Revision (writing)

Revision as a threshold concept

Revision is a threshold concept. Threshold concepts are ideas that are essential to grasping further topics of study. It is sometimes viewed as challenging for students due to preconceived views. 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. It also works to make students more receptive to teacher feedback, giving teachers the title of "co-authors" of students writing.

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. First-order thinking involves intuition and creativity; it consists of exploring tangents and generating ideas. 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.

Reflective writing encourages writers to think about their own thinking which is also known as metacognition. 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? 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. In writing, revision is a powerful tool that relies heavily on one's knowledge and intentions.

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. Recently, due to the collaborative capabilities of the Internet, there are writers who "crowdsource" reviews from several people, who contribute digital annotations.

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. 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. 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. 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.

For further reading see the reference guide:

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

References

References

1. Elbow, Peter. (1981). "Writing with power : techniques for mastering the writing process". Oxford University Press.
2. (2004). "Revision Cognitive and Instructional Processes: Cognitive and Instructional Processes". Springer Science and Business Media LLC.
3. (1981). "A cognitive process theory of writing.". College Composition and Communication.
4. Britton, James, Tony Burgess, Nancy Martin, Alex McLeod, and Harold Rosen. (1975). ''The Development of Writing Abilities (11-18)'' London: Macmillan Education.
5. Downs, Doug. (15 June 2016). "Naming What We Know, Classroom Edition : Threshold Concepts of Writing Studies". University Press of Colorado.
6. (2020). "Writing about writing". Bedford/St.Martins.
7. (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.
8. Elbow, Peter. (1987). "Embracing contraries : explorations in learning and teaching". Oxford University Press.
9. "Reflective Writing and the Revision Process: What Were You Thinking? – Writing Spaces".
10. 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.
11. Lisa S. Ede, Andrea A. Lunsford (1990). ''Singular Texts, Plural Authors''. Carbondale. Southern Illinois Press.
12. (2007). "Effective Learning and Teaching of Writing: A Handbook of Writing in Education". Kluwer Academic Publishers.
13. "Benefits of Peer Review".
14. (2020-09-30). "Writing a Videogame: Rhetoric, Revision, and Reflection". Prompt: A Journal of Academic Writing Assignments.
15. Johns, Ann. (1997). "Discourse Communities and Communities of Practice: Membership, Conflict, and Diversity". Text, Role, and Context: Developing Academic Literacies.
16. (1997-06-13). "Discourse communities and communities of practice: Membership, conflict, and diversity". Cambridge University Press.