Revision (writing)

Last updated

Revision is a process in writing of rearranging, adding, or removing paragraphs, sentences, or words. Writers may revise their writing after a draft is complete or during the composing process. Revision involves many of the strategies known generally as editing but also can entail larger conceptual shifts of purpose and audience as well as content. Within the writing process, revision comes once one has written a draft to work with, so that one can re-see and improve it, iteratively. Working at both deeper and more surface levels a writer can increase the power of the text. [1]

Contents

In an essay, revision may involve the identification of a thesis, a reconsideration of structure or organization, working at uncovering weaknesses, elaborating evidence and illustrations, or clarifying unclear positions. A factor that distinguishes students from making surface level revisions to macro level revisions, is the amount of time given by teachers. Revision takes time. Many writers go through multiple rounds of revisions before they reach a final draft. [2]

Revision is a larger category of writing behaviors than line-editing or proofreading, though writers often make large reorganizations and word-level edits simultaneously. There are theories such as the three-component model[ further explanation needed ] hypothesized by Linda Flower and John R. Hayes [3] and James Britton et al.'s model of the writing process as a series of stages described in metaphors of linear growth, conception - incubation - production. [4] Here, a review by the writer or a third party, which often give corrective annotations, is part of the process that leads to the revision stage.

Revision as a threshold concept

Revision is a threshold concept. [5] Threshold concepts are ideas that are essential to grasping further topics of study. [6] It is sometimes viewed as challenging for students due to preconceived views. [5] The hierarchy system established in classroom settings between teacher and student might encourage students to see revision as a form of punishment, forcing students to fix their mistakes. [5] It also works to make students more receptive to teacher feedback, giving teachers the title of "co-authors" of students writing. [7]

Reflection in the revision process

Another way to think about the writing process and revision is Peter Elbow's concept of first- and second-order thinking. [8] First-order thinking involves intuition and creativity; it consists of exploring tangents and generating ideas. [8] The prewriting and drafting process entails first-order thinking. Second-order thinking involves being critical and analytical of one's own writing; it consists of reflecting on the ideas developed through drafting and ensuring that they are clearly expressed and well-supported. [8]

Reflective writing encourages writers to think about their own thinking [9] which is also known as metacognition. [10] Reflection can also be considered a type of second-order thinking. This analytical approach of thinking asks the writer to examine their work with a critical mindset. Writers are able to consider the intended audience and purpose of a piece of writing by asking themselves who, what, and why questions such as: Who is my audience? What is the theme? Why is this important? [9] Reflection can help writers gain more insight into the composing and revision processes by providing a method for them to develop a sense of purpose, analyze their ideas, and set revision goals. [9] In writing, revision is a powerful tool that relies heavily on one's knowledge and intentions. [10]

Revision as a collaborative process

In educational settings, peer revision, or feedback, is a common collaborative writing practice. In organizational and other workplace settings where collaborative writing is common, participation of multiple writers facilitates communal revision. [11] Recently, due to the collaborative capabilities of the Internet, there are writers who "crowdsource" reviews from several people, who contribute digital annotations. [12]

Teachers' prompts that incorporate the process of invention spark collaboration and communication amongst students in the classroom, producing feedback between peers. Peer review allows writers to learn from one another and assess issues that may have been overlooked. [13] It gives writers an outside perspective, increasing their understanding of how their writing is being interpreted by their intended audience. It allows students to learn and strategize with one another. [14] Peer feedback engages the concept of discourse communities, where individuals share genres, language, values, concepts, and "ways of being" too better the group as a whole. [15] Discourse communities give writers a space to collaborate with those who have a suitable degree of relevant content or who share a common set of goals. [16]

For further reading see the reference guide:

A. Horning & A. Becker (Eds.) (2006). Revision: History, Theory, and Practice. Parlor Press and WAC Clearinghouse.

Related Research Articles

Collaborative writing, or collabwriting is a method of group work that takes place in the workplace and in the classroom. Researchers expand the idea of collaborative writing beyond groups working together to complete a writing task. Collaboration can be defined as individuals communicating, whether orally or in written form, to plan, draft, and revise a document. The success of collaboration in group work is often incumbent upon a group's agreed upon plan of action. At times, success in collaborative writing is hindered by a group's failure to adequately communicate their desired strategies.

Instructional scaffolding is the support given to a student by an instructor throughout the learning process. This support is specifically tailored to each student; this instructional approach allows students to experience student-centered learning, which tends to facilitate more efficient learning than teacher-centered learning. This learning process promotes a deeper level of learning than many other common teaching strategies.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Draft document</span> Preliminary stage of a written or visual work

In the context of written composition, drafting refers to any process of generating preliminary versions of a written work. Drafting happens at any stage of the writing process as writers generate trial versions of the text they're developing. At the phrasal level, these versions may last less than a second, as writers compose and then delete trial sentences; as fully developed attempts that have reached the end of a stage of usefulness, draft documents may last for perpetuity as saved "versions" or as paper files in archives.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Writing process</span> Process in which words and phrases are formed to produce a text

A writing process describes a sequence of physical and mental actions that people take as they produce any kind of text. These actions nearly universally involve tools for physical or digital inscription: e.g., chisels, pencils, brushes, chalk, dies, keyboards, touchscreens, etc.; these tools all have particular affordances that shape writers' processes. Writing processes are highly individuated and task-specific; they often involve other kinds of activities that are not usually thought of as writing per se.

Cognitive rhetoric refers to an approach to rhetoric, composition, and pedagogy as well as a method for language and literary studies drawing from, or contributing to, cognitive science.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Composition studies</span>

Composition studies is the professional field of writing, research, and instruction, focusing especially on writing at the college level in the United States.

Peter Elbow is a professor of English Emeritus at the University of Massachusetts Amherst, where he also directed the Writing Program from 1996 until 2000. He writes about theory, practice, and pedagogy, and has authored several books and papers. He is one of the pioneers of freewriting.

Linda Flower is a composition theorist. She is best known for her emphasis on cognitive rhetoric, but has more recently published in the field of service learning. Flower currently serves Carnegie Mellon University as a professor of rhetoric.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">First-year composition</span> Introductory core curriculum writing course in US colleges and universities

First-year composition is an introductory core curriculum writing course in US colleges and universities. This course focuses on improving students' abilities to write in a university setting and introduces students to writing practices in the disciplines and professions. These courses are traditionally required of incoming students, thus the previous name, "Freshman Composition." Scholars working within the field of composition studies often have teaching first-year composition (FYC) courses as the practical focus of their scholarly work.

The process theory of composition is a field of composition studies that focuses on writing as a process rather than a product. Based on Janet Emig's breakdown of the writing process, the process is centered on the idea that students determine the content of the course by exploring the craft of writing using their own interests, language, techniques, voice, and freedom, and where students learn what people respond to and what they don't. Classroom activities often include peer work where students themselves are teaching, reviewing, brainstorming, and editing.

Assessment in computer-supported collaborative learning (CSCL) environments is a subject of interest to educators and researchers. The assessment tools utilized in computer-supported collaborative learning settings are used to measure groups' knowledge learning processes, the quality of groups' products and individuals' collaborative learning skills.

Peer critique, a specialized form of critique, is the common practice of writers reviewing and providing constructive criticism of each other's work before that work is turned in for credit or professional review. Writers in many genres and professions including fiction writers and technical writers use some form of peer critique as part of their process of writing. It is also commonly used as an instructional technique in school writing settings. Peer critique may also be referred to as peer review, writing groups, writing circles, or writing workshop.

Peer feedback is a practice where feedback is given by one student to another. Peer feedback provides students opportunities to learn from each other. After students finish a writing assignment but before the assignment is handed in to the instructor for a grade, the students have to work together to check each other's work and give comments to the peer partner. Comments from peers are called as peer feedback. Peer feedback can be in the form of corrections, opinions, suggestions, or ideas to each other. Ideally, peer feedback is a two-way process in which one cooperates with the other.

Academic discourse socialization is defined as one's growing process to realize the academic discourse and reach the expectation of the academic community. Academic discourse socialization is a form of language socialization through which newcomers or novices gain knowledge of the academic discourses by socializing and interacting with peers, experts, or more knowledgeable people in their community and social network. A dynamic and complex process, academic discourse socialization requires negotiation of both knowledge and one's identity. This kind of interaction is defined as a bidirectional process in which both novice learners and experts learn from one another.

Efforts to teach writing in the United States at a national scale using methods other than direct teacher-student tutorial were first implemented in the 19th century. The positive association between students' development of the ability to use writing to refine and synthesize their thinking and their performance in other disciplines is well-documented.

A dialogue journal is an ongoing written interaction between two people to exchange experiences, ideas, knowledge or reflections. It is used most often in education as a means of sustained written interaction between students and teachers at all education levels. It can be used to promote second language learning and learning in all areas.

Theories of rhetoric and composition pedagogy encompass a wide range of interdisciplinary fields centered on the instruction of writing. Noteworthy to the discipline is the influence of classical Ancient Greece and its treatment of rhetoric as a persuasive tool. Derived from the Greek work for public speaking, rhetoric's original concern dealt primarily with the spoken word. In the treatise Rhetoric, Aristotle identifies five Canons of the field of rhetoric: invention, arrangement, style, memory, and delivery. Since its inception in the spoken word, theories of rhetoric and composition have focused primarily on writing

Collaborative pedagogy stems from the process theory of rhetoric and composition. Collaborative pedagogy believes that students will better engage with writing, critical thinking, and revision if they engage with others. Collaborative pedagogy pushes back against the Current-Traditional model of writing, as well as other earlier theories explaining rhetoric and composition; earlier theories of writing, especially current-traditional, emphasizes writing as a final product. In contrast, collaborative pedagogy rejects the notion that students think, learn, and write in isolation. Collaborative pedagogy strives to maximize critical thinking, learning, and writing skills through interaction and interpersonal engagement. Collaborative pedagogy also connects to the broader theory of collaborative learning, which encompasses other disciplines including, but not limited to, education, psychology, and sociology.

Writing assessment refers to an area of study that contains theories and practices that guide the evaluation of a writer's performance or potential through a writing task. Writing assessment can be considered a combination of scholarship from composition studies and measurement theory within educational assessment. Writing assessment can also refer to the technologies and practices used to evaluate student writing and learning. An important consequence of writing assessment is that the type and manner of assessment may impact writing instruction, with consequences for the character and quality of that instruction.

Martin Nystrand is an American composition and education theorist. He is Louise Durham Mead Professor Emeritus in the Department of English at the University of Wisconsin–Madison and Professor Emeritus of Education at the Wisconsin Center for Education Research.

References

  1. ↑ Elbow, Peter (1981). Writing with power : techniques for mastering the writing process. Oxford University Press. ISBN   978-0-19-512018-9. OCLC   993491749.
  2. ↑ Allal, Linda; Chanquoy, L.; Largy, Pierre (2004). Revision Cognitive and Instructional Processes: Cognitive and Instructional Processes. New York: Springer Science and Business Media LLC. p. 190. ISBN   9789401037761.
  3. ↑ Flower, Linda; Hayes, John R. (1981). "A cognitive process theory of writing". College Composition and Communication. 32 (4): 365–387. doi:10.2307/356600. JSTOR   356600.
  4. ↑ Britton, James, Tony Burgess, Nancy Martin, Alex McLeod, and Harold Rosen. (1975). The Development of Writing Abilities (11-18) London: Macmillan Education.
  5. 1 2 3 Downs, Doug. Adler-Kassner, Linda; Wardle, Elizabeth (eds.). Naming What We Know, Classroom Edition : Threshold Concepts of Writing Studies. pp. 66–67. ISBN   978-1-60732-578-9. OCLC   1253563203.
  6. ↑ Wardle, Elizabeth; Downs, Doug (2020). Writing about writing (4th ed.). Bedford/St.Martins. ISBN   978-1-319-33234-1. OCLC   1321787544.
  7. ↑ Magnifico, Alecia Marie; Woodard, Rebecca; McCarthey, Sarah (2019-06-01). "Teachers as co-authors of student writing: How teachers' initiating texts influence response and revision in an online space". Computers and Composition. 52: 107–131. doi:10.1016/j.compcom.2019.01.005. ISSN   8755-4615. S2CID   86438229.
  8. 1 2 3 Elbow, Peter (1987). Embracing contraries : explorations in learning and teaching. Oxford University Press. ISBN   0-19-504661-7. OCLC   988428588.
  9. 1 2 3 "Reflective Writing and the Revision Process: What Were You Thinking? – Writing Spaces" . Retrieved 2023-03-19.
  10. 1 2 Lindenman, Camper, Jacoby, Enoch, Heather, Martin, Lindsay Dunne, Jessica (June 2018). "Revision and Reflection: A Study of (Dis)Connections between Writing Knowledge and Writing Practice". College Composition and Communication. 69 (4): 581–611. JSTOR   44870977 – via JSTOR.{{cite journal}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)
  11. ↑ Lisa S. Ede, Andrea A. Lunsford (1990). Singular Texts, Plural Authors. Carbondale. Southern Illinois Press.
  12. ↑ Rijlaarsdam; Bergh, Huub; Couzijn, Michel (2007). Effective Learning and Teaching of Writing: A Handbook of Writing in Education. New York: Kluwer Academic Publishers. p. 105. ISBN   978-1402027246.
  13. ↑ "Benefits of Peer Review". www.southwestern.edu. Retrieved 2023-03-19.
  14. ↑ Gerdes, Kendall; Beal, Melissa; Cain, Sean (2020-09-30). "Writing a Videogame: Rhetoric, Revision, and Reflection". Prompt: A Journal of Academic Writing Assignments. 4 (2): 3–12. doi: 10.31719/pjaw.v4i2.64 . ISSN   2476-0943. S2CID   224977261.
  15. ↑ Johns, Ann (1997). "Discourse Communities and Communities of Practice: Membership, Conflict, and Diversity" (PDF). Text, Role, and Context: Developing Academic Literacies: 51–70. doi:10.1017/CBO9781139524650.006. ISBN   9780521567619.
  16. ↑ "Discourse communities and communities of practice: Membership, conflict, and diversity", Text, Role and Context, Cambridge University Press, pp. 51–70, 1997-06-13, doi:10.1017/cbo9781139524650.006, ISBN   9780521567619 , retrieved 2023-03-19
This page is based on this Wikipedia article
Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply.
Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.