Category: Blog Posts

I was repeatedly surprised and disappointed by the number of technical and communication issues that my team encountered during the comprehensive edit project. My team members and I frequently encountered difficulties finding or accessing files in the group Microsoft SharePoint drive.

Technical and Communication Issues

At the beginning of our work on the project, I did not pay enough attention to giving files brief, descriptive names that can be understood on devices with small screens. As a result, my teammates had issues identifying files when their devices did not display the full file names.

We resolved most of the issues we had finding files by renaming files to feature distinguishing information earlier. We still had some difficulty communicating about file names because we each used different nicknames for the files we were working on, but not nearly as much.

I think this communication issue primarily resulted from technological limitations because changing file names to include identifiable information early enough to be displayed on all devices mostly resolved the issue.

Later, as we were formatting and proofreading our copyedited version of our manuscript, we encountered further technical difficulties. The Word doc file we were working on stopped functioning properly, leaving us unable to edit the document. This technical issue became especially disappointing and frustrating when I discovered that SharePoint’s feature to allow users to revert documents to a past version did not work on this document for an unspecified reason. I was delighted and surprised when I discovered that, although I could not revert the document to a past version, I could download a past version to upload as our new working version.

Instructional Materials

I used many of the ideas that I learned from Dr. Kim’s Copyediting and Style Guides instructional material, Word Tutorial, and AI Tool Tutorial on the comprehensive edit project.

Before watching Dr. Kim’s video lecture about style sheets, I was unfamiliar with style sheets. As I wrote the style sheet for the comprehensive edit project, I frequently consulted the video lecture. This helped me keep the purpose and key components of a style sheet in mind as I wrote contributed.

I used the techniques and skills that I learned from Dr. Kim’s Word Tutorial and AI Tool Tutorial continuously in the comprehensive edit. Word features, including Styles, Track Changes, Macros, and Find and Replace, significantly increased the speed of my edits. ProWritingAid’s readability report allowed me to confirm that my edits were improving the document.

Estimate of Scope

My group’s estimate of scope in the brief proposal feels accurate, although I did not track my hours worked. Our estimates of the levels of structural edit and copyedit required were correct. I think that my group probably worked more hours than we proposed, but we spent that extra time on things not accounted for in the proposal.

While my group’s estimate of scope of edit was accurate in the brief proposal, I underestimated the time I needed to spend communicating with my teammates about the project and working on the style sheet.

AI Tool Use

My approach to the comprehensive edit was significantly influenced by the fact that I used an AI tool. After confirming the level of edit necessary, I relied heavily on ProWritingAid to identify grammar and spelling errors and readability issues.

Without an AI editing tool, I would have had to spend much longer proofreading to find obvious spelling and grammar errors. These errors are easy to spot and correct if you are looking at the right part of the text, but if you do not know what part of the text they are in, you need to read the entire text carefully multiple times just to find errors.

ProWritingAid’s grammar and spelling tools allowed me to focus my attention on correcting errors rather than reading copious amounts of text to spot them. Unlike Microsoft Word’s built in spelling and grammar checker, I felt confident relying on ProWritingAid to identify all outright incorrect grammar and spelling errors. Thanks to this, I could spend more time making sure that the document aligns with our style sheet.

Conclusions

To achieve my career goals, I must demonstrate my credibility as an employee and an editor. Completing a large team editing project with minimal oversight was significant to my career goals because it developed and demonstrated my ability to plan, cooperate, and perform editing duties on a realistic project.

As a technical communicator, it is necessary to have the ability to work effectively with colleagues to determine what work is necessary, allocate that work, and then complete it. This project gave me an opportunity to enact and practice these vital skills.

The ability to work as a part of a self-directed team to complete a project was highly meaningful to my career goals.

I encountered many new ideas that supported my work on course assignments as I read through the instructional materials for modules 3 and 4.

Editorial Comments and Author Queries

I was delighted to encounter material that directly addresses the editor-author relationship. I am still learning about editor-author communications, so I found the advice on being polite and persuasive in editorial comments and author queries to be very helpful.

The ideas from Dr. Kim’s module 3 video lecture and Deming’s 2010 article: “Between Author and Editor Queries: Conversing with the Author in Writing” supported my work on the structural edit assignment by giving me ideas on how to include justifications and goodwill buffers in my suggestions.

By including goodwill buffers and explanations, my suggestions become more polite and persuasive. Accurate editorial suggestions are useless if they offend the author, and they aren’t implemented.

Developing a strong editor-author relationship is vital for my career objectives, as it applies to both writing and editing. Editing is an essential step in producing quality deliverables, and positive editor-author relationships make it much easier for both sides. Editor-author relationships offer valuable chances to connect with colleagues on a deeper professional level.

Editing for Subject-Verb Agreement

It pleasantly surprised me to see how easy it is to ensure subject-verb agreement, despite the prevalence of mistakes in this area. Since I often see subject-verb agreement mistakes, I expected the rules for it to be complicated.

I was delighted to read that there are only eight exceptions to the general rules for subject-verb agreement. I expect this information to be very useful when I complete the copyediting test for this course. I previously lacked confidence in my ability to correct subject-verb agreement because the topic intimidated me. Reading the rules for making sure that subjects and verbs agree significantly increased my confidence to copyedit for this type of error.

Gender Neutral Pronouns

Revising Professional Writing‘s advice on gender-neutral language pleasantly surprised me and then disappointed me. Reading about multiple strategies to make language gender neutral delighted me. In contrast, it disappointed me to see they/them referred to as exclusively plural pronouns.

I expected a conversation about the usage of “they” as a singular gender-neutral pronoun, especially since this use is now prescribed by APA Seventh Edition. On the other hand, I realize that this textbook is four years older than the APA decision to adopt singular they. Which gender-neutral pronouns are conventional evolves with time, and at the time of Revising Professional Writing‘s publication, discussion of singular they was much quieter.

I think that editing for gender-neutral pronouns will be very important for my career goals even if I never work as an editor. Using gender-neutral pronouns is important for inclusivity and showing your knowledge of current professional norms.

Conclusions

Receiving direct advice for establishing a healthy editor-author relationship delighted me. The advice guided me in organizing my suggestions for the structural edit assignment, ensuring they were polite and persuasive.

Reading a comprehensive explanation of how to check subject-verb agreement surprised and delighted me. I expected subject-verb agreement to be much more complex than it is.

Reading advice for editing for gender neutral pronouns surprised me and left me feeling mixed. I appreciated the advice that was presented, but the textbook disappointed me by not addressing the use of they as a singular pronoun.

As I went through the instructional materials for Modules 1 and 2, I encountered many new ideas which surprised, delighted, and disappointed me.

Schemes for Categorizing Levels of Edit

I was both surprised and disappointed when I read about the variety of conflicting schemes for categorizing the levels of edit. I expected the levels of edit to be standard across the industry. The lack of consistency in titles for different levels of edit makes it difficult to understand the specific level being referred to.

While I thought there would be one standard scheme for level edits, thinking deeper, I can see why they vary between organizations. Different organizations create schemes that work for their individual needs. These organizations have little incentive to standardize with each other. This is still disappointing because it makes communicating about levels of edit difficult.

Revising for Paragraph Unity and Cohesion

The guidelines in Revising Professional Writing for revising paragraph unity and cohesion pleasantly surprised me. I thought of these concepts as too vague to codify in any sort of detail. It delighted me to read about concrete methods to improve these aspects of a text. One could improve any text by making sure that paragraphs start with a controlling idea and grouping details into units that support that idea. While less universally applicable, the AB:BC and AB:AC informational pattern consistently presents information clearly. I found these guidelines to be delightfully clear and applicable.

Technical Editing as Quality Assurance

The framing of technical editing as a form of QA presented in Corbin et al (2002) and Dr. Kim’s video lecture delighted me. I deeply understand the importance of QA because my mother has worked as a quality engineer for most of my life. The connection between QA and technical editing deepened my appreciation for the value of editing. I hadn’t previously made this connection in my mind.

The idea of technical editing as quality assurance was most meaningful to my career goals. Based on Dr. Kim’s Module 2 video lecture, I think justifying the value of editing will be important to my career goals. The value of editing, and especially structural editing, can seem abstract. In contrast, the value of QA is easy to quantify. Framing technical editing as a form of QA makes it easier to explain its value.

The idea of technical editing as a form of QA also makes its process and purpose easier for me to understand. This framework clarifies the broader purposes of editing beyond copyediting. Technical editing and substantive editing ensure that products meet design goals. These design goals obviously extend beyond mechanical accuracy. Technical editing ensures that the text meets all quality standards, including content and organization. Viewing technical editing as QA clarified its importance in my career goals and industry.

Connections and Conclusion

The instructional material’s emphasis on revising for paragraph unity and cohesion, and its inclusion of the concept of technical editing as a form of QA, pleasantly surprised me. In contrast, reading about conflicting schemes for the levels of edit negatively surprised me.

The idea of technical editing as a form of QA was most meaningful to my career goals. This idea helped me understand the value and purpose of technical editing.

Overall, I was surprised and delighted when I found more information than I expected, but disappointed when I found labels conflicted between sources.