Be able to critique their own and others’ work by emphasizing global revision early in the writing process and local revision later in the process.

Introduction:

Prior to learning about peer editing in ENG110, I always thought of peer editing as reviewing someone’s work. I would always look for grammar mistakes, punctuation mistakes, and/or awkward phrasing. I personally always thought that if the author wrote something the way they did– it’s because they want it like that. However, as I am learning more about peer editing and how to become better at it, I have realized that if a piece of information is missing, or doesn’t fit with the writing, that I need to tell the author because it’s something they may be blind to.

After reading a section from Nancy Sommers in her book College Composition and Communication, I have become more aware that peer revision is not just about what is on the surface (grammar, spelling, punctuation, etc.), it is more about the deeper meaning and how the problem or main topic is developed. “The two elements of the experienced writer […] are the adoption of a holistic perspective and the perception that revision is a recursive process” (Sommers 1980). Peer revision isn’t just a one time read– you need to read the material more than once to understand the development of the paper.

---

How I make revisions: