[APG Public List] National Genealogical Meetings

Amy Crow amy at amyjohnsoncrow.com
Fri Oct 2 12:20:00 MDT 2009

Donn was talking about the proposal, not the syllabus material, which  
is typically due 3-4 months ahead of time. That is certainly long  
enough for some sites to die (and others to be born!), but it isn't as  
bad as if the syllabus had to be turned in at the same time as the  
original proposal.

Amy Johnson Crow, CG

On Oct 2, 2009, at 2:15 PM, <barb at johnwylie.com> wrote:

> If I’m understanding Donn’s message correctly, his question was why  
> are potential speakers required to submit lecture proposals more  
> than a year before the conference. With technology advancing at  
> lightening speed, during the long lead time, many resources become  
> more accessible, more restricted, or completely overshadowed by the  
> conference date. Websites maintained by volunteers may have been  
> abandoned or the new webmaster may have made a weak website into a  
> treasure trove of information.
> As a speaker, I’ve had to take time from my prepared lecture to  
> point out that Item #4 on the handout’s resource list is no longer  
> current.
> Barbara Brixey Wylie
> Grand Prairie, Texas
> APG Member
> From: apgpubliclist-bounces at apgen.org [mailto:apgpubliclist-bounces at apgen.org 
> ] On Behalf Of DonnDevine at aol.com
> Sent: Thursday, October 01, 2009 10:20 PM
> To: apgpubliclist at apgen.org
> Subject: [APG Public List] National Genealogical Meetings
> I just received an invitation from a large professional organization  
> in another discipline to submit an abstract for a possible  
> presentation at its March 2010 national meeting. The lead time is  
> four to five months, depending on the subject matter, with the  
> applicable cutoff dates set by the committees responsible for  
> different portions of the program.
> Our national genealogical organizations have submission deadlines up  
> to 14 months in advance of the meetings, with the result that there  
> is little or no opportunity for recent developments and discoveries  
> to be considered for the program.
> In most professions where research plays an important role, national  
> conferences are the means by which practitioners stay on the cutting  
> edge. Conference presentation usually precedes publication in peer- 
> reviewed journals. However, in genealogy the very early conference  
> proposal deadlines give print journals a clear edge on timely  
> reporting of new findings.
> Can anyone explain why genealogy is so different from other  
> scholarly disciplines? Are presenters unable to propose recent  
> discoveries because of the early deadlines? Or do conference  
> planners even look for previously unpublished research findings and  
> breakthroughs, like more effective methodologies, discovery of old  
> errors, or use of novel sources?
> Donn Devine, CG, CGL
> Wilmington DE
> CG, Certified Genealogist, CGL, and Certified Genealogical Lecturer  
> are service marks of the Board for Certification of Genealogists,  
> used under license by board certificants after periodic evaluation,  
> and the board name is registered in the US Patent & Trademark Office.
> _______________________________________________
> APG Public Mailing List
> http://apgen.org/publications/publiclist/

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: ../attachments/20091002/ff1c5d1d/attachment.html

More information about the APGPublicList mailing list