Re: Texas Tech U/ tech writer experience....

[Rachael Lininger <techwhirl -at- earthlink -dot- net>]

Isaac Rabinovitch <isaacr -at- mailsnare -dot- net> wrote:

>I'm not saying that you can't get by without the paper. But you 
>better be *very* good. If you're up for a job and don't have the 
>formal credentials, you better come accross as a *lot* more 
>qualified than the other candidates. That wasn't so hard to do 5 
>years ago, when there were more jobs than candidates to fill 
>them. But now the streets swarm with well-qualified people 
>who can't rent a job -- and you're up against all of them. Under 
>these circumstances, you need every advantage you can muster.

Agreed. But the person who wrote originally already has two 4-year
degrees -- including one in English -- and is talking about a graduate 
degree. That's where I am, as the difference between a double major
and two degrees isn't that significant to HR. My current crackpot 
theory on the job market is that there should be a balance between 
education and experience that's appropriate for the field. In chemistry, 
a Ph.D is a reasonable place to be without experience. I'm not sure 
that a graduate degree without any experience is terribly helpful in 
tech writing. To my mind, the cost in money, time, and soul-sucking 
educational bureaucracy isn't worth the potential benefit, which is 
only potential.

Then again, I burned out and crashed _really_ hard in graduate
school, so I may be overestimating the costs.

Besides, when they ask you what your long-term goals are, you can
use the graduate program as a nice, concrete example that You Are
Going Places. The interviews that went best for me where the ones
where I discussed (whether they brought it up explicitly or not) my
long-term career goals. Faces frequently lit up when they realized
that I had a plan.

Rachael