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:What Degree Would You Get? From:"Larry Kunz ((919) 254-6395)" <ldkunz -at- VNET -dot- IBM -dot- COM> Date:Tue, 11 Apr 1995 14:17:33 EDT
This has been a wonderful thread, but I'm disappointed nobody has
mentioned Philosophy. (I'll wait while the snickering dies down.)
When it came time to declare my college major I discovered that, with
just a few additional courses, I could double-major in English and
Philosophy. I've always been glad I did.
We Philosophy majors used to joke about finding someone who'd pay us
$50K to sit under a tree and think. It never quite turned out that way,
but my problem-solving skill and critical-thinking ability have helped
me get, keep, and succeed at my tech-writing jobs. They've helped me
in innumerable other ways too -- not all of them work-related.
The thread also evoked memories of my co-authoring a white paper with
George Hayhoe, Freda Stohrer, and Sherry Southard, about the
relationship between academia and industry, their mutual expectations,
and their need to work together. (It was published in *Technical
Communication*, 1Q94, page 14.)
I caught some of the "typical" industry viewpoint in Gina Jerome's
comments:
> However, with our industry changing so rapidly, I'm not sure it's
> wise to invest the time necessary to get another degree as I'm not
> confident that academia can keep up with current technology.
Stuart Selber's response typified the perspective of the academy:
> This assumes that university degrees should be skills based and
> application specific. And we all know that's shortsighted. A better
> service, I think, is to provide people with broad frameworks from
> within which to base technology and communication related
> decisions.
The subject is much more complex than these brief quotes suggest.
I'm not picking on Gina and Stuart: Go back and read their full
postings, which were excellent, and you'll see that they're both
well aware of the complexities.
*** WARNING: STC PLUG COMING ***
Neither industry nor academia has a corner on the truth. STC is
studying the issues and trying to sustain a fruitful dialog between
the sides. Anyone interested in participating should contact Ken
Rainey, Assistant to the President for Academic and Research Programs,
at krainey -at- sct -dot- edu -dot- We value your insights!
Larry Kunz
STC Assistant to the President for Professional Development
ldkunz -at- vnet -dot- ibm -dot- com
