After reading Nancy Sommers' article, respond to the following questions:
*How does she view editing/revising?
*What is most important, according to her, when a teacher offers suggestions?
*If you were a teacher, how would you response to student projects?
*Think about your own project you just completed--how might you respond to it?
*How does her article relate to your own thinking/theorizing about editing?
Same guidelines per normal.
DUE: Tuesday, July 19, 2011 by class time.
As Nancy Sommers stated, teachers spend the majority of their time responding and revising a student’s writing. If I was a teacher I think it would be effective to have mini conferences with the students before I started to edit. Yes, it would be extremely time consuming to meet with each student before every major assignment, but for you to be able to best edit someone else’s work, it is imperative to know what they are trying to say. To be able to properly communicate an idea through writing is one of the qualities to being a great writer. Improvements can always be made that is why it is a constant process. Sommers says, “we comment on student writing to dramatize the presence of a reader, to help our students to become that questioning reader themselves, because, ultimately, we believe that becoming such a reader will help them to evaluate what they have written and develop control over their writing.” This quotes reiterates my previous statement that improvements can always be made. By teaching students to imagine what the reader’s response will be to their writing will ultimately help them in their future compositions. It is very important that while editing someone’s work they you don’t completely change their writing where they lose their voice. Sommers gave an example of a student’s idea of what they want to say and what the teacher is asking them to do. Nancy Sommers believes that, “These different signals given to students, to edit and develop, to condense and elaborate, represent also the failure of teachers' comments to direct genuine revision of the text as a whole. “ I agree that it is important to respond to the writer but make sure your comments are easy to understand. If a comment is too vague or not worded properly it could the leave the writer more confused than before. Something that she stresses in this article is that if a teacher responds to a student’s work in a specific way about correcting punctuation, word choice, or grammar, student’s will be misguided that their rough draft just needs to be touched up a little bit then it is ready to go. When revising especially the first draft ,” Our goal in commenting on early drafts should be to engage students with the issues they are considering and help them clarify their purposes and reasons in writing their specific text. “After reading this article, it made me realize that revising someone else’s work can be very risky. I started thinking about my idea of editing and this article was very eye opening. As I was reading this I immediately thought back to when I was in high school. My teacher would return the paper and there would be various comments on it and I would become confused on what they wanted me to say. As I get older I realize that finding your own voice as a writer and sticking to it but always improving will remind me of the passion I have had for writing. So from now on whenever I edit I will be very careful to not try to completely change what the writer is originally trying to say but I will explain in detail what my corrections mean and how they can still put their own twist on it.
ReplyDeleteNancy Sommers declares that teachers nowadays were never taught how to correctly revise and edit a student’s paper. She summarizes that from now on teachers should learn and begin to develop an appropriate level of response for commenting on a student’s draft. “Comments should point to breaks in logic, disruptions in meaning, or missing information… help them clarify their purposes and reasons in writing their first specific text.” I recall in high school I took criticism very harsh and I did not think I was a good enough writer for my teacher to notice me. From their comments and revisions to crossing out words and making it sound more collegiate, I began to notice that my entire point of view and audience had changed. Sommers points out that, “…teacher’s comments can take students’ attention away from their own purposes in writing a particular text and focus that attention on the teachers purpose in commenting.” If I were to be a teacher and I was revising and editing one of my students’ papers I would put myself in my students point of view as if I were writing this paper. I will constantly keep in mind what type of audience is he or she trying to connect with as well. Being a teacher we are only taught how to do certain things, Sommers’ states that teachers are not taught to revise and edit students papers, correctly. “As writers we need and want thoughtful commentary to show us when we have communicates our ideas and when not, raising questions from a reader’s point of view that may not have occurred to us as writers.” The whole point of becoming a teacher is to help their students, in this case, to become better writers. In order to do so, teachers need to realize what the student(s) are trying to say. Then again, the process of revising always involves risks. When revising my latest project that I had recently turned in, it was a process and it did take many risks that are along the lines of what to delete and what to keep. I would constantly ask myself questions, is this properly placed here? or should we re-organize this entire piece? When I saw the final product I knew for a fact I would receive positive feedback. Of course not everything is perfect, nor do I believe anything can be, however, if your composition includes all its guidelines and more, you have reached your goal. Nancy Sommers’ article related a lot to what I believe is the correct way to revise and edit a composition. Being the fact that at times I talk in circles and maybe sometimes backwards, Sommers has a way of allowing the reader to fully understand the importance of revising and editing, and doing it the best way possible.
ReplyDeleteIn this article, Nancy Sommers sought to create a more effective way for teachers and students to relate to revision and editing. She evaluated the subjects, and decided that the two were in dire need of reformation. Although teachers must spend most of their time editing and revising student work, most were very unaware of how to do so effectively. The purpose of commentary on student composition is to help the student reorganize and restructure. This highlights the pedagogical purpose described by Sommers. Students often miss the mark when revising their work. Why is that? Teachers are no longer editing student work; teachers are dramatizing the presence of a reader (Sommers). Of course teachers realize the importance of assisting their students with editing and revision, but that manner in which they execute this action has become distorted. Sommers and her colleagues completed a study on teacher comments and student confusion. There were two discoveries; teacher comments distract their students away from their original intention, and teachers have developed a grading strategy suitable for any paper (Sommers). What is important is the way in which the teacher interacts and develops the student’s writing. I have already explored the option of teaching. Therefore, much thought has gone into how I would grade my students. I would hope to connect their ideas or purpose with the writing, without eliminating their personality from the piece. I would take into consideration, that most students misunderstand the subject matter, audience, or genre of writing. In my comments, I would strive to clearly direct and explain what needs to be changed and why. My comments would be far from vague, in hopes of redirecting their attention to the purpose of first drafts and revision. The revision process weighs heavily on a composition that is deemed “good writing”. In regards to the first main assignment I would grade it effectively without being harsh. I agree with Sommers, that most teacher comments are mean- spirited. If I were the eyes on this assignment, I would discuss why certain things did and did not work. I would first evaluate the text, because with anything related to design it’s easy to become distracted by aesthetics. If the text did not effectively target the audience, I would explain why the discourse did not work. I would evaluate the tone and message delivered through the text, captions, images, and over all design. My hypothetical rubric is based on scholarly mentions, factual information (no fluff please), intention or message of the author, design, and fluidity. I found common ground between many of Sommer’s theories on editing and my own. I know that curriculum has evolved and many efforts have been made by educators to improve writing. I still think that many educators are missing the mark. Educators play an extremely important role in a student’s life. I feel that I agree that Sommer’s evaluation of editing and teacher-student relations (strictly based on composition) holds much credibility. Sommers said, “Our comments need to offer students revision tasks of a different order of complexity and sophistication from the ones that they themselves identify, by forcing students back into the chaos, back to the point where they are shaping and restructuring their meaning.” These ideals explained by Sommers really hit home for me. I believe that teachers really need to improve their relationship with students. Educators should take on more of a strategic role when it comes to something as personal as crafting an individual’s composition skills. As we have already discovered, writing is involved in many subjects, and no matter which we choose to indulge in, having the proper foundation really shapes an individual’s integrity as a writer.
ReplyDeleteIn Nancy Sommers articles she states that teachers spend too much time editing and commenting on student’s papers. She says that “teachers' comments can take students' attention away from their own purposes in writing a particular text and focus that attention on the teachers' purpose in commenting.” I agree with this quote because my senior year in high school I had an English teacher who focused her attention on editing and making our papers acceptable. She never cared what we wrote about or how the writing inspired us. As a writer myself I do like to have critical feedback but not an absurd amount. It only makes me a better writer. Nancy Sommers says it best, “Comments create the motive for doing something different in the next draft; thoughtful comments create the motive for revising.” However too much editing can annoy me; it distracts me from what I’m actually writing and makes me focus more on making the punctuation and grammar right. That is not always the most important thing and sometimes can make a paper worse just like Nancy Said. “It is possible, and it quite often happens, that students follow every comment and fix their texts appropriately as requested, but their texts are not improved substantially, or, even worse, their revised drafts are inferior to their previous drafts.” The most important thing that Nancy Sommers tries to get across is that “Written comments need to be viewed not as an end in themselves but as a way for teachers to satisfy themselves that they have done their jobs-but rather as a means for helping students to become more effective writers.” If I had to put myself in the teacher’s shoes I would sit down one on one with each student. I know this would be time consuming, but from experience I know that one on one time with teachers helped me best. Not only would I go over the editing and commenting marks that I had made but I would also make sure that they are not getting off track with the purpose of why they are writing this paper. I would also make sure that they are not talking in circles, which sometimes I even have trouble with. With the newsletter project we just completed ill always wish we had a little more time. Looking over it and re-reading it I find several grammatical errors that I wish we would have caught. Just simply getting someone else to read it and edit it would have been a huge help. I like how Nancy Sommers wrote this article. I agree with what Amy said, “As I get older I realize that finding your own voice as a writer and sticking to it but always improving will remind me of the passion I have had for writing.” Sometimes I struggle with this. But as I get older I find myself becoming better at this, I am actually figuring out who I am as a writer and also an editor.
ReplyDeleteI really enjoyed reading Sommer’s piece. In the beginning she said, “Students make the changes the teacher wants rather than those that the student perceives are necessary, since the teachers' concerns imposed on the text create the reasons for the subsequent changes.” Interestingly enough, that came up in our discussion today in class. Does a teacher’s edit cause students to revise to the point where they lose the very essence of their own work? Honestly, I think there is a happy medium for everything. Taking critique of others is essential in order to develop into a great writer. However when it comes to the point where the essence or voice of the writer is vanished- is not editing. But what choice do students really have, they want a good grade. Grades should not e the reason why someone changes their voice, but they do. I know particularly in high school, comments made from teachers to revise papers, did make students feel like they were changing the idea of the student. I agree with Sommer, students compositions begin as “this is what I want to say”, after teacher comments, “This is what my teacher wants”. Teachers should provide assistance with writing, but not impose their writing styles onto their students. She introduces the idea of the language of comments. Some comments made by teachers take the students’ original purpose of the writing,. It brings up the idea of writing for a grade rather than to have an idea expressed and understood. But we cannot solely blame the teachers. The teachers were not TAUGHT how to revise and edit. Teachers must first accept the opinions of their students and edit what they have. Not change their work to what the teacher think will sound better. During our newsletter project, I edited the work of my peers. I did not change the content of their work, but just changed any grammar or spelling errors. Chelsea brings up an excellent point. Educators are the foundation a student’s (academic) life. I would hate to speak as if, I am no longer a student, but when I was a younger student I see the point that Sommer is making. I was a student guilty of changing my content to meet the needs of my AP English teachers. Having someone else who understand the point of editing and revision is important. Having a paper full of errors is embarrassing. Shannon, I too wish I had more time to edit my group newsletter. Unfortunately, my group was given the burden of doing another group member’s work. It cut out a GREAT deal of time we allocated to edit. I wish we had more time too. I think that is the uniqueness of the course. We are given realistic scenarios that we will encounter in the work force.
ReplyDeleteSommers views editing/revising as a tool. I think she sees her editing skills to be of great help to her students. I agree that a teacher’s review is a form of editing. It is something we talked about in class today. I think she sees that sometimes students do not respond to constructive criticism and do not take the advice given. I have never really thought about how when I do not take editing advise from a teacher that they may notice. I guess they actually do. It was interesting to view Sommers’ view on this given she is the teacher and I am the student. It seems that she thinks that communication is the most important aspect of editing a student’s work. She was talking about a computer program that gives feedback similar to an English professor and how the student’s response was a little more positive. To quote her directly she says, “besides, the calm, reasonable language of the computer provided quite a contrast to the hostility and mean-spiritedness of most of the teachers' comments”. itsannesanchez summarizes this pretty well when she says, “I recall in high school I took criticism very harsh and I did not think I was a good enough writer for my teacher to notice me”. I also remember having these issues when writing. I thought that the teacher thought I was a terrible writer and did not think about pursuing it as a career until college when things were put into perspective a little more. Amy also thinks that communication is a huge error when a teacher tries to edit and makes the suggestion to have teacher conferences. In ENC1102 last summer, my professor held these conferences and I learned a great deal about editing and how to revise more effectively. If I were put into the teacher’s shoes and had to revise my students’ writing, I think that I would hold workshops. We are doing that in my Article and Essay class now and I find it to be very helpful. I think that when students can hear the other student’s feedback on top of the teacher’s feedback. Sometimes we need to hear it from people we relate to more. When editing a friend’s paper, I try to be as brutally honest. If something doesn’t flow or if thing’s are out of place I will try to offer suggestions for a better way. The project I just completed involving editing was very tedious. I had to condense a lot of information into half the amount of words. It was a lot more difficult than I expected. I don’t think that this article really followed my style. It was too formal and uninteresting. In the editing process I had to make sure that the writing catered to a specific audience and could not take as many liberties. It was a good learning experience needless to say.
ReplyDeleteNancy Sommers talks about how much time teachers spend revising and reading students papers, and I must say that was a lot when you really think about it. For something like that to take up so much time, teachers should be experts at it. Sommers shows in her study that teachers tend to lack when it comes to making helpful comments. She says that, “we comment on student writing to dramatize the presence of a reader, to help our students to become that questioning reader themselves, because, ultimately, we believe that becoming such a reader will help them to evaluate what they have written and develop control over their writing”. She also believes that by writing comments, it helps students in composing. Also, she hopes that it will motivate new thoughts for the next draft. Nancy says that without comments, students would keep a narrow mind in editing which I totally agree. I remember writing in high school when my teach said to write a first draft, edit it and do a final draft, I would make a few little grammar changes and that would be it. That is why it is important to have someone give comments on your paper to help you develop it more. But those comments are not always helpful. One example the author talks about is how teachers often leave vague comments on student’s papers. Comments like, “ elaborate” or “be specific” can sometimes confuse students because that isn’t being text specific. Students can also drift away from what they were trying to say by following all the teacher’s suggestions. I remember when writing high school research papers, I would always change what the teacher told me because that is what I thought I was supposed to do. Well, by doing that, I sometimes would stray away from what I was talking about in order to say what my teacher suggested. It is important as writers, to understand our audience as well as what point we are trying to make to our audience. This way, when teachers leave comments, we can choose which ones are most helpful to your work. Chelsea makes a great point in saying that teachers need to work on their relationships with their students. This can help when leaving comments because they can be more personalized instead of using general comments. If I were a teacher, I would defiantly work on having strong relationships with my students. This helps them earn trust in me and I would also feel more comfortable writing more personalized comments on their work. Editing in general is meant to help improve writing as well as make the writer expand their thoughts in their composition.
ReplyDeleteThe article got me thinking a lot about comments I’ve received on papers and overall they are all pretty useless and frustrating. Sommer’s stance on editing/revising student’s papers is that teachers do more harm than good. As writers we want need and want comments but the ones we get only lead to more unanswered questions and confusion. Sommers says that the process of editing, revising and proofreading are all reduced to trivial activities and that after a student gets his/her paper back they are only concerned with correcting what the teacher marked. This it totally true! I know I get so focused on correcting the errors my teacher points out and the kinda correcting the words or sentences around those but I hardly ever think to apply the remarks to the rest of an essay. Sommers also pointed out how teachers read with “preconceptions and preoccupations” meaning teachers delve into a paper looking for specific elements. Reading a paper with preconceptions of what the format should be and grammar, a teacher should interpret the paper as an audience rather than think like a teacher. She also points out how comments are generalized and can easily be written on another paper and provides just as much confusion. My favorite point of the article though is the irony of teachers being vague in their comments while at the same time demanding a student be more specific. Total irony. Especially when you ask them to be more specific and they can’t/won’t. The most important part to Sommers when a teacher is offering suggestions is to respond thoughtfully. Being thoughtful in comments she says, will engage a student and dramatically help the writing. By focusing on negative aspects of a paper, teacher always leave out the compliments. If I were a teacher I would treat each students paper as an individual concept rather than lump it in with the rest of them. Yes I would follow basic formatting but I’d also let them know in explanation what can be improved or changed and what I think is great and in the right direction. I agree with Shannon that one on one explanations are the most beneficial. That way a student can ask what a teacher means by a particular comment or explain to the teacher what he or she means in a particular sentence. Yes it is time consuming, so I would definitely make a sign up sheet available, that way they people who want help can get it. As a non teacher critiquing a friends paper I try to be as specific as possible and give helpful feedback and suggestions. If I know a reworking of a sentence can drastically help my friends paper I will suggest it. Its important to help people in revising like that. Jasmine, I share your feelings on the group project. While it would have been nice to catch all the mistakes we were given a real world situation and sometimes you need to do more in a certain area that makes other situations fall to the back burner. Procrastination also doesnt help..
ReplyDeleteNancy Sommers views responding to students as an assistive action. She feels that teachers can guide their students to their ultimate purpose in writing and help them feel like they are in control of what they are writing. She states, “Even more specifically, however, we comment on student writing because we believe that it is necessary for us to offer assistance to student writers when they are in the process of composing a text, rather than after the text has been completed.” Sommers discusses the substantial amount of time that goes into revising and editing student writing. She feels the revision of students writing, from a teacher helps the student to recognize the presence of an audience, thus making them aware of their writing. Sommers essentially sees the most important thing in revision is the ability for a student to relate to the comments and advice without straying away or feeling like they don’t understand what their teacher proposed. Sommers goes on to discuss how many times, the comments that a teacher offers can sometimes mislead students into thinking that their work is hardly a draft but rather a finished product that requires little effort in revising. If I were a teacher (I’d be terrible) but I would attempt to understand where the student is coming from before I make any suggestions. Try, if possible to have them explain themselves on something that may trip me up. I never see it necessary to point out unnecessary faults or be so harsh that a student shys away and feels less competent in their area of writing. I would try to offer suggestions rather than corrections when possible, because many times a student feels their professor knows best anyways. A “suggestion” doesn’t put the writer on the defense or make them feel belittled. Sommers states that sometimes teachers comments can make a student feel as if they’ve done something wrong and their revising process becomes “a guessing game” as to what the teacher wants. I feel it’s crucial to never make a student feel dumb and or be unclear as to what you’re looking for. If I were asked to respond to the project I just completed, I would make sure I knew the genre and audience to which the project was aimed. Furthermore, I would do my best to be fair and relatable. This concept is elementary, but if someone doesn’t understand what you’re trying to say…your attempt at revision is in vain. I agree entirely with Sommers views on teacher-student editing. Specifically, I agree that many times the original work may suffer or even cease to exist as a result of teachers’ comments. It has happened to me where I was crucified by a teacher on my writing and as a result, I felt like I was a worthless writer and I lost all confidence to produce anything of decency. I agree with Jasmine in saying that teachers must first accept their students’ opinions and work for what it is before they begin to revise and edit. It is essential for a teacher to be fair to their students and to make them feel confident as writers.
ReplyDeleteSommer’s article shows evidence that she believes that the purpose of teacher’s editing or comments is to “create the motive for doing something different in the next draft; thoughtful comments create the motive revising”. She goes on to add that without comments most papers will be “consistently narrow and predictable”. With this being said she focuses on examining what is considered as good comments, she argues that students can be easily confused with comments that aren’t specific. She emphasizes the importance of the kind of language being used in comments. For example, she talks about teachers giving contradicting comments where the teacher advices to fix errors but also tells the student that the writing needs development. She reiterates the importance of language and wording and how teachers’ comments redirect the student’s voice to please the teacher rather than write with the purpose of voicing him/herself. She further goes on to advise that a teacher’s comment should give some level of importance to the errors the teacher sees in the student’s writing. Comments should be text-specific in order to give beneficial feedback to the students. If I was a teacher commenting on a student’s paper I would keep in mind to be clear with my suggestions and more importantly, specific. Moreover, I would want my comments to be able to keep the student focused on writing’s purpose. Sommer gets kind of deep when she tries to reason with why some teachers’ commenting styles are problematic. She argues that the teachers’ comments can be biased because they read the writing as if they were the writer and give comments based on their beliefs and styles of composing rather than “reading and responding to the meaning of the text”. I think she brings up a good point because there has been times when I’ve changed my entire paper based on my teacher’s review. After reading the teachers’ comment Sommer provides in her article, I realized how I do exactly what Sommer argues, I tend to focus on fixing what my teacher reviewed rather than staying focused on the purpose of the writing. This gives me a new perspective on editing my drafts and what I need to keep in mind throughout the whole composition. Proposing a solution for this problem Sommer says, “Instead of finding errors of showing students how to patch up parts of their texts, we need to sabotage our students’ conviction that the drafts they have written are complete and coherent. Our comments need to offer students revision tasks of a different order of complexity and sophistication from the ones that they themselves identify, by forcing students back into the chaos back to the point where they are shaping and restructuring their meaning”.
ReplyDeleteBefore reading this, tearing apart a writer’s paper with little to no explanation of how the work can grow is something I would do. When it comes to handing back work that I’ve edited, I tend to just correct, correct, correct. Correct what? No written work needs to be “corrected.” It needs to grow and discover new options, but not correct itself. There is no wrong and right in the eyes of the editor. Right and wrong is only to be determined by the writer. Because teachers read papers to have the ultimate say in the grade received by the student, the common response to edited work is to please the teacher in order to succeed. It could be said that Sommers is arguing that the teachers should gauge the grade scores on how satisfied the student is with her work, rather than how well the student captured the voice the teacher desired or expected. Because I’ve admitted to being one of the fools who offer terrible written feedback, I must say that if I were a teacher, I would hold one-on-one sessions with the student, like those in ENC1102 that Sydney mentioned in her comment. I give much better feedback in a conversational setting than I do on paper. As a student, in-class workshops have been the most helpful when getting feedback on my work. Brainstorming and expressing ideas come to me in conversation and in hearing what other editors have to say. As a teacher, I would have to balance my strength in verbal commentary with my weakness in written commentary. This is why the editing mini assignment was a challenge. There was no writer to communicate with, so editing his words to, ultimately, be published without his consent was a tough task. As a team, we made corrections and altered the article multiple times. Our finished work is comprised of whichever suggestions we thought the writer would take into consideration and execute. Reading Sommer’s article has helped me become aware of my strengths and weaknesses as an editor (or as a teacher—wherever I’ll end up). Sommers points out a consequential weakness that most teachers have while editing a student’s work. She says, “The problem here is a confusion of process and product.” The process of writing, exploring, and discovering is an entirely different experience from the final written product. “We need to develop an appropriate level of response for commenting on a first draft, and to differentiate that from the level suitable to a second or third draft.” Here, Sommers more concretely identifies the difference between process and product. In recognizing and accepting the truth of the editing process, a teacher will better help her student produce a work of which to be proud. Editing the first draft with suggestions for direction and editing the final draft with grammatical corrections and finishing touches are two thoroughly different tasks. In writing a critique on the many ineffective editing approaches many teachers take, Sommers skillfully and successfully teaches us how to edit our editing.
ReplyDeleteEditing and Revising are complicated endeavors according to Nancy Sommers. From a teaching perspective, she says she comments on students writing to dramatize the reader, to make the student aware of the audience they are writing for, and also prefers to offer assistance while they are composing, not after. When it comes to editing as a teacher, it’s important not to comment too much and make the student confused on what’s important and what’s trivial. Revising is also risk for students because they often try to balance making the changes that were suggested, but don’t take the chance for further revision, although it may be needed. Back to editing, most teachers comments are not specific and could be interchangeable from text to text. They use too many generalities and vague directions. A teacher must anchor the strategy in the student’s text for useful revision. If I were to respond to my student’s projects, I would include commentary on what worked as well as what didn’t work. I would explain the characteristics the piece is lacking and where I am taking off points and for what reasons. I would make suggestions on where there could be eliminations, revisions, or re-wording. This is similar to the approach I use when editing peer’s work, I offer suggestions and ask questions in places of confusion, or that I’m curious to know more about.
ReplyDeleteI think my editing project was pretty successful, as far as restructuring paragraphs and maintaining a flow of the essay. I don’t think the main points were quite as clear as concise as they could have been, but there was so much information to weed through, I think I got it down to the main points of the composition with evidence to support them. I took out a whole lot in my editing, but I really didn’t see the information as pertinent to the main focus of the argument, the definition of the American Dream and portrayal of this concept in the media, so I chose to eliminate it. Overall, the organization was arranged to best present the stance of the essay for my audience and I chose facts to support my argument. However, editing is a continuous process so I could probably go on forever if time allowed.
This article relates to my own theorizing about editing because I’ve always had either really helpful editors in class, or editors that were wasting time, focusing on grammatical errors and technicalities, which I feel should be the last step in the process. In the initial stages of editing, I want to know if my language is conveying my main point and if the paragraphs are flowing smoothly together. Editing is the most important part of composition because it is never finished. You can keep revisiting a work for years and find ways to change it and revise it. This class has made me realize how important editing is and how big of a part it is played in my creative writing major.
@Jessica: I also catch myself revising what my teacher suggested rather than staying focused on my purpose of the writing.
Nancy Sommers views editing and revising as a process that is tedious yet necessary. She says that there should be multiple drafts completed instead of just the rough draft and final draft that most of us were taught throughout elementary and middle school. She describes editing as the more mechanical part of writing. During editing, spelling mistakes and missed or misplaced punctuation are corrected, along with the overall structure and flow. When it comes to revising, Sommers sums it up by saying that students should begin to view “revision as discovery, as a repeated process of beginning again, as starting out new.” If we revise completely, papers will often end up much different than they began. They will be fragmented and awry before coming back together to finally address the point of the paper. Sommers explains that it is very important for teachers to give thoughtful feedback with no contradictions. Critiques that say “too wordy; be specific about your point” can be very confusing to students because it is actually asking for two opposite things. Sommers also says that teachers should avoid comments that can easily be “rubber-stamped” from one student’s paper to another. “Be specific, remember your audience, elaborate” are all critiques that could be put on every student’s paper and offers no real assistance in what should be done to correct the problems at hand. Basically, Sommers believes that teachers must read the papers and search for breaks in logic and challenge the writer to rethink and revamp their paper entirely. Instead of correcting minute grammatical errors, teachers should force the authors to think about their own work and how their thoughts can be expanded upon and reorganized so as to really convey the point of their paper and maintain strong arguments throughout it. Before reading this text, if I were a teacher, I know I would have fallen under the same category as the ones in the study: I would have been very general and focused more on the mechanics rather than the content as a whole. After reading this, however, it’s easy for me to see how I can improve that. When editing from now on, I will read the paper as a whole and ignore the mechanical problems. Instead, I will focus on what is actually being said and how that can be improved. From the mini-assignment that we completed yesterday, I think that at first I was so focused on the mechanics of the paper that I didn’t really understand the content because I was too busy fixing grammatical and structural errors. However, once I was almost finished with reading the entire paper, I realized what point was being conveyed by the author. This helped me write a critique on the last paper of the paper explaining that he needed to focus more on one point instead of breaking off into unnecessary tangents. I explained that he should focus on one specific point- that the American Dream is viewed different by everyone- and expand upon that. Nancy Sommers’ article helped me realize that editing and revision are far more than just correcting the grammatical errors and structural problems of a paper; it is allowing the author to rethink and recreate their basic points and evolve them into a strong, credible paper. I know that this will help me in the future by forcing me to read my own work and look for any breaks in knowledge that could be deleted and fixed to make my paper more cohesive. Overall, I want to make sure that the point I’m trying to convey is actually shown to the reader and makes perfect sense.
ReplyDelete@Jessica and @Whitney: I have also been one to only correct what my teacher suggested instead of delving into the actual content of the paper. After reading this text, though, I know it's definitely important to search the content of the paper before the mechanics.
ReplyDelete@Caroline Hughes: I think you are right on point when you say, "I would try to offer suggestions rather than corrections when possible, because many times a student feels their professor knows best anyways. A “suggestion” doesn’t put the writer on the defense or make them feel belittled." When peer-editing or editing in a future job, I think it's important to respect the author's work and the effort they put into it. For the mini-assignment, had the author been present, I probably would have had a very tough time with constructive criticism. I probably would have thrown in some "what does that even MEAN?" and "that's literally not even a necessary statement." Sometimes we have to bite our tongues so that we do not completely tear someone (and their work) to shreds. Instead, offering suggestions and asking questions about the work and their thought processes would be a better approach.
Many of the ideas that Sommer’s discusses deal with the mixed messages that teachers send to students when editing their papers. This idea of style vs. content is imperative to all writing, especially early on, but the process in which we have adopted in regards to editing has become somewhat misdirected. I now realize my grades throughout highschool have been calculated without regard to yielding the best result, but was more for the peace of mind of the teachers. No teacher ever say down with me after class to help me write my paper and to tell me how I should go about editing it. If I were a teacher I would make sure to be available to all my students via email or meeting to help them edit their paper for the best possible grade. The content would obviously be handled together, allowing me to help explain new ideas that would fit into the students argument, or making comments on what needs to me explained and what needs to be excluded. As for the style of writing, I would try my best to teach this to my students and allow them to show me their own style. Obviously, if this poses a problem, I would want to be readily available to assist them in finding their own voice. However, I feel that style is more of an intrapersonal thing, differing from person to person, but when it comes to content, the majority of the papers would be fairly similar in this regard. Through this last mini-assignment, I have learned that through group effort, it is much easier to accomplish something than to do it alone, therefore I would want this idea to be reflected in my teaching. I feel that Sommers did a great job of describing the process that we currently have for grading papers. She makes great points that show the flaws we have in our system, and how it could be confusing to young writers as to what is being asked of them. I’d have to agree with Sommers, at least after reading her paper, and say that something about the way editing is being done is wrong. Sommer also seems to say that teachers need to show students that the editing process is not just a “rewording activity” but is much more than just that. She states that revising, editing, and proofreading should no longer be collapsed and reduced to a trivial process, and should no longer take away from the students attention and focus on the paper. I agree wholeheartedly with this, and after reading about it, it has become much more apparent how I’ve personally dealt with this idea. I’d make sure to stay away from confusing my students as a teacher, and help them keep a strong focus on their message.
ReplyDeleteMuch of the information in the reading deals with teachers and how they edit the work that goes on with their students. The point of editing and revising here is to better the students work and how they compose later on in their life. I would have to say that she views editing and revising as being a motivational step. You as a teacher are there to deliver information that can be useful and helpful to the student. You should never be discouraging to the students. The most important thing that should be kept in mind when teachers give back the work of students after editing is to keep a promising and positive voice. The worst thing that a teacher can do is to hurt the ego of a writer and make them afraid to express their views in their work. If I were a teacher, I would follow the route that one of my teachers followed with me and my peers. We would do peer editing as well as editing with the teacher. Each student would turn in a paper and not have their name on it. The teacher would then pass out all of our work to each other. From there we would edit the work without knowing whose paper we had. This was great for the editor as well as the composer. The writer was not worried about if the students knew it was their work, and if they would be made fun of. The editor was not afraid to be honest with the work of their peers or biased if you were given your friends work. The work was then given back to the teacher and she would allow us to find our papers and review the changes our classmates made. We then scheduled our own little mini sessions with the teacher to talk about our work. This was extremely helpful. The one on one time was great. The atmosphere that is created is much easier to deal with and comforting. I would definitely take this route if I were a teacher. The project that I just completed, when thinking about the editing process, I would make sure that the different pages flowed. Because of the different authors for each page, making sure that everything flowed is extremely important for a piece of work. I would also ask exactly who the audience is. After knowing this information, the other most important part of a piece of work can be finished. Knowing the audience helps people understand the type of words and color that need to be used. Like Amy said, I agree with her method she would use as a teacher. The mini meetings are very helpful when developing the method of a young writer. This article is exactly what pops into my head when I think about editing. The only editing I have experienced deals with teachers. This article was mainly about how teachers are editors and handling the work of the youth.
ReplyDeleteWhile reading this article, I thought back on past papers and comments I received from teachers. I had never really thought in great detail about how a teacher’s comment could wrongly affect a paper. I never second-guessed a comment, just “corrected” the paper based on what the teacher was looking for. After gaining the opinion of Sommers’ about the comments teachers make on papers, it made me realize how much those comments influence the original writings of a student.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Sommers’ argument that the corrections teacher’s make, as readers, should be there “to help our students to become that questioning reader themselves.” Instead, the teacher’s comments might be doing more harm than good.
Based on this article, teachers need to find a better way of helping students improve their writing other than leaving vague remarks on specific aspects of a paper. As readers, teachers need to be able to give suggestions to the students, making it clear that first drafts are NOT finished drafts. With student projects, I would take into consideration the time and effort that the group members contributed. The more thought that is put into a project, the better the outcome. I would make comments that could help the students in future projects; not just vague ideas, but specific changes to help them improve. I would take into consideration an individuals writing style when viewing his/her work because it is important that I don’t interfere with the writer’s original intent. Regarding the projects we just turned in, I think everyone did a great job on them. My group spent time on it and did the best that we could. This article changed how I am going to view comments from now on. I know now that even when writing a first draft, a few minor changes are not going to solve all the issues. As writers, we should keep revising and changing discourse to make it flow based on our individual styles with a teacher’s comments taken into consideration. Like Jessica, I am the type of student to change every little detail of a paper based on teacher’s comments. Through this article, I gained a new perspective about comments and how they can be helpful when used correctly by the writer.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThe article by Nancy Sommers was a complete eye-opener for me with respect to revision and what it means to for teachers to assist students in the revision process. I think Sommers views editing as the final step in the writing process where comments concerning “errors in usage, diction, and style” are emphasized and revising is recursive allowing the text to go through several changes in order to be fully develop and the authors to go back-and-forth “revising the structure and meaning of their texts.” In taking a second and third review of the article, I found several important aspects of teacher comments; I think the point that Sommers is mainly trying to convey is that teachers should not review a student’s work as though it was in final draft. Essentially she means that the initial focus of the teacher should not be with grammatical errors, syntax, and spelling rather they should provide feedback as to whether the student needs to develop or expand the meaning of their text by doing more research or restructuring paragraphs for logic and clarity.
ReplyDeleteIf I were a teacher charged with responding to student projects I would do like Amy and have “mini conferences with students” (like many professors do with college students) but I wouldn’t do it before critiquing the students work because I would want to be able talk with the student to understand their message then make suggestions as to how they can improve their text to ensure their meaning is conveyed. I would discuss the audience factor of composing to ensure that the student understands that certain aspects of the paper may need to be more or less detailed, such as defining terms for those who aren’t well-versed about a particular subject matter, or jumping head first into it. I would make suggestion to help the student maintain their voice in their project and not incorporate my own. As far as the project we completed recently, editing an article for Rolling Stone Magazine, when I think about how I approached the editing process I did exactly what most teachers would have done - took the authors voice out and added my own. In my defense, I wanted to know the main point the author was trying to convey (there were several in the article) but in the end I took my understanding of the message and I may have repurposed the authors article entirely.
The article relates to my thinking or theorizing of the revision process because initially I viewed the process the same as my teachers – the revision process was the final step in writing a paper. But now my theory has changed since I know that the revision process is meant to be recursive and that I should allow myself the time necessary to go back-and-forth with my texts to ensure that my meaning is presented in as clear and concise a manner as possible. Going forward I will review commentary from my instructors a little more critically, seeking out suggestions or comments about the meaning I am trying to convey in my writings.
Sommers views editing/revising with specific emphasis on pedagogic editing. As such, her views of editing are skewed toward producing better writers, rather than producing better pieces of writing. Sommers advocates the use of clear direction in editing, and indicates that some 'editing,' done by a teacher, would necessitate a reconstruction of an entire written piece. She explains that the types of criticisms offered are often conflicted, because a teacher wants to address a student and the piece simultaneously, and sometimes these two things are at odds. She states, finally, that teacher comments are not revisions, but instead are '[developed] to provide an inherent reason for students to revise.' In a sense, she sees teachers as super-editors, not editing themselves, but 'editing' to inspire edits.
ReplyDeleteIf I were a teacher, I think it would depend very heavily on the student, the project, and how far along that project was. If, for instance, it was the beginning of a school year, and a student has demonstrated difficulty in composing a coherent piece of writing, but has also shown that they do not have a solid grasp on mechanical issues, I would start with higher order concerns first. In a first draft, my response to the project might be more socratic -- "what do you mean when you say this? What would happen if this were put in a different order? -- where a later draft, where higher-order concerns have been somewhat addressed, might be the time to mention run-on sentences and subject/verb agreement, prior to a final draft being submitted. With students who demonstrate more aptitude, the same process could be executed, but most likely it would be possible to combine the two processes -- 'consider revising your thesis to include... also on page 3 paragraph 2 you need a semi-colon not a colon.'
As a teacher, I think that the revision process for my last project would focus on expansion. While it did meet the specifications of the assignment, there was clearly more material that could've been introduced, more explanations that would've been pertinent, etc. As such, the questions I would ask as a teacher evaluating the project would be along the lines of "what could you do to expand the visual metaphor created with the Mario characters?" or "can you explain the connection between the last two areas of your Prezi more clearly?"
This article relates to the thinking that I've done about editing, because I feel like this is the type of editing that a good composer will do to him/herself. Obviously, a good composer will also check their mechanics, etc., but they also have to create for themselves the impetus to go back and revise again, rather than leaving a piece of writing the way it is when it is only proofread.