Re: STC Certification

Subject: Re: STC Certification
From: Robert Lauriston <robert -at- lauriston -dot- com>
To: Monique Semp <monique -dot- semp -at- earthlink -dot- net>, TECHWR-L Writing <techwr-l -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com>
Date: Wed, 10 Feb 2016 14:59:15 -0800

I'd see STC certification on a resume as a sign of bad judgment.

A significant percentage of my work time is spent keeping up with new
technologies as my company adopts them. Typically they haven't been
around long enough that I could take classes in them.

Maybe at some point the STC's certification program was envisioned as
something that would advance the profession, but the end result seems
primarily focused on making money.

Here's the TOC for the expensive textbook their expensive test is based on:

Professional Engineer licenses are issued by state governments.
Looking at the relevant California agency, there's no general
continuing education requirement. Why should there be? Some
specialties don't change much from decade to decade, others require at
least one class a year to keep up to date with the latest changes in
relevant regulations.

On Wed, Feb 10, 2016 at 9:40 AM, Monique Semp
<monique -dot- semp -at- earthlink -dot- net> wrote:
>> I'd see it as a major negative on a resume.
> Hmm; how so? I'd think that the worst that could happen is that a resume
> reader doesn't know what it means.
>> but to keep your certificate current you need to take part in various
> STC activities or take college courses related to technical writing.
> I believe it's pretty standard for certifications to require continuing
> education. I know for certainty that the PE (professional engineer) license
> requires you to take (or teach) a certain number of classes every year or
> two in order to maintain your license/certification.
> And I think it a good thing. Just because one is current with technologies
> and skills when a license/certification is obtained doesn't guarantee that
> in 10 years anything new has been magically gleaned/learned. So taking
> courses ensures a minimal level of continued participation in a professional
> field.
> (I do agree that there are many legitimate concerns about this particular
> certification. And as I said, I am not planning to pursue it. But I do not
> agree that every aspect of the certification is bogus/sham/whatever. It's
> not perfect, but it's an important first step to advancing the field of
> technical communications in a way that's similar to many other professions.
> And as far as I know, there's no better alternative.)
> -Monique
Visit TechWhirl for the latest on content technology, content strategy and content development |


You are currently subscribed to TECHWR-L as archive -at- web -dot- techwr-l -dot- com -dot-

To unsubscribe send a blank email to
techwr-l-leave -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com

Send administrative questions to admin -at- techwr-l -dot- com -dot- Visit for more resources and info.

Looking for articles on Technical Communications? Head over to our online magazine at

Looking for the archived Techwr-l email discussions? Search our public email archives @


STC Certification: From: Claire Lundeby
Re: STC Certification: From: Robert Lauriston
Re: STC Certification: From: Monique Semp

Previous by Author: Re: STC Certification
Next by Author: Re: STC Certification
Previous by Thread: Re: STC Certification
Next by Thread: RE: STC Certification

What this post helpful? Share it with friends and colleagues:

Sponsored Ads