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:Certification From:David Dubin <David_Dubin -at- NOTES -dot- PW -dot- COM> Date:Wed, 3 Jan 1996 16:00:45 EST
I think certification is an excellent idea as long as each and every element of
the process is OBJECTIVE, not subjective. As an example; why must a candidate
for certification have a degree in Journalism, Technical Writing, or English?
Taken even further, why must a candidate for certification even need a degree?
If we agree that a candidate does not need a degree, can we agree on how many
years experience are required to offset a degree? Is five enough or is ten
better? Who is to say?
What type of questions will be asked? Will there be questions about grammar and
punctuation? Will there be questions about technical communications theory?
What about questions dealing with adult learning theories and methodologies?
Perhaps more importantly, who will be the arbiter of what questions are asked
and what are considered correct responses?
Yes, I think certification is an excellent idea in theory. The problem with
certification is that the transition from theory to practice is similar to the
transition from being a candidate to being an incumbent; you knew what you had
to promise before you were elected, but, once elected, cannot figure out how to
keep all of those promises.
David Dubin -at- notes -dot- pw -dot- com
This has been one man's opinion, yours may vary with mileage.