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:STC Evaluations (was Video Icon Placement) From:"Mark L. Levinson" <nosnivel -at- netvision -dot- net -dot- il> To:"TECHWR-L" <techwr-l -at- lists -dot- raycomm -dot- com> Date:Fri, 16 Jul 2004 22:27:32 +0200
HSC wrote:
> One last question, does anyone know what type of
> evaluations the STC competitions follow to determine
> the winners? I found their evaluation form, but I am
> unsure what categories apply to the different levels
> of winners.
Following is an explanation from the STC.
Distinguished:
Clearly superior in all areas. The entry contains no major
flaws and few, if any, minor flaws. It applies the principles
of technical communication in an outstanding way,
particularly in the way that it anticipates and fulfills the
needs of its audience.
Excellence:
Consistently meets high standards in all areas. The entry
might contain a single major flaw or a few minor flaws. The
entry clearly (if slightly imperfectly) demonstrates an
exceptional understanding of technical communication
principles.
Merit:
Consistently meets high standards in most areas. The entry
might contain a small number of major or minor flaws, but
still applies technical communication principles in a highly
proficient manner.
No award:
Contains work that is of average or less-than-average
professional quality. The entry generally has many major
and minor flaws. It shows a lack of understanding of
technical communication principles, is poorly executed, is
hard to use, or fails to meet the needs of its audience.
Major flaws and minor flaws are considered as follows:
Major flaw - Substantially hinders the user.
Examples: illogical organization; incomplete or
missing content; consistently unclear style;
no table of contents, headers, page numbers,
or index; inaccurate page numbers in table of
contents or index; procedural steps buried in text;
a consistent pattern of spelling and grammatical
errors; confusing terminology.
Minor flaw - Might cause a momentary stumble, but
doesn’t slow the user down much.
Examples: a few instances of spelling and grammatical
errors, misplaced graphics, inconsistent capitalization,
or confusing terminology.
For any entry to receive an award, it must be thorough,
accurate, useful, appropriate, and well executed. Note
that the size of an entry might affect whether a flaw is major
or minor; for example, misspelling a client’s name in a short
marketing brochure would be a major flaw.
Mark L. Levinson
Herzliya, Israel
nosnivel -at- netvision -dot- net -dot- il
ROBOHELP X5: Featuring Word 2003 support, Content Management, Multi-Author
support, PDF and XML support and much more!
TRY IT TODAY at http://www.macromedia.com/go/techwrl
WEBWORKS FINALDRAFT: New! Document review system for Word and FrameMaker
authors. Automatic browser-based drafts with unlimited reviewers. Full
online discussions -- no Web server needed! http://www.webworks.com/techwr-l
---
You are currently subscribed to techwr-l as:
archiver -at- techwr-l -dot- com
To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-techwr-l-obscured -at- lists -dot- raycomm -dot- com
Send administrative questions to ejray -at- raycomm -dot- com -dot- Visit http://www.raycomm.com/techwhirl/ for more resources and info.
