“I am just a worthless liar; I am just an imbecile:” These words have rung through the heads of many a writer as they sit down to start editing. You might have often felt the dread of having to go back over what you originally thought was good writing with a fine-toothed comb to find all the mistakes: The work that you were once proud of has now become hollow mockery. This is true for most writers unless you are one of those people who do perfect first drafts, but they do not exist. Editing can be the worst part of writing any article. The continual act of polishing, rewording, and trying to make your work perfect can drain any writer. By stepping back and assessing our approach, we can develop healthier ways of editing our work and more practical editing skills. Focusing on our mentality, process, and method, we can develop an approach to editing that does not result in computers thrown in the bin.
When approaching any piece of work, the mentality in which we do so dictates all that shall follow. No matter who we are or what we do, as writers, we must continually be seeking to develop our craft through healthy self-criticism. Overconfidence leads to unrealistic expectations; pessimism leads to a cycle of negativity. Fundamentally as writers, no matter how long we have been at the craft, we must understand that our first draft probably is not our best work—nor is our second or even third. Our fourth, however, is going to be better. We have to adjust our mindset that this is not failure after failure, but rather a work of continual growth and refinement (Bak, 2003). Each stage of the editing process is not to highlight what is bad, but rather it is drawing out how our message can be developed. Only when we have established a positive mindset towards editing can the real work begin.
Having established a healthy headspace, we must do one thing before we can approach the text: We must leave it alone for as long as possible. This is something that you have spent a considerable amount of time thinking about, reading about, and writing about. You are too close to be objective. Take a walk, paint a picture, reconnect with an old friend. The time that we set aside for these tasks cannot be undervalued and much depends on the time that we set aside for it (Pospelova, 2016). After you have gained some space, you can start the process of editing. For simplicity’s sake, we can break this down into four steps:
- To start, reacquaint yourself with your work. Read through it and highlight the parts that you think stand out and that you like. These are the parts that you might wish to draw out but also to remind yourself that you have done a good job.
- For the second, read through the manuscript. Reread your thesis then read through your work, checking that each paragraph goes towards proving this point.
- Having checked your thesis, on the third pass, you can now assess whether the structure of your essay best supports the thesis and that there is an overall coherency to your work.
- Lastly, by going through your essay with a fine-toothed comb, you can notice any spelling, punctuation, or grammar (SPAG) errors that have slipped through. Likewise, you can identify any clunky phrases or bits that need to be rephrased.
What must be stressed when making all these changes is to do so on different editions, the undo button can only save so much before you realize you have deleted something important. Similarly, when rewriting or restructuring your manuscript, it can be beneficial to do so on a separate document—free from the clutter and pressure of the original. What is important is that you keep track of the changes that you have made and the evolution of the essay.
Having followed these steps, we should have identified and hopefully resolved the main issues with our work. It would be easy to think that, at this stage, the editing process is over. Far from it, there is still more to be done that will help develop your work to its zenith. One of the best things you can do to improve your work is to have it peer reviewed (Wisker, 2013). Bodies that specialise in peer reviewing, such as the Peer Support Writers Group, offer valuable feedback because the readers are anonymous and disconnected from you. They are not someone in your department or your archenemies. They have no connection with you or your work, so they are best suited to look at the mechanics and structure of your work rather than the content. Regardless of who you get to read your work, the value of a second and third reader is immensely valuable. The same can also be said for peer reviewing other’s work. Doing so allows us to see how others approach writing and to develop a keen eye for detail which can be applied to our own work (Valies & Talandis, 2023).
We are now nearly at the finish line. However, with all the changes that we have made, it is inevitable that SPAG errors will have slipped in. For this read through, it is worth starting at the end and working backwards sentence by sentence. In doing so, we have separated the part from the whole and are able to look at sentences clearly. This process also allows us to reassess our sentence structure and word choice. We have to be tight with our words. On a sentence-by-sentence level, we must analyse our choice of words, looking to see if they best serve our purpose and best express our intent (Talandis, 2020).
As we approach the end, we must make sure to set aside time to focus on those mechanical bits that can end up taking hours. Double-checking all our references, for example, is one of those jobs that can end up taking up an afternoon. The other is to make sure that we have followed the style guide and referencing system for where you wish to submit. Are they using APA or MLA? Do they require you to submit an abstract or not? Go over their submission guidelines again and double and triple check that everything is up to standard. With competition so stiff, it would be a shame to be rejected for an easily caught mistake.
Learning to think of your work critically is the first step in being able to effectively critique your work. It sounds obvious, but it must be restated and reinforced to do so in a positive and healthy mindset. Following a structured review and revision process will allow you to break the task down into manageable steps. Peer reviews will allow for a fresh perspective while style guides will give you a framework to operate. Yet for all this, the only way to get better at editing and reviewing your work is by doing it (Wisker, 2013). You can read all the articles and guides you want, but till you put your head down, it will all count for naught.
References
Bak, N. (2003). Guide to academic writing. University of the Western Cape. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/236229397_Guide_to_Academic_Wri...
Pospelova, T. (2016). The influence of self-editing on micro skills development in academic writing in English as a second language. Journal of Language and Education, 2(1), 30–38. https://doi.org/10.17323/2411-7390-2016-2-1-30-38
Talandis, J. (2020). Less is more: Tips for removing unnecessary words. The Language Teacher, 44(3), 43–45. https://doi.org/10.37546/JALTTLT44.3
Valies, K., & Talandis Jr., J. (2023). Peer reviewing to improve your writing. The Language Teacher, 47(3), 48–50. https://doi.org/10.37546/JALTTLT47.3
Wisker, G. (2013). Articulate: Academic writing, refereeing, editing and publishing our work in learning, teaching and educational development. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 50(4), 344–356. https://doi.org/10.1080/14703297.2013.839337
