I’m nearly finished with a six-week course, the All-DNA Advanced Evidence Analysis Practicum, one of the Salt Lake Institute of Genealogy’s offerings.  Each Saturday we get a new puzzle and have six days to come up with the solution.  (I have a stack of Sunday crosswords sorely in need of my attention.  It seems I’m too excited about the real-life DNA puzzles I’ve been working on.) On the following Saturday, the instructor walks us through their solution in a guided discussion.  And then a new instructor comes to the mound and pitches the next mystery.

I like this class on so many levels.  We’re getting case studies and solutions from some of the top DNA instructors in the country.  My fellow students aren’t too shabby either.  Some have been willing to share their solutions, which gives me a peek into another genealogist’s mind about how they went about tackling the problem.  In their reports I learn different ways to set up tables and present data, as well as verbiage to try to succinctly explain some challenging concepts.  We;re learning about new tools to use to solve our problems.

One of my favorite reasons, however, has to do with record sets.  Studying groups of people sharing DNA with one another is only part of the solution.  Documentary sources in which our ancestors and those of our matches appear must also be studied to determine which people were in the correct location to create the exact chromosomal combination in our mystery person. 

I think I’ve looked at records from close to 20 different states and a few countries to solve the five cases in the practicum.  Some locations appear in my own family’s history.  Some record types are part of my regular playlist.  But in working through these problems I’ve been exposed to record sets I’ve never used. 

One recent case used a particular record set in a particular county of Pennsylvania I hadn’t ever used.  I have several family lines of my own (and ones I’ve researched with my dear friend, Barb, the person who sucked me into the fascinating world of genealogy).  As researched the DNA case I made a mental note to see which other Pennsylvania counties had records in that same set.  As it turns out, A LOT!  I’ve now got a whole list of Pennsylvania township assessment records from a whole list of Pennsylvania counties to follow-up on.  Maybe, just maybe, I can make some headway on Barb’s brick wall ancestor.

I think you should expect to learn something in every class you take.  And if you’re lucky you might learn something – a new record set, for instance – that you never expected to learn.

For more about attending SLIG, click here.
​
 Disclaimer – The Salt Lake Institute of Genealogy has provided me a discount on my SLIG 2020 tuition for my participation as a SLIG ambassador..  The opinions expressed are my own.

In January 2017 I took Thomas W. Jones’s “Advanced Genealogical Methods” course at SLIG.  In his last session, “Continued Advancement,” he presented options and suggestions for continuing education.  The final half-page of the syllabus material for that presentation was a big blank space beneath the words, “Your Plan for Continued Advancement for 2017, 2018, and 2019.”  It was a call to action - what are you going to do, Mary Roddy, to become a better genealogist?!

My plan:
2017:

1. Read NGSQ religiously
2. Finish ProGen
3. Prepare 4 new talks
4. Join Jill Morelli’s On-The-Clock study group

2018:

1. Submit [an article] to NGSQ [the National Genealogical Society Quarterly]
2. Attend an institute – maybe SLIG again, maybe a different one
3. Work on Portfolio submission materials (for the Board for Certification of Genealogists)
4. Prepare 4 new talks

2019:

1. Apply to speak at NGS and other larger conferences
2. Prepare 4 new talks

 
When I enrolled in Tom’s course, I had no intention of becoming certified.  I’m already a Certified Public Accountant – what did I need another certification for?  But after a week of inspiration, I came away thinking, “Hmmm, I do that… I do that… I do that… I don’t do that, but I could.  I might just have certification in my future.“  The seed was planted.

So how did I do on my list? Numbers 3, 8 and 10 – I probably didn’t quite make this goal of 12 new talks, but I do have several completed and some in the works, so I feel OK about that one.

Items 4 and 7 – Check.  Jill’s Certification Discussion Group (I guess I didn’t even know what it was called when I made my original list), watered the seed Tom planted.  She demystified the process and made me feel certification was a goal I probably had the skills to achieve, and her structure gave me a plan.  I did work in 2018 (and 2019) on my portfolio.  What is noticeably absent from my plan is actually submitting a portfolio.  But you know what?  I did it anyway, and I passed!  I submitted my portfolio in May 2019 and got the good word in July.

Item 6 – I have a couple more SLIGs and a GRIP under my belt.    And more SLIGs to come.  Obviously I think institutes are an integral part of my genealogical improvement plan.  Item 9 – I continue to submit to national and state conferences and I was lucky enough to be selected to speak at the NGS conference in 2019.  I had a great time, and learned so much.

Item 5 – Submitting to the NGSQ.  This is the one I’m super excited about.  I was taught how to string words together many years ago, and I really enjoy the process of writing.  But until I took Tom’s course, I never thought about submitting to a peer-reviewed journal.  In his five days of teaching, and picking apart several NGSQ articles, I realized, yeah, I could probably do something like that.  A couple of colleagues encouraged me to submit my ProGen case study, and luckily the editors were interested! 

The editorial process was lengthy – first I had to address comments from three peer reviewers.  There were holes in my research I needed to fill, but their suggestions served me well as I tackled other genealogical problems, and they ultimately gave me a stronger foundation when it came time to submit my portfolio.  The opportunity to get expert opinions on my work was priceless!  (And free!  Get professional critiques for free - that’s a win in my book!)

 And then I waited, and waited, and waited.  And finally, the editor contacted me to make more changes, corrections, and clarification, but he had space for the article in the upcoming issue.  And this morning, the latest issue of the NGSQ with my article, “John C. Ahern a.k.a. John Lockren of Sonoma and Alameda Counties, California: Who Were His Parents?” arrived in my mailbox.  I think I did pretty well accomplishing those 10 plans I made in January 2017.

Tom Jones gave me a call to action, and I’d like to pass that on to institute instructors and students alike.  Teachers, as you’re wrapping things up in the last session of class, give your students five minutes to think about how they’re going to apply their new-found knowledge.  And students – even if your instructor doesn’t formally encourage you to make a plan, I’m pretty sure the inside cover of the back of your syllabus is blank and is the perfect place to set down your goals.  Do it!

​For more about attending SLIG, click here.
​
 Disclaimer – The Salt Lake Institute of Genealogy has provided me a discount on my SLIG 2020 tuition for my participation as a SLIG ambassador..  The opinions expressed are my own.