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.
I like it, except I believe the evaluating body ought to be independent of
one's employment and social scenario -- a Board of Certification, if you
will. If loopholes are provided they will be used. Maybe the STC could
handle that part, somehow.
-Vester
----------
From: geoff-h
To: Multiple recipients of list TECHWR-L
Subject: Re. Certification based on experience
Date: Friday, July 14, 1995 2:05PM
James Perkins raised an interesting point in his discussion of
certification. In his example, an Australian psychologist can become
certified without actually practicing, and herein lies the key: as
several techwhirlers have noted, the letters after your name aren't as
important as the letters that you've put on the printed page and sent
to an audience.
If "we" ever do decide to go with certification, this strikes me as
the way to go: a testimonial from your supervisor and colleagues, to
prove that you've been doing real work, for a real audience, and that
the audience really benefitted from the value you added. (Yes, this is
simplistic and prone to abuse, but it's a starting point. Perhaps some
form of audit to confirm that the testimonial is real.)
Comments?
--Geoff Hart #8^{)}
geoff-h -at- mtl -dot- feric -dot- ca
Disclaimer: If I didn't commit it in print in one of
our reports, it don't represent FERIC's opinion.
