22.2 Work on defining occupational roles and standards for museum and building conservation professionals is well advanced and forms the basis for the delivery of N/SVQs in these two areas which overlap in part the main sector of archaeological employment. The standards developed for N/SVQs in Environmental Conservation (Archaeology) in 1994 provide a model on which to base an extended analysis of occupational roles and functions in archaeology across the whole sector. This functional analysis is an essential first step in building a framework for training standards and provision, professional qualification and career progression. Preferred methodologies for this type of analysis are established and the aim should be to achieve an acceptable conformity with the approach adopted for other sectors. The Institute of Field Archaeologists has established its interest in undertaking such a project for the profession.
Recommendation 2 :
That the ATF commission IFA to undertake on its behalf the design and implementation of a project to define professional roles and functions across the archaeological sector.
22.3 Developing criteria for the content and standard of professional training should follow on as a natural development from the functional analysis outlined above. The desirability of validating training courses, or elements of courses, against criteria relating to relevant functions in professional roles will have to be balanced with the practicalities of implementation within the given framework. A lead body in taking this initiative forward will be the IFA's new Higher Education Committee in conjunction with SCUPHA (for undergraduate and post graduate courses) and SCACE (for Continuing Education training in the growth area of certificates, diplomas and HND/Cs)). Consensus on the mechanisms for validation, and on an appropriate validating body, should be developed jointly between professional interests and the principal training providers in the sector. Since the main incentive for training providers to achieve accreditation via a validation procedure will be the advantage offered to them by a formal link between validated training courses and the award of a professional qualification, this work will need to move forward in conjunction with the development of the latter by the IFA.
Recommendation 3 :
That the ATF support the IFA's Higher Education Committee in working with SCUPHA and SCACE to develop an outline core curriculum for archaeology training closely related to the key roles and functions identified for the profession.
23. Professional qualification
23.1 There is broad based agreement in the archaeology sector on the value of an independently awarded professional qualification in archaeology, linked to a course of approved training and / or a period of formally assessed work experience, and to Continuing Professional Development. This would bring work in archaeology into alignment with professional qualifications established in adjacent sectors (e.g. in directly related areas, such as museums and building conservation, and other related professional fields such as archives, planning, and surveying). In some other related fields, however, such as environmental conservation and ecology, formal routes to professional qualification are still being developed. A closer study of the mechanisms in place, or being developed, for the award of professional qualifications and for continuing professional development in related sectors will provide valuable comparative material on which to base specific proposals.
Recommendation 4:
That the ATF initiate a project for a comparative study of professional qualifications in related fields as the basis for developing a suitable model for the archaeological profession
23.2 The initiatives outlined above (Recommendations 2 and 3) should provide the basis for formulating routes to professional qualifications and vocational qualifications over the next three to five years. The body at present best placed to design, and appoint an awarding body for, a professional qualification is the Institute of Field Archaeologist. Within the sector as a whole, however, the IFA has yet to win support for its professional role from a majority of those working in the profession. The process of undertaking a sector-wide study and of ensuring the alignment of training with evolving professional requirements will give the IFA an opportunity to strengthen its position with the profession and to develop its internal structure and membership on a broader professional base.
Recommendation 5:
That the ATF work with the IFA and with the active involvement of other relevant professional associations towards the design of a professional qualification for practice in archaeology.
23.3 In view of the current direction of Government policy towards a grouping of archaeological work with other historic environment information resource and conservation activities, there appear to be advantages for a relatively small occupational sector such as archaeology (current population c.4-5000) to work towards a professional qualification which offers opportunities for broader cross sector career movement. Vocational qualifications may play an important part in training for a broader-based cultural heritage and environmental conservation work sector.
Recommendation 6:
That the ATF ensure that archaeological interests are represented and integrated in the work of CHNTO and LANTRA, the NTOs for cultural heritage and environmental conservation, in developing occupational standards and vocational qualifications; and that representatives of the NTOs have observer status in the Forum.
24. Information and access to training
24.1 The CBA currently manages the only central database of information about archaeological education and training in the UK. A publicly accessible bureau of current information about training courses and events has been identified in this review as a needed resource, not only for general interrogation but as the basis for mapping the present distribution and content of training. The CBA's 'Guide to Archaeology in Higher Education' (covering undergraduate, graduate and also HND/C, certificate and diploma courses offered through CE ) will be published in hard copy in June. The last similar guide, published in 1995, is also available on the CBA's web site.
Recommendation 7 :
That the ATF work with CBA, in collaboration with the IFA, SCACE and SCUPHA, to develop and maintain a comprehensive on-line information service providing career advice and details of the availability of archaeology education and training courses, as a service to the interested public and to independent and professional archaeologists.
25. Work experience
25.1 There are few established 'apprentice' or trainee entry routes into the profession. Work experience is recognised as essential to complement formal training but very few training courses actually offer placement experience. No central clearing house exists for organisations offering placement opportunities and trainee posts, or for individuals seeking such positions. The quality and content of placement experience is acknowledged in current circumstances as very variable.
Recommendation 8:
That the ATF work actively with ALGAO, IFA, SCACE, SCAUM and SCUPHA towards the development of trainee and work experience placements across the sector as part of a sponsored entry route to the profession; investigate the feasibility of maintaining a centrally co-ordinated register; and develop guidelines for the content and quality of professional placement experience.
25.2 The value of professional exchanges, secondment and shadowing for established and mid-career professionals is widely acknowledged and has a high level of support in principle from public sector archaeology organisations in particular. This approach has barely been developed in the archaeological sector and merits further investigation. It offers a mechanism for breaking down the tendency towards partitioning within the sector and has potential to bring valuable new connections and reciprocal benefits to individuals and organisations.
Recommendation 9:
That the ATF work with ALGAO, IFA, SCACE, SCUPHA and SCAUM to develop mechanisms to encourage sponsored professional exchanges and secondments across the sector, and investigate the feasibility of establishing an agency arrangement to co-ordinate a central register of professional exchange opportunities in the UK, Europe and internationally.
25.3 Long term field projects as training exercises offer opportunities which are not usually available in contractually governed situations. Research-based survey and investigation projects - securely tied into regional, national and European archaeology research strategies - can be combined with scope for training and work experience at a variety of skill levels. They can be the focus for best practice, for developing new technical applications, for the exchange of experience and expertise and a source of keen public interest in archaeology.
Recommendation 10:
That the ATF in conjunction with ALGAO, SCACE, SCAUM and SCUPHA develop proposals for research-based training projects as the basis for dialogue with the heritage agencies on a jointly funded and sponsored initiative for a series of archaeology research and training schools.
26. Training policies and plans in organisations
26.1 The weakness and unevenness of organisational provision for training in archaeological and other skills is evident from this review. Current initiatives, like Investors in People, Total Quality Management, and Best Value, are contributing towards a changing professional environment in which more responsibility is being taken by organisations, and by individuals, for investment in training programmes and professional development. Positive improvement in provision can be required and encouraged by professional bodies in archaeology. SCAUM, IFA and ALGAO are already developing guidance and best practice for training policies and planning in organisations. However, a formal requirement for Continuing Professional Development, which is widely recognised in other professional areas of work as an important element in an individual's commitment to maintaining and developing professional skills and standards, has yet to be introduced effectively in the archaeological sector..
Recommendation 11:
That the ATF work with IFA, SCAUM and ALGAO to foster and actively to encourage training policies, planning and commitment to Continuing Professional Development as good business and professional practice for organisations and for individuals.
27. Skills base
27.1 The general picture of training requirements which emerges from analysis of the interview survey (above 12.7-8) shows that skills in using and managing digital data, and skills in business and project management for archaeological work are identified by individuals as areas of priority training need. Update in new technical developments, in legislative and policy areas and in European funding and practice are also well defined topics of relevance. In addition, the training of finds and other specialists in archaeology is identified as a specific subject of concern (21.2).
27.2 Two current, detailed studies are relevant to these issues. First, the ADS Digital Data Users survey (see Condron et al 1999) will shortly be published. Strategies for Digital Data will include detailed recommendations for future training provision and other development needs in the area of information technology. Second, the IFA and Museum of London Specialist Services are undertaking a survey of the distribution and scope of specialist consultants in archaeology which will consider, among other issues, training needs for this group. The outcomes of these two studies will provide a far more detailed picture of the present situation and desirable future action than this preliminary survey can provide. Both studies should be used to inform the Forum's future priorities.
27.3 The survey of individual training experience and preference reported here could be usefully complemented by a detailed enquiry among unit heads and managers of public service archaeology sections about skill shortages and specific training needs in an organisational perspective.
Recommendation 12:
That the ATF work with other organisations assessing training and development needs in archaeology, including IFA and ADS, to direct future resources for training to areas where skill shortages and the priority for professional update are clearly defined.
28. Independent and voluntary sector
28.1 This review was designed to examine the state of training within the archaeological profession. Training provision for the voluntary and independent sector was not specifically considered, although a number of independent archaeologists were interviewed and several of the initiatives proposed may well also serve their interests. The work of this part of the archaeological community provides an essential focus for wider public appreciation of, and involvement in, archaeology and cannot be divorced from the issues under consideration here. Historically, it has been an important training ground for many who have gone on to develop their interest through a professional role.
28.2 The Heritage Lottery Fund's current study of skills shortages and training needs in the heritage labour market specifically includes the voluntary sector as a target for future initiatives and this work should provide a starting point from which the ATF can work towards identifying specific training issues and needs in this group in the archaeological sector.
Recommendation 13
That the ATF work with CBA and other relevant bodies, including the HLF, to identify the best means to develop and strengthen the skills base of the independent and voluntary sector in archaeology.
29.1 A review of related studies over the past four years presents a picture of archaeology training provision which is weak at entry level, unstructured and poorly aligned with professional needs. In education , however, archaeology successfully serves a broad constituency through further education, continuing education, and adult liberal education to university degree level. In general, undergraduate learning is designed to be broad based rather than vocational and aims to provide a general science or humanities degree strong in transferable skills. There is little to guide the prospective career archaeologist towards the fact that some courses are more oriented towards practical skills than others. Despite the fact that only a small percentage of graduates continue, with further training, to pursue a career in archaeology their numbers far exceed the opportunities available for entry to the profession.
29.2 Vocational training and continuing professional development are offered largely through Continuing and Higher Education but also by a range of professional and public organisations and a few commercial businesses. It is largely unvalidated for professional purposes, very diverse and unrelated in any formal way to the requirements of organisations and professional roles. Exceptions are in the related sectors of museum work and historic building conservation which have more developed training structures and routes to qualification. Overall archaeology training provision and delivery is uneven and access to it is hampered by lack of information about availability, quality and content.
29.3 An interview based survey of individual experience of training in archaeology provides useful general indications of broad trends in the profession and in the workplace. Organisations which have strategies for training and which support their staff in career development are in a majority, albeit a small one; a larger majority of archaeologists also benefit from training opportunities on an ad hoc basis. On the whole, however, the provision in organisations is weak. Those working in the public sector are generally served better than those in the private sector. Organisations appear to be stronger on providing training in business-related and generic skills than in professional ones.
29.4 Analysis of entry routes to professional work confirms the impression that archaeology is overwhelmingly a graduate profession. The availability of work experience, either in a voluntary capacity or as a trainee in casual work, appears to be a significant factor for those who have established themselves successfully in professional work. A substantial number also have a post graduate qualification, which is increasingly common among those entering the sector. There is evidence nevertheless that a substantial proportion of graduate entrants, even with post graduate qualifications, 'drop out' within their first few years.
29.5 A more detailed picture of current training delivery shows that the majority of those working in archaeology rely on using a significant amount of personal time to obtain training and update. Two areas predominate - transferable skills in managerial and computer skills, and update in new archaeological research. New technical developments, and legislation and policy update also feature prominently. Training in field skills is surprisingly low on the agenda.
29.6 Priorities for new training in the future show a distinct profile. Skills in computer applications and use of digital data in archaeology were the choice of the largest group, followed by developments in technical applications and management skills. New archaeological research, in general and in specialist areas, remains a prime area for many. Other topics ranked relatively low within the survey group but may still provide useful indicators for targeting future training.
29.7 As a community, those who work in archaeology appear to be less than satisfied with their overall access to training . While inadequate employer provision and limited resources are legitimately part of this picture, a shortage of appropriate courses delivered in a suitable form, and the absence of a professional qualification and CPD structure in archaeology, are also identified as significant factors.
29.8 Interviews with representatives of organisations and the survey sample group identified the main issues in training and career development in archaeology as
Proposals and recommendations
29.9 The Forum has an important strategic role as a lead body in training and the review suggests it should develop its profile and strengthen its position in partnership with its member organisations. A suite of related initiatives is proposed to establish a co-ordinated framework for career entry, professional qualification and career development in archaeology linked to the needs of professional roles and supported by appropriate training delivery. This includes work on defining professional roles, development of a basic curriculum for archaeology training and a comparative study of professional qualification in related sectors, leading towards the design of a professional practice qualification for archaeology. Archaeological interests should also be involved in the development of occupational standards and vocational qualifications.
29.10 Alongside this sequence of development projects, the review suggests that a series of new or continuing initiatives should be progressed. A comprehensive information service for education, training and professional update in archaeology would provide a valuable resource, serving needs across the sector. Two other proposals recommend fostering work experience opportunities at trainee level, as part of a sponsored entry route to the profession, and developing mechanisms for professional exchanges and secondment across the sector. Regional research excavations and training schools could form part of a integrated strategy to support these two areas.
29.11 Positive measures are required to encourage the adoption of training policies and plans in archaeological organisations as a matter of professional good practice and to promote active participation by individuals in their personal professional development. Particular areas of skill shortage and identified training need are recognised in the review and could form the basis for supported programmes of targeted training through the ATF and its members. Finally, although many of these initiatives will also serve the interests of the independent and voluntary sector, further work is need to identify means to develop and strengthen the skills base of those working alongside professionals in archaeology.
Aitchison, Kenneth, 1998, 'Profiling the Profession: A survey of archaeological jobs and job profiles in the UK', Draft Report, Landward Archaeology, July 1998
Baker, David, 1999, An Assessment of English Sites and Monuments Records for the Association of Local Government Archaeological Officers , Historic Environment Conservation, report 97/20
Collis, John and Hinton, Peter, 1998, 'Training, training and obuchyeniye ', The Archaeologist 31, 15-17
Condron, Frances and Wise, Alicia, 1998, User Needs Workshop Report , Archaeology Data Service, York
Condron, F., Richards, J.D., Robinson, D., and Wise, A., (forthcoming) 1999, Strategies for Digital Data: Findings and Recommendations from Digital Data in Archaeology: A Survey of User Needs, Archaeology Data Service, York
DETR, 1998, 'Modernising Local Government: Improving Local Services through best value', DETR, London
English Heritage, 1997, Archaeology Division Research Agenda (Draft) , English Heritage, London
Fraser, David, 1991, Professional Training for Archaeologists: the questionnaire' , The Field Archaeologist 14, 244
Frey, James H., 1983, Survey Research by Telephone , vol. 150 Sage Library of Social Research, Sage, London
Hardy, Alan, 1997, 'Someone else's problem? An inquiry into field training', The Archaeologist 29, 8-9
Henson, Donald, ed., 1999, Guide to Archaeology in Higher Education , Council for British Archaeology, York
Heyworth, Michael, ed., 1995, British Archaeological Yearbook 1995-96 , Council for British Archaeology, York.
Hunter, J. R., 1999, 'The role of the universities: a view from the Standing Conference of University Professors and Heads of Archaeology', paper given at IFA Conference, Glasgow, April 1999.
Institute of Field Archaeologists, 1993, 'Continuing Professional Development: A guide for members', Institute of Field Archaeologists
Institute of Field Archaeologists, 1998, 'Training in Archaeology: A statement of intent', Institute of Field Archaeologists, Reading
Moloney, Rebecca, 1998, 'Practitioner Survey 1997', The Archaeologist 32, 15-16
Olivier, Adrian, 1996 , Frameworks for Our Past: A review of research frameworks, strategies and perceptions, English Heritage, London
Oppenheim, A. N., 1998, Questionnaire Design, Interviewing and Attitude Measurement , Pinter, London
Richards, J.D., 1987, 'Archaeology in the Universities: IFA submission to the UGC Arts Sub-Committee Working Party', The Field Archaeologist 7, 97-98
Startin, Bill, 1993, '"Developed in Archaeology by Archaeologists for Archaeology"?', The Field Archaeologist 19, 375-78
Turner, Robin, 1996, 'Jobs in British Archaeology 1995', The Archaeologist 25, 8-9
Turner, Robin, 1997, 'Jobs in British Archaeology 1996', The Archaeologist 29, 6-7
Turner, Robin, 1998, 'Jobs in British Archaeology 1997', The Archaeologist 31, 12-14
Turner, Robin, 1999, 'Jobs in British Archaeology 1998', The Archaeologist 34, 12-14
Wood, John, 1994, 'CPD: what's new about it?', The Field Archaeologist 20, 410-11
Aim of project:
1 To gather rapidly an outline picture of the present state of training within the archaeological profession
2 To collect representative, preliminary and outline views as to what areas and character of training is though to be most desirable
3 To make outline proposals for further project work aimed at co-ordinating archaeological training initiatives within England, in conjunction with the Archaeology Training Forum.
Brief:
i This project is commissioned by English Heritage. The brief for the work has been agreed with the Archaeology Training Forum.
ii The consultant will design a methodology for collecting data suitable for achieving the aims stated above. It is anticipated that this will make use of a telephone poll.
iii The consultant will discuss the proposed methodology for collecting data with English Heritage and revise the methodology accordingly.
iv The consultant will gather the data according to the agreed methodology in iii.
v The consultant will propose, discuss and agree with English Heritage a format for the presentation of a report on the data gathered.
vi The consultant will produce the report according to the format agreed above in v.
vii. The consultant will submit a draft report for approval by English Heritage.
viii. The consultant will revise the report in the light of comments provided.
ix. The consultant will prepare and submit six copies of the final report.
It is anticipated that the project will be competed in approximately three months from commissioning and that a presentation to the ATF of the results will take place at its meeting on 10 February 1999 in London.
1. A random sample of individuals working in archaeology in the United Kingdom was drawn from the membership of four groups: the Institute of Field Archaeologists, the Standing Conference of Archaeological Unit Managers, the Society of Museum Archaeologists and the published list of local government archaeological officers and others responsible for local archaeology services including the maintenance of SMRs in England. Appendix 3 presents the questionnaire which formed the basis for interviews with the sample group together with the data gathered from respondents.
2. Telephone interviews were chosen as the principal method for data gathering, rather than a written questionnaire, because they can be undertaken in a short timescale, have been shown to produce a good level of return and often produce better discriminated responses than written survey requests (Frey 1983, 27- 55; Oppenheim 1998, 97-8, 102). Personal interviews can minimise the possibility of misunderstanding in a questionnaire because the interviewer is able explain the scope and intention of the questions and prompt the respondent where appropriate. Although this approach is time consuming, it has the added advantage of creating an opportunity for a dialogue with individuals about their experience and views. This proved to be most valuable in focusing the principal issues and gathering the perceptions of practitioners from all parts of the archaeological sector about the kind of changes viewed as necessary or desirable in the field.
3. A 10% random sample of people from the selected groups (176 individuals) were contacted by letter in January 1999 and invited to participate in the review. Over 65 hours of interviews were conducted during the latter part of January and in February 1999. At least three attempts were made to contact each individual by telephone, at different times of the day and week. 123 successful contacts were made (70% of the sample group) which appears to be typical of results reported by similar surveys (Frey 1983, 42 cites median non-contact rates of 25 - 39% depending on the number of call backs).
4. Full interviews with 102 (58% of the sample group) respondents were successfully concluded. 21 (11% of the sample group) respondents did not participate in the full interview because they did not regard themselves as working in archaeology or had left the heritage sector. The overall completion rate - 70% contact with the random sample and an 83% response rate for successful telephone contacts - was a reasonable return (Frey 1983).
5. Early on in the survey it became clear that there were practical difficulties in contacting archaeologists working on short term contracts in field projects because of their frequent changes of address and employer, and inaccessibility by telephone. To attempt to redress this imbalance, an article about the ATF review was published in 'The Digger' (February 1999) seeking voluntary contributions. Although this produced a small and valued response, the experience of this part of the archaeological community is likely to be underrepresented in the sample.
6. The survey was not designed to gather information about conditions of employment in relation to training. There were therefore no questions relating to contractual arrangements or to distinguish those in professional employment from independent archaeologists. It is recognised that some groups are not well represented in the populations from which the sample was drawn, for example, those on short term contracts (above 5.). Given the preliminary nature of the review and the relatively modest size of the sample, however, it was not judged useful to attempt to assess the detailed training needs or experience of particular groups within the archaeology sector. Where possible the need for further studies to address such issues has been identified in the report.
SECTION 1 : POSITION IN ARCHAEOLOGICAL SECTOR
1.1 Are you actively engaged in archaeological work?
| number of responses | % | |
|---|---|---|
| Yes | 102 | 83 |
| No | 21 | 17 |
| TOTAL | 123 | 100 |
1.2 How long have you worked in archaeology (or related field)?
| number of responses | % | |
|---|---|---|
| Less than 1 year | 0 | 0 |
| Between 1 and 5 years | 13 | 13 |
| Between 5 and 10 years | 11 | 11 |
| Between 10 and 20 years | 50 | 49 |
| More than 20 years | 28 | 27 |
| TOTAL | 102 | 100 |
1.3 In which sector of the archaeological community would you describe your current work?
| number of responses | % | |
|---|---|---|
| Archaeological consultancy, fieldwork & research | 45 | 43 |
| Archaeological heritage management (conservation & information - national) | 7 | 7 |
| Archaeological heritage management (conservation & information - local/regional) | 25 | 24 |
| Education & research | 13 | 12 |
| Environment & countryside management | 0 | 0 |
| Historic estate management (historic properties & sites) | 0 | 0 |
| Museum services | 11 | 11 |
| Other (please give details) | 4 | 4 |
| TOTAL | 105 | 100 |
SECTION 2 : TRAINING IN ARCHAEOLOGICAL ORGANISATIONS
2.1 Does the organisation you currently work for have a training policy or plan for its employees development?
| number of responses | % | |
|---|---|---|
| Yes | 57 | 56 |
| No | 34 | 33 |
| Don't know | 7 | 7 |
| Not relevant | 4 | 4 |
| TOTAL | 102 | 100 |
2.2 Does your organisation encourage you to assess your own career development and training needs e.g. by offering a regular job review or appraisal interview?
| number of responses | % | |
|---|---|---|
| Yes | 60 | 59 |
| No | 37 | 36 |
| Don't know | 1 | 1 |
| Not relevant | 4 | 4 |
| TOTAL | 102 | 100 |
2.3 Does your organisation provide you with training in house or on the job?
| number of responses | % | |
|---|---|---|
| Yes | 78 | 76 |
| No | 19 | 19 |
| Don't know | 0 | 0 |
| Not relevant | 5 | 5 |
| TOTAL | 102 | 100 |
2.4 Has your organisation supported your training by, for example, sending you on courses, paying course fees or allowing you time to pursue a course of new learning?
| number of responses | % | |
|---|---|---|
| Yes | 81 |
79 |
| No | 17 | 17 |
| Don't know | 1 |
1 |
| Not relevant | 3 | 3 |
| TOTAL | 102 | 100 |
SECTION 3 : TRAINING AND INDIVIDUAL ARCHAEOLOGISTS
3.1 Before you started work in archaeology, what course of learning or training in archaeology did you follow?
| number of responses | % * | |
|---|---|---|
| Degree in archaeology | 71 | 70 |
| Degree in another subject | 22 | 22 |
| Postgraduate degree/diploma (taught) | 26 | 26 |
| Postgraduate degree/diploma (research) | 19 | 19 |
| Certificate in archaeology | 3 | 3 |
| Diploma in archaeology | 5 | 5 |
| GCSE/AS/A level qualification | 7 | 7 |
| Evening classes/day schools | 21 | 21 |
| Work as trainee or volunteer in a field project | 71 | 70 |
| Work as trainee or volunteer in a museum project | 7 | 7 |
| Other (please give details) | 24 | 24 |
| None | 0 | 0 |
* Expressed as % of the total number of respondents.
3.2 Do you use your own time, outside your current work commitments, for your professional development e.g. by attending conferences; writing or giving papers; membership of professional committees or following a course of training or learning?
| number of responses | % | |
|---|---|---|
| Yes | 74 | 73 |
| No | 25 | 24 |
| Don't know | 1 | 1 |
| Not relevant | 2 | 2 |
| TOTAL | 102 | 100 |
3.3 Think back over the last three years and try to recall what training or professional update you have obtained through attendance at courses, dayschools, conferences or formal training sessions. Please indicate the areas of training in which you have had recent experience.
| number of responses | % * | |
|---|---|---|
| Archaeological field skills | 15 | 15 |
| Health & safety in archaeological work | 45 | 44 |
| New archaeological research | 87 | 85 |
| New developments in archaeological techniques or applications | 50 | 49 |
| New planning and other relevant legislation e.g. in Europe | 40 | 39 |
| Heritage management (presentation, interpretation, visitor management) | 21 | 21 |
| Historic environment conservation (landscape characterisation, countryside management) | 31 | 30 |
| Transferable skills (computer, database, word processing skills, management skills, financial etc.) | 74 | 73 |
| Other | 40 | 39 |
* Expressed as % of the total number of respondents.
3.4 If you had to choose just one area of recent training which of those that you have indicated (in the question above) would you say is the most useful to you for your current work?
| number of responses | % * | |
|---|---|---|
| Archaeological skills | 5 | 5 |
| Health & safety in archaeological work | 0 | 0 |
| New archaeological research (attendance at conferences/day schools) | 28 | 27 |
| New developments in archaeological techniques or applications (e.g. GIS, GPS) | 10 | 10 |
| New planning and other relevant legislation e.g. in Europe | 8 | 8 |
| Heritage management | 4 | 4 |
| Historic environment conservation | 3 | 3 |
| Transferable skills (computer database, word processing skills, management skills, financial etc) | 31 | 30 |
| Other | 20 | 20 |
* Expressed as % of the total number of respondents.
3.5 Are there any areas of training or new learning which you think you would benefit from - both in your current work and for your future development?
This was an open question and the responses are summarised as follows :
| number of responses | % * | |
|---|---|---|
| Information technology, computer skills and the use of digital data | 34 | 33% |
| New techniques & applications | 23 | 22% |
| Management & organisation skills | 19 | 18% |
| New research in archaeology /own specialist field | 15 | 14% |
| Legislation and policy update | 8 | 8% |
| European programmes and exchanges | 8 | 8% |
| Heritage management | 6 | 6% |
| Historic environment conservation | 5 | 5% |
| Fund raising | 4 | 4% |
| Writing and publishing | 3 | 3% |
| Public presentation | 2 | 2% |
| Other | 17 | 16% |
* Expressed as % of the total number of respondents.
3.6 Would you say that you faced difficulties in obtaining the training you need to develop your archaeological and professional skills?
| number of responses | % | |
|---|---|---|
| Yes | 43 | 42 |
| No | 57 | 56 |
| Don't know | 1 | 1 |
| Not relevant | 1 | 1 |
| TOTAL | 102 | 100 |
3.7 What would you say were the main obstacles that face you in obtaining the training you need or would like?
| number of responses | % * | |
|---|---|---|
| Don't know what training is available | 0 | 0 |
| Don't know what training and skills I should be trying to acquire | 1 | 1 |
| Can't find the right courses or training provision for my needs | 35 | 34 |
| Can't afford to pay for training and update courses | 36 | 35 |
| Haven't got time to attend training and update courses | 37 | 36 |
| My employer doesn't make adequate provision for training and update | 31 | 30 |
| Consider that I receive adequate opportunity for the training and career development that I need in my present employment | 17 | 17 |
| Don't think I need any further training or career development opportunities | 0 | 0 |
| Other (please give details) | 44 | 43 |
* Expressed as % of the total number of respondents.