From Discipline to Profession: A Problem Facing Anthropology1

Practicing Anthropology, 2001

A glaring mismatch exists between anthropology graduate programs in the United States and the careers of their graduates. Here, I focus on gaps in Ph.D. curricula, but similar patterns characterize many M. A. programs as well. In this article, I challenge the academic anthropology establishment to show that it is providing doctoral students with the knowledge, perspectives, and skills they need to realize optimal work lives. In my view, they are not. Nor are most students being prepared to weigh the ethics of getting the job done outside the ivory towers. Below I present data concerning curriculum offerings and degree requirements at the twenty largest anthropology Ph.D. programs in the nation. To provide context, I first remind the reader of employment patterns for new anthropology Ph.D.s. in the United States.

Practicing Anthropology

Despite their academic training, most anthropologists do not work in tenure-track positions in departments of anthropology. While some systematic data indicate where these anthropologists are employed, we know less about their experiences or what led them to work outside the academy. This paper discusses examples of divergent career paths among the special issue contributors and analyzes key themes in their papers. While their histories vary generationally, our authors share commonalities. Many mastered cross-over skills that prepared them to work collaboratively and to apply anthropological insights and methods in research and community settings. Some perceived stigma and barriers to communicating with traditional academic colleagues. Others merged theory and practice to develop pedagogical reforms. Drawing on lessons as mentors in training programs and advocates in our own careers, we recommend that practitioners' narratives be used to re-imagine career options, revise trainin...

NAPA Bulletin, 2008

With its sustained emphasis on creating, implementing, and maintaining positive impacts on issues of local, national, and global importance, applied anthropology continues to be a crucial and relevant field of study. Its practitioners demonstrate their engagement in multifarious ways both in and outside the academy, showcasing their commitment not only to the tenets of academic rigor, but also to challenges shaped by real-world situations. This unique volume of 14 articles by 16 academics and practitioners provides specific advice to students on both the tangible benefits and potential disadvantages of careers in applied anthropology in the national and international arenas. Contributors offer practical, step-by-step advice on practicing anthropology with an M.A. degree, careers in national and international consultancy, small consulting business development, executive leadership, combining careers in applied anthropology and the academy, field school training, collaborative research and public engagement, applied anthropology in nonanthropological settings, among others. Although most draw on their personal life histories and careers as illustrations, their focus is on reflection, analysis, and recommendations that result from their experiences. The contributors to this volume stress the contemporary relevance of anthropology, the advantages of obtaining training in anthropology, and the plethora of opportunities to put anthropology to use in the real world with exceptional results. Keywords: applied anthropology, career advice, practicing anthropology, mentorship, theory and praxis napa B u l l e t i n 2 9 / I n t r o d u c t i o n

National Association for the Practice of Anthropology Bulletin, 2008

With its sustained emphasis on creating, implementing, and maintaining positive impacts on issues of local, national, and global importance, applied anthropology continues to be a crucial and relevant field of study. Its practitioners demonstrate their engagement in multifarious ways both in and outside the academy, showcasing their commitment not only to the tenets of academic rigor, but also to challenges shaped by real-world situations. This unique volume of 14 articles by 16 academics and practitioners provides specific advice to students on both the tangible benefits and potential disadvantages of careers in applied anthropology in the national and international arenas. Contributors offer practical, step-by-step advice on practicing anthropology with an M.A. degree, careers in national and international consultancy, small consulting business development, executive leadership, combining careers in applied anthropology and the academy, field school training, collaborative research and public engagement, applied anthropology in nonanthropological settings, among others. Although most draw on their personal life histories and careers as illustrations, their focus is on reflection, analysis, and recommendations that result from their experiences. The contributors to this volume stress the contemporary relevance of anthropology, the advantages of obtaining training in anthropology, and the plethora of opportunities to put anthropology to use in the real world with exceptional results. Keywords: applied anthropology, career advice, practicing anthropology, mentorship, theory and praxis napa B u l l e t i n 2 9 / I n t r o d u c t i o n

IGNOU, 2022

Broadly, anthropology can be divided into academic anthropology and practicing anthropology considering the career choices pursued by the trained anthropologists. We will be discussing these two domains at length in this unit. The term ‘applied’ or ‘practicing’ anthropologists are used inter-changeably in this unit to keep it simple for the purpose of understanding. However, there are scholars (Baba 2009; Nolan 2003) who make a distinction between ‘applied’ and ‘practicing’ anthropologists too. Applied anthropologists generally oscillate between academic and non-academic settings. Both practicing and applied anthropology have their focal point of policy formulation rather than contributing to pure theoretical knowledge.

Applied Anthropology: Unexpected Places Topics and Methods, 2015

Over a one-and-a-half-year period I worked at two nonprofits, Witness for Peace Southeast (WFPSE), a small international nonprofit that focuses on human rights issues created by United States military and economic intervention in Latin America, and a large environmental organization in Australia, Greenpeace Australia Pacific (GPAP). Though the organizations differed in size, location, and interests, my work at both generated similar queries about how anthropology can be used outside of the academic setting. However, for both roles with the nonprofits, I was not hired as an anthropologist. Instead, it was assumed that my anthropological learnings would bolster my work and creativity throughout the job. I hoped this would hold true. Nonetheless, with both positions I struggled to determine how my studies would amplify my work, as little I learned in school spoke directly to working outside of the field of academia. My story begins in 2013 when I graduated with a master's in anthropology from George Mason University. When I began graduate school I wanted to use my anthropological education to work from within the US government and better international relationships. My master's was aimed to buttress my passion for humane US policies with the knowledge, skills, and qualifications necessary to pursue my goal, which, simply put, was to help people. However, as my education continued I quickly decided that I was uncomfortable working within an institution in which the results of my research could be taken piecemeal and used to justify already existing policies that needed alterations. I adhere to the notion that all anthropological work should be published publicly. And so, I decided I wanted to pressure the system from the outside instead of working within it. Getting my master's in anthropology to "further my career" was not about increasing my salary (though I hoped this would be a happy side-effect), it was intended to assist me in finding my niche in the world, to make my daily life more meaningful through an education that gave me the skills and knowledge to make a sustainable change in the ills of the world-specifically the impacts of US militarization in Latin America. Throughout my struggle to find my career, I have slowly learned that my career does not define me. I define my career. My passion, my interests, my love and knowledge of anthropology, and my own need to have a job that I feel pays earth and humankind for my existence, defines what I do.

American Anthropologist, 2012

This article explores shifts in anthropological career opportunities and subjectivities in the United States since World War II. Survey and interview data reveal a lively discourse surrounding the changing job market in which practicing anthropology outside of the academy is often identified as a secondary occupational choice. We argue that the nonacademic practitioner's subjectivity is defined in contrast to (and by) academically based anthropologists and the long-standing, but often implicit, hierarchy of universities and programs. Typically, the nonacademic "other" is further marginalized by his or her gender and racial-ethnic minority status. However, we find evidence of a "sea change" within the discipline, led by nonuniversity-based practitioners and a subset of departments (often with a commitment to applied anthropology), that produces and links practitioners with students and faculty in their programs. [careers, practicing anthropology, gender] Subjectivités des carrières dans l'anthropologie auxÉtats-Unis: sexe, pratique, et résistance Cet article examine les transformations dans les perspectives de carrière et des subjectivités auxÉtats-Unis depuis la Seconde Guerre mondiale. Les données recueillies au cours de sondages et d'entretiens nous révèlent une discussion animée sur le marché de l'emploi changeant, où exercer le métier d'antropologue hors du milieu universitaire s'apparentè a un choix de métier secondaire. Nous soutenons que la subjectivité du praticien non-universitaire se définit par contraste avec (et par) des anthropologues dans les universités ainsi qu'une hiérarchie bienétablie, mais souvent implicite, d'universités et de programmes d'études. Typiquement, l' "autre" non-universitaire est encore plus marginalisé par son sexe et par son statut minoritaire racial/éthnique. Toutefois, nous trouvons des signes d'un bouleversement dans la discipline, bouleversement initié par des praticiens non-universitaires et par un sous-ensemble de départements (souvent engagés dans l'anthropologie appliquée) qui forment des praticiens et lient ceux-ci aux etudiants et aux professeurs dans ces départements. Las subjetividades de carrera en la antropología de los Estados Unidos: Género, práctica y resistencia Este artículo explora los cambios en las oportunidades de carrera antropológica y las subjetividades en los Estados Unidos desde la Primera Guerra Mundial. Los datos de entrevista y encuesta revelan un discurso animado sobre el mercado de trabajo cambiante en lo que la práctica de la antropología fuera de la academia frecuentemente es la opción profesional secundaria. Argumentamos que la subjetividad del practicante no docente se define en contra de (y por) antropólogos licenciados y la jerarquía antigua pero implícita de las universidades y de los programas. Usualmente, el "otro" no-académico es marginalizado por su género y estatus racial-étnico minoritario. No obstante encontramos evidencia de una transformación dentro de la disciplina, dirigida por practicantes no licenciados y un subconjunto de departamentos (frecuentemente comprometido con antropología aplicada) que producen practicantes y los conectan con estudiantes y educadores en sus programas.