A review of STC's Technical Editing Foundations course

October 2017

STC logo

Chris Lovie-Tyler is the Technical Editor at Vista Entertainment Solutions, a company that makes software for the cinema industry.

I'd been a technical writer for nearly three-and-a-half years when I got the opportunity this May to move into the newly created role of Technical Editor at Vista.

Before moving into technical communication, I'd done a diploma in editing and proofreading, and some freelance editing, and I was keen to specialise in editing. I thought the Technical Editing Foundations course might be a good refresher and give me some insight into technical editing specifically. It was and it did.

Over six weeks, we covered:

  • What technical editors are and why they're needed
  • Hard (technical) and soft (interpersonal) skills that are needed for technical editing
  • Recognising and fixing passive voice and wordiness
  • Working with style guides and other resources
  • Using Word Track Changes, PDF annotation, and traditional proofreading symbols to mark up documents
  • Levels of editing

Most of this was familiar territory, but I still found it valuable. I came away with the confidence that I was on the right track with my approach and the processes I was putting in place. I also picked up a bunch of practical tips that I was able to apply in my editing.

Probably the most valuable part of the course was on soft skills. The ability to work collaboratively and build a positive relationship with writers is essential in editing, particularly when you're working with multiple writers with different personalities and skill levels like I am.

The only negative in the course was when the tutor, unintentionally, went too far with role playing bad soft skills. She'd done this exercise with previous intakes, and it had been fine, but because she went on a bit too long with it, and probably because of the mix of people this time round, some people took it badly and complained. She apologised profusely and said she'd never intended to discourage or offend anyone. In the feedback at the end of the course, I suggested that it might be better (less risky) to just give some examples of bad soft skills rather than role play them. I think it was an honest mistake, and I don't think she'll do it again.

Overall, the course was worthwhile, and I'd recommend it for anyone whose job involves editing. In technical communication, even if you're a writer, you probably regularly have to review and rewrite other people's writing, so you're editing more often than you realise!

A few things to note:

  • The course assumes you already have a solid grasp of grammar, punctuation, and usage, so it only touches on these superficially.
  • Because of the time difference (the course is run out of the U.S.), you'll have to get up at 2am to participate!
  • There's a largish assignment at the end and a (mostly) multi-choice exam. It's pretty straight forward if you've been paying attention.

Chris Lovie-Tyler