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.
Re: Original work [was RE: STC certification program: skeptical curmudgeonlyness, part II]
Subject:Re: Original work [was RE: STC certification program: skeptical curmudgeonlyness, part II] From:Gene Kim-Eng <techwr -at- genek -dot- com> To:Lynne Wright <Lynne -dot- Wright -at- tiburoninc -dot- com> Date:Fri, 21 Oct 2011 12:58:40 -0700
If the list you're thinking about included on-site testing, it wasn't from
me.
If I believed a tech writer candidate still required on-site testing after I
had employed all other evaluations, my method would be a temp-to-perm
contract.
Gene Kim-Eng
On Fri, Oct 21, 2011 at 12:10 PM, Lynne Wright
<Lynne -dot- Wright -at- tiburoninc -dot- com>wrote:
> This brings us back to an earlier comment from Gene, I believe, about how
> important it is to use a variety of factors -- from written samples, to
> on-site testing, to grilling people to see if they are bluffing or can
> actually walk the walk, to some special kind of intuitive spidey-sense built
> on years of experience -- to determine which applicants are worth hiring.
> And I think that is what's getting people's danders up about the
> certification process as proposed.
>
> If no Tech Comm. Manager in their right mind would hire somebody based
> solely on a pile of pre-packaged self-evaluations and samples, then it seems
> a bit odd to award professional certification that way. Especially since the
> standards/criteria for qualifying aren't defined; and everything about the
> process, instructions, etc. is vague and confusing.
>
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Create and publish documentation through multiple channels with Doc-To-Help.
Choose your authoring formats and get any output you may need. Try
Doc-To-Help, now with MS SharePoint integration, free for 30-days. http://www.doctohelp.com
---
You are currently subscribed to TECHWR-L as archive -at- web -dot- techwr-l -dot- com -dot-
