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.
Well, that's the crux, isn't it? The evaluators bring their training,
education, and experience to the table. Agreed, an Award of Excellence
is awesome!! But, just who is critiquing your stuff?
I mean, the STC is so very broad in scope that it might be somebody who
is literally applying some techniques they learnt in "Usability class,"
or it might be an insightful guru with a bunch of experience. It might
be somebody who has no idea what you are doing, or somebody who has been
there and appreciates the hurdles.
I'd say, if you got an excellence award, you are doing fine. For those
who did not, perhaps you should consider the STC judges as part of your
target audience before you prepare your documentation. This might lead
to some compromises for your paying audience, but you should be able to
hide that sufficiently. Just a thought.
Still, wasn't the original poster talking about an actual conference
session, and not the STC publications competition?
-----Original Message-----
From: Spreadbury, David C. [mailto:David -dot- Spreadbury -at- marconi -dot- com]
Sent: Thursday, January 30, 2003 5:08 PM
To: TECHWR-L
Subject: RE: STC Conference: Manual Evaluations--valuable?
I'm not a big advocate of the STC. I don't feel it is really a group
interested in technical content, but more layout and presentation.
Anyway, I just went through this with our local chapter.
Prior to the actual ceremony I got to talk with a couple of the document
reviewers. One of them, who happened to hit me in a negative manner with
her
evaluation, appeared open to discussion and seemed to listen to my
explanation of why I chose to present the information the way it was
presented. She didn't really come down on me about it. It is a matter of
opinion how the information is presented, and she was open to that. As
far
as the final evaluation sheet is concerned, I look at it as a way to
improve
the next document. There were some things in the evaluation that showed
me
where I may make the document more useable to the end user. This was in
no
way a public humiliation. I looked at it as an opportunity to learn to
produce a better document.
BTW, the document that was submitted received an 'Award of Excellence',
which will look pretty good on my resume.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
A new book on Single Sourcing has been released by William Andrew
Publishing: _Single Sourcing: Building Modular Documentation_
is now available at: http://www.williamandrew.com/titles/1491.html.
Help Authoring Seminar 2003, coming soon to a city near you! Attend this
educational and affordable one-day seminar covering existing and emerging
trends in Help authoring technology. See http://www.ehelp.com/techwr-l2.
---
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.
