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: Editing and writing tests for jobs From:"Grant, Christopher" <CGrant -at- glhec -dot- org> To:"TECHWR-L" <techwr-l -at- lists -dot- raycomm -dot- com> Date:Wed, 15 May 2002 11:15:30 -0500
> Well it's about time this topic reared its head again :)
Heh.
I think the idea that "experienced" writers should _not_ be tested, _simply_
because they have "experience," is absurd. "Experience" (with respect to
technical writing) is subjective, IMHO: working as a technical writer for a
few years now, I've worked with people whose experience has been of
tremendous assistance and was commensurate with a high level of job
expertise. OTOH, I've also worked with people whose experience did NOT
correspond to a high level of technical skill or job expertise.
My point is that experience really ought to be tested, to characterize it.
Just saying that you have experience means nothing. I mean, there are such
things as BAD experience, no? :)
I also don't understand the notion of writers being insulted by writing
tests (though I agree this seems to be the case.) If you've got the skillz,
show 'em off. If a writer truly is insulted by the idea, then IMHO either
A. that writer doesn't have the skills, or B. the writer _does_ have the
skills and can afford to blow off potential employers requiring such
testing.
I like Connie's approach and believe that such a test would be a GREAT way
to characterize a potential employee's experience:
> I typically present an introductory, or fairly simple UI that's
> already been documented and ask the candidate to do so, with some
> background on typical users, power users, etc. No time limits, no limits
on
> questions that can be asked of me, no limits on how to structure the
document.
Basic stuff. What technical writer would be insulted by such a screening
test? If I go buy a new car, I test drive it first. I don't just look at
the sticker and features and decide on the basis of that alone.
-Chris Grant
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Free copy of ARTS PDF Tools when you register for the PDF
Conference by May 15. Leading-Edge Practices for Enterprise
& Government, June 3-5, Bethesda,MD. www.PDFConference.com
Check out RoboDemo for tutorials! It makes creating full-motion software
demonstrations and other onscreen support materials easy and intuitive.
Need RoboHelp? Save $100 on RoboHelp Office in May with our mail-in rebate.
Go to http://www.ehelp.com/techwr-l
---
You are currently subscribed to techwr-l as: archive -at- raycomm -dot- com
To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-techwr-l-obscured -at- lists -dot- raycomm -dot- com
Send administrative questions to ejray -at- raycomm -dot- com -dot- Visit http://www.raycomm.com/techwhirl/ for more resources and info.