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:more about what tools to learn From:Jim Williams <WILLIAMSJA1 -at- WOODS -dot- UML -dot- EDU> Date:Sat, 25 Feb 1995 16:58:54 EST
In response to my question about what tools a new technical writer should
learn, Glen Accardo wrote:
>Being able to say that you can use
>FrameMaker will not make me hire you. At best it'll chop off a couple of
>days of initial training, which I'm willing to sacrifice for someone who
>Show me you can write a manual or a help file -- show me that you know
>the differences in the writing -- and I'll make sure you learn whatever
>tools I happen to use.
I'm wondering if your attitude is the exception rather than the rule. The
few writers I have talked to so far told me that employers were looking for
a big list of tools on a resume. The writers I talked to thought that being
able to list a bunch of programs on their resume got them an interview,
where they were then able to demonstrate that they could write.
>What matters is that people fill in holes in their experience/knowledge
>when necessary, and have acquired this knowledge in a way that "pleases"
>employers. Some people want you to have a degree in a field before they'll
>believe you'll know it. Some people with degrees don't know their field.
>Other employers demand ON THE JOB experience, and claim, for example, that
>using Word Perfect in school is meaningless. Others compare your knowledge
>with theirs: if knowledge(yours) < knowledge(theirs) then you = stupid.
>I don't necissarily agree with any of these, but I've seen the attitudes,
>so don't be shocked when you are labeled ignorant when you really aren't.
This is something that I've wondered about. If somebody asks what
experience I have using some program listed on my resume, how are employers
going to respond if I have to admit that I just taught myself how to use
them? If I'm applying for an entry-level job how can they expect me to
have on-the-job experience using some tool?