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.
Subject:Re: STC - academia or real-world? From:Jill Burgchardt <jburgcha -at- PESTILENCE -dot- ITC -dot- NRCS -dot- USDA -dot- GOV> Date:Fri, 8 Jan 1999 14:11:11 -0700
1. Do we need academics doing their research papers?
Yes. Academics perform many of the quantitative studies that our bosses want to
see when we suggest a new approach.
2. Is their work academic drivel?
Some, just as some work by real-world technical writers is drivel. Most of the
academic research I've seen in this field has focused on real-world studies. It
supports what we do. It gets credibility (justly or unjustly) with many people
because it is written by someone with all those letters after their name. In
general, this field has a stronger pragmatic side in academia than several other
fields I could name.
3. Is there room in STC for both without snobbery or reverse snobbery?
Yes. Just because an article appears as academic drivel to one practitioner,
doesn't mean that no one else finds it useful. People have different learning
styles. Some practitioners learn more from those articles than they would from a
hands-on workshop. Some academicians generate ideas from other articles, others
go out and observe in a hands-on kind of way. As ideas permeate across career
paths, learning styles, whatever dividing lines exist, they are disseminated to
more people. Maybe an academic paper made person A's eyes glaze over, but person
B read it and saw practical implications. Later person A sees person B's
implementation of the idea and says "wow, that would improve my documents"
without recognizing the academic paper as the source. It can work the other way,
too. An academic may observe something developing among practitioners and
recognize it as a new development, then articulate it for others. We all
benefit, unless the exchange of ideas stops because one group or the other
adopts an elitist attitude.
Jill Burgchardt
jburgchardt -at- pestilence -dot- itc -dot- nrcs -dot- usda -dot- gov
Admittedly biased spouse of a very down-to-earth, pragmatic academic
(who knows just how off-base people are in their assumptions about ivory towers,
all that free time, absentminded professors, those who teach cause they can't
do, no real-world experience, and _________________ (insert your favorite
stereotype).)
