Swedish Archaeologist Gets New Aberdeen Chair

I've always wondered if it is wise to allow people to study topics that they have almost no hope of finding a job with. I almost did a pHd in Astrophysics back in 1994...think where I would be today if I did that. Umm, still living with my parents..?

Maybe everybody applying for University should be forced to talk to a careers expert, and perhaps there should be more study-loan available to people studying things for which there is a demand.

Yes, there should definitely be a dampening feedback loop from the unemployment rates to the university course menus. As it is, the whole system is driven by the wishes and beliefs of 19-year-olds.

I did a lot of soul-searching as I prepared to start my graduate work in vertebrate paleontology. . .I saw my fellow students who were struggling to find consulting jobs, the occasional preparator's position, the rare museum slot, and the rarer academic job. Luckily, I had some honest colleagues who weren't afraid to be encouraging *and* realistic. It strongly influenced my choice to pursue vert paleo in an anatomy department - at the very least, I have a marketable skill (teaching anatomy to medical students) when I'm done!

Cool, Andy! When I teach archaeology, I tell the students to become doctors, engineers or lawyers, then work 75% and do amateur archaeology on the side.

Well... On the other hand, when you do have active regulation - like Sweden did with teaching students and still does with physicians - you just get wild swings of overabundance and scarcity instead, as nobody can really predict 5-7 years ahead (never mind the 10-15 years for PhD:s) what the job market is going to actually be like.

I guess I would argue that at 25 years of age and with an academic degree you're supposed to be able to take responsibility over your own life and actually take a look at job prospects and other factors before deciding on a multi-year, life-altering course.

I would _also_ argue that it is a rather narrow view to see your career options only in terms of academic jobs or in the particular field you did your PhD. Fact is, when looking at academia your chances are pretty slim in just about any field out there, with multiple highly qualified applicants for every position, in Sweden and elsewhere. That's not surprising; it's a direct consequence of the career structure of academia.

Most of us will _not_ be able to stay in academia. Most of us, no matter what the field, will have to seek something elsewhere, most likely not actually doing research and probably not working in the field we trained in. But that doesn't mean the degree is a waste.

Believe me, kind sir, there are no swings in the overabundance of archaeologists.

I agree about the responsibilities of 25-y-os. But the actual fact is that far too many do take a stupid path at that age. (I was 22 myself.) If the undergrad slots were fewer, then there would also be fewer PhD candidates.

Any suggestions of where, outside archaeology, an archaeology PhD would improve my salary as compared to going directly to that job at age 22?

Ah, but he does have to live in Aberdeen (the 'Granite City'). Probably the only place in Scotland I wouldn't like to live :)

I'd quite happily live in Barad Dur if the Dark Lord offered me a job like that. I can just see those monographs and conference volumes: "Early Iron Production in the Gorgorothian B", "Second-Age Scimitar Mounts and the Negotiation of Local Military Identity".

But could you compromise your academic honesty enough to work for Sauron? After all, he would expect you to publish papers demonstrating that the Numenorean civilization was based on influences from Mordor and that his armies defeated those of the Last Alliance.

Hey fellow supernumarary: in the 80s when I was an undergraduate, everybody I knew in archaeology tried to discourage me from pursuing it because there were "no jobs." For 20+ years I never hurt for work until the last year or so. Maybe it is time for a PhD to make myself even more useless.
What kind of woman does a Saudi want for a wife? One with a job! They did they same thing, subsidised everybody that wanted to go to school--they all got religion, literature and philosophy degrees and now they import engineers, scientits and doctors (real doctors, that can take care of what ails you)!

Doug, given that my readers would be orcs, I wouldn't bother too much about issues like that.

Mary, I haven't hurt for work since the early 90s, but occasionally I've hurt for pay. And I hurt badly for job security and acadmic affiliation.

Where did that Saudi come from?

Swings in employment wasn't the point - that planning doesn't work either was.

Martin, there are many jobs where having an advanced degree is a clear benefit no matter what the actual degree. No, it won't be a job in archaeology (or anything related to it) but the degree gives you a leg up on your competition as long as you have good secondary skills, be it computer programming, business administration or economics (as part of managing grant money and projects) or whatever. Which, of course, you have cultivated all along, right?

If you are going to take a strict economic view, we should shut down most graduate programs altogether, with medicine and a couple of technology programs left. Over a lifetime you will earn less as a PhD in most fields than if you just left after your undergraduate degree. So to protect people from themselves as you suggest, we'll have to shut down all research training in all arts and most sciences.

You can seriously not appreciate the value of getting paid - getting a real salary - for five years just doing something you love? Even if you never could land any kind of jpb afterwards that is a deal way better than what most people ever get offered in their life. Artists and stage performers would kill for a chance on a once-in-a-lifetime deal like that.

Employers get to choose between people like me, whose main skills are useless and whose secondary skills are useful, and loads of people whose main and secondary skills are useful. Not a great way to compete.

PhD programs are marketed to students, and treated in political discourse, as a means to an end -- viz, to become a useful researcher and teacher. Society does not offer this kind of education in order for people to do fun abstruse things for five years on a public salary. If it became widely known that that is what PhD programs are for, then the funding would disappear immediately.

I have wide interests. There are innumerable things I could quite happily have studied besides archaeology. If that avenue hadn't been open to me, I might today have been able to contribute something far more useful, which would have been better for the taxpayers who funded my PhD training, for my sense of self-worth and for my economic means. Everyone wins except for that abstract entity, archaeology. And I care more about people than abstract entities.

But the question is: were you aware of the situation on the job-market when you started archaeology and just thought that you'll be ok as long as you did something you liked or were you being naive?
(I'm 21 now (and fully aware of the limited job-opportunities)and still think my studying archaeology is a pretty good idea)

I've gone into archaeology training twice, both times vaguely aware that the labour market wasn't great but with delusions of grandeur.

First I did a BA in '92 and immediately got a job in contract archaeology. Two years after graduation I was (incredibly!) offered a steady job, but turned it down because contract archaeology is mostly pretty boring. Instead I went back to the university to do a PhD. This took me nine years and was fun, but when I graduated in '03 I found that there are no jobs where that level of qualification does you any good. Instead I subsist on small grants, continue doing research and wait for the Boomers to retire.

I should perhaps point out that I am actually unusually successful for an archaeology PhD my age. Most of my co-students at the PhD program have gone back to their old jobs in contract archaeology.

Scandinavian contract archaeology is an extremely overpopulated labour market. If you get a job, then it's poorly paid and you won't get a steady all-year job until after ten years. I think studying archaeology on the side while concentrating on something more sensible is an OK idea. The only happy and affluent archaeologists are the amateur ones.

Actually, contrary to M's suggestion, Aberdeen is a pretty nice city these days. Lots of oil money swilling around.

I'm doing a PhD for enjoyment, not for the money. Thats always been my philosophy as a student; there's plenty of time to worry about work (i.e. the next 40 years) so why bother doing it now. Having said that, I can't imagine my job prospects within my field are especially great. There are only so many jobs available in academia and plenty of people who want them; this is especially true for palynologists (although I think I'm pretty much the UK's only Pleistocene pollen person now plus I do things on the charcoal side). I guess I could get some contract work for archaeology units, but it doesn't pay too well.

My friend works in banking in the City (of London) and he reckons he could get me a job pretty easily. So, if I fail to get a job doing what I love, I'll become a souless corporate whore. At least I'll be rich though!

After a short stint of archaeology in Lund in the late 90's I switched to economy and finance. Mostly, it was because of the job prospects, and since I like economy about as much as archaeology the decision was not that difficult. As it turned out, I graduated just as the market plummeted, which was kind of discouraging. But, as noted previously this market swings back in a totally different way as compared to archaeology. So, in the end I landed an interesting and well-paid job, allowing me to nurture my archaeological interests in my spare time -- an unbeatable combination as far as I am concerned.

Tobias, congratulations! I look forward to seeing you work your ass off for free at a dig of mine on your vacation. (-;

What happened to Arkeologikonsult? Usually reliable sources inform me that in the mid-90's, they were a good employer.

Arkeologikonsult is still around, still employing a lot of people and still paying good salaries. But the owner suddenly died recently.

As do I!

My wife worked for them 1994-1995; she liked them a lot.

Sorry to hear about Roger Blidmo. He seems to have been a dynamic personality.

Few would gainsay that!