At the May meeting, five STC members gave simultaneous presentations. Anne Odell presented technical communication, Curtis Foreman presented marketing communication, Bryan Johnson covered editing, Betty Taylor reviewed indexing, and Susan Patch presented Information Design. Each table had four to five people, providing an intimate setting for attendees to ask questions of the presenters and to share experiences.
For the newsletter meeting review, I decided to submit the meeting to a review by some of the attendees. After the meeting, I asked some attendees for feedback on the meeting format and content. When asked what she hoped to get out of the meeting and which presenter was the most helpful, Christina Drabik responded, “I came because I was interested in learning more about indexing. The speaker gave a good overview of what indexing is. She also recommended a number of good resources including the best indexing book for technical writers (Larry Bonura’s The Art of Indexing).”
Dana Bidnall is a student and attended the bi-monthly meeting for the first time. When asked how she liked the format, she commented, “I did like the format of the meeting. It was great from a student’s perspective as we got to pick three areas rather than having to listen to topics that we may not have been interested in. A neat idea may have been to have each speaker answer say, five or ten pre-prepared questions (same for each speaker). Best perks of the job? Most challenging? Describe the industry in one word?”
As for the content, Dana appreciated Curtis Foreman’s presentation, “I liked Curtis Foreman’s talk. He talked a bit about his own job but more about the industry he’s in in general. Maybe I’m biased, as he is an acquaintance!”
As for the format, each person had similar comments. Christina commented, “It was nice to have a more intimate format where we met with experts in small groups. I would have liked to have more time with each expert so I could ask more questions, though.”
Dana said, “Another speaker I listened to talked about his particular job a lot, which was okay, but I wanted more of an overview of that field, with some examples from that person’s job thrown in. I think perhaps the speakers felt a bit rushed with the time constraints. I went to a very similar event put on by IABC that same week. They had 20 to 25 minutes per speaker, but there were only three, and those three speakers moved from table to table. Not a criticism, just an observation.”
Overall, the small group presentation seemed to appeal to and engage its audience. The meeting was very active with a lot of talking among the groups. The format was refreshing after many hours of sitting alone at a computer.
