Perhaps her presentation will be included in the NGS Conference Live Streaming. I've watched the last 2 or 3 years and it's a terrific way to get to participate when you can't be physically present. Dianne Holley dianne@cmemories.us Austin, TX -----Original Message----- From: TRANSITIONAL-GENEALOGISTS-FORUM [mailto:transitional-genealogists-forum-bounces@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of kathygrant@cinci.rr.com Sent: March 23, 2017 14:41 To: Melissa Finlay <melissa@finlayfamily.org>; transitional-genealogists-forum@rootsweb.com Subject: Re: [TGF] Studying the research reports of Elizabeth Shown Mills I agree with Melissa - would love to see this class on a webinar - lots of travel just isn't in my budget right now. ---- Melissa Finlay <melissa@finlayfamily.org> wrote: > Melanie, Jill and Elizabeth, > > Thank you for the additional tips and insights. As I study and practice this type of report writing, I feel like this is THE element that has been missing from my research efforts for 26 years. It truly is the most efficient, cohesive, and easily-referenced way I have ever tried to record my research. I appreciate each of you willingly mentoring those of us who are working our way to the next level in the field. > > Elizabeth, your "Information Overload" class is at the very top of my list of classes I want to take. Unfortunately, I cannot make it to NGS-Raleigh this year. Perhaps at a future conference, or even a webinar event? > > Melissa Finlay > www.finlayfamily.org > > > On Mar 23, 2017, at 1:16 PM, transitional-genealogists-forum-request@rootsweb.com wrote: > > > > Send TRANSITIONAL-GENEALOGISTS-FORUM mailing list submissions to > > transitional-genealogists-forum@rootsweb.com > > > > To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit > > > > http://lists2.rootsweb.ancestry.com/mailman/listinfo/transitional-ge > > nealogists-forum > > > > or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to > > transitional-genealogists-forum-request@rootsweb.com > > > > You can reach the person managing the list at > > transitional-genealogists-forum-owner@rootsweb.com > > > > When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific > > than "Re: Contents of TRANSITIONAL-GENEALOGISTS-FORUM digest..." > > > > > > Today's Topics: > > > > 1. Re: Studying the research reports of Elizabeth Shown Mills > > (Elizabeth Shown Mills) > > 2. Re: Studying the research reports of Elizabeth Shown Mills > > (Dianne Holley) > > > > > > -------------------------------------------------------------------- > > -- > > > > Message: 1 > > Date: Thu, 23 Mar 2017 13:51:38 -0500 > > From: "Elizabeth Shown Mills" <eshown@comcast.net> > > To: <TRANSITIONAL-GENEALOGISTS-FORUM-L@rootsweb.com> > > Subject: Re: [TGF] Studying the research reports of Elizabeth Shown > > Mills > > Message-ID: <044101d2a406$80fed8b0$82fc8a10$@comcast.net> > > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" > > > > Melissa, > > > > No. I do not maintain a separate research log for each family. I > > long ago decided that doing so was of minimal value--and even > > misleading to me in retrospect-because each research effort is based > > on a certain set of parameters. Certain people, certain associates, certain presumed facts. > > Those parameters are not the same for everyone in the family and new > > people are continually being added who would not have been covered > > by earlier research in this-or-that item on my log. > > > > The research reports that you've found at HistoricPathways follows > > the template I've used since about 1980. When I bought my laptop, in > > the mid-to-late 80s, I began the > > "write-the-research-report-as-you-do-your-research" practice that > > many now use. I follow this practice not just for client work but > > for my own family research. I follow it for online research as well as onsite work. > > > > Although some circumstances or types of problems call for a > > different organization, etc., the basic process is this: > > > > Step 1: > > As I analyze the research problem I'm about to tackle, I create the > > "background" information--identifying > > - the person who is being researched > > - the key "facts" upon which the research will be built > > - the key associates > > - any problems that my analysis has revealed in the set of 'facts' > > upon which prior research is built > > - any limitations on the project > > - sources to be searched (a to-do list) > > > > Step 2: > > Onsite (which includes online), I open a "Research Notes" section > > and, as I use each item on my source list, I start a "research > > note," in which I create > > - a full citation to that source; > > - comments on any problems I observe with that source; > > - whatever findings the source yielded (I make abstracts or > > transcripts here); and > > - my analytical observations about what I've just found, how it fits > > or conflicts with something known or believed, and any additional > > work it might suggest. > > > > When I finish using each source, I move that item off my to-do list > > and at it to the tail end of my report, under a header such as "Resources Used." > > If the search of that item yielded negative results, I add a note > > there to say so. If there were individuals or items I might need to > > investigate further in that source, I'll add whatever note or > > comment or details needed at the point I come back to this. (And, of > > course, any analytical comment that is attached to an abstract or a > > transcript, must be clearly separated from the abstract or the > > transcript, so that my thoughts aren't mixed into the actual details > > from the document. I typically add my comments in a block indent, > > headed by the word "COMMENT," so readers of the report will clearly > > know that this is my personal comment, not part of the original.) > > > > Step 3: > > When research is done, I reread the whole report I had created right > > there onsite (or online). I reevaluate the thoughts I recorded at > > the moment I used each source, given that later findings might have > > altered a possibility. Or, more often, something I found later will > > link with something found earlier, to create new insight and new > > possibilities that I need to comment upon in the report. > > > > Step 4: > > When all the analysis is done, I go back to the first page, below > > the "Background" section and add an "Executive Summary" to hit the > > high points of what I found, concluded, or dismissed from further consideration. > > > > Step 5: > > I create a new "Further Research" section at the end of the report. > > Any unexamined resources left on my initial to-do list will be moved > > to this new research plan--if they are still relevant. New items are added to the new > > plan on the basis of what I learned from this block of research. (When I > > come back to this research project, I then take this work plan from > > the end of the last report, open up a new report for the new block > > of research, and plug in the plan that I created at the end of the > > last report.) > > > > > > After the report is finished, I do one more thing for each person > > who is key to my research. A bit of background explanation might be needed here. .... > > > > Those of you who have seen some of the reports at my > > HistoricPathways site also will have seen two distinctively different critters: > > (a) research reports; and > > (b) individual research notes for specific individuals (examples: > > William Cooksey; George, John, and Thomas Watts; Samuel Witter) > > > > A research report is a technical account of one specific block of > > research-just the work done in that one block. However, for our key > > people and key associates, we also need a summary of all information > > we have found on that person to-date-incorporating all the the > > different blocks of research we have done. The standard "biography" > > that is created by gen software does not fill this need. In the > > creation of those relational database biographies, we extract a > > "fact" here and a "fact" there and plug them together into > > designated fields, weaving facts into a narrative with either the > > software's boilerplate or else our own thoughts. The result is a > > nice narrative, but it too-often leaves us wondering whether a > > specific document actually said those words or whether it was our supposition back then when we didn't know as much as we do now. > > > > So, for each key person I'm seriously working on, I want a means by > > which I can see all the abstracts or transcripts I have accumulated > > for this person--exactly what the record says--in chronological > > sequence, together with my clearly separate analyses of each > > finding. That's what the individual "research notes summaries" do > > for me. Consequently, when I finish a report on a block of > > research, I do cut-and-paste to transfer each new finding to my > > "notes summary" on each key person--plugging it in wherever it belongs in the chronology. > > > > Incidentally, at NGS-Raleigh, I'm slated to do a session on this > > topic, "Information Overload? Effective Project Management, > > Research, Data Management & Analysis." It's a topic I've done twice > > before at one conference or another, so it won't be new to some of > > you. The accompanying syllabus material goes into a lot more detail > > about the process I outlined above--and the session itself details > > processes that there wasn't enough room for in the 4-page syllabus material. > > > > Elizabeth > > > > -------------------------------------------------- > > Elizabeth Shown Mills, CG, CGL, FASG HistoricPathways.com > > EvidenceExplained.com > > > > AUTHOR/EDITOR OF > > Evidence! Citation & Analysis for the Family Historian Evidence > > Explained: Citing History Sources from Artifacts to Cyberspace > > Professional Genealogy: A Manual for Researchers, Writers, Editors, > > Lecturers & Librarians The Forgotten People: Cane River's Creoles of > > Color & other works on research methodology & Southern history > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: TRANSITIONAL-GENEALOGISTS-FORUM > > [mailto:transitional-genealogists-forum-bounces@rootsweb.com] On > > Behalf Of Melissa Finlay > > Sent: Thursday, March 23, 2017 9:40 AM > > To: TRANSITIONAL-GENEALOGISTS-FORUM-L@rootsweb.com > > Subject: [TGF] Studying the research reports of Elizabeth Shown > > Mills > > > > As I work towards becoming a professional genealogist, I am > > carefully studying the research reports (and articles about writing > > them) shared so generously by Elizabeth Shown Mills on the Historic > > Pathways website, Evidence Explained website, and the APG website. > > My question for Elizabeth, and any others who write reports in this > > manner: does the report also serve as your research log? It seems to > > be robust enough to me to fill the job of report and log. Keeping a > > separate log seems redundant to me with this type of report. > > I am learning so much from studying these reports and writing after > > the same pattern. Thank you for sharing them. > > > > Melissa Finlay > > www.finlayfamily.org > > > > > > ------------------------------- > > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > > TRANSITIONAL-GENEALOGISTS-FORUM-request@rootsweb.com with the word > > 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the > > message > > > > > > > > ------------------------------ > > > > Message: 2 > > Date: Thu, 23 Mar 2017 14:16:28 -0500 > > From: Dianne Holley <Dianne@HolleyArt.com> > > To: "'Elizabeth Shown Mills'" <eshown@comcast.net>, > > <TRANSITIONAL-GENEALOGISTS-FORUM-L@rootsweb.com> > > Subject: Re: [TGF] Studying the research reports of Elizabeth Shown > > Mills > > Message-ID: <034501d2a409$f93c3860$ebb4a920$@HolleyArt.com> > > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" > > > > Thank you, Elizabeth!! > > > > Dianne Holley > > dianne@cmemories.us > > Austin, TX > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: TRANSITIONAL-GENEALOGISTS-FORUM > > [mailto:transitional-genealogists-forum-bounces@rootsweb.com] On > > Behalf Of Elizabeth Shown Mills > > Sent: March 23, 2017 13:52 > > To: TRANSITIONAL-GENEALOGISTS-FORUM-L@rootsweb.com > > Subject: Re: [TGF] Studying the research reports of Elizabeth Shown > > Mills > > > > Melissa, > > > > No. I do not maintain a separate research log for each family. I > > long ago decided that doing so was of minimal value--and even > > misleading to me in retrospect-because each research effort is based > > on a certain set of parameters. Certain people, certain associates, certain presumed facts. > > Those parameters are not the same for everyone in the family and new > > people are continually being added who would not have been covered > > by earlier research in this-or-that item on my log. > > > > The research reports that you've found at HistoricPathways follows > > the template I've used since about 1980. When I bought my laptop, in > > the mid-to-late 80s, I began the > > "write-the-research-report-as-you-do-your-research" practice that > > many now use. I follow this practice not just for client work but > > for my own family research. I follow it for online research as well as onsite work. > > > > Although some circumstances or types of problems call for a > > different organization, etc., the basic process is this: > > > > Step 1: > > As I analyze the research problem I'm about to tackle, I create the > > "background" information--identifying > > - the person who is being researched > > - the key "facts" upon which the research will be built > > - the key associates > > - any problems that my analysis has revealed in the set of 'facts' > > upon which prior research is built > > - any limitations on the project > > - sources to be searched (a to-do list) > > > > Step 2: > > Onsite (which includes online), I open a "Research Notes" section > > and, as I use each item on my source list, I start a "research > > note," in which I create > > - a full citation to that source; > > - comments on any problems I observe with that source; > > - whatever findings the source yielded (I make abstracts or > > transcripts here); and > > - my analytical observations about what I've just found, how it fits > > or conflicts with something known or believed, and any additional > > work it might suggest. > > > > When I finish using each source, I move that item off my to-do list > > and at it to the tail end of my report, under a header such as "Resources Used." > > If the search of that item yielded negative results, I add a note > > there to say so. If there were individuals or items I might need to > > investigate further in that source, I'll add whatever note or > > comment or details needed at the point I come back to this. (And, of > > course, any analytical comment that is attached to an abstract or a > > transcript, must be clearly separated from the abstract or the > > transcript, so that my thoughts aren't mixed into the actual details > > from the document. I typically add my comments in a block indent, > > headed by the word "COMMENT," so readers of the report will clearly > > know that this is my personal comment, not part of the original.) > > > > Step 3: > > When research is done, I reread the whole report I had created right > > there onsite (or online). I reevaluate the thoughts I recorded at > > the moment I used each source, given that later findings might have > > altered a possibility. Or, more often, something I found later will > > link with something found earlier, to create new insight and new > > possibilities that I need to comment upon in the report. > > > > Step 4: > > When all the analysis is done, I go back to the first page, below > > the "Background" section and add an "Executive Summary" to hit the > > high points of what I found, concluded, or dismissed from further consideration. > > > > Step 5: > > I create a new "Further Research" section at the end of the report. > > Any unexamined resources left on my initial to-do list will be moved > > to this new research plan--if they are still relevant. New items are added to the new > > plan on the basis of what I learned from this block of research. (When I > > come back to this research project, I then take this work plan from > > the end of the last report, open up a new report for the new block > > of research, and plug in the plan that I created at the end of the > > last report.) > > > > > > After the report is finished, I do one more thing for each person > > who is key to my research. A bit of background explanation might be needed here. .... > > > > Those of you who have seen some of the reports at my > > HistoricPathways site also will have seen two distinctively different critters: > > (a) research reports; and > > (b) individual research notes for specific individuals (examples: > > William Cooksey; George, John, and Thomas Watts; Samuel Witter) > > > > A research report is a technical account of one specific block of > > research-just the work done in that one block. However, for our key > > people and key associates, we also need a summary of all information > > we have found on that person to-date-incorporating all the the > > different blocks of research we have done. The standard "biography" > > that is created by gen software does not fill this need. In the > > creation of those relational database biographies, we extract a > > "fact" here and a "fact" there and plug them together into > > designated fields, weaving facts into a narrative with either the > > software's boilerplate or else our own thoughts. The result is a > > nice narrative, but it too-often leaves us wondering whether a > > specific document actually said those words or whether it was our supposition back then when we didn't know as much as we do now. > > > > So, for each key person I'm seriously working on, I want a means by > > which I can see all the abstracts or transcripts I have accumulated > > for this person--exactly what the record says--in chronological > > sequence, together with my clearly separate analyses of each > > finding. That's what the individual "research notes summaries" do > > for me. Consequently, when I finish a report on a block of > > research, I do cut-and-paste to transfer each new finding to my > > "notes summary" on each key person--plugging it in wherever it belongs in the chronology. > > > > Incidentally, at NGS-Raleigh, I'm slated to do a session on this > > topic, "Information Overload? Effective Project Management, > > Research, Data Management & Analysis." It's a topic I've done twice > > before at one conference or another, so it won't be new to some of > > you. The accompanying syllabus material goes into a lot more detail > > about the process I outlined above--and the session itself details > > processes that there wasn't enough room for in the 4-page syllabus material. > > > > Elizabeth > > > > -------------------------------------------------- > > Elizabeth Shown Mills, CG, CGL, FASG HistoricPathways.com > > EvidenceExplained.com > > > > AUTHOR/EDITOR OF > > Evidence! Citation & Analysis for the Family Historian Evidence Explained: > > Citing History Sources from Artifacts to Cyberspace Professional Genealogy: > > A Manual for Researchers, Writers, Editors, Lecturers & Librarians > > The Forgotten People: Cane River's Creoles of Color & other works on > > research methodology & Southern history > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: TRANSITIONAL-GENEALOGISTS-FORUM > > [mailto:transitional-genealogists-forum-bounces@rootsweb.com] On > > Behalf Of Melissa Finlay > > Sent: Thursday, March 23, 2017 9:40 AM > > To: TRANSITIONAL-GENEALOGISTS-FORUM-L@rootsweb.com > > Subject: [TGF] Studying the research reports of Elizabeth Shown > > Mills > > > > As I work towards becoming a professional genealogist, I am > > carefully studying the research reports (and articles about writing > > them) shared so generously by Elizabeth Shown Mills on the Historic > > Pathways website, Evidence Explained website, and the APG website. > > My question for Elizabeth, and any others who write reports in this > > manner: does the report also serve as your research log? It seems to > > be robust enough to me to fill the job of report and log. Keeping a > > separate log seems redundant to me with this type of report. > > I am learning so much from studying these reports and writing after > > the same pattern. Thank you for sharing them. > > > > Melissa Finlay > > www.finlayfamily.org > > > > > > ------------------------------- > > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > > TRANSITIONAL-GENEALOGISTS-FORUM-request@rootsweb.com with the word > > 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the > > message > > > > > > ------------------------------- > > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > > TRANSITIONAL-GENEALOGISTS-FORUM-request@rootsweb.com with the word > > 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the > > message > > > > > > > > ------------------------------ > > > > Subject: Digest Footer > > > > > > > > ------------------------------ > > > > End of TRANSITIONAL-GENEALOGISTS-FORUM Digest, Vol 11, Issue 72 > > *************************************************************** > > > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > TRANSITIONAL-GENEALOGISTS-FORUM-request@rootsweb.com with the word > 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the > message ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to TRANSITIONAL-GENEALOGISTS-FORUM-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message