This has been a busy week. Teaching most of the week, along
with a pile of meetings, including one to discuss succession planning at the
publisher I volunteer for; plus general midterm busyness. Then the weekend in
Toronto for a three-day meeting to discuss editorial certification and
professional standards. I've reached Saturday feeling pretty wiped out.
I have worked as an editor for so long that I rarely think
about my profession as a profession. The certification meeting has prompted me
to do so. How should a body test prospective editors seeking to demonstrate that
they have the skills to work successfully and appropriately as they enter the
profession? A wholly knowledge-based test is likely insufficient, as there might be
limited or no demonstration of actual skills; and a practice-based test, such
as the exams I've marked in the past for one certifying body, is probably too
rigorous for entry-level purposes. We want to demonstrate competence or
proficiency, but not necessarily excellence. (A demonstration of excellence is
the aim of the full certification exams.)
Do employers want to see confirmation of competence?
Apparently they do.
Based on my experiences as an instructor of editing and
publishing, I know that many students who leave my classroom, and my colleagues'
classrooms, do not possess the knowledge, the skills, or the aptitudes to be
successful professional editors — yet that doesn't deter some of them. And I've
also met many writers who think that, because they work with words, they're
inherently editors. Not every writer is an editor, and not every editor is a
writer, although we have things in common. Perhaps a test of competencies would
be valuable for writers who market themselves as writer/editors. And perhaps
the same test would be valuable for people reaching retirement age who think
they'd like to "dabble" in editing as an income supplement. I've
taught a handful of potential dabblers over the years, as have my colleagues;
as professionals, we need the dabblers to know there's more to editing than adding and
deleting commas.
So perhaps an objective, knowledge-based test — an
instrument that requires a degree of judgement as well as a thorough general
knowledge of grammar, language vocabulary, publishing process, and basic
editorial conventions — is something the market wants, or at least could use. I hope so: it's what
I spent several hours discussing with national editing colleagues today. And I
was surprised to discover it's something I have a strong opinion about. I'm no
great fan of certification in general, but given that national editing societies
are issuing statement of professional standards, then some form of testing for
competency or proficiency seems warranted. All the better if, at least for our
committee's purposes, the competency testing becomes a pathway to long-term
professional development and even certification of excellence. (Frankly,
that's not for me; and I doubt I could pass the certification exams anyway:
they're much harder than anything I do in real life.)
When I was starting out as an editor, it was one of the last
apprenticeship professions. That is, the best way to become an editor was at
the elbow of an experienced editor. I have been lucky to have had great
mentors along my professional journey (as well as some poorer supervisors who
were instructive nonetheless). There was no coursework in editing when I was an
undergrad, but I read every resource I could put my hands on — and I continue
to do so. Today, of course, there is robust undergrad, diploma, and post-degree
education in editing right across Canada. But as one of my heroes, Betsy
Lerner, observes, the only person who really knows (at least in the context of
book editing, my home turf) whether an editor edits, and edits well, is the
author. And that doesn't seem right today, given the high stakes in book
publishing specifically and in communications generally.
I'm pleased to find my feathers a little ruffled by the idea
of competency testing. Going into this weekend's meeting, I would have said I
would never be in favour of such testing. (In fact, I completed a survey to
express exactly such a position.) Today, my position sits on the other side of
the circle. I think that's personal growth, right?
No comments:
Post a Comment