Archiver > TRANSITIONAL-GENEALOGISTS-FORUM > 2010-01 > 1264634438

From: Tom Jones <>
Subject: Re: [TGF] Certification vs. education (Was: Usability[was Genealogy as a discipline])
Date: Wed, 27 Jan 2010 18:20:38 -0500
References: <> <01ac01ca9def$f836b580$e8a42080$@net> <> <02e201ca9ec7$5c2a3170$147e9450$@net> <> <034301ca9eeb$bcc17a60$36446f20$@net> <> <034e01ca9eff$f8a20fe0$e9e62fa0$@net> <> <035601ca9f05$f938e9f0$ebaabdd0$@net> <> <005a01ca9f7b$0e840f90$2b8c2eb0$@net> <> <><>
In-Reply-To: <>

I would make no assumptions about how much pet sitters make, especially
in comparison to genealogists, many of whom pursue professional-level
genealogy solely for their own enjoyment. In the Washington, D.C., area,
where both fields can be lucrative, pet sitters may earn more than
genealogists. In any case, I would not attribute ICE accreditation of
the Association of Pet Dog Trainers (not "pet sitters") to someone's
"thought that certification was in their organization's best interest."
Instead, their accreditation reflects the maturity of their field as a
profession. Genealogy is a ways behind them on a continuum of
professional maturation. Rather than reflecting a degree of "caring,"
income, skill level, or other single factor, the difference lies in a
complex interaction of each field's purpose, organization, history,
potential for harm, diversity, leadership, and development, including
willingness to embrace the exclusive stance the label "professional"
often implies. Genealogy *is* maturing as a profession, rapidly in some
ways. But, like someone else has said, we will not see genealogy become
a full-fledged profession anytime soon. Our field is experiencing
adolescent growing pains, which professional pet-dog trainers seem to
have put behind them. The maturation of all professions is a process,
and fields both behind and ahead of genealogy are moving along that
evolutionary continuum.

I agree the time has come for us to form our own opinions, but I would
like us to base them on correct information. --- Tom

Jeanette Daniels wrote:
> Meredith,
> My apologies to you and anyone else that thought I was rude. It was a knee-jerk
> response to Elizabeth's question. You are right. I should have just ignored it. I
> thought with my discussion of pricing that it would be obvious that the pet sitters
> found a way financially to become properly certified. I'm sure that their annual income
> isn't that great but somehow they thought that cerfication was in their organization's best interest.
> I personally believe that the subject has been well covered and it is time for everyone
> who cares about the topic to form their own opinions if they haven't already. Improving
> the genealogical profession is truly all that matters.
> Jeanette

This thread: