Re: "Training" versus "education"

["Steven J. Owens" <puff -at- NETCOM -dot- COM>]

Paul Sholar, (pks -at- gensym -dot- com), Sr. Technical Writer at Gensym Corp, writes:

> Consider these opinions:

> *  We receive "training" to learn how to perform a job.
> *  We receive "education" to learn how to learn.

> I would recommend that an undergraduate student take courses that
> reflect his/her true intellectual interests.  One can always receive
> "training" after learning how to learn, which should be one's goal
> while an undergraduate.
> [...]
> Jobs and job requirements change.  Without "education" you will tend to
> bear the brunt of change, rather than anticipate and participate in how
> change happens.

     I agree whole-heartedly; the more rounded education will serve as
the theoretical foundation upon which you'll build your job skills.  BUT...

     ...on the other hand, job training is not necessarily something
you can count on your employer to provide, particularly if you're not
yet employed!  Employers seem increasingly reluctant to hire new
graduates.  I think you have to take your "job training" into your own
hands, while you're getting your education by more formal means.

     I went into great detail, in a post a while back, on things you
(a student interested in technical writing careers, that is) can do on
your own to improve your employability, so I'll just leave it at that.

     By the way, Mr. "Sr. Technical Writer", how does Gensym arrive at
that classification?  I'm trying to build a rule-of-thumb definition
of entry-level, mid, and senior technical writer, so I can post it and
let people take shots at it.

Steven J. Owens
puff -at- netcom -dot- com