Re: Training technical writers

[Dick Margulis <margulisd -at- comcast -dot- net>]

The question is quick, but the answer is long. Very long. There have 
been several lengthy and sometimes rancorous discussion threads over the 
years addressing this question.

To the extent that there is any consensus at all--which there really 
isn't, but I'll pretend for the nonce--it is that all tech writers 
should be grounded in general science, math, and technology sufficient 
to be able to understand quickly the subject matter they will be 
documenting. Obviously, someone who is going to document the assembly of 
barbecue grills does not need the same kind of technical knowledge as 
someone who is going to write software life cycle documents; but both 
have to be generally familiar with engineering jargon and scientific 
terminology across many disciplines and have to know where to find the 
information they need. So a certain number of math, science, and 
engineering credits should be a prerequisite for a tech writing 
curriculum--if only to demonstrate a level of interest in _technical_ 
writing, rather than a desire to have one's poetry subsidized by a day job.

In addition, tech writers should be firmly grounded in grammar and 
rhetoric (either taught within the curriculum or as prerequisites): You 
want people who can write well by the time they complete the program, 
however you get them there. They also need to have a metalanguage to 
talk about writing.

The curriculum should cover audience analysis, usability testing, and 
the principles of document design--organization, typography, layout, 
readability, usability, etc.--for all manner of print and electronic 
media. It's more important to have a firm grasp of what the output 
should look like in order to be effective than to memorize the 
operational details of software tools that will be obsolete in five 
years anyway, although students should finish the program knowing how to 
produce various types of documents with at least one modern set of 
tools. (I think you provide the software in a lab and point the students 
to user manuals; I don't think more than five minutes of instructor time 
should be spent teaching tool use.) Students should also learn the 
basics of graphics--screen captures, image manipulation, a little 
technical illustration, a little photography, enough about printing 
technology so that they're no longer dangerous.

The curriculum should cover principles of information 
organization--topics like relational database design and query 
languages, content management, single-sourcing, etc.

The curriculum should prepare students for real-world working situation: 
understanding personality types in the workplace; understanding the 
different ways organizations can be structured; understanding (at a 
minimal level) the basic concepts of project management, product 
management, business analysis, corporate decision-making (its seeming 
lack of logic when viewed from below); understanding something about 
personnel review systems; understanding various ways to organize a 
documentation group; understanding how to manage a group (delegation of 
authority, assignment of resources to project teams, collecting and 
evaluating metrics, making budgets).

If you can put together a curriculum like that, your graduates will not 
have any trouble finding work.

I know this is not a direct answer to the question you asked, but I'm 
not aware of any organization that has credibly proposed such a 
curriculum standard; so I hope this at least proves somewhat useful.

Dick

Ron Scheer wrote: