Lecture 8

Writing Process 5: The Revision

Process & Conducting the Peer Review
Prepared by: J. Lawrence

Review
 ❖Understand the revision
process and its importance in
academic writing.
❖Learn strategies for revision
Objectives including appropriate
questions to ask.
❖Understand the peer-review
task for the SRP.
 Is necessary

The
revision Not the same as editing.
process
An integral and critical
aspect part of any good
writing process.
 The revision of your scientific
research paper should be a
well-structured exercise.

Revising
the SRP
All members of the team
should participate.
 Decide on the
strategies that your
How will team will use.
your team
proceed?
See the following
slide for some
suggestions:
 Do individual “read alouds” of your team’s paper.
This is a very effective strategy .

Your team should do a close reading of the paper.

Some Do a round table team reading.

specific
strategies Check how you integrated information from
sources.

Highlight each weak area and fix it.

 Revision (cont’d)

However, you are encouraged to

consult with your tutor if you need
It is not your tutor’s responsibility advice or clarification on any
to fix it. aspect of the paper.
Your revision will be about making
critical changes to the first draft of
your scientific research paper.

The ultimate purpose is for you to

improve different aspects of your SRP:

• Content
• Analysis
• Organization
• Sentence structure
• Evidence/Integration of information from
sources
Your team should ask
some important
questions to guide the
revision process:
 Is the thesis statement solid,
logical and fluent?

Ask Is it a clear, well constructed

questions declarative sentence?
about the
thesis Does the thesis statement include
three (or four) main ideas?
statement.
Is the thesis statement at the end
of the introduction?
 Does your introduction grab the
readers’ attention?

Did you define all key terms?

Introduction
Does your introduction create a
strong background to your paper?

Does the introduction lead

smoothly to the thesis statement?
 ❖Is your team satisfied with how the
main ideas were developed in the
Ask paper?

questions ❖Did your team use relevant evidence

about the from credible sources to support the
development of each main point?
main ideas
❖Did the team develop the main ideas
in a concise, yet comprehensive
manner?
 ❖Does each paragraph have a clear
and strong topic sentence that is
linked to the three-pronged thesis
statement?

Ask ❖Does each paragraph have the PIE

questions effect?

about
❖Are the paragraphs internally
paragraph coherent?
development
❖Are the paragraphs externally
coherent? (That is, did the team
make appropriate transitions
from paragraph to paragraph?)
 ❖Organization-Is there a logical flow
of the information?
Ask
questions ❖Analysis-How did the team make
comments on information cited from
about sources?
organization
and analysis ❖How did the team connect the
ideas throughout the paper?
 Did we develop a paper that
reflects the narrowed topic that
our team formulated?
Your team
should ask Did we write to achieve the
more intended purpose?
questions
Did we consider what was
suitable for the intended
audience?
 ❖Is the conclusion appropriate for the
kind of writing you used to compose
your paper?

Ask ❖Did your team introduce some

completely new ideas in this final
questions paragraph?

about the ❖Does the conclusion provide the essence

conclusion of the main points the team developed
in the paper?

❖Was the conclusion crafted in such a

manner that it will leave the intended
audience with something to think about?
Content-How did the team create the content?

• How did the team integrate evidence from other sources?

Vocabulary-Is the word choice appropriate,

formal and void of unnecessary jargon?

Style- Is the style appropriate for scientific

writing?

Sentences- Are the sentences well

constructed?
Ask questions about the quality of the paper

WHAT ARE THE STRENGTHS WHAT ARE THE WEAKNESSES

OF THE PAPER? OF THE PAPER?
 Strengths Weaknesses
1.
Compile,
2.
then discuss
the strengths 3.
and
weaknesses 4.
of the paper.
5.
6.
7.
 Critically review the strengths
Review
and weaknesses.

The team Discuss

Discuss the weaknesses and
should: decide what you will do to…

Improve improve them.

 Avoid needless complexity

❖In revising your paper be mindful of an idea articulated by

Alley (2018):

Many words used in scientific writing add no precision or

clarity-only complexity… In scientific writing beauty lies in
clarity and simplicity (p. 21).
 ❖How did we use parts of speech?
❖nouns
❖pronouns
Ask ❖verbs
❖adjectives
questions ❖adverbs
about ❖conjunctions
grammar
❖You will pay keen attention
to these when you do the
editing of your paper
 ❖How did we use punctuation?
❖capitalization

❖colons - :
Ask
questions ❖semicolons-;
about
❖commas- ,
punctuation
❖parentheses- ()

❖Apostrophes –’
 Peer
review
 Peer review is a process in which
writers (“peers”) evaluate the
quality of other scientists’ work.
What is
peer
review? The purpose of peer review in
FOUN1014 is to provide an
opportunity for students to
critically engage in the assessment
of the scientific research papers
 ❖The peer review process is
seen as the gold standard
in science because it
ensures the rigour, novelty,
and consistency of
academic outputs.
The Peer- Typically, through rounds of
Review review, flawed ideas are
eliminated and good ideas
Process are strengthened and
improved (Spicer & Roulet,
2018, para. 13).
 Some students believe that
peer review is a waste of
time.

Misconceptions
Some students expect their
about peer peers to correct their
review papers.

Some students believe peer

reviews should only be done
by experts.
 For FOUN1014, peer review is an
integral stage of the writing process
because it is a meaningful way of
sharpening students’ critical
literacies.
Peer
review During this mentally engaging process,
students are required to engage in
and interpretive reading, good writing, critical
thinking, active listening, informed
FOUN1014 speaking and analytical viewing.
students
Please pay keen attention to this
mandatory exercise.
 Content

Analysis
You may
comment on
Organization
any of the
following:
Sentence structure

Evidence/Integration of information
from sources
 Each member of your team
should review papers written
by other teams
You are required to write ONE review for
grading.
 Peer Review in 3 Minutes
• https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rOCQZ7QnoN0

Peer Review: What is Peer Review?

• https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O3lkm8LsgoU
 ❖ Before you even make your first
comment, read the document all the way
through.
❖If the guidelines for providing feedback
are unclear, ask your instructor for
clarification.
❖Be respectful and considerate of the
Guidelines writer's feelings.
❖ Be sure that your comments are clear
and text-specific so that your peer will
know what you are referring to (for
example, terms such as "unclear" or
"vague" are too general to be helpful)
(Pedagogy in Action, n. d., para. 2)
 "As a peer reviewer, your job
is not to provide answers. You
raise questions; the writer
makes the choices. You act as
a mirror, showing the writer
Your task how the draft looks to you
and pointing out areas which
need attention." - (Williams,
University of Hawaii, as cited
in Pedagogy in Action, n. d.
para. 1 )
❖As instructed by your tutor, type an individual
review of the other team’s scientific research
paper.
❖Combine your self- and peer-reviews into one
document and upload it to Turnitin by Week 11.
Also, submit a copy (with cover page) to the
dropbox on OurVLE during this week.

❖The Self- and Peer-Review is an INDIVIDUAL assignment

worth 5%.
 SAMPLE COVER PAGE
Peer Review
Name of reviewer: Joanna Doe
Names of writers: Lawrence, Ayton, Porter and McCaulsky
Title of paper: Excessive use of smart telephones by Jamaican
adolescents
Review date: March 21, 2022
 This review presents comments on two of the strengths and weaknesses
identified in the paper written by Lawrence et al. (2021) as well as suggestions
their team may consider for addressing the issues.
In terms of strengths, the body paragraphs are well organized and
coherent. They are developed in chronological order as proposed in the thesis
statement. For example, in developing the first main point, the writers ensured
that the perspectives presented in the first two body paragraphs were directly
linked to the first main point mentioned in the thesis statement. As a result of this
the writing is logical. The team also used transitional words such as “Firstly” and
“Finally” to indicate the beginning and development of each main point and this
helped the reader to focus on the writing.
One weakness identified is that the introduction is ineffective; it is too long.
The writers took a long time to get to the point and this affected the manner in
which they established the focus of the paper. Also, the paper lacks specific
background information. For example, some of the statistical findings used to
make the point that Jamaican adolescents use their smart telephones excessively
were derived from research done in Australia. Since these findings do not reflect
what obtains in the Jamaican context, the background to the essay is weak.
Based on the weaknesses, the team should revise the introduction to make
it more concise by removing irrelevant details which belong in the body
paragraphs. They should also revise the body paragraphs by citing statistics which
are directly related to Jamaican adolescents’ excessive use of smart telephones as
this will help to contextualize the paper.
 Be committed to developing the ideas you included in
the thesis statement .

Pay keen attention to organization, content and analysis.

Final Strive for coherence and cohesion.

thoughts Be rigorous in your revision; do not get attached to your

words and ideas. Get rid of irrelevant information

Improve what your team has already written.

Re-read, revise and review your draft.

 References

Alley, M. (2018). The craft of scientific writing (4th ed.). Springer.

Pedagogy in Action. (n. d.). Guidelines for students: Peer review.

https://serc.carleton.edu/sp/library/peerreview/tips.html

Spicer, A. & Roulet, T. (2014). Explainer: What is peer review? The

Conversation. https://theconversation.com/explainer-

what-is-peer-review-27797