Genealogical Maturity

Genealogical Maturity is a system of self evaluation and self improvement first proposed by the Ancestry Insider in 2009. The Genealogical Maturity model measures one's understanding and use of the Genealogical Proof Standard. and the associated Evidence Analysis Research Process Map. The model measures improvement in five areas: sources, citations, information, evidence, and conclusions.

Definitions
The Genealogical Maturity model uses dictionary definitions as much as possible, with clarifications from leading genealogists.

source – 1. the origin that supplies information. 2. “an artifact, book, document, film, person, recording, website, etc., from which information is obtained.”

citation – 1. “citations are statements in which we identify our source or sources for…particular [information].” 2. “a citation states where you found [the cited] piece of information.”

information - 1. “knowledge obtained from investigation.” 2. “the content of a source—that is, its factual statements or its raw data.”

evidence – 1. “something that furnishes proof.” 2. “information that is relevant to the problem.” 3. analyzed and correlated information assessed to be of sufficient quality. 4. “the information that we conclude—after careful evaluation—supports or contradicts the statement we would like to make, or are about to make, about an ancestor.”

conclusion – 1. “a reasoned judgment.” 2. “a decision [that should be] based on well-reasoned and thoroughly documented evidence gleaned from sound research.”

Self Evaluation
The model asks that a person place a check mark next to each of the following statements that describes him or her.

Information
1. Entry

Typically does not realize the need to judge information quality and has no basis for doing so.

2. Emerging

Emerging realization that information quality differs. Muddles evaluation by thinking of primary/secondary sources instead of primary/secondary information, leading to muddled evaluation when sources contain both.

3. Practicing

Judges information by source type, informant knowledge, and record timing. Applies "primary/secondary" to information instead of sources.

4. Proficient

Additionally, learns history necessary to recognize and evaluate all explicit information in a source.

5. Stellar

Additionally, utilizes implicit information in a source. Finds information in cases like illegitimacy that stump most researchers.

Evidence
1. Entry

Limited understanding of evidence and the role it plays. Typically ignores conflicting evidence.

2. Emerging

Captures direct, supporting evidence and increasingly depends upon it.

3. Practicing

Additionally, captures directly conflicting evidence.

4. Proficient

Additionally, recognizes and captures indirect, supporting evidence.

5. Stellar

Additionally, recognizes and captures indirect, conflicting evidence.

Conclusions
1. Entry

In the absence of analysis, reaches conclusions by instinct.

2. Emerging

Learning to evaluate the quality of sources, information, and evidence. Emerging ability to resolve minor discrepancies.

3. Practicing

Additionally, resolves conflicting evidence or uses it to disprove prevalent opinion. Usually applies correct identity to persons mentioned in sources.

4. Proficient

Additionally, when necessary creates soundly reasoned, coherently documented conclusions utilizing direct and indirect evidence.

5. Stellar

Additionally: Publishes clear and convincing conclusions. Teaches and inspires others.