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.
> In one broadly accepted definition, tacit knowledge is what designers have
> because of the experience they gain with a product during its design phase
> and subsequent testing.
> Our goal as writers is to transform that tacit
> knowledge into something explicit for those who lack the designer's
> knowledge. Making this knowledge explicit (via manuals, interface
> improvements, tutorials, or whatever) gives our audiences a chance to use
> the product, and through that use internalize (make tacit) the explicit
> instructions. _That's_ what Jim was saying, and he's correct.
There are several different kinds of knowledge here that you need to
distinguish between:
1. Tacit knowledge: the inexpressible knowledge that informs performance and
which cannot be learned by theory but only by practice. (The existence of
which you may or may not believe in.)
2. The unexpressed knowledge of how to do design which is capable of being
expressed. Capturing and expressing this knowledge is the ambition of
knowledge engineers. Their aim is to assist it training new experts and/or
the programming of computers to replace experts.
3. The created knowledge that is the result of actually designing something.
This knowledge is not tacit in either of the senses above. It has been
expressed in specifications, designs, and product. Technical writers take
this knowledge and use it to create the fourth kind.
4. Procedural knowledge. How to actually use a specific widget to perform a
specific task.
The origin of this debate concerned the value of a PhD program for training
technical writers and it turns on the distinction between 1 and 2 above. You
and Jim have both confused the issue by bringing types 3 and 4 into the
debate.
The question is, are writing skills *primarily* developed by the actual
practice of reading and writing, or by the study of communication theory.
If you presume that type 1. tacit knowledge does not exist and that we have
actually mastered and can successfully teach all the relevant type 2
knowledge, then you would presumable opt for the study of communication
theory.
If you accept the wisdom or the ages, the advice of just about every writer
who has ever written on the subject, and the manifest evidence of actual
performance, you will opt for the practice of reading and writing. (And
spend you education dollars studying the arts or sciences.)
---
Mark Baker
Stilo Corporation
1900 City Park Drive, Suite 504 , Ottawa, Ontario, Canada, K1J 1A3
Phone: 613-745-4242, Fax: 613-745-5560
Email mbaker -at- ca -dot- stilo -dot- com
Web: http://www.stilo.com
This message, including any attachments, is for the sole use of the
intended recipient and may contain confidential and privileged
information. Any unauthorized review, use, disclosure, copying, or
distribution is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended
recipient please contact the sender by reply email and destroy
all copies of the original message and any attachments.
