I wonder how much Light's extraordinary credentials played into his suggestions for professionalization. Five degrees is remarkable in any fields, and in any era. His career-long focus on health sciences may speak to the importance he places on a scientific background for technical writers. Focus on subject matter knowledge, as opposed to some general standards, has been mentioned as one of the challenges to professionalization of technical communication that we've read about.
Reading Light's suggestions in a 21st-century context, I think that a scientific background is just as important as he claimed in 1960. However, I see it as less of a preparation for writing in some specific field, and more as training in critically analyzing and translating scientific information in general. Clearly explaining some of the world's most opaque and esoteric knowledge speaks seriously to a technical writer's merits.
Being a critical and analytical thinker enables a technical writer to perform in a number of sectors. I advise students on college admission and some of the advise I offer to students is that in an undergraduate experience a liberal arts education offers the chance to advance both writing and problem solving skills. These are the two most basic elements to succeed in any profession, well really to succeed in life-- if you can communicate effectively and figure your way out of a challenge-- you will make your way just fine. The readings for this course about the professionalization of technical writers just takes that concept further-- validating that technical communicators have emerged as players in today’s economy with valuable skill sets to navigate rapidly changing work structures.
ReplyDeleteI agree that achieving background knowledge in scientific fields in addition to training in writing and editing is essential for a technical writer's success in most industries. Light could not have envisioned the explosion of computer science and technological industries in the last couple of decades, but his suggestions for training and steps to professionalize the field of technical communications are just as applicable today as when he wrote them. To be honest, I was surprised when I read that Light wrote his article more than 50 years ago! His definition of a technical writer as a translator explains his emphasis on scientific training. A translator has to be able to speak the source language and translate it to the target language. Adequate scientific training in any scientific or technological field teaches the technical writer the "source language" they will be translating for the layperson.
ReplyDeleteThis is absolutely true: "Clearly explaining some of the world's most opaque and esoteric knowledge speaks seriously to the a technical writer's merits."
ReplyDelete