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.
Before we call for an organization to "govern" and
certify us, better to decide if certication is
required or desirable. Because, once such an
organization exists, it will surely begin regulating.
Writing is very subjective, and therefore hard to
certify. A style of writing that works well for
projects that must be localized may not work well at
all for an annual report. Would one's knowledge of the
rules of grammar be tested? Typing speed? Ability to
meet deadlines? Ability to present to clients? Who
gets to decide what TW's *must* know?
Often, certification is used by those in a particular
position to create barriers to entry to others seeking
that position (i.e., are used to increase job
security), and so can cause stagnation in the field.
There are plenty of highly certified but not
particularly competent people in all kinds of jobs.
It's fine to say that certification would simply be
one tool to help managers determine that a candidate
is qualified, but I have often seen that certificates
are used to replace the effort required to determine
if a candidate is really a good fit for the job. I
know technicians who are better engineers than
engineers, but who cannot work as engineers due to
company policy. Or great managers who cannot manage
because company policy requires a Bachelor's degree
> I don't share the anti-certification view that some
> people seem
> to have.
> I just think that any discussion about the
> nuts and bolts
> of how and what to certify is mere wheel-spinning,
> because the
> first step in the process is for members of the
> profession to come
> to a consensus on a certifying organization.
> IMO, the only
> open discussion should be on developing a governing
> body, and
> once established, the governing body should develop
> the quals
> in an organized manner that doesn't resemble a
> Usenet flame
> Gene Kim-Eng
Now Shipping -- WebWorks ePublisher Pro for Word! Easily create online
Help. And online anything else. Redesigned interface with a new
project-based workflow. Try it today! http://www.webworks.com/techwr-l
You are currently subscribed to techwr-l as:
archiver -at- techwr-l -dot- com
To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-techwr-l-obscured -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com
Send administrative questions to lisa -at- techwr-l -dot- com -dot- Visit http://www.techwr-l.com/techwhirl/ for more resources and info.