So, I had intended that I would write about the Annual Science Meeting and the first QUADRAT Training Day a little sooner, but I can hardly express the amount that has occurred in the last month. And, so I thought that it would be just as conducive to spend more time reflecting on the aforementioned event and write an entry on Conferences more generally as they seem to have been a fixture of this early research period. It is my intention that I also write briefly here on the mental miasma that still seems to surround my being here, and the question that seems to run on repeat as to why this does not yet seem in any way normal or mundane. There will of course also be an update on any decisions taken related to the project and where you may find me in another month’s time.
The Conference is a medium which is supposed to mimic an academics happy place, so to speak, where flocks of researchers gather to actively listen to, debate and hopefully celebrate the latest in research. There is always an excess of interesting conversations, good will, good food and sometimes a little too much alcohol. It was once expressed to me that the last item of the list was essential because academics are fundamentally awkward beings and well, alcohol is a catalyst for conversation. This environment is also a treasure, a space which becomes a melting pot of ideas, a nebula where new research can be formed, and networks expand. Recently a shift in the attendees at Conferences has occurred, now wonderfully the crowd is not only academic, those that attend each Conference is never the same. The Conference now is truly interdisciplinary at least most of the time and from my fortunate experience. So, I think you can tell, I do appreciate Conferences, despite my own challenges with the concept of networking and this environment will be a beneficial place to foster development in my own research and this project. Of course, I will make it a point to only present my research at truly accessible Conferences and to present my research in an accessible format, not over-complicated and making use of accessible design techniques involving contrast, readability, image descriptors, transcripts, etc.
The Annual QUADRAT Science Meeting (4th October 2022) was unfortunately a little problematic in the first instance, firstly due to it being situated outside Aberdeen which made is relatively difficult to access, it meant an early bus journey and for myself an expensive taxi ride. I understand and to some extent appreciate the reason for this, organisers in line with the Carbon off-set policy of QUADRAT and the University of Aberdeen, hosted the event at the P&J Live Venue which is one of the most environmentally conscious and carbon neutral venues in Europe. This is a policy which I wholeheartedly support and in line with a fundamental pillar of my own research ethos, that of environmental sustainability wherever feasible. However, on balance the benefit of what is a truly outstanding venue may have been offset through our collective journeys to it and in particular the combined ferry and bus travel of the Queens University Belfast contingent. The second issue that, as Cohort 4, we did not actually know anyone participating in the presentations nor did we know or recognise each other. Later we were informed that usually the Training Day would have taken place prior to the Conference, but still, due to this the experience was a little isolating and the potential of the event was reduced somewhat. The intention of the Annual QUADRAT Science Meeting I believe is to help to foster a sense of community amongst the PhD Students and Researchers, but to also celebrate the collective achievements of the group. To an extent, this, it did achieve. An entire day of talks on everything from Ocean Oxygenation (B. Hoogakker) to Microplastic Uptake (R. Coyle) to Slurry Effect On Earthworms (C. Boughton) to study of Broad-Leaved Woodland (A. Everard). This was intriguing, bemusing and at times completely baffling, and feedback from others maintains this, yet it was fundamentally beneficial to broaden my research horizons and appreciate the works of my colleagues. What was a good day on the whole ended on a significant bad note, the plenary speaker with quite a lot of his overtly problematic comments caused quite the spike of anxiety and irritation for attendees. Despite being an award-winning scientist, the conversation was not inspirational and practically the only aspect of use noted was that as researchers we will need to be able to face rejection, which set the tone quite honestly. Comments such as PhD Students needing to work at least (minimum) 37.5-hour weeks, even though the UK average for full-time workers is 36.3 hours (September 2022), or they obviously are not enthusiastic about research and shouldn’t be in the industry are infuriating and quite frankly worrisome. This unsustainable work culture is why many do not make it to the end of a PhD, why ‘breakdown’ events are part of the fatalist humour of the PhD and why our research culture is not as rich as it could be because we are losing excellent scientists to, woke terminology or otherwise, burnout.
The 5th October 2022 Training Day was another matter, it began well with instruction by Dr C. Fraser Wood of The Mindset Method group. This consisted of content which has been of real use to me, detailing what is expected of a research student and how to plan for success without damaging our research mindset, and delivered in such a positive and uplifting manner. Needless to say, this dispelled some of the disillusionment and anxiety caused by comments made by the plenary speaker of the previous day. There was a similarly useful session later in the day in terms of content which detailed the expectation and responsibilities in the Student-Supervisor relationship, I was previously unaware for example that it was supervisor responsibility to help me to determine my next steps after the PhD journey. Otherwise, there was a session delivered by the University of Aberdeen Student Support Team which was, in my opinion, problematic. It heavily encouraged peer-centric support associated with mental health and mental wellbeing. To an extent to be clear, I agree with this, however, this in many examples took this to a level in which professional level services would be required and at which point any engaging peer would also be at risk of mental health crisis. By all means care for each other in the research bubble but any individual should also be aware this should not be to the detriment of their own mental wellbeing, tackling something like an eating disorder (one of the examples) should only be done by a professional. The last point, and issue unfortunately, in regard to this is the extent to which much of this information would have actually been useful to the Queens University Belfast contingent. Much of the information, contacts, etc. provided was solely applicable to University of Aberdeen affiliates which must have been frustrating and somewhat isolating for the Belfast students.
Recently I attended the Prehistory On The Edge Conference (11th-12th November 2022) at the University of Aberdeen. The Conference brief was the study and celebration of the Stone Age (Mesolithic) in North-West Europe in order to honour the memory of the exceptional researcher and all-round lovely human Prof. Caroline Wickham-Jones. It achieved this and more with an outstanding selection of academics, authors and archaeological volunteer groups all contributing talks which simultaneously updated attendees to significant changes in the world of Stone Age archaeology and honoured the contribution made to projects by Prof. C. Wickham-Jones. Of particular interest to me and this project was a presentation entitled ‘Late Pleistocene and early Holocene Hunter-Gatherers in Changing Technological, Climatic, and Animal Environments: A Portfolio of Recent Work’ presented by S. T. Hussain (CLIOARCH Team). Their work on species distribution models for the Late Pleistocene, using climate data from the period and modern distribution data modes combined with an optimal foraging theory perspective might be specifically influential to the first aspect of this PhD project. This research demonstrated for example that animal habitat suitability can be low whilst representation in archaeological sites is high in relation to Reindeer. This method of mapping will be influential to the Stage 1 ‘Collation of extant data and mapping leading to comparison of extant models’ section of this PhD, as it provides a method for the combining of palaeoecological datasets and archaeological site data. Also particularly impactful were the talks entitled ‘What’s the Story? Crossing the Genres with Caroline Wickham-Jones’ by Margaret Elphinstone and ‘A Selection of Extracts/Readings’ by Kathleen Jamie. This highlighted how we as archaeologists can better engage outside our direct discipline to communicate our research in a sometimes more impactful sense, Prof. C. Wickham-Jones achieved this in part through working with authors to help inform them in accuracies. Some of the extracts and works read were moving in the extreme and I hope to produce as an aspect of this PhD outputs which aren’t necessarily academic in nature with more public appeal and this same ability to move. Whilst maintaining the ethos that between archaeology and fiction, a difference in genre does not imply a difference in standards. After all, fiction can do something which I as an archaeologist cannot, in reconstructing potentially the unanswerable question of vanished mindsets, bridging the distance from material cultures using imaginative narrative.
I will be attending another Conference soon, the Association for Environmental Archaeology (AEA) Conference (2nd-4th December 2022) in Glasgow. This will certainly be a more traditional archaeological Conference, although the programme seems to promise interdisciplinarity. Updates to follow on this.
I have been here for nearly two months now, time has flown, so perhaps essentially that is the reasoning behind my not yet falling into a routine or this entire experience feeling normal and mundane. Or perhaps, the process of a PhD will never and was never meant to be normal, after all, what I am being allowed to do is exceptional. Whatever the circumstance, it is necessary to note that if you undertake a PhD do not expect for it all to settle down in the first few months or even perhaps the first year. And that is fine. In the space of a year, I have completed my MRes, begun a PhD, submitted for publishing my first article and moved the furthest from home I have been, that is a lot and I’m firing on my fight or flight responses constantly, so I am just going to exist now for the remainder of the year and keep trying to ‘find my feet’.
The major update with the project I suppose is that I have now decided that I will undertake a PhD by papers, with at least three paper outputs. This will be a challenged however I believe that the project structure that is developing is suited to this format. Otherwise, I am still reading, though this may be a little more directed now as I begin to understand exactly what I want to achieve.
Signing off,
Leia Tilley