Savage’s discussion of the history and perception of
professions in the US compels me to consider my own work within the
professional field of teaching. I took a “non-traditional” and thus
non-professional path to teaching. When I first stepped into a classroom as a
substitute teacher in a Chicago charter school, I had had no training
whatsoever. My Bachelor’s Degree was the only prerequisite at this particular school.
I was hired for my first full time teaching job as a Latin instructor because I
had a BA in Latin and minimal experience as a substitute teacher; the private
school at which I worked was not required to hired fully licensed and certified
teachers. Somehow, I was able to circumvent all training and certification in
the field, but I still consider myself a professional teacher.
My personal experience is somewhat akin to Savage’s
observation that “job advertisements for technical writers persist in
representing job qualifications in terms that leave the field open to
candidates other than those with formal education in technical communication” (p.
144). Savages cites hiring managers who
are over their skies when it comes to hiring for technical writing, and they ironically
cannot properly execute a job description for a technical writing position.
Both of these strike me as broad strokes observations and quite subjective.
Savage’s observation that many technical writers are hired
in-house based on “subject matter knowledge” and a general facility with the
written word also strikes me as a broad speculation, but it is logical. This
would be a safe, cost-effective practice for an organization. This makes me
wonder if corporations who need to employ technical writers are themselves not
interested in the continuing professionalization of technical writing. Savage
does mention that the road to professionalization is filled with obstacles, and
I think this may be one.
I absolutely agree with Savage’s claim that one major
difficulty in the professionalization of technical communication is the “difficulty
of defining the expertise of technical communicators in order to set the field
apart” (p. 159), and I would consider this the biggest roadblock. If employers
had a better grasp of what well trained technical communicators can do, the
resulting hiring practices would help foster a stronger professional identity which
would, in turn, accelerate the breaking through of other roadblocks mentioned
by Savage.
Given what I now know about technical communication, I do think that full "professionalization" (whether as defined by Faber or Savage) is important because it can protect and preserve the security of its practitioners.
It's very fair to say the corporations aren't interested in the professionalization of technical writing. Their priority is finding someone who will do the job well for the company. This is why Faber limited the definition of "professional" so severely to fields that give practitioners independence from managers from outside the profession. And this is also why I suspect, and Savage acknowledges, many technical writers themselves aren't interested in professional certifications; they may have been hired in-house or took unusual paths to the occupation like you did with teaching.
ReplyDeleteI agree with your observation that many of Savage's claims, such as hiring managers are unable to effectively hire technical communicators, are based on broad generalizations. Savage failed to provide any specific proof that the technical communicators who are hired by these managers are ineffective in their jobs, and he did not point out any areas of technical communication that would improve if technical communicators had to be certified. In order to make a case for the professionalization of professional communicators, one has to first make a strong case for why the varied backgrounds of technical communicators is problematic.
ReplyDeleteI think that technical communication is becoming more valuable to organizations, especially those interested in managing strategic communications in our increasingly tech-dependent environments. I think one of the problems that stands in the path of technical communication is that many technical communicators lack the formal training to position themselves into strategic roles. So, although they, or their organization, may not see the value in certification or formal education/training, they would most probably benefit from it.
ReplyDeleteYour analysis of the roadblocks and barriers for the professionalization of technical communication is quite helpful in adding to the initial text itself.
ReplyDeleteDid you ever go back to secure your teaching certificate? How do you feel your progression in the field has been different than those that had went the traditional routes for training and certification?
Something we all need to keep in mind is that you cannot take Savage's chapter out of context. It was published in an edited collection, many chapters of which focused on the issues you are discussing. Editors of collections try to solicit chapters from a variety of people so that each chapter can focus on a different issue related to the same topic. Keep that in mind as you read--these conversations happened within a context and some took place more than a decade ago.
ReplyDelete