College/University students: A public service annoucement:

Have you ever tried the revision process that I’ve suggested? Obviously, I’m not saying to revise for the sake of revising, but I AM saying to read very carefully and critically over your own writing with an eye toward looking to places where it could be improved, and to think very hard about how it could be improved.

And I’m not saying that the form is more important than the content, but the form of a paper is important: the more “beautiful” it is (and this beauty can be Bauhaus), the better the reader will understand the point you’re making, and the likelier you are to persuade the reader.

Again, I used to not revise, and I still don’t revise if the paper is a throwaway paper where all I care about is making a perfect grade. I can make a perfect grade with most professors from a first draft. The revision process is for subjects where I care intensely about what I’m studying and want to create the best paper I can. For that, a willingness to do major revision is vital.

Daniel

I’m just not sure I see what major revision often needs to be done on my finished papers. All of the things you listed that should be fixed during your revision process are not there in my first draft.

For example, you say:

None of this stuff will ever make it onto my computer screen. I absolutely understand that not everyone writes this way, but I really very rarely need to edit for this sort of stuff. The only way in which I think my papers could be majorly revised is for ideas, and I am completely incapable of looking at my ideas and arguments objectively before at least 6 months have passed from their original formulation. I often wish I could do this sooner!

But I strongly suspect you and I are both discussing writing at a much higher level than the students in capybara’s class. I actually had someone hand in a paper in which he spelled tough ‘tuff’, so I know where she (he?) is coming from. And, because I am the luckiest person ever, I just recieved 90 more to grade…

There’s a big problem with the way academic writing is taught. Almost no one I’ve talked to is aware that the sole reason that their papers are being read is because someone is being paid to do so. You can write like that in school and do fine, but in any kind of professional setting, people need to be aware of the reasons to read your stuff or they’ll just ignore it. And if you’re not high up on the food chain, the fact that you wrote it will never be enough, no matter your qualifications or expertise.

:smack: That could have been worded more clearly.

Where’s my damned eraser?

It’s not that I think outlines and drafts are useless. They do have a purpose, particularly in the case of longer, more complex papers. Heck, I’ve outlined longer broadcast pieces to make sure they make sense. I also plan to outline my thesis, which I’m sure will go through numerous drafts and revisions before submission and defense.

I just disagree with the notion that outlines and drafts are ALWAYS required. I’ve been writing long enough that I’ve internalized most of the rules of good writing and don’t really feel the need to go through the useless steps and additional work of writing an outline and copious drafts if the nature of the paper doesn’t really call for them.

Robin

If the spell Czeck says it is write, then it must be write!

I once worked on a program where the fellow before me had an array of, and I quote, “pneumonics”. It had nothing to do with lungs, fwiw.

Hey, Bs get degrees!

Yes, but Bs don’t get you into graduate school.

Robin

If you’ve really tried this and are incapable of it, if I were your writing advisor I’d be telling you to work on it. I’m really convinced that developing the ability to read one’s own work critically and polish it can make a tremendous difference in everyone’s writing, whether you’re at the point where sentence fragments are a problem for you, or you’re at the point where you’re working on the multipart implicit thesis.

Daniel

They do if you work in the field for awhile, then go back to uni!

I do appreciate your advice. What I’m trying to express is that I do try to make my papers the best papers they can be - I just have different methods and priorities than you do, clearly. If I had to choose between extra time spent on research and extra time spent on writing, I’d choose the research.

I’m going back through a paper now, doing some revision; this is the sort of thing I revise:

  1. MAJOR: The paper is about the role of literature in the elementary school classroom. My paper originally covered three areas: the books that should be available to students, the presentation of literature to students, and the teaching of literacy skills to students. However, on rereading it, I realized that the second area was better off divided into two subcategories: the actual presentation of the books, and the creation of an environment conducive to reading. I changed my thesis to account for this slight difference and will reorganize that section of the paper to reflect the change.
  2. MINOR: I changed “books of photographs with captions” to “books of captioned photographs.” I changed:

to

in order to tighten up the language. “Story-telling and story-understanding, skills essential to human knowledge” becomes “telling and understanding stories, skills essential to other fields of knowledge,” thereby becoming grammatically standard and less bombastic. “Even a single child may feel like reading books of varying levels of complexity at different times” becomes “A child may want to read books of varying levels of complexity on different occasions,” becoming more formal. (It’s still somewhat awkward; if I had more time, I’d come back to this sentence later, trying to improve it more).

This is how I find that revision benefits my own writing.

Daniel