Program / Course 23: Research Methodology / Lesson 6.4
What you will learn
- Distinguish revising (argument and structure) from editing (sentences) and proofreading (details).
- Revise a draft in stages, starting with the largest problems.
- Check every quotation, citation, date and name against its source.
- Record what you changed because of the evidence, and state the limits of your research.
The big idea
A draft becomes a paper through revision. The work goes best in stages: first revise the argument and structure, then edit paragraphs and sentences, and last proofread for small errors. Waiting a few days before the final reading helps. At the end, every quotation, citation, date and name should be checked against its source, because a single error can damage the trust a paper has earned. A closing note on the limits of the research is part of honest scholarship.
Key terms
- Revising
- Reworking the content of a draft: the thesis, the argument, the evidence and the order of sections.
- Editing
- Improving paragraphs and sentences for clarity, economy and style.
- Proofreading
- A final check for small errors in spelling, punctuation, formatting and citations.
- Fact-checking
- Verifying dates, names, numbers and claims against reliable sources.
- Peer reader
- A person who reads a draft and gives honest comments, as a helper, not an authority.
- Limitations
- The ways in which a study is restricted by its sources, method or scope, stated honestly by the writer.
- Cooling-off period
- A rest between drafting and revising, so that the writer can read the text freshly.
Background
Few writers produce a good paper in one pass. Revision is the stage at which a paper becomes good, and it usually takes longer than students expect. The common mistake is to treat all errors alike and to begin with small ones, correcting commas in a paragraph that may be cut. A better order moves from large to small. First ask whether the argument works. Then ask whether each paragraph does its job. Then polish sentences. Last, check details. Each stage uses a different kind of attention.
Time helps. After finishing a draft the writer knows what was meant and tends to read it as intended, not as written. A few days away restores the distance of a reader. The assignment of this course asks you to wait at least three days. A reader who sees the paper for the first time, a friend, a teacher or a colleague, is even better, because that person can say where the argument is unclear or unsupported. Proverbs praises the wise who listen to counsel (Proverbs 12:15) and the friend whose wounds are faithful (Proverbs 27:6).
The final stage, checking, is where integrity is tested. A quotation copied from memory may be slightly wrong. A date may have been mistyped. A name may be misspelled. A footnote may point to the wrong page. These errors are usually accidental, but they are noticed by readers, and they lead readers to doubt the rest. A paper whose facts have been checked can be trusted. In the commandments, the prohibition of false witness (Exodus 20:16) covers carelessness about the truth as well as deliberate falsehood.
Step-by-step explanation
Step 1: Rest, then read the whole paper
Leave the draft for at least three days. Then read it from beginning to end, preferably aloud or printed out, without correcting. Mark places where you are confused, bored or unconvinced. Those are the places a reader will also stumble.
Write a reverse outline: the main point of each paragraph in one line. Look at the list as a whole. Does it show an argument that moves toward the thesis?
Step 2: Revise the argument and structure
Check that the thesis is clear and that the body proves it. Move, merge, cut or add sections as needed. Cut material that is interesting but beside the point. Make sure the strongest objection is treated fairly and that the conclusion says only what has been shown.
Where the evidence has led you to change your mind, change the paper. List the places where you altered the argument because of the evidence. The assignment asks for this list, and it also helps you to see that the paper has been honest with itself.
Step 3: Edit paragraphs and sentences
Check each paragraph for one clear point and an explained use of evidence. Strengthen transitions. Shorten long sentences, replace jargon, prefer active verbs, and delete words that add nothing. Check that terms are defined and used consistently, and that your claims match the strength of the evidence.
Read a paragraph backwards, sentence by sentence, to catch awkward wording you might skim past when reading forward.
Step 4: Check quotations, citations, facts and names
Take each quotation and compare it, word for word, with the source. Check the page number, and make sure you have not taken it out of context. Check each footnote against the bibliography. Check every date, name, number and foreign word against a reliable reference. Confirm the spelling of names and the accents on words.
If a quotation came secondhand, find the original or cite it as ‘quoted in’. Make a list of everything you checked, and mark anything you could not verify. Remove or qualify what you cannot verify.
Step 5: Proofread, add the closing note, and ask for a reader
Proofread last, for spelling, punctuation, formatting, headings, page numbers and the form of notes and bibliography. Run a spelling check, but do not rely on it, since it misses correct words in the wrong place.
Add a short note, in the paper or after it, stating the main limit of your research (for example, that you could read the sources only in translation) and one question that remains open. Ask a reader for comments, then respond to those that persuade you.
- Does the draft prove the thesis I stated?
- Where would a first-time reader be confused or unconvinced?
- What have I cut or changed because of the evidence?
- Have I checked every quotation against the source?
- Are my dates, names and spellings right?
- What is the main limit of my research, and have I said so?
Examples
Large-scale revision
After a rest, a student sees that her third section, a long account of the historical background, takes up a quarter of the paper but supports none of her points. She cuts it to two paragraphs and uses the space to deal with an objection she had treated briefly. (A constructed example.)
A quotation check
A student checks a quotation against the book and finds that she copied ‘will’ for ‘wills’, and that the page number was off by two. She also notices that the sentence she quoted continues in a way that qualifies it. She corrects the quotation and includes the qualification. (A constructed example.)
A closing note on limits
‘This study rests on English translations of the primary sources, and on a small number of secondary works. A reading in the original languages and a wider survey of the scholarship might refine or correct its conclusions. A question that remains open is how the same teaching was received in the Eastern churches.’ The note is modest and specific. (A constructed example.)
Changing the argument
A list headed ‘Changes because of the evidence’ records: ‘Early draft claimed the text was written before 150. After reading the two articles on its vocabulary, I changed the claim to say the date is uncertain and may be later.’ The list shows honest work.
Different perspectives
Academic scholarship
Scholars routinely circulate drafts to colleagues, present papers at conferences for criticism, and revise in response to reviewers. Few regard a first draft as finished. The thanks in the preface or first note of a book often name those who read and corrected it.
Catholic and Orthodox traditions
These traditions value counsel from those with experience, such as a spiritual director or an elder, and scholars in them also submit work to colleagues and editors. The habit of receiving correction with humility is regarded as a virtue in the life of faith and in scholarship.
Protestant tradition
Protestant teaching on the fallibility of human judgment supports seeking criticism, and the Bereans’ practice of examining what they were told against Scripture (Acts 17:11) is often cited as a model. Many Protestant seminaries teach drafting and revision as part of the preparation for preaching and teaching.
Writers and editors
Professional editors distinguish developmental editing (structure), line editing (sentences), copyediting (consistency and correctness) and proofreading (final errors). They recommend doing them in that order, and say that mixing them wastes effort.
Why it matters
The reader sees only the final text. If it is confused, unchecked or careless, the reader will not see the effort behind it. Revision is how a writer pays back the reader’s attention. Checking is how a writer keeps faith with sources, and the closing note on limits keeps faith with the reader, who is told what the paper can and cannot claim. These habits belong to anyone who speaks or writes about matters of importance.
Common misunderstandings
Misunderstanding: Revision means fixing spelling and grammar.
Correction: That is proofreading, the last stage. Revision begins with the argument and structure, which matter more.
Misunderstanding: If I wrote it carefully the first time, I need not check it.
Correction: Even careful writers make slips in quotations, dates and page numbers. A systematic check is the only way to find them.
Misunderstanding: Admitting limits makes the paper look weak.
Correction: A clear statement of limits shows that the writer understands the evidence. Readers trust writers who say what they have not done.
Misunderstanding: Criticism from a reader means the paper is bad.
Correction: It means the reader has found something to improve. Almost every good paper has been improved by such criticism.
Knowledge check
What is the difference between revising, editing and proofreading?
Revising changes the content: thesis, argument, evidence and order of sections. Editing improves paragraphs and sentences for clarity and economy. Proofreading is the last check for small errors of spelling, punctuation, formatting and citation. They should be done in that order, since there is no point polishing sentences that may be cut.
Why wait several days before the final check?
After writing, you read what you meant, not what is on the page. A rest restores the distance of a reader, so confusion, gaps and errors become visible. A few days is usually enough for this effect, and the assignment of this course asks for at least three.
What should you check before submitting a paper?
Every quotation against its source, every citation against the bibliography, and every date, name, number and foreign word against a reliable reference. Also check page numbers, formatting and spelling. Items you cannot verify should be removed or qualified.
What does the closing note on limits do?
It tells the reader the main constraint on the research, such as reliance on translations or a small number of sources, and names one question that remains open. It shows honest awareness of what the paper can and cannot claim, and points toward further work.
Think it through
- What kinds of errors do you most often miss in your own writing?
- Who could give you honest criticism of a draft, and what would you ask them to look for?
- How does the idea of false witness apply to a misquoted source?
- What would you be willing to cut from your paper if it did not serve the argument?
Independent assignment
A revision log
In your own notebook, take a draft of at least 800 words of your research paper. Rest for three days. Then write a revision log of about 400 words listing what you changed at each stage (argument, paragraphs, sentences, checking) and why. Include a table of at least ten quotations or facts you checked, with what you found. Add your closing note on limits and one open question. Do not send this to anyone.
Further study
- Bruce M. Metzger and Bart D. Ehrman, The Text of the New Testament: Its Transmission, Corruption, and Restoration Notice how a scholarly work describes the limits of the evidence and revised editions correct earlier ones.
- Bruce M. Metzger, The Canon of the New Testament Observe how the author states what the evidence does and does not permit him to say.
- Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, Fallacies Use it as a checklist when you reread your argument.
- Proverbs 27:6 Faithful are the wounds of a friend, a text for honest review of a draft.
- Proverbs 12:15 The wise listen to counsel.
- Exodus 20:16 The commandment against false witness.
- Ephesians 4:25 Speaking the truth to one another.