Revisions, and why we do them

It's that time of year again, where teachers and students get down to the business of learning.  As many of you know, I teach writing.  And part of writing, and of teaching writing, is revision.  I have a fairly short assignment that I'm doing with one of my classes, one for which I asked students to submit a draft last week so that I could go through and suggest changes.  Only about half the class sent drafts to me originally, then I had a few stragglers submit theirs after the initial ones were returned.  I still have yet to see about a quarter of the assignments.

After the first batch of suggestions and edits, I told students several times to re-submit their work so that I could go over it again.  Less than half of those who submitted have done this, but more are trickling in now that I've begun to hand those back.

Those that haven't submitted drafts by now are out of luck, as the assignment's due next week and I don't see them again until Tuesday.  Of those who've only submitted a first draft, several have asked why they'd need to submit again, considering, as they put it, "You've already corrected all the mistakes, so why bother?"  Then there's the third group, some of whom are horrified to receive a second edited / commented draft that seems to have more writing on it than the first.

I think I'm going to have to put a handout together on the stages of editing, explaining what instructors (and editors) are looking for in the various drafts of a document.

Personally, I like to do at least four sets of revisions.  The first set focuses on larger problems, the most significant of which are barriers to reader comprehension.  The second set focuses on logic, flow, and (for technical writing) accuracy of content.  The third set involves a closer look at document flow, and a first-pass detailed edit.  It's not until the fourth set of revisions that I'm looking to do a detailed copy edit ... and that's if we've managed to get to this stage, as sometimes I have to do two or three passes looking for and fixing barriers to comprehension.

The long and short of it is that multiple edits are needed, especially if you want to produce the best possible document, whether it's a technical report, a poem, or a novel.

Rejections

I'm in the process of making final selections for the upcoming issue of Wolf Willow Journal.  It's been an interesting process, and one that I'm really enjoying.  But I'm fast approaching the point at which I'm going to have to send out a bunch of rejections.  And I'll admit that there's good work that's been submitted that I likely won't accept because it just doesn't fit with where the issue is going.

I was reading a post on one of my Facebook groups yesterday, where an author was bemoaning the fact that she'd sent a particular piece out five times, and received five rejections.  She was ready to give up.  There were the usual "editors have no idea what they're doing" responses, and there were the "I had to submit 200+ times to get x published" responses.  I've had work accepted the first time I've sent it out, and I've got other work that's been submitted numerous times, to no avail.  That seems to be the way it goes, with publishing.

So, what next for the poor writer?  Perseverance and belief in yourself are one key.  Making sure to do thorough market research is another key.  Submitting the best work you possibly can is another, and one that I harp on again and again because, well, it's important.  But none of these guarantee publication.  That's up to us fickle editors, unless you choose to self-publish.  But do remember that a rejection isn't necessarily a critique or comment on your work ... sometimes, it's excellent, but it just doesn't fit.