Nancy Somers’ article about revision was pretty groundbreaking for me. The idea that many students (including myself) often use the revision process to switch up the phrases, order and vocabulary but not their idea shocked me for some reason. It made me consider all of the work I have ever produced and how I personally revise my work. What I also found pretty cool was that the students and “experienced” writers used for the study all had a different term and their own definition of revision. 

When I consider my revision process, there is a lot of reconstructing of sentences and swapping out words for other words that may sound “better”. Sommers’ explanation that the students are done revising when they have hit every point on the “revision checklist” has made me think about how much of my work is my own versus what someone else is looking for. Am I revising my work to fit someone else’s standards? Also what makes a writer “experienced” by her terms. I think that term is subjective and she should have used a different term. I understand that she means the experienced writers are ones that currently have a career in writing but just because someone doesn’t have title doesn’t mean they aren’t experienced. I think the revision process needs to be retaught and have less of a checklist and more of a guideline with concepts to consider. When students are given “rules” and “structure” around their writing and revision, the idea of writing for a grade or for someone else is reiterated over and over. It creates a cycle where writers feel the pressure to make sure their work is good enough for the authority figure who will be reading it. The way writing and the revision process is taught teaches the student to please others.