RLP 229: Interview with Deborah Keyes

Nicole (1s):
This is Research Like a Pro episode 229. Interview with Deborah Keyes. Welcome to Research Like a Pro a Genealogy Podcast about taking your research to the next level, hosted by Nicole Dyer and Diana Elder accredited genealogy professional. Diana and Nicole are the mother-daughter team at FamilyLocket.com and the authors of Research Like a Pro A Genealogist Guide. With Robin Wirthlin they also co-authored the companion volume, Research Like a Pro with DNA. Join Diana and Nicole as they discuss how to stay organized, make progress in their research and solve difficult cases. Let’s go.

Nicole (43s):
Hi everyone and Welcome to Research like a Pro

Diana (46s):
Hi Nicole How are you doing today?

Nicole (48s):
I’m doing well. I’m excited to have Debbie Keyes here to talk with us about her project.

Diana (53s):
Oh, me too. I love having guests. So we’re going to have some fun today.

Nicole (57s):
What have you been working on and doing?

Diana (59s):
I’ve been working on giving feedback for the latest Research Like a Pro study group reports, and it’s been so fun to read through everyone’s projects and see the progress they’ve made. You know, in the study group we have such a wide variety of projects, everything from proving family stories to trying to find unknown parents and so many different localities. I’ve done some Irish reports and Virginia just so many different places. And I know you’ve been working on those too. Are you enjoying it?

Nicole (1m 33s):
Yes, I am. I read a report about research in Wales yesterday and I’ve kind of learned a bit that Wales only had a few names that they recycled over and over and so this report was focused on narrowing down which birth Registration belonged to Harriet Jones and there were like 10 Harriet Jones to weed through. So it was really interesting.

Diana (1m 54s):
Yeah, I love it because you really do learn something outside of your area. One of the reports that I reviewed had used Deed Mapper, which I know you are working with Deed Mapper and was using a bunch of deeds to prove the parentage and that was really fascinating to see how that all was working together. So it’s been fun.

Nicole (2m 15s):
That is fun. And I need to go read that because I’m in the thick of Deed Mapper trying to figure it out. Well our announcements are that the Research Like a Pro with DNA Study group is going to be starting in February of 2023. Registration begins December 1st, so coming up and it’ll be going until May, so it’ll be all spring. We’ll be working on Research Like a Pro with DNA and if you are interested in joining as a peer group leader, we would love for you to apply and that application is on our website and you receive complimentary Registration as a peer group leader. We’re also looking forward to Roots Tech and working on our syllabus materials for that conference, which was going to be in March of 2023.

Diana (2m 58s):
Yeah, that’s coming soon. How does this happen? We have to get our presentations and syllabus ready so it’s exciting. Well, today we have with us Deborah Keyes. Hi Deborah. We’re so happy to have you on the podcast today.

Deborah Keyes (3m 11s):
Hi Diana Nicole Thank you.

Diana (3m 14s):
Deborah was a member of our Research Like a Pro DNA study group earlier this year, so in the spring and we were so impressed with her project that we wanted to have her come on and talk about it with us today. So, let do a little introduction. Deborah, where are you from?

Deborah Keyes (3m 30s):
I was born in New Jersey but went to college in Massachusetts. I settled here after graduation, so after more than 40 years, I guess I’m a native now, So always been up in the New England area or northeast. Right. That’s awesome. Well I have yet to get out there, you know, I’m here in Utah and just this summer I made it as far west as Missouri, so getting closer but me to eventually get up and that area, that would be so fun.

Nicole (4m 3s):
Debbie, when did you start doing Genealogy research?

Deborah Keyes (4m 7s):
I started researching my family about 30 years ago after hearing some oral history about both sides of my family. For example, my grandfather who died in 1941 had been born enslaved at the time I started. I had no idea how hard this research was gonna be.

Nicole (4m 27s):
African-American research and researching enslaved people. I know it’s a challenge, but until we’ve done it ourselves, I don’t think we realize how hard it can be. So Thank you for telling us about this project, I think it will be helpful for other people who are working in the same challenges and regions,

Diana (4m 47s):
Right? So very limitations and we’re excited to see how DNA has really helped you with that. But before we do that, just tell us a little bit about your educational experiences. Well,

Deborah Keyes (4m 58s):
Almost six years ago I decided to get more serious about my Genealogy research. Before then, I had been doing the normal ancestry, occasionally family search, but I really wanted to see if I could handle and stay interested in courses. So I took Boston University’s four week Essentials Genealogy class. I loved it. So I immediately attended their 15 week genealogical certificate program. From there I’ve been taking a variety of courses at SLIG, grip Pro Gen, and most recently your Research Like a Pro DNA class.

Diana (5m 39s):
I think we were in the same class, the African American class for I G R with Deborah Abbott. Didn’t we do that together?

Deborah Keyes (5m 46s):
Yes,

Diana (5m 46s):
That is right. I love that class so much and I wanted to learn about more tools for African American research because we have a lot of clients that come to us with these same types of challenges, limitations that you have in your research and I felt like I just really needed to up my game. That was such a good course.

Nicole (6m 6s):
All right, so we are going to spend some time in this podcast episode today just talking about your project from the research like a Pro with DNA study group. So let’s start by hearing about your objective.

Deborah Keyes (6m 19s):
My research objective was to use DNA and documentary research to test the hypothesis that Alfred a Slagle was the biological father of Mary Carrington. Alfred was born one July, 1867 in Mecklenburg County Virginia and died two September, 1945 in Emporia Virginia. Mary was born June, 1892 in Virginia and died 17 April, 1927. Also in Emporia Greensville County. Virginia documentary evidence suggests the biological mother of Mary had been Catherine Carrington.

Deborah Keyes (7m 3s):
She was born about 1860 in Petersburg Virginia and died 28 October, 1948 in Emporio Virginia. In a side note, three things were important to this project. One, the genesis of the objective have been passed down as oral history in the Carrington family. The test taker Rebecca, who is Mary’s daughter, just turned 99 last month and lived in the same town as Alfred Slagle, who she had been told was her grandfather. Alfred Slagle had four brothers between seven years older and two years younger.

Deborah Keyes (7m 43s):
The objective really needed to prove which brother was the father of Mary and third Alfred SL had been born of German ethnicity and Catherine Carrington had been of African descent.

Nicole (7m 58s):
Thank you for sharing that side note and that was really helpful for understanding how this project came about and kind of what you were hoping to determine. And it’s also helpful to hear that there were some other candidates besides Alfred, you know his brothers. So that was a helpful explanation.

Diana (8m 14s):
Yeah, and I am always so fascinated with the importance of oral history in African American Genealogy. That is often the clue that really, really helps. So I love that you had that oral history. So when we start with the DNA process, we do some initial clustering and really recommend to everyone in our study group that they tried the leads Method or you know, some type of clustering. And what did that show you?

Deborah Keyes (8m 45s):
I used DNAGedcom to gather the match information between 50 and 400 Santa Morgans. It produced over 20 clusters, but the biggest group included a super cluster of Slagle and Carrington matches. This proved the Carringtons and the Slagle families were related because there was no documentary evidence that I’ve been able to find that Links the Carrington and Slagle families together. But this was indisputable proof.

Diana (9m 19s):
Absolutely and that’s why we love using DNA for these pro types of projects that are so difficult. So that’s interesting that it was a big super cluster as you said. So then the challenge comes with trying to organize all that and figure out that common ancestor.

Nicole (9m 36s):
As a follow up question about that clustering after you gathered the matches with DNAGedcom, it sounds like you used the DNAGedcom program to cluster the Collins leads Method, is that right?

Deborah Keyes (9m 50s):
I did. That’s right. That’s right.

Nicole (9m 52s):
Right. Yeah, so any listeners who aren’t sure what that is, you can go to the DNAGedcom website, which we’ll put a link to in the show notes and you can learn more there, but you’ll need to Subscribe to their services and download the software program called DNAGedcom client in order to do this. I think you mentioned that you were using matches from Ancestry dna? Yes. Okay, I love that because I always like to start with ancestry matches too. There’s just so many more in that database.

Deborah Keyes (10m 21s):
Rebecca, the test taker actually was also on my Heritage Family Tree dna, but DNAGedcom is not as efficient with them. Sometimes it works, sometimes it didn’t and so I manually did matches for my Heritages and Family Tree dna. The issue was as you said, that the number of matches that Rebecca had were so much larger on Ancestry that it was not as much value with the other two sites. So and she’s also on 23andme, so it’s been helpful to have her on all of those sites.

Nicole (10m 60s):
That’s great that you took the time to review her matches at each website and that’s what we absolutely recommend in the study group because you never know which site will have a useful match, but we’ve definitely seen a trend that there’s more matches available at Ancestry because of the testing database size that they have.

Deborah Keyes (11m 16s):
Right.

Nicole (11m 17s):
Let’s talk now about organizing the DNA matches that you found in this part of the course research like a Pro. With DNA we work on creating a diagram using either lucid chart or diagrams.net. So tell us about this. Which program did you use?

Deborah Keyes (11m 36s):
I use Luchar because I had an account and was already familiar with it. Since I didn’t know how these matches were related to the test taker or to each other, I created a descendant tree in Lucidchart which allowed me to see the relationships between the matches. This showed me their most recent common ancestor in a visual format. I could then put that visual map into DNA painters. What are the odds feature?

Nicole (12m 6s):
I love the, what are the odds feature and that’s so great that you were able to use that in your project.

Diana (12m 12s):
Well and I think it’s so helpful to have this in a diagram that you can move things around because sometimes we’re making a hypothesis and we have to move things and try out some different scenarios and rather than redrawing it all, we can just move those little boxes. So it really was such a revelation to me when I started using it. So I’m sure you loved using it as well. Had you used Luchar for any type of DNA work before

Deborah Keyes (12m 43s):
I had, I was familiar with it so it was helpful Rebecca, because of her age, as I said, she just turned 99, has a lot of DNA matches and they’re sizeable DNA matches. So trying to map all of those out, it was very helpful because one of the issues when putting them into a tree like Ancestry is you can’t really see how people are related to each other. So when you put it in lucid chart in a descendant tree, you can fit people in descending from and figure out who the common ancestor is and so you can kind of see the relationships and test out whether those relationships based on the number seven organs.

Deborah Keyes (13m 31s):
Make sense?

Diana (13m 32s):
That’s exactly right. Well you said a couple of things that I think that are really important. We emphasize a lot the importance of getting your test taker to be the oldest generationally that you can find. And so Rebecca was really key I would think, to this project having her DNAs. Yes. Yeah, so that’s wonderful that you were able to find that and I am assuming that you did a lot of reaching out to these matches to try to figure out how they connected.

Deborah Keyes (14m 1s):
Well kind of, no. One of the problems, so the the Carrington side, Rebecca’s side was fairly easy and one of the best things about her, including her age is that she has a phenomenal memory. And so I was able to fit in people on the Carrington side fairly easily, both based on their trees documentation and her memory on the SL side. However, there had been no contact really between the families and it was uncomfortable for me to reach out to these European ethnicity people to say hey.

Deborah Keyes (14m 48s):
But as it turns out, Rebecca’s highest match was Alfred Lego’s granddaughter and when Rebecca’s match appeared in in Ancestry, she reached out to me thinking I was Rebecca cuz she didn’t know anything about her and I also don’t think that she looked at the ethnicity and she also thought that this Rebecca, the match was related to an uncle or a brother of her grandfather. And so it was a little uncomfortable for me because I knew a lot about her grandfather but she turned out to be really good.

Deborah Keyes (15m 30s):
And what was interesting when we first communicated, which was probably about four years ago, she didn’t seem to know anything about the African American branch since that time. However, and we’ve been in communication, she’s checked with family members on her side of the family and they have confirmed the relationship between the Carringtons and the SLAs. And I have had conversation with her but not with anybody else.

Diana (16m 3s):
I can only imagine how uncomfortable that would be, you know, to say, Hey I know there’s something going on here that you’re not aware of. And that is the nature of DNA, isn’t it? That yes I, we have a similar thing in our family history that I’ve discovered and I don’t know that the DNA match knows and I’m not ready to reveal that two of them. So you know, sometimes you just have to wait until the right time and having her reach out to you first was, was really a a good thing. We have to use a lot of common sense and a lot of good communication skills. I guess let’s get back to our documentary information because I’m so curious about that and one of our very first things we do after creating that objective is to do a timeline with our citations so we know exactly where the information came with sources.

Diana (16m 52s):
So what starting point information stood out for you? Were there some helpful clues that you discovered? I’m sure you’d gone through this information so many times, but putting it into a timeline, did that help

Deborah Keyes (17m 3s):
You? So I’m familiar with timelines and what the biggest issue for me was locating the birth records of Catherine Carrington’s children, major Virginia counties began recording births in 1853 and the births I was researching were between 1896 and 1903. So I thought, you know, it would be a fairly easy search. Well although Katherine had at least eight children, I was only able to find birth records for three of them and of course none of them were for Mary and also none of the three records had any information about the father. Not his name, not his location, not his occupation, absolutely nothing.

Deborah Keyes (17m 49s):
The timeline though did help me to see the location of the Slagle brothers between 1880 and 1910 it showed that all the brothers had stayed within the same county in Virginia sometimes within the same town for decades. This made it difficult to rule out any one brother. The timeline also showed the same information about Catherine. She had lived in the same Greensville County Virginia as the four brothers.

Diana (18m 19s):
So I think that is so often the case that we know a lot about, you know, like one of the ancestors. So you knew a lot about the Caring Tens but the SLAs, it was helpful to get the information down for them and I know that it is so difficult when you’ve got brothers and any one of them could have been the father and you know, it’s a half relationship so it makes it so difficult to figure out who was who was the real father. So I’m just so curious to, as we talk about this, to see what you decided cuz I remember when you were working through this project in the study group and struggling with this,

Nicole (18m 58s):
Let’s now talk about kind of the analysis part of the research process and you know, after analyzing these starting point sources, did you find that you needed to order any originals and then on the DNA side analyzing the DNA matches, did those line up with the expected amounts of shared dna?

Deborah Keyes (19m 21s):
So I didn’t need to order any originals, luckily the records that I did find were images of birth and marriage registers and death certificates. So I didn’t feel the need, you know, if they had been index records I might have ordered them, but I actually found registers and among the known DNA matches on the Carrington side, there were no issues that appeared there and I really didn’t know enough about the Slagle side to determine, in fact I didn’t have any known Slagle matches so I really didn’t know if there were any issues on that side.

Nicole (20m 3s):
Right. Those were all of the matches you were trying to see if they would provide evidence for one brother or the other brother. Right. It’s great when you can find that you’re, you know, starting matches the Carrington side, those are all Matching up correctly, everything looks good to go, then you can use those matches and they’re shared matches like you found in the cluster to help you, you know, identify more distant shared matches and those Legos and try to figure out how they connect in.

Diana (20m 31s):
So when you were analyzing the DNA of these matches, did they line up with the expected amounts, you know, that you’re comparing on your Luci chart and the relationships, how did that work?

Deborah Keyes (20m 44s):
The Sun Morgan count among the Carrington matches all seemed to line up with their relationship to the test taker. However, the Leggo side was a little different. The test taker’s highest leggo match was a granddaughter of Alfred’s Leggo. They should have been half first cousins. However, the amount of shared DNA was lower than expected, although it was within the parameters set by Blaine bet Ander’s shared Cent project at 283 cent Morgans. It was lower than expected, it was still within the range for a half first cousin, but on the lower end at a 25% probability.

Diana (21m 24s):
And we talk a lot about looking at those and trying to, you know, decide how to use that information. So it’s good that you notice that and just have that in the back of your mind as you’re going through the research. It’s always nice when you’re right in the middle and it lines up perfectly but then often it doesn’t. So it’s the way, it’s the way DNA inheritance goes,

Nicole (21m 48s):
Right? Yes, and I, I like looking at the histogram for that. So that’s also a helpful way to measure that. So you said it was 283 cent Morgans?

Deborah Keyes (21m 59s):
Yes.

Nicole (21m 60s):
So that’s interesting that it, you know, the probabilities in the shared Centor project tool at DNA painter give it, you know, not the top grouping of probability, not the 59% but but the 25%. But then when you go look at the half first cousin, it’s also a little bit lower on the histogram. It’s not right in the middle. So that’s good, good analysis and thanks for sharing kind of how you did that. Next in the research, like a Pro with DNA process, we study Locality and try to learn about what records might be available on the documentary side of the research to enhance our case. So what Locality did you study?

Deborah Keyes (22m 39s):
The majority of the activity took place in Greensville County Virginia. So my Locality guide concentrated on that location since I thought the important dates were the period of time when Catherine’s children might have been conceived between 1886 and 1903. The Locality guide focused on that period.

Nicole (23m 1s):
Wonderful.

Diana (23m 3s):
Yeah and we do teach that to narrow that down so it’s not overwhelming. So that’s really good that you were able to do that. Now we’ve already talked a little bit about ethnicity and the African American versus the European group. So how did that play into your research when you looked at your matches?

Deborah Keyes (23m 24s):
It did play into it, but not in the conventional way, meaning using it to confirm ethnicity passed down from a parent. In this case, since Catherine Carrington was of African descent, the records about her family were spottier than the ones about Alfred. For example, I was able to find birth records for all of the SLA children, but only three of the eight of Catherine’s also, although I got confirmation from more than one Slagle descendant that Catherine and Alfred had had children together, none of those children appeared in any of the Leggo family trees, whereas the Leggo connection appeared in the Carrington family trees.

Nicole (24m 13s):
Oh, that’s so interesting. It is a bit disappointing that this Leggo family did not add the Carrington branch to their tree. But I remember when you told me during the study group that communications with this Leggo cousin were going well and that that they had confirmed the story from their side so they weren’t rejecting the relationship altogether?

Deborah Keyes (24m 30s):
Right. It would be kind of hard to do though because both the Carringtons and the SLS had very large families and the number of Carrington cousins that the SLS had have to amount to the hundreds.

Nicole (24m 48s):
Wow.

Diana (24m 50s):
Hard to discount that. Yeah.

Nicole (24m 52s):
Let’s talk a little bit about exploring DNA tools. That’s kind of a, the middle part of the DNA study group where we just see if there’s any other DNA tools that we can use to help us. What did you take away from that lesson?

Deborah Keyes (25m 6s):
So I used, as I mentioned, DNAGedcom gey network graphs, what are the odds? Lucid chart and through lines using DNAGedcom, I produced a leads cluster map which displayed the interconnections between the Slagle and Carrington families. It also showed which specific matches shared DNA with others in the group. The Guffy network produced a graph that showed a mind map version of the interconnections and how individuals were connected to people within their cluster and outside the groups I used the descendant tree created in Lucid Chart to input data to what are the odds that developed hypotheses for which Leggo was the father of Mary through lines for this project wasn’t very useful because as I stated earlier, none of the leggo matches had Carrington people in their trees.

Deborah Keyes (26m 5s):
Just an aside, I will say that gfe network is a very complicated tool. It was one I had been familiar with before, but your lesson and instruction on using gfe was the best I’ve ever seen and enabled me to get through the process to produce a usable mind map type thing. So that was a huge positive aspect of the tool thing for me.

Nicole (26m 36s):
Oh wonderful. I’m so happy to hear that my instructions were clear and that it was useful to produce the Gey network graph and be able to see those interconnections in kind of a like, I like how you said a mind map way because it really is like that with the connections and the objects connected like that.

Diana (26m 52s):
Yeah, for a visual learner, which with DNA you pretty much have to be a visual learner because you are trying to look at some figure things out. I really think the GFE network graphs are amazing and I’m just looking at the one in your report that you did and you did such a lovely job. So congratulations on tackling that. That must have felt really good.

Deborah Keyes (27m 12s):
It

Nicole (27m 13s):
Did. I wanted to also note what you said about through lines that it wasn’t very useful because of the lack of this connection and a lot of the cousin’s trees. So that’s another thing to be aware of with using through lines, they can sometimes give us helpful clues and point us in a direction to look but they aren’t always going to have the answers. Right.

Diana (27m 35s):
Well they’re so dependent upon trees. Nope. So good thing you had other tools and methods to use. Once you’ve explored your tools, you’ve done some Locality Research, then it’s time to do a research plan and you have to prioritize. So out of all the different ideas that you had to do for furthering the research, you know, how did you prioritize?

Deborah Keyes (27m 59s):
I started with Alfred’s Lego’s family to try and determine where the family specific the brothers were before and during the period Catherine’s family could have been conceived. One big disappointment was the lack of city directories produced for any of the towns and the Greensville County during the requisite period. That meant I had to rely on census birth, death and marriage records. I also searched land records, then I performed the same research for Catherine’s family.

Diana (28m 33s):
Well I’m not surprised about some of the lack of records there in Virginia because even though it seems like there should be records, you know sometimes there just aren’t and we have to turn to other methods. So glad you were able to find a few things to work with, even though city directories are wonderful for Locality and placing someone in the right place. Too bad that those weren’t always part of every city or every small town.

Nicole (28m 58s):
You had in your results summary that you reviewed the real estate tax records from 1885 to 1894, did that help you confirm where this leg brothers were?

Deborah Keyes (29m 7s):
No, because I think only one of them ended up with property and it was after the period of time that I was looking at.

Diana (29m 16s):
Looking at your conclusion, it looks like you still don’t have it proven

Deborah Keyes (29m 20s):
To your mind and that’s what I’m writing now.

Diana (29m 23s):
Yeah,

Deborah Keyes (29m 25s):
So what I’m writing before we start recording is I’m just saying my final results concluded that a Carrington male fathered Mary Carrington.

Nicole (29m 37s):
So as you followed your plan and logged your results, did you find out anything helpful?

Deborah Keyes (29m 42s):
My final results concluded that a Carrington male fathered Mary Carrington but I was not able to prove that it had been Alfred. On the last day of class I got confirmation from Alfred’s granddaughter that one of the matches was her brother that match shared even less dna, which caused Wado to hypothesize that one of Alfred’s other brothers had been the father. However, with oral history on both sides of the family indicating Alfred further research will be needed.

Nicole (30m 15s):
Yes, that is disappointing that the match with the brother did not point to Alfred’s Lego as strongly as you know his sister. But I agree that future research will hopefully help you figure out if the oral tradition is true. It seems like with so many matches that you will be able to find the DNA evidence that will help solve this case.

Diana (30m 39s):
As you were working through this whole project, we have you use Air Table because it was so amazing for logging all the documentary as well as all the DNA work. So how did that go?

Deborah Keyes (30m 52s):
I loved using Air Table. I had been exposed to it before but I had a difficult time figuring out how to use it for DNA research. Your template and processes were excellent. There were so many features to help capture DNA research from the DNA match details table to the research log. One of my favorite features is the citation table. I use that now to record all types of citations. I can’t speak highly enough about your template and the instruction.

Diana (31m 27s):
Wow, that’s great. I love Airtable as well and I’m so grateful Nicole that you figured out how to do all the DNA linking and tables and fields. It really is so amazing and it makes working with your dna, it makes you feel like you’re not spinning your wheels, you’re making progress on this focus objective and you know how to organize things. It really is a great, a great, great tool. So Thank you

Nicole (32m 0s):
Well, I’m glad that it’s useful and that’s so great that you’re continuing to add citations to the citation template part of the base because it’s such a helpful way to not have to recreate the wheel every time you make a citation. Just come back and see what you’ve already created. All right, well tell us how report writing went.

Deborah Keyes (32m 19s):
I thought the report writing went really well. Writing the report is one of the hardest things for me. The writing as You Go process as well as the Reflection Journal were fantastic. I had learned the writing as you go concept before, but your course allowed me to implement it as I was researching a real project, it updating Airtable and the Reflection Journal all made the writing the final report so much easier.

Nicole (32m 46s):
Oh fantastic. And did you share your report?

Deborah Keyes (32m 50s):
I did, yes.

Nicole (32m 52s):
Oh. Great. And so what are your future research suggestions going forward on the subjective?

Deborah Keyes (32m 57s):
So the first one is just before the end of the course I discovered a male Carrington who was a descendant of Mary’s brother. I would like to see if he would take a Y DNA test, which will help confirm his Y DNA lineage two, my test taker has a single living Carrington first cousin. I had sent her an Ancestry DNA kit and the results just recently came back. Yay. I’ve been in contact with the person who helped her take the test but so far have not been granted access to her matches. Oh, once I have it, I’d like to construct a descendant tree with her as the test taker and Ron Wado again.

Deborah Keyes (33m 42s):
Third, I need to contact Blaine Beninger to ask about half-sibling relationships and their effect on Cent Morgan counts.

Nicole (33m 53s):
Wow, those are great. And I really like this great news about the first cousin who’s taken the test and, and when you get to analyze new results like that, it’s always very exciting I think. Yeah, so wonderful. So, and the Y DNA Avenue also sounds really great, so congratulations on moving forward with these new research avenues Thank

Deborah Keyes (34m 18s):
You.

Diana (34m 18s):
Yes, I think that’s the exciting thing about doing a complete project. You do get new ideas of what to do next until you get it all written up. You just can’t always see anything else to do and you feel like you’ve come to the end of your research. So it’s great that you had a list of things to do next to continue. So as we wrap up this episode, can you give us some takeaways from the research Psycho Pro with DNA process that you learned?

Deborah Keyes (34m 46s):
I really love the class because of the number of previous courses I had taken, I wasn’t sure how it would help me. I can honestly say I’ve gotten more out of your class than any other I love and use your processes. In my current research, the feedback from the peer groups as well as my fellow classmates were invaluable. The share number of podcasts, videos, tools, templates and resources was astounding. I intend to extend my access to your site once my membership expires in order to continue to have access to those resources. Having said all that, I believe the real value in your class is your approach to teaching this course.

Deborah Keyes (35m 32s):
It was tremendously helpful to select a research object, perform the research, practice using the tools, and write a finished report all under your guidance. Your course was a great addition to my genealogical foundation, Thank you for developing this program.

Diana (35m 51s):
Aw Thank you so much for all of those wonderful comments. You know, that’s always been our hope. Nicole and I are both teachers and we’re always have in the back of our mind how best to teach things and we just completely believe with all of our hearts that you learn best by doing your own project. You know, it’s wonderful to have that background though. We always recommend everyone learn as much as they can about all different types of sources and localities, but you know, you just have to put it into practice in your own project. And so it’s, it’s really wonderful to hear that that worked well for you. So Thank, you

Deborah Keyes (36m 31s):
You’re welcome. It was a pleasure.

Nicole (36m 34s):
Well, thanks Deborah for coming on the podcast today. It was a wonderful chance to learn about the Carrington and Slagle research project you did. And also thanks for telling our listeners about the research like a Pro with DNA study group. And now that we are beginning Registration for the next one, we hope that all of you listening will consider if this might be something that could help you with your research and, and if so, please join us in our next study group.

Diana (37m 2s):
Yes, and I think a really good takeaway from your project Deborah was that you know, it’s okay that you didn’t solve it with this one. Go at it. You have ideas for what to do next. And we do teach that sometimes it takes several phases of a project to come to proof, especially with something really tough like this. And I think that’s such a good lesson to learn. So this was a really, really great example to really teach that.

Nicole (37m 28s):
All right everyone, thanks Debbie for coming on and we’ll talk to you guys again next week.

Deborah Keyes (37m 33s):
Thank you.

Diana (37m 35s):
All right, bye-bye everyone.

Nicole (37m 36s):
Bye. Thank you for listening. We hope that something you heard today will help you make progress in your research. If you want to learn more, purchase our books, Research Like a Pro and Research Like a Pro with DNA on Amazon.com and other booksellers. You can also register for our online courses or study groups of the same names. Learn more at FamilyLocket.com/services. To share your progress and ask questions, join our private Facebook group by sending us your book receipt or joining our courses to get updates in your email inbox each Monday, subscribe to our newsletter at FamilyLocket.com/newsletter. Please subscribe, rate and review our podcast. We read each review and are so thankful for them. We hope you’ll start now to Research Like a Pro.