Post History
Personally, I'm heavily in favor of #3 as a way of learning anything and everything to do with writing. I too spent several years studying engineering and have done my fair share of technical writi...
Answer
#3: Attribution notice added
by
System
·
2019-12-08T02:16:33Z (almost 5 years ago)
Source: https://writers.stackexchange.com/a/5342 License name: CC BY-SA 3.0 License URL: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/
#2: Initial revision
by
temporary_user_name
·
2019-12-08T02:16:33Z (almost 5 years ago)
Personally, I'm _heavily_ in favor of #3 as a way of learning anything and everything to do with writing. I too spent several years studying engineering and have done my fair share of technical writing. If you're not a horrific writer to begin with, I feel you should have no trouble picking up the style and voice of technical writing by reading it. However, I should note there is a little more to it than that-- you can imbibe the _style_ just by reading it a lot; it'll get in your head. But the _content_ you can't get subconsciously, not as easily anyway. You need to actively think about what you're reading. Why were the report's components placed in the order that they were? What did the author treat in depth and what did they gloss over? How did they start, and how did they conclude? Once you know the voice of technical writing, understanding questions such as these will tell you what to say with it.
#1: Imported from external source
by
System
·
2012-03-31T05:13:29Z (over 12 years ago)
Original score: 3