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.
At 03:53 PM 4/17/96 GMT, Bernard A. McCann wrote:
<snip snip snip>
>May I sincerely thank those who responded and I look forward to producing
>a less ambiguous survey at a later date. Meanwhile, I hope that some
>"employers" will seriously think more about technical writer job
>descriptions, ie very few technical (as in engineering and science)
>writers are highly qualified editors and electronic publishing operators,
>and it is unlikely that a writer will attain "senior" status with only
>three years experience.
>Bernie
>bi975 -at- freenet -dot- carleton -dot- ca
Bernie
It almost sounds like you used the survey to support a pre-existing opinion.
1. I use a lot of different tools because my employers demand them. If
they have to pay for training, that is, time spent on the job learning a
tool, it's because they chose the tool. I just learn it to please my employer.
2. Don't underestimate the number of tools a writer is required to use.
Today I used OS/2 and Windows, two different screen capture programs (one
for each operating system), a graphics program, a mail program on the
mainframe, and an early version of the product I am documenting. I'm
actually writing the book in WordPerfect.
3. If I don't know it, I'm expected to learn it. If it doesn't work, I'm
expected to find a solution - and be quick about it.
In my experience, my current situation is not unique. In a previous job I
had to use many different programs. I estimated that I spent about 60% of
my day on that job just using the software, not writing anything.
>very few technical (as in engineering and science)
>writers are highly qualified editors and electronic publishing operators,
I am a highly qualified editor (one crackerjack of an editor) and
electronic publishing operator (well, not expert, but pretty good).
>and it is unlikely that a writer will attain "senior" status with only
>three years experience.
Guess what? I agree with you here. Not only that, but with brand new
writers, your chances are good that their writing and editing won't be very
good. It does take a while to develop the necessary skills. I'd put the
minimum at 5 years, but the more the better.
Thanks for being honest about the survey. It always helps to have the other
person's point of view.
Marilynne
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Marilynne Smith
mrsmith -at- cts -dot- com
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Post Message: TECHWR-L -at- LISTSERV -dot- OKSTATE -dot- EDU
Get Commands: LISTSERV -at- LISTSERV -dot- OKSTATE -dot- EDU with "help" in body.
Unsubscribe: LISTSERV -at- LISTSERV -dot- OKSTATE -dot- EDU with "signoff TECHWR-L"
Listowner: ejray -at- ionet -dot- net