Engage with your seminar professor and colleagues on the topic of revising the draft of your research paper using the following prompt to begin the discussion:
Revising My Draft
You should have several pages or more of your first draft in hand by this time. Now, the process of revising your draft begins. You will most likely make some significant revisions to your draft before turning it in for your professors’ comments. Your draft will be improved by multiple iterations of revising and careful proof-reading. Some of your revisions may be major structural additions, subtractions, or movements. Some of them will be smaller adjustments related to sentence structure, grammar, and style. All of your revisions are important and focused on preparing your best draft for submission. Of course, you will personally review and revise your draft, but you may also have one or more readers review it per our conversation in last week’s forum. Your readers may point out suggestions, but you will make the actual revisions based on their input. Your professors will serve as a final pair of readers and will give you feedback for further revisions that may be needed to prepare your final draft for submission near the end of the course.
Now, share your specific plans for revising your first draft before submitting it at the end of week 8.
Review your reading this week in TCR and on the University of Toronto website. Also, it would be good to read the three, brief chapters in Turabian on “Revising Your Draft” (ch 9; pp 102-105), “Writing Your Final Introduction and Conclusion” (ch 10; pp106-12), and “Revising Sentences” (ch 11; pp 113-26).
Post your answers to the following questions:
In the past, how have you revised your drafts before submission? Be honest and give a brief outline of your past revision process.
What are the three most important insights that you found in your reading this week about the process of revising your draft? Please cite your sources from the assigned readings. The insights that you share may be things that you have done in the past that the reading reinforced/expanded or new things that you have learned and plan to apply.
Back to: Week 7 Overview
Back to: Research and Writing in Ministry Home Page
1. In the past, my process was to spend a lot of time on creating a detailed visual outline. With that in hand, I would use speech-to-text to dictate the rough draft. I wouldn’t worry about making every sentence perfect. Instead, I would focus on getting the ideas fleshed out as quickly as possible. The rough draft would be complete, and then I would quickly go through and clean up the obvious grammatical errors. Next, I would use Word’s commenting feature to highlight and comment on my draft. My main focus was to find where things felt clunky, disconnected, or unsupported. I would also comment on whether the evidence called for a revised conclusion. Next, I would evaluate whether or not the sections needed to be reorganized to flow more logically. After resolving all the commented sections, I would comb the paper for more grammatical mistakes and send it to my wife so that she could comment on what else needs attention.
2. Here are the three insights that I found in my reading this week:
a. First, I need to start with the larger structure. Procter recommended that we should examine organization before editing sentences. This encourages what I already do. Her suggestion to create a “reverse outline” added a useful practice; I will start comparing what I actually wrote with what I originally planned. I can use this practice to identify repetition and sections that drifted since I am prone to ramble.
b. Second, I need to test the connect between evidence and claims. TCR advises that we need to explain evidence, qualify claims, and address objections. The hardest things so far is differentiating between the pastors’ perceived value of peer groups and the hard evidence that accountability reduces isolation. Even though they are related claims, they aren’t identical.
c. Third, I need to finalize the introduction and conclusion after revising the body. After my argument is complete, I need to make sure that the introduction accurately introduces the argument my paper makes.
Hey Skylar! I never considered going back and revising the intro and conclusion after the body. I have always written from the intro straight through and ended with my conclusion. That is a tip that I have never used or considered, but makes a lot of sense now. Thanks for mentioning it!
Mark,
I write almost every sermon or Bible study in this order: Body, Conclusion, Introduction. After completing the Body and Conclusion, the Introduction almost writes itself. I give this advice in both this course and my preaching classes.
Dr. Bryan
Hi Skylar. Thank you for the suggestion of speech-to-text. I have never tried doing that. I also like your idea of writing and then checking for grammar. I often get stuck on the formatting and editing part page per page. Instead, I should focus on that last. I know Dr. Bryan and the readings have said research writing is saying less but more intentional. Do you find it harder to say less?
1. What are my specific plans for revising the first draft?
-Revising is already taking place. I have reformatted my outline three or four times at this point. I have also edited the thesis statement and changed my biblical emphasis from the church in Ephesus to the church in Corinth.
-Going forward, I plan to have my readers (wife and an international student that is like a son to us) review each section as I finish it. Once the paper is done, I will take a break for a day, have my readers read the entire paper, and review it myself at least three times before turning in the work.
-Specifically, as a preacher, I can be too wordy in expressing my thoughts. I also use multiple words to express what I am trying to convey. I need to watch for these bad habits in my revision.
-Next, I will need to be careful that the information is not presented as a bunch of data. I need to work on making the data become a dialog between the experts.
-Lastly, I will verify if my key terms flow through the whole paper
2. In the past, how have you revised your drafts before submission?
-It has been so long since I have been in school, it is hard to remember specifics. Knowing myself back then, I probably reread my work a couple of times to make grammatical corrections and then submitted the work. I do know how I edit my sermons. For sermon preparation, I write a sermon manuscript (word for word, of what will be preached). For the process of creating the manuscript, I create the outline, collect data and illustrations for each section, and paint broad strokes of the sermon message. I finish with broad stroke writing on Tuesdays, and then Wednesday is for writing the detailed and organized manuscript. On Thursday, I put down the sermon, and I do other parts of ministry. The weekends are for revisions. I review the manuscript five to six times before the sermon message.
3. What are the three most important insights that you found in your reading this week about the process of revising your draft? Please cite your sources from the assigned readings.
Taking from each reading this week, here are three of the most important insights.
A. From the University of Toronto articles, I specifically took note on the article on “Wordiness.” Once again, it is my nature to be wordy. The article made mention of ways I can eliminate words. The first suggestion was to remove doubling of words. An example given was, “future prospects.” The article suggested to choose one word. The article also suggested omitting several patterns of wordiness. It suggested omitting intensifiers, qualifiers, catch all words like kind and factor, and unnecessary words like “to be” and “being.”
B. The next insight comes from The Craft of Research, section 11.2 and 11.4 (My kindle is a bit wacky right now, and I can’t give the page number). Both sections encourage the reader to implement key terms that will flow through the entire paper. Section 11.2 encourages the reader to introduce these terms in the introduction.
C. Finally, Turabian gives important insight in the introduction of chapter 10. The introductions states three aims in formulating an introduction, and three aims in creating a conclusion. The introduction aims are; put your research in context to other research, persuade the audience the need to read the paper, and give the audience understanding of your report. The same introduction provides three aims for conclusion; let the reader understand clearly your claim, understand the importance of the claim, and suggest further research the paper did not cover. Both of these aims will work as an outline as I formulate and revise my draft.
I also have to switch gears between academic work and sermon writing. Sermons require lengthy illustrations or storytelling sections that draw an audience into your thoughts. Sermons also require constant repetition since the medium is auditory. I never know if someone heard me the first time, so I have to circle back for emphasis and clarity. On the other hand, academic work is a reference that someone can re-read if they missed a point. People reading our academic work also do not care about the fluff; they want to follow the data and logic.
I share your struggle since my brain has been wired for sermons for the last decade of ministry.
Skyler,
I write in both realms all the time. Once your brain is trained to write academically, the switch to that style becomes much easier. Once you know how to ride a bicycle, it is much easier to ride a motorcycle and to switch between the two.
Dr. Bryan
Hey Johnny! I also shared about my struggle to jump back into academic writing as someone whose primary writing experience recently has been in sermon form. It is a whole different ball game, but I feel like this semester is helping me ease back into it. One commonality is the defining of terms that a writer must do to help communicate clearly. That is something that I noticed is important in both preaching and academic writing.
Hi Johnny. I also get wordy myself. I am trying to learn the art of deeper thought and less words. This class has helped me not to be ashamed to look up the definitions of big words or words I have heard before but don’t quite know what they mean. I write lessons for church ministries, put together trainings, and children’s sermons. But writing a research paper is scary for me. I am out of practice. I need to work on defining the key terms I want to use in my paper. Have you figured out what key terms you want to use?
Thanks for pointing out the information about the introduction and conclusion in Turabian. While that is probably the book I need to read and study most, it’s been the most ignored as I’ve tried to stay on top of everything else. I have enjoyed looking at everyone’s personal thougths and tips on this paper.
In the past, I would start with a very loose outline and just figure it out as I go. Revisions have involved re-reading papers several times and noting what to change. But I have never felt the pressure to write at such a high level as I do now. All the reading this semester has been very challenging for the writing process. I have written my thesis and outline on a whiteboard and made several revisions over the last several days as I finished finding sources.
The three things that I learned from this week’s reading are:
1. I need to do a much better job evaluating faulty agreement. When I hurry, I get sloppy, so I set aside more time to write than I typically would.
2. Over the course of the semester, I have already made improvements, but I still tend to be too wordy. The article on faulty parallelism helped me identify bad habits.
3. The article on using verbs when referring to sources was very useful. In our book reviews, I’ve struggled with this topic.
When I saw how many articles we had to read this week, I honestly wasn’t very excited, but I found all of them somewhat useful, since the small things make big differences.
Hey Rob! The reading felt daunting for me as well. I over emphasize in comprehending and struggle with skimming. But as you mentioned, the reading is so beneficial in the writing we are doing that it is worth the effort and the struggle. I have made it a practice to create cheat sheets (cliff notes) on what I am learning. When I have time, I plan to do that with our reading material.
Hey Rob! The part about using verbs was an interesting read for me, as well. It is a section I flagged and plan to read back through. I will be considering how to apply it as I continue drafting my paper.
1. I plan to finish my draft, allow it to cool for a few days, then revisit it with fresh eyes. I want to make sure my claim is clear, my pathway of reasoning is evident and flows well, and that my formatting is good. I’ll read through it a couple times, finish my final edits, then submit it.
2. In the past, I haven’t done much drafting if I’m honest. I wrote the paper, maybe read back over it once or twice, with specific attention to formatting, and then submitted. I developed an outline before so I kept the flow of the paper moving, but I didn’t do much revision between the initial writing and submission.
3. In TCR chapter 11, page 192, it is stated that the main point should be stated at the end of the introduction. This was helpful, just as a reminder, especially after not writing an academic paper for several years. Most of my writing has been in the form of sermons, where many styles can be used. It’s good to remember in this setting that clarity is key. In the same chapter, page 194, evaluating the argument is outlined with several helpful questions. The one from this section that stuck out to me was question four. It reminds me that claims do not exist in a vacuum, but need to be backed by evidence, but also presented by addressing counter claims or challenges to the author’s claim. Lastly, in chapter 15 of TCR, page 260, avoiding excessive abstraction is discussed. It’s easy to say “the church” or “evangelicalism”, but clarifying and narrowing who or what the subject group is helps the reader understand the argument and weigh it’s validity.
Hi Mark! As you mentioned, sermon presentations are such a different form of communication, that we are almost working counter to what we do in our preaching. Much of preaching is elaborating, repeating, and back tracking. Academic writing is not that. Preaching many times has hooks that surprise. Writing is successful if it is predictable. (Example = The first sentence should contain the main point of the paragraph.)
I can relate to your past habit of drafting. My idea has been to reread and make corrections as I’ve gone back through it. I do not remember doing any original thesis research in the past, so the thought of having someone read a draft before making revisions in intimidating.
Yes, I have. I often do better work in the afternoon and evening. I typically finish the paper at night. Then I will sleep on it. Then I will read through the whole paper once. I will make any needed changes. I will check for grammar issues. I will read it out loud one more time. I will make any last changes. Then I will do one last grammar check. That is my ideal revision process. I am struggling with time management and unfortunately didn’t get to do this process as well as I wanted to do on the annotated bibliography.
1. How to draft a new first sentence from “A Manual for Writers” pages 110-111. I appreciated the advice of making the research paper livelier for readers by using a pithy quotation, a striking fact, a relevant anecdote, or combining all three. I found the sample sentences for each one very beneficial. I now know the paper can’t be just research it has to be engaging for the reader too.
2. Since I have dyslexia spelling and grammar are harder for me at times. The commonly misspelled words on page 4 of “Some Tools and Rules to Improve Your Spelling” was very useful. As well as the easily confusable words on page 2. I printed hard copies of the resources from this week’s reading. I know with easily confusable words spell check in Word doesn’t always catch the wrong word spelled right. Word also will sometimes autocorrect incorrectly.
3. The “Punctuation” handout helped me understand better when to use commas, semicolons, colons, dashes, and parentheses. I didn’t know a comma was the most used form or punctuation. Just like with the previous two insights, the examples shown are what I gleaned the most from. I have found an example will put my mind at ease and gives me something to work from.
If I could put an emoji in our comments it would have been a smiley face. I have to work really hard on my spelling for the same reason. As I saw the list of common misspelled words I highlighted the words I struggle with. It is beneficial something as simple as this. As coach Wooden preached to his basketball teams, “I believe in the basics: attention to, and perfection of, tiny details that might be commonly overlooked. They may seem trivial, perhaps even laughable to those who don’t understand, but they aren’t. They are fundamental to your progress in basketball, business, and life. They are the difference between champions and near champions.” these books are giving the essential basics we need for success.
The discussion on the first sentence of a paragraph was helpful for me, both in the reading and in our discussion on Zoom. I do not think I have been intentional on this in the past, so I will be try to give extra attention to how I formulate the first sentence of my paragraphs. Thanks for sharing!
Class,
Thank you for making on time replies that address the writing prompt this week. You have each gained good insights from your reading that you can apply to revising your research paper draft as well as future papers.
Now, please read and respond to the insights of your peers as you discover what they have found. Perhaps they discovered something that you missed that will also be helpful to you in the revision process.
I typically revise what I have written primarily by reading it silently. However, I also read it aloud. I think Lezah mentioned that she does this too. Engaging not only the sense of seeing but also the sense of hearing sometimes reveals issues. It may look right, but when read it doesn’t sound right. I have never tried it, but I think that with today’s technology one could certainly have a computer or even a phone read a paper back. This might allow one to focus on the sense of hearing even more keenly.
As I mentioned in our Zoom session last evening, I pay close attention to my topic sentences. Is the sentence clear? Do the other sentences in the paragraph connect with the topic sentence? Do I remain in the same verb tense and person as much as possible throughout the paragraph? Do I make a clear transition to a new paragraph with a new topic sentence?
It is also important to review the overall paragraph structure of the paper. Is every paragraph in the right place? Is the flow of the argument clear? Does a paragraph need to be moved structurally to a different position in the paper? Outlining the flow of one’s argument to ensure the writing flows smoothly from claim to evidence to conclusions is a good check in the revision process.
Sometimes, especially if I have read the paper multiple times, I read the paper backwards. I start by reading the last paragraph, then the penultimate paragraph, all the way back to the first paragraph. This technique causes me to look at each paragraph in a new way. After reading the paper from beginning to end multiple times when revising, familiarity with the writing can easily lead to overlooking needed changes. Reading what I have written backwards gives me “fresh eyes” to see things that were missed.
Finally, I would say that having another set of eyes or several other sets of eyes to read what you have written is an important part of the revision process. I believe that each of you has at least one other person reading your paper. That is excellent. Take their input with thanks and make good revisions based on it.
Blessings,
Dr. Bryan
I really appreciated that you shared your process of using topic sentences at the beginning of each paragraph. I will try and focus on that more in the future.
Also, I need to try reading my papers aloud. I read my sermons aloud before preaching because it helps with revising transitions, highlighting points to emphasize, and recognizing which statements need repetition or a pause afterward for reflection. I have never considered how it would benefit an academic paper.