TechWhirl (TECHWR-L) is a resource for technical writing and technical communications professionals of all experience levels and in all industries to share their experiences and acquire information.
For two decades, technical communicators have turned to TechWhirl to ask and answer questions about the always-changing world of technical communications, such as tools, skills, career paths, methodologies, and emerging industries. The TechWhirl Archives and magazine, created for, by and about technical writers, offer a wealth of knowledge to everyone with an interest in any aspect of technical communications.
Subject:Re: On degrees and the like... From:"Elna Tymes" <etymes -at- lts -dot- com> To:TECHWR-L <techwr-l -at- lists -dot- raycomm -dot- com> Date:Tue, 28 Mar 2000 08:08:08 -0800
Eric Ray wrote:
> For example, an aspiring technical writer fresh out of
> college with a degree in "technical communication" would
> have far better chances to jump right into a tech comm
> position if the resume shows Frame, RoboHelp, and HTML
> skills. A tech comm degree program that teaches useful
> skills but does not necessarily leave a student with
> specific marketable toolsets is likely doing the
> job-hunting student a disservice--at least in the short
Today's job market focuses (unfortunately) so much on familiarity with tools
that certificate programs and some BA programs (I don't think you CAN get a BS
in technical writing - but then, that would be an oxymoron, wouldn't it? <g>)
tend to teach the tools at the expense of broader education. Like you, I don't
like that tendency - it tends to produce tradespeople, rather than
professionals who can bring thinking and analysis to the job as well as ability
to use tools.
> As it is, it's nice to see that every day or two, even
> now, something comes up that I can say "hey, I remember
> that from the <blah> class I took during my first year
> in the MA program, or that relates to <blah>, which
> I am familiar with"--and that's the real value of
> a degree in any field, not just tech comm.
Exactly. My BA, received long ago from Stanford, is in journalism and I chose
it because (a) it focused on learning about other things and then writing about
them, and (b) it afforded us the greatest choice in non-major electives. I
learned how to write at the old Underwood typewriters at the Stanford Daily,
where the best writing coaches were students a year or two ahead of me. (They
were far, far better tool-teachers than any of the profs in my major.) But my
real education came in all those electives - science and math and art and music
and literature and comparative religion and poly sci and history and logic - oh
my! - and like you I remember and use something from one or another of those
classes a couple of times a week.
When my sons were looking at college, my advice was to major in something they
loved, but to also acquire sufficient skills that they could find a job after
they graduated. In majoring in something they loved, I figured that they'd
learn more about the art and discipline of learning to learn than any
trade-oriented program could provide. But by also acquiring salable skills,
they'd be able to effectively market themselves in the job market. I still
believe that kind of balance is very important.
> Do I have a proposal or answer? No. But I think that there's
> more to being a really good technical writer than can come
> from any program, any certificate, and any specific set of
> requirements, and I think that we'd be doing ourselves and the
> profession a service if we were to focus our energies on how
> to help people enter the profession and on how to prepare
> people to succeed in the profession, rather than beating the
> dead horses of STC, certification, degrees, and the like.