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.
/kevin wonders: <<I'm trying to imagine the added-value of a techwriting PhD
(educationally and in terms of research, NOT in terms of
yet-another-credential for the student...). I'm failing, miserably.>>
No education is ever wasted if it helps you do your job (or live your life)
better, and it's certainly true that some employers get all misty-eyed and
open their wallets upon seeing an advanced degree. <g>
If that doesn't convince you, think of it this way: An _experimental
research_ PhD (as opposed to a literature search or theoretical PhD) usually
requires scientific or other research to solves a problem and develop new
knowledge of How Things Work. The goal is to expand the overall body of
knowledge. If you write your thesis on a practical problem (interface
design, audience analysis, optimal rhetoric) and demonstrate a better way to
solve it, what could be more useful professionally*?
* Okay, a rhetorical question. Obviously, writing and tool skills. Let's
take those as given, okay?
<<If I bend over backwards and squint through a rose-colored prism, I can
almost see the value in a Masters.>>
A Masters degree may or may not involve actual experimentation, but always
(like a literature review PhD) involves broadening and deepening your
knowledge of the theory behind a profession. Though there's a broad
perception in our community that theory has no relevance to the real world
of our jobs (witness the occasional kicks against the journal _Technical
Communication_ on techwr-l and the many STC members who brag they've never
read it), that's an opinion founded on ignorance. Understanding theory helps
you think about what you're doing and how you're doing it, and that's always
a good thing.
<<There's still tool-related knowledge>>
My take on this is that using tools without theory offers little opportunity
for improvement and leads to rote performance of tasks, whereas using theory
without knowledge of tools and the work environment risks putting you out of
touch with the real world. Ideally, you want a mixture of both.
<<Or have I missed a whole rich field of study while being a journeyman...
er... trade/craftsman all these years?>>
Depends. Can you tell me about the good and bad aspects of social
construction and their implications for our work? Can you explain the
cognitive psychology of vision and information processing, and their
influence on page (printed or onscreen) design? If not, you've missed at
least two major fields of rich and fascinating study. Do they affect your
job performance? Not necessarily. But then, you won't know that until you've
dipped your toes in those waters, will you?
--Geoff Hart, geoff-h -at- mtl -dot- feric -dot- ca
(try ghart -at- videotron -dot- ca if you get no response)
Forest Engineering Research Institute of Canada
580 boul. St-Jean
Pointe-Claire, Que., H9R 3J9 Canada
"Wisdom is one of the few things that look bigger the further away it
is."--Terry Pratchett