Some Thoughts on Becoming an Editor (and Knowing the Difference between Editing and Revising)

Everyone needs a n good editor.

For the first half of my life, until my mid–30s, I didn't have a mindset of editing something written because I never viewed myself as a writer. In high school and college I wrote the required papers and reports, doing the required editing in order to pass and nothing more. In my junior and senior undergrad years I started a daily journal (almost every day), and continued for a few years, but it became increasingly infrequent until I stopped due to increasing family and work responsibilities. (They are still in a desk drawer in my home office, but I have not looked at them for years.) The journal has never been edited.

I recall one incident that nudged me to think that I may be a decent writer. In my senior year in college I was taking a history course, when near the end of the course my professor pulled me aside to inform me of a dilemma – he did not know what grade to give me because my writing was very good, but my exam scores were not. This was true because I was working full time and had little time to prep for exams. I got a B in that course.

It wasn't until I was in my doctoral program that the requirement for quality writing, with the need for coherent editing, became evident. The ultimate product of that awareness, of course, was the dissertation. And even with its completion my perception of submitting something for publication very slowly evolved. While I did present my doctoral research at an adult education research conference, I never considered preparing it for publication.

Here is another incident to illustrate my slow evolvement in writing and editing that occurred during my doctoral program at The Ohio State University (that's the correct title – go Bucks!). I worked at the Ohio Board of Regents, as one of four consultants that examined the management practices at all the state community colleges and universities. We had examined the practices, and the manuals presenting the best management practices were being written for distribution to the college and university administrators (they were later published and distributed nationally). My specific management area was college and university personnel practices. I had written the first three sections of the community college manuscript, and had submitted it to our boss, the coordinator of the entire project. A few days later I returned from lunch and found the draft in my in–basket. In a quick read I saw that he had lined out sentences and paragraphs, and inserted rewrites and comments on every page. I was furious and let him know when he came by my cubicle a few minutes later. Fortunately, he listened, and then quietly said he did the editing because that was his job.

“Write like nobody will ever read it. Edit like the whole world will.” Sharon Lippincott.

While it took a few days – no, weeks, for my acceptance and understanding of what had occurred, that incident became a major benchmark of my career for two reasons. First, in all my education, from elementary through graduate, this was the first time something that I had written had been so extensively reviewed and edited. Second, this was the beginning of my growing awareness that the process of producing quality writing requires thorough review, editing, and further writing. Note, it is not rewriting – it is further writing with greater clarity and purpose. Also note, this incident and awareness did not occur as part of my formal education, i.e., while required papers were read, at least most of them, none were ever so thoroughly reviewed and edited.

Moving ahead, this was not good news for the students in the courses I taught, as I vowed to review and edit their papers. In my courses I scheduled the submission of “term papers”, i.e., papers requiring research and following a style format, e.g., APA, to be submitted about 3/4 s into the semester in order to have time to read, edit, and return the papers for their submission of a revised draft (more about this below). Doing this also facilitated better doctoral research drafts, particularly their dissertation research.

“Writing without revising is the literary equivalent of waltzing gaily out of the house in your underwear.” Patricia Fuller.

Most of the above was training ground for being a decent editor. However, when working with doctoral students, I became increasingly aware of the important task of revising, i.e., to make what is written understandable to the intended readers. This is an evolving and challenging skill that is a continuing work in progress with every document I revise. It is what I have had to do as an editor of this journal. It is highly demanding, and something that I would not have been able to do until this later time in my life, largely due to my teachers.

All the above is directed to this point: If my teachers, particularly in my undergraduate and graduate work, had taken the time to more thoroughly edit my written work, including the option, if not the requirement, of my submitting a revised draft, I would have acquired the importance of accepting the critique of my writing, and the importance of further writing, to the benefit of the reader, even if the reader is just the teacher. Though not often a specific directive in a teacher's job description, you – all teachers or faculty –should be self–imposed editors of your student's writing. Your edits should be thorough, providing careful guidance of grammar and format, and also content with the proviso of understanding your role of editorial revision.

Editing and Revising Course Papers

Years ago, when “Internet” was not in any dictionary, I developed a simple system for reviewing and revising course papers. First, I set the maximum number of pages based on the number of students in the course; it usually ranged between five to eight pages. The three areas evaluated in all the papers were content, format, and grammar. In my first year of teaching I read every paper and wrote full sentence comments that required my spending several hours to complete. Reflecting on those papers I realized many of the comments were repeated in every paper. From this I created a list of content, format, and grammar statements, identifying them with a C (7 statements), F (18 statements), or G (9 statements). Now, with each statement having a coded letter and number, I just wrote it on the margins of the paper. Here are three examples: C5 – What you have stated could be described more fully, more completely; F3 – This is a new topic, and should be designated with a sub–heading. Refer to the APA manual guidelines; G2 – Sentence/phrase structure not correct.

When the reviewed papers were returned, a list of the coded statements were given to each student, along with a personal evaluative summary and grade at the bottom. The grade was usually poor, because the higher the frequency of the codes, i.e., statements requiring corrections, the lower the grade. As stated above, these papers were submitted about 3/4 s into the semester, providing adequate time to revise and return the paper for a final review, and the final grade.

To implement your version of this system only requires the listing of the standard comments/statements you use, and then creating a coded listing of the statements. Granted, if the system is used in multiple courses, the students will become familiar with the codes, but this is OK because the statements are addressing content, format, and grammar issues. What is equally important is the personal evaluative summary each student receives, that you can now prepare since you are not spending time writing repeated statements throughout the paper.

As stated, this system was created prior to computers. With computerized document review and edit programs readily available, e.g., the Review program in Microsoft Word, the use of this manual/paper system can be questioned, when the paper is sent online to be reviewed. Its use, however, is still relevant, because the content can be highlighted and a marginal “comment” inserted, so either the code or the complete sentence can be given. The review paper can be returned, with the personal evaluative summary and grade given in a designated area on the returned paper.

Editing and Revising Dissertation and Publication Papers

The process of editing and revising dissertation research and papers for publication is substantially different than course papers. It is more intense in both effort and time. I will not discuss the formats of dissertations and publications, as both are governed by guidelines established by professional associations, and publication and style manuals. I want to describe my approach to editing and revising.

I begin with a quick read of the entire draft. At the beginning I do not make any notations, but I find myself writing comments as I get into the draft, which often results in going back to read pages I had already read to make notations related to what I was reading further in the paper. I do not begin a second read immediately, but allow some time for reflection. Then, in the second read I start editing for format and grammar. In the dissertation papers I use the codes described above because there are always a lot of errors (I do not use it in publication drafts). I also begin revising, making numerous comments on incomplete sentences and paragraphs, clarifications and omissions, noting that what is being said here has already been addressed previously (sometimes exactly), and so forth. This draft is returned to the writer, with the request that it be revised and returned as soon as possible. It is important that a momentum and drive be maintained.

The third, and sometimes a fourth or more, reading and revising is done, using the process described above. Somewhere in this circular process, I become aware that an additional step must be made. It is when I realize that the writer is no longer able to make the necessary substantive revisions. Often this is due to time, i.e., the dissertation is at a point where it can be completed and defended without having to pay for another semester, or a paper is at a state that it will be accepted with revisions, and can be published soon. Occasionally, it is due to the realization that the writer does not adequately understand what needs to be done. This is when I give specific instructions of what to write, move, or change. Sometimes I do the revisions I believe are necessary, and send the revised draft to the writer for approval (they have always been approved).

This, I have come to believe, is one of the major responsibilities of an editor. An experienced editor has acquired a depth of knowing what works, being able to picture the entire manuscript as a whole, and seeing how the sum of its parts will contribute to the greater whole. This is both an acquired skill and an art.

Finally, a closing reflection. I retired a few years back, and was honored at a luncheon, primarily for the many graduate students I worked with as teacher and advisor. Gratifying comments were made by each of the them. One student in particular recalled my editing of the course papers, especially my practice that, if there were many editorial corrections and edits in the first three pages, I entered the statement, “I have stopped editing at this point. With all the edits you have already seen, I believe you are able to submit a revised draft.” (this was C7) Turning to all students in the room, he asked that those who had received that statement on at least one of their papers to please stand. Almost all of the students stood up. Knowing that these were students who had or were going to graduate, I considered this to be a badge of honor. I trust that they, too, will have most of their students standing when they retire.