Journal 7

Bisaillon conducted research to determine what defines revision in a professional context, what approach is taken by those who make their living revising (professional editors), are there resemblances between their strategies, how much the revision process influenced their conception of revision and their experience. This data was collected using six editors and placed them into two categories “lest experienced” and “most experienced”, and also placing them into the category of normal versus communicational perspective. A procedure of protocol analysis was then initiated in which the editors would record a two hour video in the home while revising in which each reader was told to describe each edit made, a set of a “semi-structured” interview is then initiated (the overall purpose was to get an overview of the editor). There were several discoveries the first being that none of the editors read the text to get a full grasp of the material, comprehension. Double checking revisions was an important also another common noted observation. The overall observation was the editors did not rely only on their “sure” knowledge. I feel professional editing is similar to students revising their own work in the sense that a lot of the same grammar rules and techniques are used. Depending on the student and if that student is revising their own work or that of a peer determines if when they revise the material if they choose to comprehend the work.