Comparison of tech writers and science editors?

[Geoff Hart <ghart -at- videotron -dot- ca>]

Karen Graber (long time, no write, K!) wondered: <<My department wants 
to hire technical writers to write some manuals on tools and labs. We 
have a Publications department that has focused it's time and energy on 
science editing of the Initial Reports and Scientific Results from each 
cruise. They do a fine job and are very proficient. However, my boss 
understands that there is a big difference between a technical writer 
and a science editor but we're having a hard time getting this point 
across to the previous Manager of Publications who is now a Deputy 
Director. She says Publications can do the manuals.>>

You'll probably have the best luck if you forget about the job titles 
and focus on the skills required to do the job. I'm primarily a 
scientific editor and French translator, but technical writing 
fascinated me enough that I invested the time to learn the skills and 
discover how the approach differed from science writing. Among other 
things, the vocabulary (jargon) and rhetoric (e.g., expository logical 
positivist vs. instructional and procedural) are very different. You 
can learn to adopt the two very different styles of writing, but need 
to be aware that the styles differ before you can do so.

Moreover, there's a very big difference between the acts of editing and 
writing. Some editors can't write to save their lives, whereas some 
writers can't edit to save their lives. (Others, myself included, do a 
credible job of both tasks.) Each profession involves a different skill 
set, and learning the new skills may take considerable time even for 
those who learn quickly and will eventually become proficient in both 
jobs.

The tools are also obviously different; scientific editing primarily 
uses word processors (particularly Word), whereas technical writing may 
use either Word or something more powerful (e.g., Frame) supplemented 
by many other add-ins to accomplish different functions (e.g., 
WebWorks, RoboHelp, HTML authoring software). Learning new tool skills 
may be a barrier to some of your editors--not necessarily one based on 
competence, but rather based on time constraints and training 
resources.

<<We want to use structured writing and framemaker to work toward a 
single sourcing process.>>

That raises an initial hurdle right there for your editors: Do they 
already understand Frame? (Many people who learned how to type with 
Frame running never learn the software's mental model and how to work 
with it effectively.) If they know Frame, do they understand 
single-sourcing and structured writing? Have they done enough technical 
writing to get good at it again with practice? If not, will your 
management provide time (probably a year) and resources (formal 
training) for them to become  proficient in these areas? If not, you 
need to hire someone who can already do the work.

<<Our publications people have framemaker experience but not structured 
writing and not interviewing experience. They do not often write 
copy.>>

See above: this clearly reveals where you'll need to provide training. 
If you're not willing to spend the time and money required, and 
unwilling to guarantee your staff that there will be no harsh 
consequences if it takes them time to come up to speed and they make 
mistakes along the way, don't bother trying. Hire someone who already 
has the necessary skills, and train your editors to work well with the 
new people.

I also have to wonder why your managers think that people who already 
have a full-time job can add another whole job to their workweek. 
Something has to give: more projects means less time per project means 
less quality means more errors. Do you have enough worker-hours to do 
both jobs with existing staff? If not, plan to hire more people.

<<I find it hard to believe that a really good tech writer would come 
to work here given the low salaries they pay the editors...>>

Depends on the job market. Here, there are enough people out of work 
that any job is starting to look good. (So why did I go freelance right 
now, you might ask? <g>) But suggesting they hire technical writers 
might be a good way to educate your employers about the value of the 
editing work too. Just a (seditious) thought...

--Geoff Hart   ghart -at- videotron -dot- ca
(try geoffhart -at- mac -dot- com if you don't get a reply)