RootsWeb: APG-L Re: [APG] Psychology of Tiers; was Jones APGQ article

APG-L Archives

Archiver > APG > 2008-01 > 1201754906

From: "Joy Rich" <>
Subject: Re: [APG] Psychology of Tiers; was Jones APGQ article
Date: Wed, 30 Jan 2008 23:48:26 -0500

When prospective clients read our directory listings and our websites, which are linked to from our listings, they can see that the 1600+ members of APG are distinct from one another. Our listings do, or can, indicate who is a CG, AG, Fellow, career genealogist (those who have written "full-time" in the biography section), holder of a degree in family history, Librarian/Archivist/Curator, Genealogical Educator/Lecturer/Teacher, Genealogical Publisher/Editor/Writer, Conference Organizer, society/organization officer, or genealogical volunteer. The self-descriptions that I haven't seen are apprentice or novice and "just want to listen in and learn from the professionals," but members who want to so describe themselves can. Apprentices and novices can indicate their level of experience and expertise in the "Related Services" and/or "Biography" sections by indicating the number of years of experience they have as paid and/or unpaid genealogists. Those who "just want to listen in and learn from the professionals" and don't want to take clients can, and probably have, put "No" in the "Accepts Clients" section of their listings. As a paid genealogical editor, I would be in level two. If I won the Lotto and no longer needed the salary but continued as an editor, I'd be a genealogical volunteer, which is in level three. I wonder what that would indicate about my level of professionalism. Joy Joy Rich Chapter Representative, New York Metro Chapter Association of Professional Genealogists http://www.apgen.org http://www.apgen.org/chapters/newyork/index.html http://www.apgen.org/directory/search_detail.html?mbr_id=584 ------------------------------ Message: 5 Date: Wed, 30 Jan 2008 08:10:45 -0700 From: Kathy Cortez <> Subject: [APG] Psychology of Tiers; was Jones APGQ article To: APG <> Message-ID: <> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; delsp=yes; format=flowed Elissa and Carolyn raise an important question. Why are some people scared of being categorized? Quite often individuals filter themselves into that lower status of their own low self-esteem or lack of education or credentials. As it stands now we are all on equal footing, as far as the general public is concerned. Yes, there are those with credentials behind their name, but APG does not assign any specific status otherwise, which is great for those who want to maintain the status quo. The field of genealogy is largely non-threatening for those who don't want to be measured. They can call themselves a professional with little or no oversight and many don't want the boat rocked. We have all arrived at APG under a variety of circumstances. Currently there is no one, best way to become a professional and for many the school of hard knocks is good enough for them and for their clients. Short of certification or accreditation there is little measure in the field of genealogy. When people post messages that in essence relay, "If we cannot play the way I want to play then I am taking my ball and going home," many on this list cave in sympathetically. That is a ploy and a tactic to keep things the same. Obviously, there is a movement afoot. Something MUST change. The organization is at a crossroads and we cannot let the "poor sports" decide the direction. Like any professional organization APG is and should be elitist, in that the members should be professional or striving to be, given the title, Association of PROFESSIONAL Genealogists. If you just want to learn from the professionals that is great, but keep in mind that the organization is trying to be more professional and is geared towards professionalism, not education. There are other avenues for education and skill-building. The field in general is trying to gain a foothold as a scholarly pursuit. APG, for one, cannot afford to pander to those who cannot or will not align with the level of professionalism needed to meet those goals. One caveat here. The members forum, which was an attempt at exclusivity seems to have failed. As far as I can tell the last time a message was posted was 4 January 2008. There needs to be a balance of inclusion and accountability. If you want to belong to a professional organization there must be a reciprocal component. Whether you want to be a professional or not, write an article, answer a question occasionally, and try to participate in APG in a positive manner. My suggestion would be that APG offer categories that denote how we spend most of our time in the field. Level One (displays a high level of peer reviewed scholarship): - CG/AG - Fellows Level Two (displays long-term occupational commitment to the field): - Career Genealogist - earning the majority of his or her income from research - Degree in Family history - Librarian/Archivist/Curator - Genealogical Educator/Lecturer/Teacher - Genealogical Publisher/Editor/Writer - Conference Organizer Level Three (genealogical supporter): - Society/Organization Officer - Genealogical Volunteer - Apprentice (Novice) - All others that just want to listen in and learn from the professionals When there is a tier system in place more people will be clamoring to reach Level One, trust me. As long as we are all on a level playing field the general public does not stand a chance of finding the best genealogists. As a result we "professional" genealogists can be satisfied with the status quo. Kathy Cortez APG Member Saratoga Springs, Utah