Knowledge (XXG)

Revision (writing)

Source 📝

84:
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.
83:
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
76:
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.
115:
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
38:
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
67:
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
58:
et al.'s model of the writing process as a series of stages described in metaphors of linear growth, conception - incubation - production. 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.
120:, 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. 68:
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.
77:
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.
35:, 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. 39:
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.
477: 111:
Teachers' prompts that incorporate the process of invention spark collaboration and communication amongst students in the classroom, producing feedback between peers.
529: 423: 307: 272: 159: 513: 662: 626: 394: 192: 100:
is common, participation of multiple writers facilitates communal revision. Recently, due to the collaborative capabilities of the
698: 333:"Teachers as co-authors of student writing: How teachers' initiating texts influence response and revision in an online space" 693: 603: 23:
of rearranging, adding, or removing paragraphs, sentences, or words. Writers may revise their writing after a
27:
is complete or during the composing process. Revision involves many of the strategies known generally as
471: 117: 97: 93: 332: 448:"Revision and Reflection: A Study of (Dis)Connections between Writing Knowledge and Writing Practice" 126: 31:
but also can entail larger conceptual shifts of purpose and audience as well as content. Within the
584: 459: 360: 225: 80: 554: 658: 622: 576: 509: 400: 390: 352: 313: 303: 278: 268: 188: 165: 155: 688: 650: 614: 566: 344: 217: 55: 47: 32: 643:"Discourse communities and communities of practice: Membership, conflict, and diversity" 604:"Discourse Communities and Communities of Practice: Membership, Conflict, and Diversity" 446:
Lindenman, Camper, Jacoby, Enoch, Heather, Martin, Lindsay Dunne, Jessica (June 2018).
424:"Reflective Writing and the Revision Process: What Were You Thinking? – Writing Spaces" 24: 682: 588: 185:
Revision Cognitive and Instructional Processes: Cognitive and Instructional Processes
105: 364: 264:
Naming What We Know, Classroom Edition : Threshold Concepts of Writing Studies
242:
Britton, James, Tony Burgess, Nancy Martin, Alex McLeod, and Harold Rosen. (1975).
51: 43: 642: 348: 654: 618: 112: 208:
Flower, Linda; Hayes, John R. (1981). "A cognitive process theory of writing".
506:
Effective Learning and Teaching of Writing: A Handbook of Writing in Education
317: 282: 580: 404: 356: 169: 571: 331:
Magnifico, Alecia Marie; Woodard, Rebecca; McCarthey, Sarah (2019-06-01).
101: 463: 447: 42:
Revision is a larger category of writing behaviors than line-editing or
50:. There are theories such as the three-component model hypothesized by 46:, though writers often make large reorganizations and word-level edits 28: 20: 297: 262: 229: 151:
Writing with power : techniques for mastering the writing process
384: 149: 221: 108:" reviews from several people, who contribute digital annotations. 187:. New York: Springer Science and Business Media LLC. p. 190. 386:
Embracing contraries : explorations in learning and teaching
92:
In educational settings, peer revision, or feedback, is a common
96:
practice. In organizational and other workplace settings where
261:
Downs, Doug. Adler-Kassner, Linda; Wardle, Elizabeth (eds.).
649:, Cambridge University Press, pp. 51–70, 1997-06-13, 555:"Writing a Videogame: Rhetoric, Revision, and Reflection" 553:
Gerdes, Kendall; Beal, Melissa; Cain, Sean (2020-09-30).
611:
Text, Role, and Context: Developing Academic Literacies
508:. New York: Kluwer Academic Publishers. p. 105. 504:Rijlaarsdam; Bergh, Huub; Couzijn, Michel (2007). 183:Allal, Linda; Chanquoy, L.; Largy, Pierre (2004). 559:Prompt: A Journal of Academic Writing Assignments 123:For further reading see the reference guide: 8: 476:: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list ( 244:The Development of Writing Abilities (11-18) 127:A. Horning & A. Becker (Eds.) (2006). 570: 490:Lisa S. Ede, Andrea A. Lunsford (1990). 129:Revision: History, Theory, and Practice. 441: 439: 296:Wardle, Elizabeth; Downs, Doug (2020). 140: 494:. Carbondale. Southern Illinois Press. 469: 452:College Composition and Communication 210:College Composition and Communication 7: 418: 416: 414: 378: 376: 374: 302:(4th ed.). Bedford/St.Martins. 256: 254: 252: 132:Parlor Press and WAC Clearinghouse. 88:Revision as a collaborative process 72:Reflection in the revision process 14: 116:feedback engages the concept of 63:Revision as a threshold concept 492:Singular Texts, Plural Authors 1: 349:10.1016/j.compcom.2019.01.005 655:10.1017/cbo9781139524650.006 619:10.1017/CBO9781139524650.006 246:London: Macmillan Education. 389:. Oxford University Press. 154:. Oxford University Press. 715: 530:"Benefits of Peer Review" 337:Computers and Composition 104:, there are writers who " 699:Composition (language) 647:Text, Role and Context 54:and John R. Hayes and 572:10.31719/pjaw.v4i2.64 383:Elbow, Peter (1987). 299:Writing about writing 148:Elbow, Peter (1981). 118:discourse communities 98:collaborative writing 94:collaborative writing 534:www.southwestern.edu 694:Textual scholarship 602:Johns, Ann (1997). 466:– via JSTOR. 267:. pp. 66–67. 81:Reflective writing 309:978-1-319-33234-1 274:978-1-60732-578-9 161:978-0-19-512018-9 706: 674: 673: 672: 671: 639: 633: 632: 608: 599: 593: 592: 574: 550: 544: 543: 541: 540: 526: 520: 519: 501: 495: 488: 482: 481: 475: 467: 443: 434: 433: 431: 430: 420: 409: 408: 380: 369: 368: 328: 322: 321: 293: 287: 286: 258: 247: 240: 234: 233: 205: 199: 198: 180: 174: 173: 145: 19:is a process in 714: 713: 709: 708: 707: 705: 704: 703: 679: 678: 677: 669: 667: 665: 641: 640: 636: 629: 606: 601: 600: 596: 552: 551: 547: 538: 536: 528: 527: 523: 516: 503: 502: 498: 489: 485: 468: 445: 444: 437: 428: 426: 422: 421: 412: 397: 382: 381: 372: 330: 329: 325: 310: 295: 294: 290: 275: 260: 259: 250: 241: 237: 207: 206: 202: 195: 182: 181: 177: 162: 147: 146: 142: 138: 90: 74: 65: 33:writing process 12: 11: 5: 712: 710: 702: 701: 696: 691: 681: 680: 676: 675: 663: 634: 627: 594: 545: 521: 515:978-1402027246 514: 496: 483: 458:(4): 581–611. 435: 410: 395: 370: 323: 308: 288: 273: 248: 235: 222:10.2307/356600 216:(4): 365–387. 200: 193: 175: 160: 139: 137: 134: 89: 86: 73: 70: 64: 61: 48:simultaneously 13: 10: 9: 6: 4: 3: 2: 711: 700: 697: 695: 692: 690: 687: 686: 684: 666: 664:9780521567619 660: 656: 652: 648: 644: 638: 635: 630: 628:9780521567619 624: 620: 616: 612: 605: 598: 595: 590: 586: 582: 578: 573: 568: 564: 560: 556: 549: 546: 535: 531: 525: 522: 517: 511: 507: 500: 497: 493: 487: 484: 479: 473: 465: 461: 457: 453: 449: 442: 440: 436: 425: 419: 417: 415: 411: 406: 402: 398: 396:0-19-504661-7 392: 388: 387: 379: 377: 375: 371: 366: 362: 358: 354: 350: 346: 342: 338: 334: 327: 324: 319: 315: 311: 305: 301: 300: 292: 289: 284: 280: 276: 270: 266: 265: 257: 255: 253: 249: 245: 239: 236: 231: 227: 223: 219: 215: 211: 204: 201: 196: 194:9789401037761 190: 186: 179: 176: 171: 167: 163: 157: 153: 152: 144: 141: 135: 133: 131: 130: 124: 121: 119: 114: 109: 107: 103: 99: 95: 87: 85: 82: 78: 71: 69: 62: 60: 57: 56:James Britton 53: 49: 45: 40: 36: 34: 30: 26: 22: 18: 668:, retrieved 646: 637: 610: 597: 562: 558: 548: 537:. Retrieved 533: 524: 505: 499: 491: 486: 472:cite journal 455: 451: 427:. Retrieved 385: 340: 336: 326: 298: 291: 263: 243: 238: 213: 209: 203: 184: 178: 150: 143: 128: 125: 122: 110: 91: 79: 75: 66: 52:Linda Flower 44:proofreading 41: 37: 16: 15: 565:(2): 3–12. 343:: 107–131. 113:Peer review 106:crowdsource 683:Categories 670:2023-03-19 539:2023-03-19 429:2023-03-19 318:1321787544 283:1253563203 136:References 613:: 51–70. 589:224977261 581:2476-0943 405:988428588 357:8755-4615 170:993491749 464:44870977 365:86438229 102:Internet 17:Revision 689:Writing 29:editing 21:writing 661:  625:  587:  579:  512:  462:  403:  393:  363:  355:  316:  306:  281:  271:  230:356600 228:  191:  168:  158:  607:(PDF) 585:S2CID 460:JSTOR 361:S2CID 226:JSTOR 25:draft 659:ISBN 623:ISBN 577:ISSN 510:ISBN 478:link 401:OCLC 391:ISBN 353:ISSN 314:OCLC 304:ISBN 279:OCLC 269:ISBN 189:ISBN 166:OCLC 156:ISBN 651:doi 615:doi 567:doi 345:doi 218:doi 685:: 657:, 645:, 621:. 609:. 583:. 575:. 561:. 557:. 532:. 474:}} 470:{{ 456:69 454:. 450:. 438:^ 413:^ 399:. 373:^ 359:. 351:. 341:52 339:. 335:. 312:. 277:. 251:^ 224:. 214:32 212:. 164:. 653:: 631:. 617:: 591:. 569:: 563:4 542:. 518:. 480:) 432:. 407:. 367:. 347:: 320:. 285:. 232:. 220:: 197:. 172:.

Index

writing
draft
editing
writing process
proofreading
simultaneously
Linda Flower
James Britton
Reflective writing
collaborative writing
collaborative writing
Internet
crowdsource
Peer review
discourse communities
A. Horning & A. Becker (Eds.) (2006). Revision: History, Theory, and Practice.
Writing with power : techniques for mastering the writing process
ISBN
978-0-19-512018-9
OCLC
993491749
ISBN
9789401037761
doi
10.2307/356600
JSTOR
356600


Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.