Holdstein & Aquiline, Chapter 10 Revising, presenting Who Says? Holdstein & Aquiline, Chapter 10 Revising, presenting

Revising Don’t forget, the writing process is recursive Higher-order concerns [compare to my checklist]: Try to react like a reader/audience member Thesis Support Focus Transitions Paragraphs [units w/conclusion] Use of sources, quotes Your role [don’t overdo it] Conclusion [that restates thesis in more detail] Appropriate language, tone [third person]

Revising (cont.) Lower-order concerns [GSP, mainly; Q: What is “GSP”? Also use of APA citations] Wait a bit for final edit; do it on paper [proofread] Watch for sentences that you changed Read the essay aloud Read for specifics, e.g. just look at commas; don’t do it all at once Peer review with a friend or classmate

Thesis This is central. Is it A position on a yes/no, debatable, non-trivial question Supported by your evidence Narrow and focused [and perhaps in more than one part/answer, e.g. X is a significant problem mainly for people Y, although there are solutions available and it is declining in impact] Of use in answering the “So what?” question

Presentation Think of your audience (this class) and what they know about your topic What tools will you use: PowerPoint, Prezi (not Prezzi as on p. 144), video, note cards, handouts Can you add something beyond what’s in your paper (often a video) You’ll likely have research with data to present; decide what forms are appropriate: Table (simple data) Bar graph (for comparisons) Pie chart (for parts of a whole)

Final thoughts Look at the handout; also the list on p. 135 Make sure all items in the Works Cited list are actually cited in the paper, and all in-text citations are in the Works Cited list [check off as you read through] [Appendix: There is a sample APA research paper. It is quite sophisticated in its tone—textbook authors usually present the best work they see, but pretend it’s merely typical. There are a few errors: p. 163 cites (Huitt, 2002) but the only paper by Huitt is from 2011; on p. 170 add (1999) after names of researchers in first sentence; some References should have a publisher, all scholarly ones lack a DOI, some errors in italicizing, Rynes et al. entry is incomplete; but all in the list are cited, and all cited are in the list!]