Re: Certification Issues

["Parks, Beverly" <ParksB -at- EMH1 -dot- HQISEC -dot- ARMY -dot- MIL>]

Arlen Walker wrote:
So perhaps the first step in a reasonable discussion of the issues is
for
the pro-certification viewpoint to admit that the purpose of
certification
is to provide a certain class of people (the certified) with an
advantage
in hiring, and to similarly hinder the hiring of those not in the class
(the uncertified).

And Jim Purcell wrote:
What is missing in the world that only certified technical writers can
provide? I still
don't know the answer to that question.

============
I'm a day behind and still haven't caught up with all the certification
posts. I snipped small pieces out of recent posts by Arlen and Jim
because I liked what they said. This whole certification thing is quite
circular. Certification for TW doesn't exist now, and TW are getting
jobs and being rewarded for performance. All is well in TWorld.

Certification is exclusionary, as Arlen pointed out.
Certification is also divisive, as this whole discussion is pointing
out.

Keep in mind that once certification is established, its very existence
will create a need for itself. It is self-perpetuating.

For those of you who are against certification, I suggest you fight hard
for your cause.


Bev Parks
parksb -at- emh1 -dot- hqisec -dot- army -dot- mil
The Friendly Faces of TECHWR-L -
http://www.bayside.net/users/cbsites/techwr-l/
Send faces to cloudbow -at- primenet -dot- com

 TECHWR-L (Technical Communication) List Information: To send a message
to 2500+ readers, e-mail to TECHWR-L -at- LISTSERV -dot- OKSTATE -dot- EDU -dot-  Send commands
   to LISTSERV -at- LISTSERV -dot- OKSTATE -dot- EDU (e.g. HELP or SIGNOFF TECHWR-L).
  Search the archives at http://www.documentation.com/  or search and
browse the archives at http://listserv.okstate.edu/archives/techwr-l.html