This is a copy of the file http://www.gu.uwa.edu.au/departments/psa/www/newsletters/feb_96/arch.htm, from the February 1996 UWA Postgraduates Student Association's Postscript Newsletter, stored at UWA by the PSA. It includes an article by 1993 PSA President Andrus Budrikis, and a summary of the University's return comments.

The contents begin below this broad line...

The following article is by the 1993 PSA president, Andrus Budrikis. It is his view of the events in the Archaeology department over the past few years. We invited the Deputy Vice Chancellor to give the University's account of events, which also follows. We realise that the article by Andrus may be controversial. However, after great deliberation we have chosen to print the article; not because we wish to alienate any sector of the University, and not because we wish to sensationalise. We believe that the issue of the way the University deals with complaints by PG students is an ongoing and important one and that the PSA has a duty to PG students to be vocal about this issue. Not only in the Archaeology Department, but across many disciplines in this University, PG students have been, and still are, faced with the question of what to do when they have a genuine complaint about someone with greater power than themselves (usually an Academic). Often students are afraid to complain formally because of the great risk to their future.

See Also:

Archaeology Saga Continues

Recently the Hon Mark Nevill delivered a speech to the Legislative Council covering many of the matters surrounding the Archaeology Saga. Reading the speech is akin to reading a cheap novel (Pulp Fiction). The reader is struck with disbelief that such a plot could be real and in fact is taking place on our own campus.

Some may think that drawing attention to this speech is "muck" raking or similar. I think it is important that this university seeks the truth. We are not a private company or some such group that can seek to cover up our bad deeds and hope to get away with them. We are a university. Our motto is to "seek wisdom". What is left of academic ideals is annunciated in our mission statement.

The PSA has been closely involved in trying to help postgraduates affected by the Archaeology Saga. In May 1993 the PSA passed the following motion "As a student representative body the Postgraduate Students Association calls upon the University of Western Australia to conduct an independent investigation into the matters and reviews with respect to the former Archaeology Department, former Centre for Prehistory, Centre for Archaeology and the archaeology postgraduate students in the Geography Department to determine whether adherence to correct process has in fact occurred with respect to resolving the problems with the above and whether these procedures are suitable with respect to both protecting postgraduate students and providing them with a suitable environment for their academic studies."

This motion was taken to the Senate in June 1993. The response was not to call for an independent enquiry or hold any enquiry what-so-ever. Why not? Simply because two inquiries had already taken place - a departmental review and the Hotop Clyde report. Presumably all the student (including postgraduate) complaints had been properly investigated.

This now appears to be far from the truth.In an article in the Australian (on the PSA Web page) Kate Legge quotes either Professor Hotop or Professor Clyde as saying that the brief they were given was "very carefully circumscribed". She also says that the departmental review members "favoured a properly constituted inquiry to hear evidence so that the allegations could be substantiated and acted upon, or dismissed..." Was the Hotop Clyde report a proper investigation or was it simply a cover up? What were the terms of reference?

Has the universities inaction affected postgraduates? It surly has. Kim Sales wrote in her letter of withdrawal of Phd candidature "The inability or unwillingness of the University to effectively deal with the problems in Archaeology has had negative repercussions for me, repercussions which force me to withdraw my candidature". She left after some five years of study.

The University has a duty of care to its members, including students, and to the public to take both its own mission statements and motto seriously. The esteem that universities hold in the public eye is not a divine right but an earned reputation. The Archaeology saga is perhaps the single biggest academic issue in the history of Australia. The continual denial of a problem or claim that the issues have been resolved or investigated properly are both erroneous and misleading. The University's administration have (somewhat successfully) portrayed the whole problem as a conflict between two academics (Prof Bowdler and Dr Rindos). By doing this they have sought to trivialise the complaints made by many students. These complaints, judging from the nature of them as outlined in Mark Nevill's speech, must have caused great anguish to the students to submit in a formal manner (to the departmental review and the Hotop Clyde "investigation"). The manner that the University has dealt with these complaints is not worthy of an institution of higher learning.

Andrus Budrikis Ph: 386-7356 FAX: 386-6924 UWA: 380-3849

STATEMENT FOR THE PSA JOURNAL

The University appreciates the courtesy shown by the PSA in inviting it to comment on Andrus Budrikis' statement on Archaeology students. The welfare of students affected by problems in Archaeology has been one of its primary concerns since they were first identified. Arrangements were made for students to be located in other departments with different supervisors, generally with success, and other kinds of help were given from time to time.

It recognises however, that there may have been a few who found the situation in Archaeology too disruptive, and left the University. Their withdrawal is greatly regretted. The University has not attempted to cover anything up.

Regrettable as the problems in Archaeology may have been, they did point out the need for the University to re-evaluate its treatment of postgraduate students as a discrete group within the community. Two positive results of this reassessment have been the creation of the Postgraduate Students Centre in Hackett Hall, and the appointment of the Dean of Postgraduate Students, who will soon be taking up office.

The working relationship between postgraduate students and their supervisors must inevitably be a close one, involving high levels of respect and understanding on both sides. The University is steadily putting in place systems and safeguards to protect that working relationship, and ensure that all students have the optimum opportunity to complete their degrees.

Return toPSA February 96 Newsletter Content Page

Return toPostgraduates Student Association Home Page