Re: Greetings

[Ad absurdum per aspera <JTCHEW -at- LBL -dot- GOV>]

I> What say the rest of you?

The idea of certification still cavitates my bloodstream --
the field isn't *that* mature -- but otherwise I agree
with Chuck Campbell on the usefulness of formal education and
training, and on the ever-increasing demand for competence out
in the job market.

Still, what I'd want most when evaluating a neophyte would be
answers to these two questions:

*  Can she write?
*  Does she have some special knowledge of the subject
   matter, or reason to make me think she would be adept
   and interested in its pursuit?

A degree or lesser degree-like object from a college would be
partial evidence that the first criterion has been satisfied.
And, I would hope, evidence that the candidate knows something
about the theories that underlie modern professional practice,
as opposed to the "monkey see, monkey do" approach. As such,
it helps solve the catch-22 of breaking into the field when one
hasn't yet put together a portfolio.  But it is neither necessary
nor sufficient.

My advice:  as your need to make a living allows, get some kind
of formal education in tech. comm. and also get a job as a junior
writer or editor, preferably with a company whose information
products have struck you as being well written and produced.  And
join the Society for Technical Communication, go to its local
meetings, read its journal, and go to conferences if you can --
that's where you'll most predictably find high concentrations of
people you can learn from.

Good luck,
Joe
"Just another personal opinion from the People's Republic of Berkeley"
Disclaimer: Even if my employer had a position on the subject,
I probably wouldn't be the one stating it on their behalf.