I fully appreciate the advantages and benefits of implementing international language standards to our documentation. My favourite technical English writing rule is to only use company-approved terminology in addition to the general vocabulary that is offered by the Simplified Technical English specification. The technical English writing rules were clearly presented during this webinar. Overall, I have found this webinar to be useful for my work and Shumin responded well to all my questions and clarified the doubts I had before taking this course.

Shumin possesses an in-depth knowledge of the English language and of Simplified Technical English (STE). We covered a lot of ground in the area of STE within a short time!

Shumin gave a two-day ASD-STE100 training to standardize and improve the language used by technical authoring personnel. I learnt a great deal in terms of advantageous STE writing rules for the authoring of technical manuals. Thank you once again for the excellent training!

The course was intellectually challenging and stimulating. "Less is more" as an STE principle is something that I quite like :). For a beginner, there is quite a lot of material to process, and study in a short time. On the plus side, Shumin presented the material intelligibly and gave sufficient number of examples during her lectures. Her presentations were very well-prepared, and I enjoyed her classes. 🙂

Rule 1.3: Use approved words only with their approved meanings and rule 1.4: Use only the approved forms of verbs and adjectives are rules that left an impression on me. But it is difficult to have a favourite rule as you need something from all the rules we touched upon. The STE writing rules were presented well and I cannot think of any way to do this better. Overall, exercises were well balanced between how much each person had to do. More crucially is that people understand each question.

Good explanation with history and background of STE to illustrate the importance of using STE in the aircraft industry. Rule 6.1: To give information gradually is my favourite. My favourite verbs are DO, PREPARE, REPLACE, REMOVE and STOP. I am now conscious of writing in shorter sentences for better clarity and getting the point across. Before STE100, I tend to include too much information for fear that the message was misinterpreted. These verbs are commonly used and I agree that the intrinsic meaning of these are sufficient to get the message across efficiently. There were good practice sessions to reinforce the essence of the respective rules. I would most certainly recommend Simplified Technical English as a standard to maintenance related fields since I personally do not like to read instructions in a disorganized manner. 

The introduction to ASD-STE100 was good and informative for someone like me with zero knowledge of the STE standard before. Rule 6.3 in STE writing summarizes the best of what I can take with me. There was quite a lot from the STE exercises to consume regarding grammar. Nevertheless, the worksheets were very good and helpful. I gained quite a lot of knowledge from them and they were the best part of this training workshop. Shumin was very professional and sharp as a razor. The best takeaway for me from her workshop is to give more thought to how I build my sentences rather than focussing on specific 'allowed' or 'approved' words.

The course was quite challenging for me intellectually, in the way that there were a lot of rules to take in in order to be able to apply them to the text given in the assignement. To spot the errors in the text and choose the correct rule for the problem wasn't always easy, but I thought the assignment itself, i.e. the practical application of the theory, was an effective way to evaluate the learning curve of the student. To cut a long story short, yes, I think the content and the assessment are appropriate. After what I have learned in the course, it seems appropriate and relevant for technical communicators to know STE at a professional level!

A very important and highlighted point during the introduction is that STE is an English language specification that is not only applicable for companies in the aerospace & defence industry. Rule 5.2 where you only have one instruction per sentence is important to us. Not being able to use the verb "CHECK' that is only used as an approved STE noun poses a challenge to me all the time. I really appreciate the STE writing rules that give us the possibility to improve the consistency of our documents. The workshop exercises were of high interest value and drive home the point that it is important to learn by doing. Although a time-consuming process, the writing workshop impressed on me that the need to prioritise the analysis of our internal documents. Shumin is a competent trainer who does not only focus on explaining and enforcing the "writing rules", but is always available to understand and empathise with the training needs of the class.

Shumin gave us a an all-rounded presentation to Simplified Technical English. Personally, rule 1.3: To use only approved words with their approved meaning holds the key to successful controlled language implementation. Rules 3.4, 3.6, 4.1, 5.3, and 5.5 are also among my favourites. The approved verb TO MAKE SURE THAT can come in very handy for technical writers as well. The presentation of STE rules offers quite a detailed overview that includes not only language rules but good, old technical authoring principles in general. It has been very helpful for us to learn and understand the concept of STE. I have found Shumin to be very competent in STE and will defnitely recommend her course!