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.
> I'm saying that the correlation between qualifications and quality work
> is weak. And what qualities would a certificate indicate that a
> resume does not? My diploma contains far less information than even
> a one-sentence description of my coursework, for example.
<SNIP>
You are very articulate, Robert, yet you are not addressing the correct
issue. You are vague about exactly how much useful information a certificate
would carry. I propose that, although it would not always give an accurate
indication of a person's competence, more often than not it would. This is
useful information.
Do you deny this? I think that position would be hard to support. There is a
big difference between someone who is willing to pay the $100 for a bogus
certificate that allows them to accept a job they are not qualified for and
will not succeed at, and someone who has proven experience and demonstrated
proficiency. As a recruiter, I could not ignore this.
The information that a certificate would carry, and that a resume does not,
is this:
* The applicant has demonstrated proficiency at editing and formatting
on a given platform.
* The applicant has proven that they have a minimum number of years of
experience in the field.
This saves the recruiter the trouble of testing the applicant and doing a
reference check, a significant savings of time and trouble on both sides.
Having said that, any recruiter who would accept a certificate unaware of
the limitations you have pointed out would be naive. But on a general
basis, I still think the certificate is useful.
An example: I am an advanced ham radio operator. I hate Morse code. I learned
it to pass the test, then I forgot every character. Almost nobody uses it any
more, yet the test survives. Why? It keeps people who are not serious about
radio off the bandwidth. It's not a perfect system, but it works. Ham radio
has not (yet) become as polluted as CB radio, for that reason.
Having a license doesn't mean I know more about radio than anyone who doesn't
have one. It simply means I have demonstrated a certain level of knowledge.
You'd be crazy to hire me as circuit designer on the strength of my license,
but it would be reasonable to hire me as a radio operator because of it.
Gawd, I do go on.
|George Allaman | |
|Tech Writer | <clever, meaningful |
|Denver, Colorado | quip which somehow |
|Office (303) 624-1619 | summarizes my life |
|Home (303) 771-8060 | philosophy> |
|Alternate: georgea -at- csn -dot- net | |
