Re: CLarification (was Real Offense)

Subject: Re: CLarification (was Real Offense)
From: Christi <christi -at- sageinst -dot- COM>
To: walden miller <waldenm -at- earthlink -dot- net>, TECHWR-L <techwr-l -at- lists -dot- raycomm -dot- com>
Date: Fri, 10 Mar 2000 09:42:03 -0800

> As a tech docs manager, I see hundreds of resumes a year from people who have
> no technical background, but have a degree in fiction or literature. I also
> see many resumes from people with comp sci degrees, but no formal writing
> experience. Both groups miss the boat. A strong background in tech writing
> theory and a strong technical background makes the perfect tech writer. And
> of course experience....

But since perfection is hardly ever acheived, consider the ability of
candidates to learn.
I have a math degree, which I only used to get my first technical
writing/editing job. I haven't used it since. But I love to learn new
technology and I learn pretty quick. So currently, I work for a telecomm co
and I am learning the technology.
I think many people judge what's on the paper (resume) without considering
what a candidate might have that's not as easy to express on paper.
I think you can show a willingness and aptitude for learning (and learning
fast) by listing the classes, seminars, etc. that you have attended.

I agree that you need to know the technology... much of the time. But I also
agree that depending on the audience and the type of doc, you might not need
to know it as in depth as someone else.

Christi Carew
Technical Writer

Sage Instruments
Freedom, CA, USA

- Beautiful young people are accidents of nature, but beautiful old
people are works of art.

Previous by Author: Re: Marketing's Role
Next by Author: on "CAN", was Old thread, hopefully new spin on "allow" v. "enable.
Previous by Thread: Re: Clarification (was Real Offense)
Next by Thread: tech writers and knowledge bases

What this post helpful? Share it with friends and colleagues:

Sponsored Ads

Sponsored Ads