Thursday, June 21, 2012

Two roads to CG

For those who choose to submit a portfolio to the Board for the Certification of Genealogists, there has always been the question of when to do the work.

At one extreme (Option #1), the applicant can choose to have all or almost all seven portfolio requirements ready, and then submit a preliminary application, putting the applicant "on the clock" with a deadline of one year to finish. (That deadline can be extended, for a fee, if needed.)

At the other extreme (Option #2), the applicant can go on the clock and then start working on the portfolio. Obviously these two polar options can be compromised.

I chose Option #1 both times, and it has advantages if you can keep the work going and resist daily distractions without an external deadline. One advantage is that if a chosen case study or kinship determination project doesn't work out, you can just pick another one and keep going without worrying about any particular deadline.

But judging from the advice given at the BCG certification seminar at IGHR (Samford) last week, something closer to Option #2 seems to be growing in favor.

For one thing, Option #2 does provide an external deadline, which can be extended (for a fee) if necessary.

Secondly, it provides greater access to the BCG ACTION list, which is open only to those on the clock and a group of BCG advisors. The list is a place to ask questions and get reliable answers -- as long as the questions do not pertain to the particulars of anybody's portfolio!

But either way, sooner or later, procedural niceties don't matter. You just have to finish those seven portfolio components. They're the interesting part. And if you're wondering whether you're ready to take the plunge at all, check out the BCG site's quiz and Michael Hait's post on the subject at Planting the Seeds last year.

Harold Henderson, "Two roads to CG," Midwestern Microhistory: A Genealogy Blog, posted 21 June 2012 ( : accessed [access date]). [Please feel free to link to the specific post if you prefer.]

No comments: