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:Re: Technical -v- Technical Writing Expertise From:Shannon Ford <shannon -at- UNIFACE -dot- NL> Date:Thu, 25 Nov 1993 08:42:01 +0100
Just to give a last few kicks...
Len writes:
> I've always felt that judging the work of anyone by the credentials she
> holds is not constructive. Far better to judge the quality of the work
> itself rather than the background of the worker.
> I've said this before in this forum, but since this thread continues,
> nobody apparently either listened or agreed. IMHO, your background
> doesn't make you good at anything; you apply all of your skills to do a
> job, and you either do it well or you don't REGARDLESS of your
> background.
Doesn't this also imply that it shouldn't matter if you have a *degree* or not?
(If you can show that you have the required skills?)
Plenty of capable people out there never finished (or started) college. I
get the feeling, though, that these people are really discriminated against
when looking for jobs that they are otherwise qualified to do.
Of course, I wouldn't hire a nuclear engineer without a college degree; it's
hard to imagine learning everything you need to know about nuclear physics
on-the-job or as an apprentice. But a writer? or an editor?
