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:Re: References to the "Learning Curve" From:Tracy Boyington <tracy_boyington -at- OKVOTECH -dot- ORG> Date:Tue, 5 May 1998 08:33:41 -0500
I think "learning curve" is a phrase that, like "I could care less," has
come to mean the exact opposite of what it really says. If you graphed
the time it takes to gain mastery, a steeper "learning curve" would mean
less time, and a flatter "learning curve" would mean more time. But
people don't see this graph in their head and instead associate "steep"
with the difficulty of climbing a steep hill. Therefore, when you use
the phrase "steep learning curve," half of your audience will think
"difficult" and half will think "easy." So I suggest we abolish the
concept of the learning curve altogether. And that's my heresy for the
> Would someone on the list please tell me what the "learning curve" looks =
> like. People keep referring to difficult software as having a "steep =
> learning curve". I have looked in the archives and people have referred =
> to the curve as "short", "sharp", and "slow". I have no idea what these =
> descriptions mean.=20
> My dictionary reports that its x-axis is Time and its y-axis is Mastery. =
> If that is true, then a "steep" curve means mastery in a short time. A =
> difficult learning experience would have a "flat" curve, not a "steep" =
> one. That is, it would take a long time to gain a small amount of =