Greetings and Salutations!
This week Abigail and I met to go over a paper from a 2020 submission. Our responsibility was to ensure the author adjusted their work according to previous recommendations provided by Dr. Farless and another intern. In our review, we discovered there were some remaining issues for the author to examine and resolve. Since our role in this step of the process was slightly different from the initial stage of review, it was refreshing to see similarities in our current recommendations and that of previous edits. While citation checks make up a great portion of our work in addition to grammar usage, many edits or recommendations are questions about arguments and context. Each time I go through a paper there is always a moment of self-reflection, perhaps a reminder to elaborate on ideas or information as well as provide sufficient evidence to back up my argument. It is easy to focus on getting a paper quickly turned in while there are many other tasks demanding our attention. Unfortunately, we can overlook the importance of effectively laying out a clear path for our argument while potentially assuming the reader will know what we are talking about. In light of reoccurring suggestions, this remains in my mind as I move forward with my own work. Each set of fresh eyes proves helpful in the process of paper polishing.
We are set to meet next Monday with Dr. Farless. In the meantime, Abigail and I will be reviewing the citations and grammar usage for another paper. We have yet to meet with one of the authors as there are some questions for the committee to review. Until then, we will probably continue to discuss some options for headings, subheadings and historiography for a lengthy paper. With each new paper, my role remains the same. With that said, it seems like we are getting into a groove with the editing process despite our many questions. But, hey, I suppose that is all part of the learning experience.
Lastly, I would like to add another pointer from A Pocket Guide to Writing in History by Mary Lynn Rampolla. Much of the time – at least when time is not in short supply – I do enjoy research, however, I often struggle with the dreaded thesis statement. Although there are many resources, professors included, Ms. Rampolla reminds us that the thesis is “specific” and is “always debatable” as the statement answers a question formed from the active reading engagement of texts.[1] From this standpoint, once we are familiar with the content, then we can formulate a claim and lay out an argument.
Here’s to another week in the books! Happy editing and happy writing!
[1] Mary Lynn Rampolla, A Pocket Guide to Writing in History, 9th edition (Boston: Bedford/St. Martin’s, 2018), 58.