Pozo 1

Reflection

This case analysis assignment has been particularly difficult for me, but thanks to

Dr.J’s feedback and the models provided, I have been able to successfully complete it. I

know I am far from perfect when it comes to writing a case analysis, but I can confidently

say that I am one step closer to knowing more about revision and understanding its process.

At the beginning I felt very nervous and incapable of even thinking about analyzing

another student’s work (because I am not the best writer myself), but with this assignment,

I learned that not every feedback or criticism has to be bad or perceived negatively. Like

we learn from Mike Bunn we can learn to “read like a writer” and learn to choose what we

want to adapt or not. Although the primary goal of this assignment was to analyze the

student’s revision process and see if it was effective, I feel like I was still able to learn a lot

from this particular student and their drafts. I am so thankful for the resources provided

from these modules, and for the feedback we constantly receive from Dr. J to improve our

writing.

I think my case analysis deserves a B for when I am done with this draft. I know my

work is not perfect, and that I can reorder some of my ideas still. I can even admit that in

fact I am capable of adding so much more, but I am trying to learn to be concise with my

ideas through writing. My original problem with my second draft was that I got too

overwhelmed because I wanted to say so much and didn’t know how to. This time I tried to

condense my thoughts and express my ideas in a way that did not seem overwhelming to

the reader. I am hoping I did a good job. I can confidently say I tried my hardest to

understand Sommer’s, Bunn’s and Murray’s ideas to apply into this project. This is why I

think I deserve this grade.

 Pozo 2

Keiko Pozo

Dr. Jensen

English 1010

29 July 2023

Student Revision: A Case Analysis Essay

Introduction

For this case analysis, I will be investigating whether the student’s essay underwent

a process of revision, and evaluate the effectiveness of the revision methods present. In

order to properly execute this assignment, I have gathered multiple resources that have

been studied in this course, such as Nancy Sommers “Revision Strategies of Student

Writers and Experienced Adult Writers,” Mike Bunn’s “Reading Like a Writer,” and

Donald Murray’s “Teach Writing as a Process Not a Product.” These informative pieces

have been selected to analyze the process of effective revision in a student's writing..The

purpose of incorporating these informative pieces is to gain insights into the efficient

methods of revision in a student's writing. By analyzing these drafts and articles attentively,

I aim to identify strategies that can not only benefit me as a fellow college student but also

aid others who seek productive revision techniques for academic success.

Literature Review

The three essays that were assigned to me by Dr. J were from a student that is just

returning to Salt Lake Community College after taking a break from college for a couple of

years. This student states that prior to leaving college, they had a strong sense of

confidence in their academic writing skills. This assurance stemmed from their adeptness
 Pozo 3

in crafting well-structured, 5-paragraph pieces during their time in high school. They were

met with the harsh reality that this was not the case in college, and soon after dropped out

after failing an assignment. Now, as they resume their college journey, the student’s is

confident and excited that their enrollment in Dr. J’s English 1010 course will allow them

to expand and learn more regarding their own specific style as a writer. This was the goal

of the assignment that I will be analyzing today, which is called “Who are you as a

Writer?.” I will examine three drafts; including a first, second and final draft for this

student.

Analyzing these drafts would be a great opportunity to apply all the three resources

from composition scholars where they question the effectiveness of revision as taught to

students in school. It will allow me to question how credible Nancy Sommer’s belief is on

the disadvantage of using a linear revision model. She states, “The students have strategies

for handing words and phrases..what they lack, however, is a set of strategies to help them

identify the ‘something greater’ that they sensed was wrong.” (pg.7) The linear model that

is mentioned basically states that students pre-write, write and then re-write; only using the

last step as the revision phase. It would be beneficial to understand that revision is much

more than just writing a draft, scratching off some sentences, and then writing it all over

again. We are recommended to consider revision as a rigorous and analytical method,

especially by Mike Bunn in How to Read Like a Writer. Revision. Bunn recommends that

readers should read to learn about writing instead of reading the content itself, and that

eventually this will make us better writers. He states, “The goal is to carefully consider the

choices the author made and the techniques that he or she used, and then decide whether

you want to make those same choices or used those same techniques in your own writing.”
 Pozo 4

With these resources, I will be able to determine if this student considered the revision

process to be a rigorous process, instead of making it an insignificant last step. Revision, as

learned in this course, must abide by Donald M. Murray’s sentiment that we must learn

writing as a “process, not a product.” (pg. 1)

I am also currently enrolled in English 1010 and believe that this assignment is vital

for me to analyze how well we, as students, apply the revision process and if the revision

process that we know of is even adequate or efficient. Likewise, it would be good to see in

what ways revision was present in between these drafts, and how these specific methods

can positively influence our writing. This would be a great opportunity to question how

credible Nancy Sommer’s belief is on the disadvantage of using a linear revision model.

She states, “The students have strategies for handing words and phrases..what they lack,

however, is a set of strategies to help them identify the ‘something greater’ that they sensed

was wrong.” (pg.7) It would be beneficial to understand that revision is much more than

just writing a draft, scratching off some sentences, and then writing it all over again.

Revision, as learned in this course, must abide by Donald M. Murray’s sentiment that we

must learn writing as a “process, not a product.” (pg. 1)

Methodology:

To properly differentiate the revision made between each draft, I separated each

draft in their own respective order and numbered them by paragraphs. While doing so, it

became apparent that Draft Number 1 was completely and entirely different than Draft 2.

Due to this finding, I put Draft 1 aside and planned to disregard it from making a close

comparison to Draft 2 and Draft 3. I did, however, make a self note to analyze Draft 1

differently and to carefully see what Draft 1 told me about the author and their initial
 Pozo 5

writing process. Then, with the remaining two drafts (two and three) I used two different

highlighters to point out any changes made to the other draft, whether that was adding,

substituting, deleting or reordering a word, phrase, sentence, etc. Since it was clear that

Draft 3 was the final draft, I had a volunteer help me read Draft 2 out loud while I

attentively followed the reading with a green highlighter in my hand. Once the volunteer

had concluded reading Draft 2, I was able to count each tally mark and see the result of

each revision method. Below are the results of my analisis:

Changes Made from Draft 1 to Draft 2

It was very difficult to make a quantitative count of all the changes made between draft 1 and

draft 2, considering that both drafts were completely different. In Draft 1, we can hear the voice of

the author and also his thinking process as he narrows down his ideas to begin drafting his essay.

Draft one is their “Pre-writing phase” and following Lammott’s draft process, he just lets it all out.

In Draft 2, his writing he organized his thoughts and ideas in a well-structured essay.

Changes Made from Draft 2 to Draft 3

Table A Word Phrase Sentence Theme Total:

Deletion 2 2

Substitution 1 1

Addition 1 3 3 2 9

Reordering 1 1

Total: 4 3 4 2 13

Discussion:
 Pozo 6

The author’s very first draft is a clear demonstration of what can be achieved through

Lammotts’s draft process as described in Shitty First Drafts, were it encourages this author to

“..enjoy this stream of consciousness writing, (which) helps (him) get all levels of my ideas out

on paper, even though it's a mess.” (Author 1, Draft 1) This brings me back to Nancy Sommers

case study where she gathered a few student writers and experienced writers and thoroughly

analyzed their revision practices. Sommers explains that an experienced writer's first draft is no

different than this author's first draft, as most experienced writers describe their primary objective

when revising as finding the form or shape of their argument. When questioned about this

emphasis, the experienced writers respond that since their first draft are usually scattered attempts

to define their territory, their objective in the second draft is to begin observing general patterns of

development and deciding what should be included and what excluded.” (Sommers pg 8) Now I

do not attempt to say or conclude that this specific example means that this author is an

experienced writer but it does say a lot about their writing process and the way that they reviewed

their first draft, and condensed their thoughts and ideas into well-structured paragraphs.

On the other hand, as seen in Table A, we can observe how the changes made from Draft 2

to Draft 3 were minimal. Within the author’s 8-paragraph essay, I calculated a total of 13 changes,

which included 2 word deletions, 1 substitution, 9 additional words, and the reordering of a

specific sentence. Could this contribute to Nancy Sommer’s belief on student’s inability and

unwillingness to properly revise their writing? I took a closer look to find out.

In an attempt to not let myself be discouraged by the total number of changes, I looked

within the drafts to see if the changes were impactful or if they were just miniscule grammatical

changes. The very first difference that I noticed was the rewording and the addition of words in

the following sentence. In Draft 2 Paragraph 1 Sentence 1, the author writes “Every writer has
 Pozo 7

their own space. This could be said about any profession or hobby, but for writers, there is a

certain comfort and routine that interacts with our process.” This got changed to, “ Every writer

has their own space, it could be a desk, kitchen counter, even laying upside-down in bed, but there

is always a certain comfort and routine that interacts with our process” As you can see, a couple

of words were added but ultimately this made little to no difference to the phrase itself. I think I

would have liked him to expand a little more on this thought, and although it allowed us to hear

his voice as an author a little more, it didn’t seem like a significant change or revision for a final

draft. The other 8 additional changes were mostly used to help polish the wording used for the

assignment and to make the transitions smoother- nonetheless, there were no major changes that

could have been pointed out.

Looking at how minimal the changes were between Draft 2 and Draft 3, it made me

wonder if the lack of deeper revision was made due to a lack of time, desire or just the simple fact

that the student didn't know how to properly revise their writing. This brought me back to

Sommer’s experience interviewing student writers. She noted that, “ On every occasion when I

asked students why they hadn’t made any more changes, they essentially replied, 'I knew

something larger was wrong, but I didn’t think it would help to move words around.’ The students

have strategies for handling words and phrases ..what they lack, however, is a set of strategies to

help them identify the ‘something larger’.. Students do not have strategies for handling

essays”(pg7) In Teach Writing as a Process Not a Product, Donald Murray contributes to Nancy’s

sentiment but with a different perspective. Donald indicates the impact of writing being taught as a

product, and not a process itself. He writes, “Year after year the student shudders under a barrage

of criticism, much of it brilliant, some of it stupid, and all of it irrelevant. No matter how careful

our criticism, they do not help the student since when we teach composition we are not teaching a
 Pozo 8

product, we are teaching a process.” (pg 1) Through this perspective, we realize that students are

taught that the linear model used would allow us to reach the ultimate product, which is good

writing. However, that is not the way that revision works. Revision should occur constantly

through writing, and like experienced writers have demonstrated in Sommer’s case study- it is

ongoing.

Conclusion:

After a thorough analysis of the provided resources and drafts, it becomes evident

that the student's writing lacks an effective revision process. Using Sommers' model, it

becomes apparent that the student, similar to the writers in her case study, only made

superficial lexical changes without incorporating any substantial conceptual alterations

throughout their draft. Initially, the student's revision process appeared promising,

especially when observing the changes made between their first and second drafts.

Experienced writers typically focus on shaping their argument during the revision process,

which the student seemed to accomplish in the beginning. However, the effectiveness of

their revision process took an unexpected turn when Draft 2 and Draft 3 turned out to be

remarkably similar. The minimal changes raised concerns about whether any significant

consideration went into the revision process at all. One cannot help but wonder if time

constraints played a role or if the student lacked the proper tools and techniques to

implement efficient revision strategies in their writing.

Regardless of the reasons, one undeniable truth emerges: revision, as demonstrated

in this case study, is a demanding and continuous process. Even the most talented writers

may go through multiple drafts and thousands of revisions before achieving the desired
 Pozo 9

outcome. It is crucial for us to embrace this journey of revision, learning from it, teaching

others, and continually striving to improve our writing skills.

 Pozo 10

Works Cited

Author 1 “Who are you as a writer? Draft 1.” July 3,2023

Author 1 “Who are you as a writer? Draft 2.” July 3,2023

Author 1 “Who are you as a writer? Draft 3.” July 3,2023

Sommers, Nancy. “Revision strategies of student writers and experienced adult writers.”

College composition and communication 31.4 (1980): 7-8

Bunn, Mike. “How to read like a writer.” Writing spaces: Readings on writing 2 (2011): 1

Murray, Donalds “Teach writing as a process not product.” The leaflet 71.3 (1972): 1