"The Expertise of Experienced Artefact Hunters on Archaeological Projects"?

According to the Facebook page of the Chartered Institute for Archaeologists (CIfA) - 'the leading professional body for archaeologists in the UK and abroad' - the non-existent Institute of Detectorists has won an award:

The Institute for Decectorists (sic) has been awarded the ATF Award 2019. The new Institute is working to change minsets (sic) among detectorists, away from personal gain and towards standards and care for the past! #CIfA2019

That's rather interesting phrasing, given that detector using artefact hunters and our archaeological colleagues at the Portable Antiquities Scheme have been denying for two decades that the aim of Collection-Driven Exploitation of the Archaeological Record is anything else. They say they're 'not in it fer the munny', they all responsibly apply 'best practice' and they all 'care for the past'.  So why give a one-man-show "institute"  an award for 'working' to achieve what everybody assures us has already been achieved in the artefact hunting community? And if the CIfA does not believe that twenty years of PAS outreach was enough to achieve these three aims, then let it say so, loud and clear - on behalf of 'archaeologists in the UK and abroad' as their wannabe representative body.

The award announced

Let's have a look at that award, it was issued by the Archaeology Training Forum for (it says here) a Continuing Professional Development course on 'metal detecting for archaeological projects - an introduction'.  I suspect this refers to the November 2018 Oxford University Department of Continuing Education meeting 'The use of Metal Detectors in Archaeological Projects'. See also here.

The ATF is, it says: 'a delegate body which represents all those organisations which have an interest in the issues of training and career development in archaeology. It was constituted in 1998 to review the provision of training in archaeology and to co-ordinate future strategies to meet the profession’s training needs'. Is the use of a metal-detecting machine in fact one of the strategic aims of the development of professional archaeology in Britain? There are no bodies connected with artefact hunting or the collection-driven exploitation of the archaeological record listed as Members of the Forum and I do not see why machine-aided artefact hunting is seen as any kind of 'archaeological training'. Maybe the CIfA and ATF can explain that. Was anybody representing the ATF or CIfA observing at the Rowley House session in November 2018? On what basis was this award given?

Of course the FLOs are excited, one of their own got an award. Here's one, ecstatically fawning:

A hearty congratulations to the Institute of Detectorists on winning the prestigious Archaeology Training Forum Award at the CiFA conference. Keith Wescott is doing great work there, improving standards, educating, and aiming to bring detectorists into professional practice.

'Doing great work' at the CIfA Conference, improving standards, educating, and aiming to bring detectorists into professional practice. Presumably he's referring to a CIfA session on this issue ('learn how to about how to integrate detectorists into your professional archaeological practice in this #CIfA2019 session!'). As Mike Parker however notes:

Mike Parker "utilising the expertise of experienced detectorists on archaeological projects"!!! You mean swing low, swing slow, walk in a straight line as directed and put a marker in when there's a beep? An archaeo student, an amateur archaeologist, and indeed an interested passing dog walker (or well-programmed drone) could do that after 10 seconds training. The idea that detectorists have an expertise to bring to the table is a fallacy. Recognising what to dig and what not to dig because it's "trash" is not an expertise that should be utilised in archaeology. That's for selective exploitation for personal gain, not science. That's the big difference between the two activities. The term "bringing expertise" is silly unless applied to an archaeological project on an entirely different planet.

The course participants

This is what the course did that is thought by the ATF to be so valuable as Continuing Professional Development for archaeologists:

We will evaluate how ‘stratigraphy’ and ‘context’ relates the ‘Code of Practice’ through to an understanding of archaeological investigation and recording in the planning process. We look at typical documents such as method statements and the Written Scheme of Investigation, to what will be required and expected of the detectorist when on site and further preparation and reporting for pre and post site attendance. This introductory course will cover specific survey methodologies such as PDAS: Partial and Detailed Artefact Surveys  [...] Programme details: Held in association with 'The Association of Detectorists'

9.30am Registration
9.45am Welcome and Introduction
Raising the profile of the ‘Consultant Practitioner’
Building the archaeologist/detectorist relationship
The ‘Code of Practice’ and ‘Treasure Act’
What do detectorists want in return?
11.00am Coffee / tea
11.30am Archaeological methods: the detectorists prospective.
Stratigraphy and the matrix
Recording and context
Trial trenching and evaluation
Working with the Project Manager   12.45pm Lunch
2.00pm The role of the detectorist practitioner
Responsibilities and what is expected?Typical documents and the detectorists submittal
Health and safety and certification schemes
Discussions on forward development
3.15pm Tea / coffee
3.45pm Methodology and the detectorist.
Site evaluation and custom settings
The need for standardised methodologies
PDAS: Partial and Detailed Artefact Survey
The detectorists check-list
5.00pm Course disperses