Learning Outcome 4: Be able to critique their own and other’s work by emphasizing global revision early in the writing process and local revision later in the process.
According to Sommers, revision is a process. I agree with this as revisions to a paper, article, etc require student writers to think outside the box. While making revisions, one cannot just think of rewording sentences, but to organize ideas. Although sentence structure is obviously apart of revisions, revising someone’s paper should mostly include thinking about how that person’s ideas are being portrayed, and whether or not these ideas belong in the paper.
In my revisions of a peer’s research, I would say I may not have been as thorough as Sommers states one revising should be. Although I had the best interest of my peer in mind, my main critique was “changing some word choice in the paper”. Using Sommers’s ideas about revision, I can look into my peer’s paper with a goal of enhancing ideas.
Looking at the revisions my peer was made on my own paper, I see that my peer did use some of Sommers’s ideas in the revisions. For example, one point of revision was “the paper could get a little more in detail about how these things help the tie into the narrative.” My peer is looking at my ideas that I have presented and suggests that I work on tying them more deeply into my narrative.
