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

2. 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]

3. 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

4. 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

5. 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)

6. 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!]