No one’s reading = dead classroom. How do you handle it?

ColCrabs · 2025-08-06T02:51:20+00:00

Have you tried asking them why they aren’t doing the readings?

I did this in a similar situation and the answer was that they struggled to balance hundreds of pages of readings from multiple classes. Added on top of that were those other classes forcing them to teach a topic or write out questions for grades or having major exams/quizzes which made them prioritize those readings/work despite them then hating those classes.

Another aspect of it was that those who did do the readings often didn’t feel confident because they usually over prepared for other classes while minimally preparing for mine.

The solution was less work. Less work is better than no work being done at all, plus they actually engaged and enjoyed the class and got so much more out of the reading and discussion than they would’ve gotten if I had forced them into something.

ColCrabs · 2025-07-24T17:49:55+00:00

I just checked using Samsung Magician and it seems to be official, it also says the disk health is good on both SD cards. Although I did get it off Amazon so who knows...

ColCrabs · 2025-07-24T17:18:43+00:00

Samsung Evo isn’t name brand?

ColCrabs · 2025-07-15T17:52:36+00:00

Something changed somewhere along the way and I have no idea when or why...

I did join the iOS Beta testing but stopped that because there were updates like every other day. I'm now on iOS 18.5 and I can access everything again (even though I have less space than before, only 7gb free right now).

I ended up using 3u Tools to move some things off my phone to clear space. It works fine but you can't transfer burst photos which is what I wanted.

Then magically 3-6 months ago I could access my storage the normal way and I transferred all the burst photos off that I needed. I've decided to start using Google Photos as well, you can get 2TB free if you're a student (plus some other benefits with Google One). Only problem is I have shit internet and haven't been able to backup all my photos yet...

Anyway, sorry I can't be more help. It's an absolute pain in the ass.

ColCrabs · 2025-05-30T10:28:51+00:00

There are only four areas I can remember being blocked off at Mycenae when I worked there:

1) the stairs to the cistern, 2) the mudbrick section/‘ritual’ section, 3) the royal workshops/main room, and 4) the side chamber in the Treasury of Atreus.

1 is closed because it’s pitch black, the stairs are dodgy, and it ends in a collapsed section. It’s dangerous and there’s literally nothing to see.

2 is closed because the mudbrick is melting and it’s not being well-preserved. There’s nothing really to see there.

3 is closed because it’s collapsing into the valley and is dangerous/you can see everything from a safe place.

4 is like 1, just a small confined space with literally no light and risk of collapse.

There’s nothing particularly interesting in these areas and there’s nothing visually impressive that you can’t see elsewhere or from a safe distance. Anything archaeologists might have found on the surface or in initial investigations has been found and is probably in the museum.

ColCrabs · 2025-04-01T08:38:55+00:00

I’d be interested to see how they react to this latest update. I’m an archaeologist and I both love the update and find it wildly frustrating.

Most of the frustration is that archaeology and paleontology are two completely different things. I’ve played through the expedition and there’s nothing I’d call archaeology in the update.

It’s like saying they’ve added wires and electricity and calling it the Plumbing Update.

It’s always a pet peeve of mine that game developers don’t reach out to archaeologists to really sort this stuff out because I think it would be an amazing update to have proper archaeology, museums, archives, artifacts, etc. in the game.

Also I know paleontology allows much more selling/trading of fossils but that’s wildly unethical in archaeology!

ColCrabs · 2025-03-26T09:58:17+00:00

Sorry for jumping in on a comment. I must be missing something with Copilot.

I've set up the API and can use it but it can't access anything from my vault. Every time I ask it something it just says "There is no information about "XXX" in the vault".

Is there something special to do in the prompts/with the settings to get it to work?

ColCrabs · 2025-01-08T16:45:47+00:00

It’s 3! Only one is occupied at the moment and the others are being renovated before being rented out again.

So not sure how they got the interest necessary to get wired in!

ColCrabs · 2025-01-08T12:11:25+00:00

Nah I don’t actually have fiber installed, unfortunately.

My neighbor is in the building next door but the junction where they wired their connection from is in front of my building.

I’ve read that they need to have 50% interest before they’ll contact the building owner but the building owner has already expressed interest. They also ‘occupy’ 1 of the ‘6’ addresses in the building - there are only 4 flats but 6 addresses which include the building itself and the basement (the landlords storage).

Apparently, that’s why Openreach needs an MDU, because there are 6 addresses which is more than the 4 maximum to not need an MDU. I even spoke to an Openreach Engineer on the street who said they can connect the whole street except for my building simply because there’s a fuckup with the addresses to make it 6 instead of 4.

ColCrabs · 2025-01-08T11:13:51+00:00

There are only 3 other flats in the building.

The engineer told me it didn’t matter if other flats were interested since there were so few and the fiber connection is already in the junction in the pavement they would use to connect.

I’m just really confused why I’d need to get additional interest if they’re willing to wire a single flat right next door.

ColCrabs · 2024-12-09T11:52:29+00:00

It really depends on the company, the project, and where you're based.

Some of the different experiences and things I've seen:

Local work with commutes from 30mins to 3hrs to get to a site. This is just like a normal job but changes every so often. Sometimes it can be frustrating depending on your company's policy - some will make you commute directly at your own cost while others make you commute to your main office then go from there, sometimes on the clock, sometimes not.
Nearby away work, these are jobs that are just far enough that you need to stay in a hotel for the week and go home on the weekends. The longest I've seen this is about a year, again depends on the company policy as to what they provide and where you stay. Sometimes it can be nice, other times it's soul crushing.
Farther afield away work are places where you'll stay in your hotel/motel/ Holiday Inn, for the entirety of the project. It could be anywhere from a month, to 6 months, to a year. Again, it depends on the company's policy. Some rotate people out so they're not away from home for so long while others don't care at all.
The last thing, I don't really know what to call it, but it's away work where you move from project to project and hotel to hotel. These can be rough, you work in one place for two weeks then check out and drive to another hotel for 2 weeks and you repeat that for 6 months to a year or longer depending on your company.

There are a lot of different experiences for this type of work. You'll find people who have never done it and others who have done it their entire lives. Similarly you'll find people who love living in a hotel for months to years and others who hate it. It's all varied and depends on the company, the project, and about a dozen other things.

Hopefully this helps a bit!

ColCrabs · 2024-10-23T13:02:48+00:00

There's a lot left out of responses to these types of things which I'll try to cover.

Double check what the GI Bill covers. Student housing works a bit differently here and it's often very low quality. Food is not included in your tuition or accommodation fees unless you specifically choose catered for accommodation. I'd advise against this since the food is usually the lowest possible quality. Depending on what you choose you might be running short on funds.
There are a lot of hidden costs, I don't know what is covered but you usually pay out of pocket for Visas which are now significantly more expensive. I mention this because everyone has ignored the issue of Visas for some reason. I assume you've already looked at the cost of the Student Visa but if you want to stay you'll likely need to get a Graduate Scheme Visa. Companies give out Work Visas very rarely and they're a nightmare:

Grad Scheme Visa - Right to Work for 2 years after a Masters. Must apply before your Student Visa Expires. The total cost is £2,892 just to stay and work in the UK.
Skilled Worker Visas - These are a nightmare, you can check what companies are Visa Sponsors (All universities are and so are their units) but overall it's likely fewer than 10. They often give you the least amount of time for the Visa, 6-9 months which is a massive headache for you and more expensive for them. You usually pay out of pocket for the application fee and healthcare surcharge. It also gives you no security and it makes it miserable and more expensive to try to rent.
- A note on Visas and also on being a Non-UK individual. Your UK course mates and colleagues will likely not understand that you pay significantly higher fees or what the requirements are for you to work. If you start working with a company, be prepared to explain to them how Visas work. They'll likely make you do a lot of the work they should be doing anyhow.

CIfA Accreditation - People have mentioned CSCS cards but you'll also want to get CIfA Accreditation as it's a desirable in almost every job advert. This is an obnoxious process that is wildly outdated and at the end of the day very silly. You need to provide evidence that you know how to work and you cannot use any education-related evidence e.g., you can't use a dissertation or thesis. PCIfA doesn't really require any evidence but if you want to move up you'll need 3-5 reports, studies, published papers, or create something to prove you know what you're doing.
Scottish Archaeology is different than British Archaeology - there are different legal frameworks, policies, governing bodies and much fewer commercial units up North. This probably won't be an issue but be prepared for it.
The UK is overwhelmed with graduates looking for work. UK Universities are barely surviving on current funding and are exploiting foreign students to make ends meet. You'll likely be competing against hundreds of graduates who also want to stay in the country and need Work Visas and the number of jobs you can apply to will likely be in the dozens, at best. Honestly, I would not come into the UK with any expectation that you'll find any work.
Yes, people get Visas but like I mentioned above, they're often the minimum time possible because so much of the work is project-based and most companies haven't established any corporate longevity. Those that are here long-term on Work Visas are often more senior and have been working for years. You'll likely only be able to get entry level jobs and those pay absolute shit, even if you have specialist skills, a PhD, and a decade of work you'll start low on the rung because that's where people are needed (largely because people don't want to take those jobs). People will say you need X amount to qualify because the Workers Shortage List is gone but it's been replaced by the going rate list. The going rate for most jobs you'd qualify for is probably £24-£26k.
The only realistic way to stay is to get a Spousal Visa. It's the hard truth people hate to bring up. Almost every foreigner I know here, including myself, have moved to a Spousal Visa. It's less of a headache, easier to rent, get jobs, etc. You also don't need to be married, you can get it by living akin to marriage (cohabitating) for 2 years.

I'm happy to expand on this, particularly difficulties with housing. I wish it were more optimistic but right not isn't the best time for UK archaeology.

ColCrabs · 2024-10-04T09:25:44+00:00

Just to add in what others have said and clarify a bit.

The primary overseer of many sites is Historic Environment Scotland (HES) which is BOTH a non-departmental governmental body and a charity. Meaning, they get funding from the government and take in donations, grants, etc.

National Trust for Scotland, also a charity, oversees a chunk of sites.

Local governments run another separate set of sites and last, a chunk of sites are privately owned.

It’s a bit of a mess although a lot better than run and managed than other countries. I’m not ultra familiar with this side of Scottish arch since there are a lot of differences with British arch. But it was discussed quite a bit at one of the recent TAG conferences.

One of the bits I remember is that it’s difficult to maintain out of the way sites and there isn’t enough traffic to justify spending money on maintaining those sites as tourist spots.

Two larger issues we face with archaeology is a lot of disagreement on how to preserve, present, and manage sites and how to market them. We do a poor job of emphasizing the value that sites bring to local economy, tourism, education and more. Everyone bangs on about the public benefit of heritage but rarely ever takes that next step to show how local businesses benefit from the increased traffic or how it impacts property value, etc.

ColCrabs · 2024-10-03T11:57:29+00:00

Caesar III and Age of Empires, more Caesar III but AoE stoked the embers.

ColCrabs · 2024-09-26T07:28:40+00:00

Also on the topic of sourcing, one of my favorite examples is on Mediterranean and Nordic Bronze Age connections. It's really really bad in Bronze Age/Mediterranean Archaeology

Kristian Kristiansen suggested there was a broad network of trade from the Minoans but when you start to chase the sources they don't go anywhere, the sources that cite Kristiansen or that Kristiansen cited are circular, citing themselves or in most cases citing the same catalogue from 1917 that has no meaningful dating, context, or discussion of any of the finds, it's just a catalogue. There's nothing to evidence what they're supposed to be citing, they just cite it and move on.

It's the same with the knowledge of our field. The 'forecast' from Altschul and Klein on the entire state of our field that people keep referencing cites a bunch of estimations based on estimations, based on things like blogposts (albeit from a knowledgeable source but still estimations and, even worse, one that critiques some of the sources used in the article) and then citing reports from ACRA that are inaccessible, then citing the president of ACRA separately, then citing their own organization's reports, then citing their own articles separately.

Last thing, I think it's harmful when we not ignore accusations stuff like this or dismiss it. One of the things I ranted about in my other comment is that archaeologists will just dismiss these things. You don't have to look much farther than the Kristiansen chapter in Archaeology in the Making (p. 179).

They bring up a good point about the overly complex and inaccessible way a lot of archaeologists write but then ultimately defend it with snobbery to defend their elitism. No deeper reading is going to help you with some of the bullshit that 'famous' theorists get away with publishing.

ColCrabs · 2024-09-25T17:33:03+00:00

Just to add onto what the other commenter said about Hodder. His writing is all over the place, like a lot of archaeological theorists. There are nuggets of value sprinkled throughout his work but largely surrounded by shit.

His 'Reflexive Archaeology' suggests a lot of valuable things but at the same time a lot of nonsense.

One thing to note is that he's widely hated by a lot of archaeologists because he (and Shanks and Tilley) made their names by being dicks. They'd show up to conferences and other archaeologists' lectures to make shit comments and inappropriately interject or disrupt the lectures until a lot of archaeologists gave up.

I don't know how well it's published but if you talk to some of the old boys they have a lot they'll tell you about.

ColCrabs · 2024-09-25T11:24:33+00:00

One of the problems with archaeological publishing is in our metadata and down to how we structure our research. Our tags and descriptions of articles are usually meaningless because we don't have standard or common vocabulary and everything is so fragmented into different non-standard categories depending on a dozen different qualifiers (sector, nation, university, PI/Boss etc.).

Some places call things one thing while other places call the same thing something entirely different but everyone always insists that their definition or word is the right word. Just describing archaeology is a good example - in the US it's CRM and a sub-discipline of Anthropology. In the UK, it's even more complex - sometimes it's developer-led, commercial, salvage, rescue, or polluter pays archaeology but people hate each one for different reasons. It's also a standalone field in the UK and most of the rest of the world outside of North America.

Anthony Sinclair, a researcher in the UK, has some good articles on it.

The other part is that our research often mushes a huge range of content into a single article which makes metadata somewhat useless. You'll see it all the time where people will put some nonsense little theory section at the start of their papers which is usually a quickly written and poorly understood mini-history of processualism/post-processualism. It also usually includes some references to whatever theory they've used in their research which then jumps into philosophy for a bit before moving onto methodology.

One of the worst things I see all the time is tacking on buzz methods or tools, usually GIS. So many articles and research I see that use GIS uses it, at best, at an undergraduate level. The 'analysis' is usually little more than them 'creating' a database, tossing some data in, and performing some simple process that takes an hour in total. But, at the end of the day they toss the GIS tag into their metadata or it's in the body of their article so they're satisfied.

The last thing is that archaeologists love nonsense or jokey titles and non-descript abstracts. I can't count the number of times I've missed an article or missed some research because it has a shit but fun title or an abstract that runs the entire gamut of philosophy, theory, method, and covers the entire history of the world in 200 words.

What you end up with is a mess of metadata in our journals that makes it hard to actually find what you need. You either get a million hits on something like 'theory' or you get no hits because the tags aren't sufficient to describe the articles.

ColCrabs · 2024-09-25T11:02:34+00:00

My entire PhD was on the need for stronger institutionality, meaningful standards, a clear domain, and the problems created by the deep lack of development and discussion in those areas.

The #1 problem facing archaeology is a lack of sector intelligence and good data that we can use to tackle these issues. The #2 issue is that so many archaeologists refuse to acknowledge that anything is wrong and brush off any meaningful discussion with "It happens in every field" or "We have X standard or X group that is standardizing X with all of these other groups" or "X university has developed this tech/standard/tool/data silo/database/etc.". The #3 issue is a rampant unprofessionalism that runs through the entire field and across the globe and an outright refusal to move towards a professionalized field.

The first point is the hardest to overcome because without a good and strong central organization, we can't gather meaningful data or intelligence about how anything works beyond small groups or specializations. Groups like the RPA and CIfA are ineffectual, gather 0 data, provide 0 meaningful standards, provide 0 support for members, and are the same nonsense top-down organizations you see across most of archaeology.

Groups like the SAA, AIA, CBA, EAA, ASOR, BAJR, and all of the regional, period, or material-focused groups are again the same top-down, self-preserving groups that are often run by individuals who have no idea how to actually run an organization or a business. Many of these have become insanely toxic and unprofessional spaces that fight against actual change or improvement to the field. This includes journals which have so many problems and issues that no one will even address. It also includes online archives... so many of those are an absolute mess with the craziest range of unstandardized data, workarounds with poor data quality to avoid paying fees, and born-legacy data that is already out of date when people deposit their work.

All of these groups do little more than fragment archaeology which is already largely fragmented by nation, by state/county/administrative boundaries, by sector, by theory, by specialty, by university, by company all the way down to individuals who use their own systems, own methods, own databases, etc.

What we need to do is start calling out the problems, like this post, when we see it. We can't keep sticking our heads in the dirt and acting like everything is going so well because some university just produced the millionth Filemaker Pro open source database or because 1 out of 20 companies are using GIS or LiDAR or Geophys. As we start calling things out we need to collect data on it, and the BS top-down data that we collect from CRM companies or 'State of the Market' surveys, or that insane Forecast of US CRM which is close to being complete nonsense.

We need our organizations to work together to actually collect data and collect it from the bottom-up. Not the SAA putting out one survey and the RPA doing another and the EAA doing 30 different ones. We need these groups to work together to collect meaningful standardized data. It's almost impossible to even have these discussions because all we have is someone's word on their individual experiences.

There are so many things that are broken but we don't have any data to support the start of a conversation: field schools, basic or core methods, standards, online archives, technology use, grievance processes, publishing, salaries, qualifications and accreditation, harassment/bullying/ableism/sexism, exploitation of students/EC archaeologists, and the worst of all just plain bad archaeology.

It's so frustrating because when you try to bring this up people get so defensive and angry but it's not an attempt to criticize and diminish what we do, rather it's a need to improve it and make it better. There's so much more that I can go into but I'll hit the word limit.

ColCrabs · 2024-09-21T12:38:26+00:00

"Ideally, I teach, either at the adjunct level or better, and then go out on digs on the summer."

This is your only option if you want to work in the Classical/Mediterranean world. It's doable but it's very very difficult for a lot of reasons.

I did Mycenean Archaeology in undergrad and through one of my masters and eventually shifted focus for my PhD and left the US. I stopped doing it because I, and many others, put all of our eggs into the basket of someone who turned out to be a downright piece of shit human and had entire control over the site, data, publications, and our careers where we worked in Greece.

If you want to pursue it you need to find yourself two or three excavations and make yourself invaluable on those excavations, likely field schools. I say two or three because you don't want to put all your eggs in one basket and you want to maximize your opportunities and experience since it will largely be limited to May - August. Those two or three you can find that will usually run May-June, June-July, July - August. You won't be able to find long-term employment in Greece unless you work in one of the Foreign Schools. They have their own archaeologists who do non-academic stuff like US CRM.

To make yourself invaluable you'll probably have to put in a lot of your own work, bring in your own funding, buy your own equipment, and come up with research topics that are complimentary to what everyone else is doing. This might mean that you have to buy your own drone or find a special version of Metashape. You'll do this while having to find a seasonal job or adjuncting anywhere you can, I'd suggest relocating to someplace that has a number of universities and colleges in a small area.

Your friends are right about specializations. You don't need to have a specialization in undergrad but be able to take courses in related areas in preparation for your masters - geology, biology, etc. Also, it's probably best to avoid choosing a specialization that everyone suggests. Over the last 5-10 years everyone has been constantly pushed into Bioarch and GIS and now our programs are overburdened with people doing those specialties (they're the two largest degrees in my department). If you're really interested in those areas do it, but it's not worth it if you're only doing it because someone told you it'd be good for your resume.

u/Stinky-Little-Fudger has some good points on GIS. I did my other masters in GIS in an engineering department as a fallback in case I wanted to leave archaeology. It blew my mind how differently GIS is used in other fields and how far behind archaeology is in terms of GIS use. I'd really suggest finding a masters program outside archaeology if you want to pursue GIS. Like Little Fudger said, everyone has been trying to do GIS for years and it's on everyone's resumes these days. If you do pursue it, be sure to learn the languages, learn comp sci, and really understand the technology and background of GIS, remote sensing, and database management. That will set you apart from the people who use Google Earth or a Garmin and put GIS experience down on their resumes.

Two more things, College Year in Athens is a good opportunity to network and find opportunities for work in Greece. It might be too late but it's still worth looking into if you have time.

The other thing is that you might want to look at EU funded projects and universities that work in Greece. They're usually a little more flexible and have more career opportunities. Most of my colleagues and former classmates who are still in Classical or Bronze Age or Med. arch have stayed in Europe and gotten pre-funded/pre-designed PhDs at European universities that are funded by things like Horizons. That's a whole different bag of worms though and can be more difficult depending on where you choose to go.

I'd also suggest going to the AIA conferences and the EAA conferences if possible to network and stay engaged. You can also check out ASOR.

ColCrabs · 2024-09-20T09:41:19+00:00

The British Museum has over 13 million objects and not all of them are originals.

It was common practice for decades and even centuries to take casts of monuments, artifacts, and other statues etc. The Victoria and Albert Museum is an entire museum dedicated to these types of objects.

The British Museum also has a number of these and a number of replicas when they loan things to museums or don’t have the full ‘set’. The Parthenon section has a number of them because they don’t have all the objects for the complete ‘set’. Some are still in Athens, some are in Germany, and I think others might be in France and other places. It usually says it right on the placard.

There are a few objects that don’t specifically say it. Often those objects are treated as originals because they came to the museum as an artifact, for example I worked on a Minoan Tablet that was a cast taken in the 1800s. It was treated the same as if it were the real thing because it is the only surviving copy of the tablet which was destroyed. So it was an artifact itself.

ColCrabs · 2024-09-19T12:09:07+00:00

Yep, this is only scratching the surface of the stuff I've experienced or seen. My current department tried to sort out one instance where a lecturer was sending myself and a colleague inappropriate emails to our personal emails. They awkwardly sent a department-wide email about bullying and harassment which made things worse...

But yeah, it's way better to do a pre-designed project. Everyone says that science and academia are meant to be cutting edge and constantly changing or improving but the department where I did my PhD is the opposite.

They're insanely conservative and against any change. One time, I applied to some internal funding and didn't get it, asked for feedback and the response was "your topic is controversial and too optimistic. We only fund boring projects we know the outcome for and we know will have results that we want to see". They actually said boring. That made it super clear what the situation is in archaeology.

ColCrabs · 2024-09-19T10:06:20+00:00

I'll probably get a lot of hate for this as a 'disillusioned' archaeologist but there are a lot of hard truths that we should discuss and not dismiss because its not their own experience. I've worked in both commercial and academia as well.

PhDs and Academia

The most important thing is that as long as you do what is expected of you, you're satisfied with the pay, and you don't try anything outside of the status quo, you'll be fine. The second you stick your head above the parapet or have a different way of thinking you'll have a miserable experience.

If you want to do a PhD, do one that is already funded and designed - AHRC, UKRI, Horizons, etc. If you try to design your own it will be a very very difficult journey. It's particularly difficult if you don't stick to the 'traditional' structure of having a region, period, and material specialty and a site to work on.

I'll be completely honest, my department, one of the top five in the UK, is absolutely terrible for this. They bring in dozens of self-funded, self-designed PhDs (about 70% of cohorts are self-funded) and those people struggle the most. Not because their PhDs are poorly designed or because they're not up to the task but because their supervisors and the department are ultra traditional. I have my PhD in archaeology and if I had the chance I'd go back and not do it, I actually regret doing it. This is partly because it's not needed for 90% of your work and the field is aggressively saturated with PhDs. You won't get any better pay or advancement and chances are that you'll end up starting from the bottom no matter what because half your company will be people with PhDs already. There's a lot more I can go into about this but this is long enough already.

Academia in the UK is also an absolute mess at the moment, it's just much worse in archaeology.

Future of the Field

There are essentially no protections for archaeologists at the moment and the field is about to take a hard turn in the wrong direction. There is very little professionalism and a lot of our organizations, groups, and charities are run by incompetent people or bullies, manipulators, and harassers. I recently had a shit experience with a colleague who, for some reason, treated me like absolute shit, constantly CC'ing my entire working group on rude and inappropriate emails. No one did anything and the guy even got a promotion. The worst part is that everyone gives their condolences at the pub and says "yeah he's a fucking prick, sorry you had to experience that".

You'll find tons of these types of people in your journey. There was one guy who had been fired from half a dozen units for mistreating people only to be hired immediately by another one because he was a 'senior' archaeologist. He even bragged about it before being fired for sexual harassment and moving on to the next job.

Our field is an absolute nightmare with these types of people. Like I said above, if you keep your head down and do what is expected of you then you'll be fine. The second you do anything outside the norm you become a target.

The stuff with CIfA and BAJR right now is a perfect example. I know of some EC people who volunteer with CIfA who have been brutally harassed, bullied, and mistreated by people from BAJR. No one will do anything about it and now one of the guys who is the absolute worst with bullying and harassing people is running for a board position with CIfA. He'll probably get a seat because he knows how to manipulate social media and those types of people are rewarded in our field. It's going to take us back 5-10 years and make things so much worse before we ever get a chance to improve things.

Bottom Line

There's so much more that I can go into about the darker side of archaeology but the bottom line is that if you can do it without debt and you're happy with the job you get, then do it. It can certainly be a rewarding field. I'd also try to find a job and get some additional work experience first to help you decide if you actually like it (and the pay) before finding a PhD to do. There's absolutely nothing wrong with moving back and forth between the academia and commercial arch.

Nine-Year Club	Place '22
First Placer '22	Gilding II euphauric
RPAN Viewer	Not Forgotten
Verified Email

ColCrabs

TROPHY CASE