Genealogical Maturity

From FamilySearch Wiki

(Difference between revisions)
(Part way done with tables)
(Fill in the tables)
Line 1: Line 1:
Genealogical Maturity is a system of self evaluation and self improvement first proposed by the Ancestry Insider in 2009. The Genealogical Maturity model measures one's understanding and use of the [[Genealogical Proof Standard|Genealogical Proof Standard]]. and the associated Evidence Analysis Research Process Map. The model measures improvement in five areas: sources, citations, information, evidence, and conclusions.<br>  
+
Genealogical Maturity is a system of self evaluation and self improvement first proposed by the Ancestry Insider in 2009. The Genealogical Maturity model measures one's understanding and use of the [[Genealogical Proof Standard|Genealogical Proof Standard]]. and the associated Evidence Analysis Research Process Map. The model measures improvement in five categories: sources, citations, information, evidence, and conclusions.<br>  
  
 
== Definitions  ==
 
== Definitions  ==
Line 5: Line 5:
 
The Genealogical Maturity model uses dictionary definitions as much as possible, with clarifications from leading genealogists.  
 
The Genealogical Maturity model uses dictionary definitions as much as possible, with clarifications from leading genealogists.  
  
'''source '''– 1. the origin that supplies information.<ref>''Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary'', online edition (www.m-w.com : accessed 23 November 2009), “source.”</ref> 2. “an artifact, book, document, film, person, recording, website, etc., from which information is obtained.”<ref>Elizabeth Shown Mills, CG, CGL, FNGS, FASG, FUGA, ''Evidence Explained: Citing History Sources from Artifacts to Cyberspace'', 2nd ed. [hereinafter, EE2] (Baltimore, Maryland: Genealogical Publishing Company, 2009), 828.</ref>  
+
'''source '''– 1. the origin that supplies information.<ref>''Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary'', online edition (www.m-w.com : accessed 23 November 2009), “source.”</ref> 2. “an artifact, book, document, film, person, recording, website, etc., from which information is obtained.”<ref>Elizabeth Shown Mills, CG, CGL, FNGS, FASG, FUGA, ''Evidence Explained: Citing History Sources from Artifacts to Cyberspace'', 2nd ed. [hereinafter, ''EE2''] (Baltimore, Maryland: Genealogical Publishing Company, 2009), 828.</ref>  
  
'''citation '''– 1. “citations are statements in which we identify our source or sources for…particular [information].”<ref>Mills, EE2, 42.</ref> 2. “a citation states where you found [the cited] piece of information.”<ref>Patricia Law Hatcher, CG, FASG, quoted in The Source, ed. Loretto Dennis Szucs, FUGA, and Sandra Hargreaves Luebking, FUGA, 3rd ed. (Provo, Utah: Ancestry, 2006) p. 24; citing “How Do You Know?” in Producing a Quality Family History (Salt Lake City: Ancestry, 1996), 117.</ref>  
+
'''citation '''– 1. “citations are statements in which we identify our source or sources for…particular [information].”<ref>Mills, ''EE2'', 42.</ref> 2. “a citation states where you found [the cited] piece of information.”<ref>Patricia Law Hatcher, CG, FASG, quoted in ''The Source'', ed. Loretto Dennis Szucs, FUGA, and Sandra Hargreaves Luebking, FUGA, 3rd ed. (Provo, Utah: Ancestry, 2006) p. 24; citing “How Do You Know?” in ''Producing a Quality Family History'' (Salt Lake City: Ancestry, 1996), 117.</ref>  
  
'''information '''- 1. “knowledge obtained from investigation.”<ref>Merriam-Webster, “information.”</ref> 2. “the content of a source—that is, its factual statements or its raw data.”<ref>Mills, EE2, 24.</ref>  
+
'''information '''- 1. “knowledge obtained from investigation.”<ref>''Merriam-Webster'', “information.”</ref> 2. “the content of a source—that is, its factual statements or its raw data.”<ref>Mills, ''EE2'', 24.</ref>  
  
'''evidence '''– 1. “something that furnishes proof.”<ref>Merriam-Webster, “evidence.”</ref> 2. “information that is relevant to the problem.”<ref>Mills, ''EE2'', 822.</ref> 3. analyzed and correlated information assessed to be of sufficient quality.<ref>Christine Rose,CG, CGL, FASG,, ''Genealogical Proof Standard: Building a Solid Case'' (San Jose, California: CR Publications, 2005), 2.</ref> 4. “the information that we conclude—after careful evaluation—supports or contradicts the statement we would like to make, or are about to make, about an ancestor.”<ref>The Board for Certification of Genealogists (BCG), The BCG Genealogical Standards Manual, ed. Helen F. M. Leary, CG, CGL, FASG, (Provo, Utah: Ancestry, 2000), 8.</ref>  
+
'''evidence '''– 1. “something that furnishes proof.”<ref>''Merriam-Webster'', “evidence.”</ref> 2. “information that is relevant to the problem.”<ref>Mills, ''EE2'', 822.</ref> 3. analyzed and correlated information assessed to be of sufficient quality.<ref>Christine Rose,CG, CGL, FASG,, ''Genealogical Proof Standard: Building a Solid Case'' (San Jose, California: CR Publications, 2005), 2.</ref> 4. “the information that we conclude—after careful evaluation—supports or contradicts the statement we would like to make, or are about to make, about an ancestor.”<ref>The Board for Certification of Genealogists (BCG), ''The BCG Genealogical Standards Manual'', ed. Helen F. M. Leary, CG, CGL, FASG, (Provo, Utah: Ancestry, 2000), 8.</ref>  
  
'''conclusion '''– 1. “a reasoned judgment.”<ref>''Merriam-Webster'', “conclusion.”</ref> 2. “a decision [that should be] based on well-reasoned and thoroughly documented evidence gleaned from sound research.”<ref>Mills, EE2, 820.</ref>  
+
'''conclusion '''– 1. “a reasoned judgment.”<ref>''Merriam-Webster'', “conclusion.”</ref> 2. “a decision [that should be] based on well-reasoned and thoroughly documented evidence gleaned from sound research.”<ref>Mills, ''EE2'', 820.</ref>  
  
== Self Evaluation<br> ==
+
== Self Evaluation  ==
  
 
The model asks that a person place a check mark next to each of the following statements that describes him or her. <br>  
 
The model asks that a person place a check mark next to each of the following statements that describes him or her. <br>  
Line 34: Line 34:
 
|-
 
|-
 
| 2.  
 
| 2.  
 +
| Emerging
 +
| Mostly relies on compiled genealogies and online sources.
 
|  
 
|  
 +
|-
 +
| 3.
 +
| Practicing
 +
| Uses a limited number of record types and repositories. Mostly relies on online and microfilmed sources.
 
|  
 
|  
 +
|-
 +
| 4.
 +
| Proficient
 +
| Uses a wide variety of record types. Often contacts record custodians to obtain copies of high-quality sources.
 +
|
 +
|-
 +
| 5.
 +
| Stellar
 +
| Insightfully pursues research at multiple, targeted repositories, making use of a plethora of records and record types. "Burned counties" are not roadblocks.
 
|  
 
|  
 
|}
 
|}
 
<br>
 
 
<br> 1. Entry
 
 
Typically relies on compiled genealogies.
 
 
2. Emerging
 
 
Mostly relies on compiled genealogies and online sources.
 
 
3. Practicing
 
 
Uses a limited number of record types and repositories. Mostly relies on online and microfilmed sources.
 
 
4. Proficient
 
 
Uses a wide variety of record types. Often contacts record custodians to obtain copies of high-quality sources.
 
 
5. Stellar
 
 
Insightfully pursues research at multiple, targeted repositories, making use of a plethora of records and record types. "Burned counties" are not roadblocks.
 
  
 
=== Citations  ===
 
=== Citations  ===
Line 70: Line 63:
 
! scope="col" | Check
 
! scope="col" | Check
 
|-
 
|-
 +
| 1.
 +
| Entry
 +
| Captures URLs for online sources and citations for published sources.
 
|  
 
|  
 +
|-
 +
| 2.
 +
| Emerging
 +
| Increasingly captures necessary information for manuscript sources.
 
|  
 
|  
 +
|-
 +
| 3.
 +
| Practicing
 +
| Typically produces complete source citations.
 
|  
 
|  
 +
|-
 +
| 4.
 +
| Proficient
 +
| Gives complete and accurate source citations including provenance and quality assessment.
 
|  
 
|  
 
|-
 
|-
|  
+
| 5.
|  
+
| Stellar
|  
+
| Overcomes limitations of genealogical software to create well organized, industry standard reference notes and source lists.
 
|  
 
|  
 
|}
 
|}
 
1. Entry
 
 
Captures URLs for online sources and citations for published sources.
 
 
2. Emerging
 
 
Increasingly captures necessary information for manuscript sources.
 
 
3. Practicing
 
 
Typically produces complete source citations.
 
 
4. Proficient
 
 
Gives complete and accurate source citations including provenance and quality assessment.
 
 
5. Stellar
 
 
Overcomes limitations of genealogical software to create well organized, industry standard reference notes and source lists.
 
  
 
=== Information  ===
 
=== Information  ===
Line 110: Line 98:
 
! scope="col" | Check
 
! scope="col" | Check
 
|-
 
|-
 +
| 1.
 +
| Entry
 +
| Typically does not realize the need to judge information quality and has no basis for doing so.
 
|  
 
|  
 +
|-
 +
| 2.
 +
| Emerging
 +
| Emerging realization that information quality differs. Muddles evaluation by thinking of primary/secondary sources instead of primary/secondary information, leading to muddled evaluation when sources contain both.
 
|  
 
|  
 +
|-
 +
| 3.
 +
| Practicing
 +
| Judges information by source type, informant knowledge, and record timing. Applies "primary/secondary" to information instead of sources.
 
|  
 
|  
 +
|-
 +
| 4.
 +
| Proficient
 +
| Additionally, learns history necessary to recognize and evaluate all explicit information in a source.
 
|  
 
|  
 
|-
 
|-
|  
+
| 5.
|  
+
| Stellar
|  
+
| Additionally, utilizes implicit information in a source. Finds information in cases like illegitimacy that stump most researchers.
 
|  
 
|  
 
|}
 
|}
 
1. Entry
 
 
Typically does not realize the need to judge information quality and has no basis for doing so.
 
 
2. Emerging
 
 
Emerging realization that information quality differs. Muddles evaluation by thinking of primary/secondary sources instead of primary/secondary information, leading to muddled evaluation when sources contain both.
 
 
3. Practicing
 
 
Judges information by source type, informant knowledge, and record timing. Applies "primary/secondary" to information instead of sources.
 
 
4. Proficient
 
 
Additionally, learns history necessary to recognize and evaluate all explicit information in a source.
 
 
5. Stellar
 
 
Additionally, utilizes implicit information in a source. Finds information in cases like illegitimacy that stump most researchers.
 
  
 
=== Evidence  ===
 
=== Evidence  ===
Line 150: Line 133:
 
! scope="col" | Check
 
! scope="col" | Check
 
|-
 
|-
 +
| 1.
 +
| Entry
 +
| Limited understanding of evidence and the role it plays. Typically ignores conflicting evidence.
 
|  
 
|  
 +
|-
 +
| 2.
 +
| Emerging
 +
| Captures direct, supporting evidence and increasingly depends upon it.
 
|  
 
|  
 +
|-
 +
| 3.
 +
| Practicing
 +
| Additionally, captures directly conflicting evidence.
 
|  
 
|  
 +
|-
 +
| 4.
 +
| Proficient
 +
| Additionally, recognizes and captures indirect, supporting evidence.
 
|  
 
|  
 
|-
 
|-
|  
+
| 5.
|  
+
| Stellar
|  
+
| Additionally, recognizes and captures indirect, conflicting evidence.
 
|  
 
|  
 
|}
 
|}
 
1. Entry
 
 
Limited understanding of evidence and the role it plays. Typically ignores conflicting evidence.
 
 
2. Emerging
 
 
Captures direct, supporting evidence and increasingly depends upon it.
 
 
3. Practicing
 
 
Additionally, captures directly conflicting evidence.
 
 
4. Proficient
 
 
Additionally, recognizes and captures indirect, supporting evidence.
 
 
5. Stellar
 
 
Additionally, recognizes and captures indirect, conflicting evidence.
 
  
 
=== Conclusions  ===
 
=== Conclusions  ===
Line 190: Line 168:
 
! scope="col" | Check
 
! scope="col" | Check
 
|-
 
|-
 +
| 1.
 +
| Entry
 +
| In the absence of analysis, reaches conclusions by instinct.
 
|  
 
|  
 +
|-
 +
| 2.
 +
| Emerging
 +
| Learning to evaluate the quality of sources, information, and evidence. Emerging ability to resolve minor discrepancies.
 
|  
 
|  
 +
|-
 +
| 3.
 +
| Practicing
 +
| Additionally, resolves conflicting evidence or uses it to disprove prevalent opinion. Usually applies correct identity to persons mentioned in sources.
 
|  
 
|  
 +
|-
 +
| 4.
 +
| Proficient
 +
| Additionally, when necessary creates soundly reasoned, coherently documented conclusions utilizing direct and indirect evidence.
 
|  
 
|  
 
|-
 
|-
|  
+
| 5.
|  
+
| Stellar
|  
+
| Additionally: Publishes clear and convincing conclusions. Teaches and inspires others.
 
|  
 
|  
 
|}
 
|}
 
1. Entry
 
 
In the absence of analysis, reaches conclusions by instinct.
 
 
2. Emerging
 
 
Learning to evaluate the quality of sources, information, and evidence. Emerging ability to resolve minor discrepancies.
 
 
3. Practicing
 
 
Additionally, resolves conflicting evidence or uses it to disprove prevalent opinion. Usually applies correct identity to persons mentioned in sources.
 
 
4. Proficient
 
 
Additionally, when necessary creates soundly reasoned, coherently documented conclusions utilizing direct and indirect evidence.
 
 
5. Stellar
 
 
Additionally: Publishes clear and convincing conclusions. Teaches and inspires others.
 
 
<br>
 
  
 
== Self Improvement  ==
 
== Self Improvement  ==

Revision as of 23:38, 23 January 2011

Genealogical Maturity is a system of self evaluation and self improvement first proposed by the Ancestry Insider in 2009. The Genealogical Maturity model measures one's understanding and use of the Genealogical Proof Standard. and the associated Evidence Analysis Research Process Map. The model measures improvement in five categories: sources, citations, information, evidence, and conclusions.

Contents

Definitions

The Genealogical Maturity model uses dictionary definitions as much as possible, with clarifications from leading genealogists.

source – 1. the origin that supplies information.[1] 2. “an artifact, book, document, film, person, recording, website, etc., from which information is obtained.”[2]

citation – 1. “citations are statements in which we identify our source or sources for…particular [information].”[3] 2. “a citation states where you found [the cited] piece of information.”[4]

information - 1. “knowledge obtained from investigation.”[5] 2. “the content of a source—that is, its factual statements or its raw data.”[6]

evidence – 1. “something that furnishes proof.”[7] 2. “information that is relevant to the problem.”[8] 3. analyzed and correlated information assessed to be of sufficient quality.[9] 4. “the information that we conclude—after careful evaluation—supports or contradicts the statement we would like to make, or are about to make, about an ancestor.”[10]

conclusion – 1. “a reasoned judgment.”[11] 2. “a decision [that should be] based on well-reasoned and thoroughly documented evidence gleaned from sound research.”[12]

Self Evaluation

The model asks that a person place a check mark next to each of the following statements that describes him or her.

Sources

# Maturity Level Sources Check
1. Entry Typically relies on compiled genealogies.
2. Emerging Mostly relies on compiled genealogies and online sources.
3. Practicing Uses a limited number of record types and repositories. Mostly relies on online and microfilmed sources.
4. Proficient Uses a wide variety of record types. Often contacts record custodians to obtain copies of high-quality sources.
5. Stellar Insightfully pursues research at multiple, targeted repositories, making use of a plethora of records and record types. "Burned counties" are not roadblocks.

Citations

# Maturity Level Citations Check
1. Entry Captures URLs for online sources and citations for published sources.
2. Emerging Increasingly captures necessary information for manuscript sources.
3. Practicing Typically produces complete source citations.
4. Proficient Gives complete and accurate source citations including provenance and quality assessment.
5. Stellar Overcomes limitations of genealogical software to create well organized, industry standard reference notes and source lists.

Information

# Maturity Level Information Check
1. Entry Typically does not realize the need to judge information quality and has no basis for doing so.
2. Emerging Emerging realization that information quality differs. Muddles evaluation by thinking of primary/secondary sources instead of primary/secondary information, leading to muddled evaluation when sources contain both.
3. Practicing Judges information by source type, informant knowledge, and record timing. Applies "primary/secondary" to information instead of sources.
4. Proficient Additionally, learns history necessary to recognize and evaluate all explicit information in a source.
5. Stellar Additionally, utilizes implicit information in a source. Finds information in cases like illegitimacy that stump most researchers.

Evidence

# Maturity Level Evidence Check
1. Entry Limited understanding of evidence and the role it plays. Typically ignores conflicting evidence.
2. Emerging Captures direct, supporting evidence and increasingly depends upon it.
3. Practicing Additionally, captures directly conflicting evidence.
4. Proficient Additionally, recognizes and captures indirect, supporting evidence.
5. Stellar Additionally, recognizes and captures indirect, conflicting evidence.

Conclusions

# Maturity Level Conclusions Check
1. Entry In the absence of analysis, reaches conclusions by instinct.
2. Emerging Learning to evaluate the quality of sources, information, and evidence. Emerging ability to resolve minor discrepancies.
3. Practicing Additionally, resolves conflicting evidence or uses it to disprove prevalent opinion. Usually applies correct identity to persons mentioned in sources.
4. Proficient Additionally, when necessary creates soundly reasoned, coherently documented conclusions utilizing direct and indirect evidence.
5. Stellar Additionally: Publishes clear and convincing conclusions. Teaches and inspires others.

Self Improvement


Notes

  1. Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary, online edition (www.m-w.com : accessed 23 November 2009), “source.”
  2. Elizabeth Shown Mills, CG, CGL, FNGS, FASG, FUGA, Evidence Explained: Citing History Sources from Artifacts to Cyberspace, 2nd ed. [hereinafter, EE2] (Baltimore, Maryland: Genealogical Publishing Company, 2009), 828.
  3. Mills, EE2, 42.
  4. Patricia Law Hatcher, CG, FASG, quoted in The Source, ed. Loretto Dennis Szucs, FUGA, and Sandra Hargreaves Luebking, FUGA, 3rd ed. (Provo, Utah: Ancestry, 2006) p. 24; citing “How Do You Know?” in Producing a Quality Family History (Salt Lake City: Ancestry, 1996), 117.
  5. Merriam-Webster, “information.”
  6. Mills, EE2, 24.
  7. Merriam-Webster, “evidence.”
  8. Mills, EE2, 822.
  9. Christine Rose,CG, CGL, FASG,, Genealogical Proof Standard: Building a Solid Case (San Jose, California: CR Publications, 2005), 2.
  10. The Board for Certification of Genealogists (BCG), The BCG Genealogical Standards Manual, ed. Helen F. M. Leary, CG, CGL, FASG, (Provo, Utah: Ancestry, 2000), 8.
  11. Merriam-Webster, “conclusion.”
  12. Mills, EE2, 820.