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.
Phil is pretty much on track with his suggestion of the certificate as a professional credential. Here's a bit of the back story:
STC has been pushing the US Dept. of Labor (DoL) to recognize Technical Communication as a profession. Recently, the Occupational Outlook Handbook did, in fact, separate technical communicators from a general "creative professions" category, where it was lumped with copywriters, artists, and the like. Now, granted, we do sometimes have to get creative, but that category generally means lower wages.
One criterion for being a profession, according to DoL, is that there must be some sort of entrance exam or test sequence that people must pass to claim that job title of Professional Technical Communicator. So this effort by the STC to gain official recognition for us as a profession required that there be such a test, and STC set out to develop not one but a suite of tests. They are not supposed to relate to any particular technology area, but rather to measure technical communication skills.
Because the tools and techniques in our profession are constantly changing, it is necessary to recertify every few years to ensure that the skills are current with the state of the art and with the marketplace.
That's the rationale. And yes, it SHOULD make money for the agency, in this case STC, that develops both the courses and the test suite. That's only fair.
Like many on this list, I have serious reservations about certification in general. I have not delved into the content, structure, and pricing of the tests, nor do I know how STC intends to promote the certificate to potential employers. That promotion and recognition are essential. But STC is developing courseware to go along with the tests, and they're actively seeking beta testers who get a reduced rate for participating. That's common for software beta testers, too. So if you want to have a hand in the process, this is a good time to get involved in testing out the materials.
I doubt that I will bother with the certification process for myself. At this stage of my career, I see little point in doing so. But its utility is not limited to those who are just out of school. Ideally, it should be geared to practicing professionals who have a few years under their belts. I am not a tax lawyer, but at least in the U.S., you should be able to deduct the cost of the coursework and test as an unreimbursed business expense.
Full disclosure:
I am an STC Fellow, but I have not had anything to do with developing or implementing the current STC certification effort.
________________________________
From: Dan Goldstein <DGoldstein -at- riverainmedical -dot- com>
To: techwr-l -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com
Sent: Monday, October 17, 2011 2:13 PM
Subject: RE: STC certification program
Awfully sorry to hear that you've been treated like a "glorified
secretary." I've never had that problem as a TW, but I understand that
it does happen.
That said, I'm fascinated by the comparison between a medical degree and
a certificate from STC (whose motivation in this case is its financial
survival).
-----Original Message-----
From: Phil Stokes
Sent: Monday, October 17, 2011 1:58 PM
To: techwr-l -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com
Subject: Re: STC certification program
I'm astounded at the skepticism here. Professional certification is good
for everybody. It protects consumers and it confers both recognition and
higher wages on practitioners.
Of course, that depends on the certification being both valid and widely
recognized. The STC and other worldwide TC bodies (like the UK's 'ISTC',
which I belong to) are responsible for the first; we, as practitioners,
are largely responsible for the second.
It's the lack of this kind of professional qualification that kills
credibility for TCs among many employers and keeps us under the thumb as
little more than "glorified secretaries." Doctors were largely
considered as quacks and taken on merit till they got professional
certification. Now look at them. ;)
This message contains confidential information intended only for the use of the addressee(s). If you are not the addressee, or the person responsible for delivering it to the addressee, you are hereby notified that reading, disseminating, distributing, copying, electronic storing or the taking of any action in reliance on the contents of this message is strictly prohibited. If you have received this message by mistake, please notify us, by replying to the sender, and delete the original message immediately thereafter. Thank you.
Create and publish documentation through multiple channels with Doc-To-Help.
Choose your authoring formats and get any output you may need. Try
Doc-To-Help, now with MS SharePoint integration, free for 30-days. http://www.doctohelp.com
---
You are currently subscribed to TECHWR-L as mkrupp128 -at- yahoo -dot- com -dot-
Create and publish documentation through multiple channels with Doc-To-Help.
Choose your authoring formats and get any output you may need. Try
Doc-To-Help, now with MS SharePoint integration, free for 30-days. http://www.doctohelp.com
---
You are currently subscribed to TECHWR-L as archive -at- web -dot- techwr-l -dot- com -dot-
