more about what tools to learn

[Jim Williams <WILLIAMSJA1 -at- WOODS -dot- UML -dot- EDU>]

In response to my question about what tools a new technical writer should
learn, Glen Accardo wrote:
...
>Being able to say that you can use
>FrameMaker will not make me hire you.  At best it'll chop off a couple of
>days of initial training, which I'm willing to sacrifice for someone who
>can WRITE.
...
>Show me you can write a manual or a help file -- show me that you know
>the differences in the writing -- and I'll make sure you learn whatever
>tools I happen to use.

I'm wondering if your attitude is the exception rather than the rule.  The
few writers I have talked to so far told me that employers were looking for
a big list of tools on a resume. The writers I talked to thought that being
able to list a bunch of programs on their resume got them an interview,
where they were then able to demonstrate that they could write.

Also,

>What matters is that people fill in holes in their experience/knowledge
>when necessary, and have acquired this knowledge in a way that "pleases"
>employers.  Some people want you to have a degree in a field before they'll
>believe you'll know it.  Some people with degrees don't know their field.
>Other employers demand ON THE JOB experience, and claim, for example, that
>using Word Perfect in school is meaningless.  Others compare your knowledge
>with theirs: if knowledge(yours) < knowledge(theirs) then you = stupid.

>I don't necissarily agree with any of these, but I've seen the attitudes,
>so don't be shocked when you are labeled ignorant when you really aren't.

This is something that I've wondered about.  If somebody asks what
experience I have using some program listed on my resume, how are employers
going to respond if I have to admit that I just taught myself how to use
them?  If I'm applying for an entry-level job how can they expect me to
have on-the-job experience using some tool?

Jim Williams