JiscMail Logo
Email discussion lists for the UK Education and Research communities

Help for EATAW Archives


EATAW Archives

EATAW Archives


EATAW@JISCMAIL.AC.UK


View:

Message:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Topic:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Author:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

Font:

Proportional Font

LISTSERV Archives

LISTSERV Archives

EATAW Home

EATAW Home

EATAW  August 2013

EATAW August 2013

Options

Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Log In

Log In

Get Password

Get Password

Subject:

Re: editing - Clinical Psychology

From:

Esther Breuer <[log in to unmask]>

Reply-To:

[log in to unmask]

Date:

Wed, 21 Aug 2013 10:30:43 +0200

Content-Type:

text/plain

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

text/plain (158 lines)

Dear Lawrie,

I guess that the "no editing"-sign in the writing centres often does  
not have anything to do with the members' attitudes towards editing  
students' papers, but it is rather a question of a lack of time for  
doing this. At my university, we can offer  40 hours of writing  
support for more than 10.000 students, thus editing papers is simply  
impossible.

All the best,
Esther Breuer


Zitat von Lawrie Hunter <[log in to unmask]>:

> Ian and Linda,
>
> Thanks so much for this affirming exchange. For quite some time I've  
> been a proponent of what I call the 'taught writing center', where  
> the services to the clients (engineering PhD students and faculty)  
> are built on the assumption that the clients have completed my  
> course work, which includes readability, structures of information  
> and the skills required for working with a mentor/editor.
>
> I have visited many writing centers and have often been surprised to  
> see "We don't edit papers" notices and caveats in quite a few of  
> those centers.  I work with individual clients for up to two years,  
> aiming at their becoming semi-autonomous academic writers and often  
> also at their gaining the skills/knowledge to work with their own  
> graduate students in the future, and the "don't edit" position seems  
> to me a case of teaching skills but not giving feedback.
>
> Thanks, thanks so much. I'll be quoting you two, if you have  no objection.
>
> All the best
> Lawrie Hunter
> http://www.core.kochi-tech.ac.jp/hunter/
>
>
> On 13/8/14 11:22 PM, Iain Kennedy Patten wrote:
>> Your last point really strikes a chord for me, Linda. In my  
>> experience, the interaction with other stakeholders in the writing  
>> process is critically important in the development of young  
>> authors. I spend a lot of time helping PhD students, postdoctoral  
>> researchers and even senior academics develop strategies to manage  
>> these interactions more effectively, and in many cases this  
>> includes understanding how to work with language professionals.  
>> Most people I work with at PhD level and beyond want their own  
>> voice to be heard. It is not an issue of letting someone else do  
>> the work for them but rather of using resources to help them  
>> communicate their own thinking as clearly and effectively as  
>> possible.
>>
>> Best wishes
>>
>> Iain Patten
>>
>> Iain Patten, PhD
>> Scientific Writing Consultant
>> www.iainpatten.com <http://www.iainpatten.com>
>>
>> On 14 Aug 2013, at 11:06, Linda McPhee <[log in to unmask]  
>> <mailto:[log in to unmask]>> wrote:
>>
>>> I absolutely agree with Elizabeth Harding. I work with PhD  
>>> students and faculty in various countries (mainly also The  
>>> Netherlands), giving writing courses to demonstrate the basics of  
>>> structure and readability, followed by a line-edit of their  
>>> about-to-be-submitted article or chapter. This is both to help  
>>> prepare the article for submission, to go over elements of the  
>>> course that the person has (or has not) absorbed, and to remind  
>>> them that the journal will also want to suggest things. These  
>>> articles are not for a grade, but are early professional writings.
>>>
>>> However, many will of course also appear as parts of PhDs. For  
>>> students who are writing a dissertation composed around a set of  
>>> articles, each of those articles will have been touched by  
>>> authors, supervisors, co-authors, language editors, journal  
>>> referees, desk editors, and so on, often by up to a dozen people.  
>>> I cannot see how a no editing policy could possibly square with  
>>> professional development in science, unless the expectations are  
>>> considerably lower.
>>>
>>> Linda McPhee
>>> www.lindamcpheeconsulting.com <http://www.lindamcpheeconsulting.com>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On 14 Aug 2013, at 08:55, Elizabeth Harding  
>>> <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>>>
>>> I must say that I am quite surprised at the reaction my message  
>>> caused yesterday and I think I must make one thing very clear. By  
>>> ‘editing’ I do not mean wholesale root-and-branch re-writing.
>>>
>>> Before retiring from teaching, I used to give, under the auspices  
>>> of the Taalcentrum at the Vrije Universiteit in Amsterdam,  
>>> Scientific Writing courses at a great many research institutes in  
>>> the Netherlands. Before the post-grad students even considered  
>>> enrolling in the course, they had to prove that the quality of  
>>> their English was very high indeed. Their Bachelor’s and Master’s  
>>> courses had been mainly in English and by the time they came to me  
>>> they had already been producing a fair body of work in that  
>>> (foreign) language.
>>>
>>> Let’s get one thing straight, shall we? These students are  
>>> researchers. The work they do is what is important and it is this  
>>> that has to be conveyed through the writing of articles. A fair  
>>> number of students would rather stick their arms into a fire than  
>>> write, but writing an article is a concomitant purgatory to the  
>>> research they are involved in and totally inseparable from it.  
>>> It’s a hurdle, very often a psychological one, and one that I  
>>> tried through the years to help them climb over.  And I do think  
>>> that to a large extent I succeeded.
>>>
>>> Another point I have to make is that all authors need an extra  
>>> pair of eyes in the form of an editor who will eliminate  
>>> repetitions, suggest the rewording of a clumsy phrase or the  
>>> joining up of a series of short staccato sentences. She will  
>>> certainly point out ambiguities and other fallacies in a text that  
>>> to the author herself seems perfectly clear. Let’s face it - an  
>>> ambiguity or any other fallacy could affect the legitimacy of the  
>>> results and cast doubt on years of work.
>>>
>>> The editor might also suggest weeding an unnecessary purple patch,  
>>> culling excessive adjectives and so on. This editing is done with  
>>> the cooperation of the author(s) and is negotiable. What an editor  
>>> does in fact is tart up an article or book, making it spruce  
>>> enough to be accepted for publication and to stand up to critical  
>>> peer-reviewing. An editor will help the author present in clear,  
>>> unambiguous text the outward proof of solid research. The  
>>> important thing is that the voice of the author remains resonant  
>>> and identifiable.
>>>
>>> And when I say all writers need an extra pair of keen eyes I mean  
>>> just that. I’m referring here not only to academic researchers but  
>>> also Mann-Booker prize winners and renowned authors of essays etc.  
>>> There are very few publishers who would allow a novel for example  
>>> to be published ‘raw’, as it were.  So if we accept that the work  
>>> of an author with a fair fist should undergo the scrutiny of a  
>>> professional editor, why on earth should we deny that service to a  
>>> researcher who is not a professional writer but is simply using  
>>> the medium of the written word to get her work known and who is  
>>> possibly a non-native speaker to boot? That would just be plain  
>>> silly, as well as being mean-spirited.
>>>
>>> Elizabeth Harding
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Linda McPhee
>>> [log in to unmask]
>>> www.lindamcpheeconsulting.com
>>
>
>

Top of Message | Previous Page | Permalink

JiscMail Tools


RSS Feeds and Sharing


Advanced Options


Archives

April 2024
March 2024
February 2024
January 2024
December 2023
November 2023
October 2023
September 2023
August 2023
July 2023
June 2023
May 2023
April 2023
March 2023
February 2023
January 2023
December 2022
November 2022
October 2022
September 2022
August 2022
July 2022
June 2022
May 2022
April 2022
March 2022
February 2022
January 2022
December 2021
November 2021
October 2021
September 2021
August 2021
July 2021
June 2021
May 2021
April 2021
March 2021
February 2021
January 2021
December 2020
November 2020
October 2020
September 2020
August 2020
July 2020
June 2020
May 2020
April 2020
March 2020
February 2020
January 2020
December 2019
November 2019
October 2019
September 2019
August 2019
July 2019
June 2019
May 2019
April 2019
March 2019
February 2019
January 2019
December 2018
November 2018
October 2018
September 2018
August 2018
July 2018
June 2018
May 2018
April 2018
March 2018
February 2018
January 2018
December 2017
November 2017
October 2017
September 2017
August 2017
July 2017
June 2017
May 2017
April 2017
March 2017
February 2017
January 2017
December 2016
November 2016
October 2016
September 2016
August 2016
July 2016
June 2016
May 2016
April 2016
March 2016
February 2016
January 2016
December 2015
November 2015
October 2015
September 2015
August 2015
July 2015
June 2015
May 2015
April 2015
March 2015
February 2015
January 2015
December 2014
November 2014
October 2014
September 2014
August 2014
July 2014
June 2014
May 2014
April 2014
March 2014
February 2014
January 2014
December 2013
November 2013
October 2013
September 2013
August 2013
July 2013
June 2013
May 2013
April 2013
March 2013
February 2013
January 2013
December 2012
November 2012
October 2012
September 2012
August 2012
July 2012
June 2012
May 2012
April 2012
March 2012
February 2012
January 2012
December 2011
November 2011
October 2011
September 2011
August 2011
July 2011
June 2011
May 2011
April 2011
March 2011
February 2011
January 2011
December 2010
November 2010
October 2010
September 2010
August 2010
July 2010
June 2010
May 2010
April 2010
March 2010
February 2010
January 2010


JiscMail is a Jisc service.

View our service policies at https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/policyandsecurity/ and Jisc's privacy policy at https://www.jisc.ac.uk/website/privacy-notice

For help and support help@jisc.ac.uk

Secured by F-Secure Anti-Virus CataList Email List Search Powered by the LISTSERV Email List Manager