Technically Speaking

GRE PREP COURSE – DAY 1:

We arrived at the classroom for the first day of the GRE prep course. The person running the class was very distracted. He kept running in and out of the room. I wondered if he even knew what was going on.

When it came time to distribute the material (class participants get two books, a packet of handouts, etc.), the facilitator (he doesn’t merit the term “teacher”) discovered that they were missing 25 copies of one of the books.

In a class of 50 people, you would think that whoever was in charge would notice that they were missing half the required number of one of the books! There must have been a lack of communication somewhere in the process.

GRE PREP COURSE – DAY 2:

This was to be the first day of class instruction. Class was to start at 5:00 PM and run until 9:00 PM. The first two hours were to be taught by the math instructor, and the second two hours were to be taught by the English instructor.

By 5:20, there was still no teacher. One of the students in the class went to the department office and asked if the teacher would be coming. The department had no idea that we didn’t have a teacher.

The department called the teacher who was supposed to be teaching at 5:00. He was totally unaware that he was supposed to be teaching the course that night. The person in the department said, “We send you an email telling you that the course starts tonight.” The teacher said, “Oh. I changed my email account, and don’t check that one anymore.”

The department then called the teacher who was to teach at 7:00 and asked if he would come ASAP. He said he would be there in ten minutes.

When the second teacher arrived at 5:30, the class finally began. As he was talking to us, the teacher told us about the last time they started the GRE course: he never received an email from the department saying the course was to begin. He only found out that it was beginning because he was surfing the University website and saw that the course was beginning in two days. So he called the department and asked if he was supposed to be teaching the first day. They said, “Yes.”

He blamed the problem on the student employees, saying that the problems were due to “high turnover” in the office.

Let’s examine some of the problems in communication that occurred:

1. The department should never have sent an email, and assumed that the email had been both received and understood. That just doesn’t make sense. If no response was received, it was the department’s responsibility to follow-up with the teacher to ensure he had received and understood the message.
2. If the teacher has changed his email account, he has the responsibility to communicate that information with the department that is paying him for his work. If the teacher has not provided an alternate means of communication, he is responsible to make sure relevant parties know when he changes his email address.
3. If communicating about the start of a new class is a perpetual problem (as it apparently is), there should be processes in place to make sure the problems are corrected. If the problem really is turnover of employees, adequate documentation should be enough to solve the problem. Don’t just blame it on part-time student employees. Find a way to fix the problem!

When you make students pay $275 dollars for a prep course, you ought to make it seem like it is worth their money. Incomplete and incompetent communication just doesn’t cut it.

Are you a member of the STC? If you are remotely interested in technical communication, you ought to be.

I’ll elaborate on the STC’s virtues in another post. However, I would like to point out one of the benefits of being a member of the STC: Intercom magazine.

STC Members receive a monthly copy of Intercom, a magazine that “is published to provide practical examples and applications of technical communication that will promote its readers’ professional development.”

Unfortunately, Intercom doesn’t always succeed at providing good examples of technical communication. Case in point: the June 2004 issue of Intercom.

As you look at the cover, you see two headlines: (1) Writing for the Web; and (2) Letting Go of the Words. You also see a list of three articles included in this month’s issue: (1) Tabular Data: Finding the Best Format; (2) The Successes and Challenges of Visual Language; and (3) Making the Web Friendlier for Lower-literacy Users.

From this information, do you know what the theme for the issue is? I guess you can make a couple of assumptions, and contrive a theory as to what all the articles have in common.

Ironically enough, the theme for the issue is “document design.” This is prominently displayed on the contents page, and is listed on the header of all the related articles.

Why is this ironic? The idea behind good document design is that you give users the information that allows them to make good assumptions about the document. You provide visual indicators that help users assess the document.

I am fascinated that an issue of Intercom with an emphasis on document design would fail to indicate that theme on the cover of the issue! That is a major document design flaw!

The articles in the issue were fantastic, and I highly recommend them. I just wish the editor of Intercom would realize the document design faux pas in their document design issue.

P.S. If you are interested in document design, I highly recommend Robin William’s The Non-Designer’s Design Book (go to listing at Amazon.com) It is a short, easy to read and easy to apply discussion of the four basic principles of good design (which you can easily remember by their first initials: C.R.A.P. – want more info? Read the book!).

If I have a hobbyhorse, it is precise communication. As a technical communicator, I believe that writers must take care to clearly and accurately portray information. I am highly amused when I come across instances of technical communication where writers have not clearly or accurately conveyed information.

Let me give you an example.

My in-laws, the Uries, bought a new microwave. By some miraculous bending of the laws of physics, Samsung USA has apparently discovered how to make the inside of a microwave larger than the outside of the microwave. At least, that is how it appears in the technical specifications of their microwave.

Samsung’s model number MD800WC (go to site) features a “revolutionary space saving design”—which is apparent, because the microwave’s interior dimensions are larger than the microwave’s exterior dimensions!

Now, you probably think I’m joking, but check out the Owner’s Manual (page 19). The outside dimensions of the microwave oven are (and I’ll convert the fractions so that you don’t have to):

16”(W) x 12.578”(H) x 17.188”(D).

Now check out the oven capacity dimensions:

16.031”(W) x 12.594”(H) x 17.031”(D).

That is pretty cool. It reminds me of the Flying Ford in the Harry Potter books, that fit the entire Weasley family and all their luggage.

If we could figure out how that technology works, imagine what we could accomplish. I could get a whole watermelon into my lunch bag. I might even get a whole gallon of ice cream to fit into the little ice-box-size freezer our landlord provided for us.

Alas, too bad that many of my exciting ideas for the future come from stupid editing mistakes.