NWP E-team presentation

1. Revision in Digital
Writing Environments
National Writing Project Annual Meeting
Orlando, FL November 2010

2. Research on revision in
the digital environment
•The pedagogical
implications of teachers as
digital writers
•An analysis of the impact
of revision in digital writing
environments

3. Purpose of the Study
1) Investigate the ways in which teachers use
revision in their own writing
2) Investigate the ways in which digital writing
environments impact revision and revision
instruction
3) Investigate the ways in which the revision
process is implemented into teachers’
classrooms.

4. Study Participants
• Tier One-Summer 2009
• 253 study participants from a random sampling of
NWP sites participating in the 2009 NWP E-
anthology
• Two surveys, writing posted to the E-
anthology, responses, and revisions posted to
the E-anthology
• Tier Two-Fall 2009
• Focus group (Random selection of 10, 2
attended)
• Tier Three-Summer 2010
• Random sampling of revised pieces posted on
the E-anthology, focusing on comments that were
given to each piece

5. Tier One Study Participants
English Language Arts 45%
Elementary 20%
Special Education 5%
Foreign Language 4%
Reading 4%
Science 4%
Social Studies 4%
Math 4%
Other 10%
(Speech, Composition, Literacy Coach, ELL, Arts/Humanities,
Music, FACS, Counselor, Principal, Careers, Curriculum
Specialist)

6. Tier One Study Participants
K-5 31%
6-8 27%
9-12 37%
Univ. 4%
Other Less than 1%
Age Range of Participants
20-29 34%
30-39 32%
40-49 17%
50-59 14%
60-69 2%

7. Tier One Study Participants
Teaching experience:
Less than three years 26%
Three to five years 20%
Six to ten years 16%
Eleven to fifteen years 17%
More than fifteen years 22%

8. Teachers and Revision
When writing for any reason (professionally,
informally, creatively, or otherwise),
• 95% of participants say they revise their work
• 5% of participants say they do not revise their work
When asked if they teach revision in writing in their
classrooms,
• 85% of participants said yes
• 15% of participants said no

9. Teachers as Writers
The most common activities participants use in their own
writing to revise include:
• reading aloud
• incubation (step away for period of time)
• peer involvement
• add, move, change, or delete (words, sentences,
para.)
• questioning

10. In their own words….
“I look for internal consistency of ideas within the paper
as a whole and then in smaller parts”
“I put it away and wait until I find it again”
“I revise very little, but if I do, it is from peer suggestion”
“I revise as I write”
“I use spellcheck”

11. Teaching Revision
The most common activities in the classroom to facilitate
revision included:
• teacher revision directly on students’ papers
• peer revision groups and feedback face to face
• independent revision and rewriting
• read aloud strategies
• examining student work as a class to offer
suggestions for revision

12. In their own words….
“we read backwards paragraph by paragraph”
“have students revise for specific things such as Noden’s
Brush Strokes or Lane’s snapshots and thoughtshots”
“check to be sure words are written, illustrated picture reflects”
“we never get to revision”
“I don’t teach revision. I teach Math”
“Students hate to revise and so do I”

13. Revision Strategies in the SI
• Peer groups
• E-Anthology feedback
• Add, move, change, or delete
(words, sentences, paragraphs)
• Re-read or read aloud
• Digital tools (E-Anthology, Ning,
Google Docs, Wiki)
• Incubation
• Editing (many mentioned
strategies usually recognized as
editing)
• Mentor texts
• Rubrics
• Simultaneous revision

14. Key Findings
~many teach revision and don’t realize that they do
~a significant percentage of participants believe that they are
teaching revision, when in fact they are teaching only
editing and proofreading strategies
~the division between revision and editing is becoming
increasingly blurred as revision becomes increasingly
simultaneous
~teachers often do not “preach” what they “practice”; meaning
that the very strategies teachers use in their own revisions
are not the strategies they teach in the classroom

15. Anticipated class time
devoted to revision
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
0-20% 21-40% 41-60% 61%+
Anticipated Class Time Devoted to
Revision
Before
participating in E-
Anth
After participating
in E-Anth

16. How do digital writing
environments impact revision
and its instruction?
•77% of participants said E-anthology participation increased
their willingness to teach revision
•Importance of audience in writing
•Collaboration/community that can develop in responding
to others
•Importance of using digital writing environments, even in
F2F classrooms
•Use of technology as motivator for student participation
in revision

17. Participants’ anticipated use of
digital environments in writing
instruction
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
Before SI and E-
Anth
After SI and E-
Anth
Use of Digital Environments
Use of Digital
Environments

18. Tier Two
Focus group at the Annual Meeting, Philadelphia

19. Emerging Themes
Audience
Genre
Self-efficacy, motivation
Teachers as writers (NWP influence)
Effects of Technology

20. Audience
Having an authentic audience for whom to write
enhances the revision process for students.
When they know that their writing is going to be
viewed by someone other than the teacher, the
final product begins to matter more.
Rowen (2005) argues that “when students know
someone other than their teacher will see their
writing, it becomes easy to help them with
process and mechanics.”

21. Audience
When asked if she could have any resource for
teaching revision to her students, what it would
be, she responded with, “real audiences for
every single thing that we do. . . . I struggle to
find that audience that provides my students
what they really need to get invested in the
writing.” She reiterates that her students “are
totally different when they have a real reason” to
write.

22. Genre
Students today are writing more than ever;
however, the formats they use differ vastly from
their ‘in school’ writing. Students still produce
academic writing: essays, research papers, and
literary analyses. They sometimes compose
poems, stories, and plays. But most of their
writing is done in forms that have yet to be
recognized as ‘writing’ by the majority of
classrooms and curricula.
“Writers now compose through new media like e-
mail, listservers, and creative software packages.
Writers use digital technologies to write many
new kinds of texts, such as Web logs, hypertexts,
and electronic portfolios” (Yancey, 2004).

23. Genre
“Students are certainly much more interested in
digital kinds of writing now in new ways –
podcasts and video casts and those kinds of
things.” She, therefore, is incorporating this
technology into her classroom. Her students
create “digital stories, which they love. . . . that
particular kind of writing that marries their love of
image and sound and all those textures.”
Williams (2001) explains, “Because digital
technology increases student access to a
diversity of expressive media, we as composition
instructors must model our engagement with the
multiple forms of literacy that constitute students’

24. Self-efficacy and
Motivation
For many students, the word revision has little
impact. They have written their draft and either
they put everything they had into it the first time
and cannot possibly improve it or they have
always gotten good grades on their papers and
they do not need to revise.
Teachers are finding that the attitude of students
about revision is affected by many things, but
one very specific influencing factor is the attitude
of teachers about the revision process.

25. Self-efficacy and
Motivation
Participant 1 says about revision that her
students “hate it. . . . I say revision, and they go,
‘Ugh’. You know, they’re squeamish about it.”
Participant 2 explains that she sees a change in
students’ interest in revision that “I’m sure is a
direct result of my enthusiasm for it as well.”
Acknowledging the importance of revision and
finding practical and comfortable ways to teach it
are practices that teachers of writing need to
adopt

26. Teachers as Writers (NWP)
Participant 1 acknowledges that “as a writer
myself, it took me a while to get to that point
[practicing revision] . . . . And I think the summer
institute helped with that to some degree.” As
teachers evolve in their attitudes about revision,
so do their students.
Participant 2 reflects, “I think certainly most
everything that I do about revision comes from a
summer institute. Certainly even the model of
writing workshop . . . comes from what I’ve
experienced participating in multiple summer
institutes.”

27. Teachers as Writers (NWP)
From creating the norms for the writing groups
to planning how to effectively respond to others’
writing, teachers continue to incorporate the
NWP techniques into their writing instruction.
For students, the impact of the NWP is clear.
They are experiencing writing instruction in new
ways. Because so many teachers experience
the summer institutes, more students, according
to Participant 2, “go through a number of
teachers who are writing project TC’s.” She also
comments, “As we have TC’s who are trained in
the schools . . . there’s a big change. I’ve
noticed a shift in the last decade over how

28. Effects of Technology
One of the most important purposes for using
many digital sites is for students to have an
immediate audience. Teachers seek out places
to publish student writing, and the internet
provides a multitude of these. From track
changes to digital writing groups, student writers
can receive feedback on their documents and
then revise for a new draft.
When asked how often their students write in
digital environments, Participant 1 said, “Every
day. Every class day. . . .the Elmo and the
internet and things to do research,” and
Participant 2 also says, “yeah, daily. . .We use

29. Effects of Technology
Participant 1 states, “If we create the
environment and give them time . . . ultimately
they become more sophisticated users of
technology and more sophisticated writers.” The
use of digital writing environments also has
changed the students’ attitudes about revision.
They are more motivated to revise when they
know they have an audience.
Participant 2 says that her students are “much
happier to revise in a digital environment, and
they’re much happier to revise for digital
publication.”

30. Tier Three
251-----number of posts that were revisions of
previous posts (marked as a revision)
5.8% of the Open Mic postings
90% Press, 9% Address, 1% Bless
Random sampling of the 251 revisions
E-team responded to 229 of the revisions---91%
Genre breakdown of random sample
Poetry 60%
Fiction 20%
Creative Non-Fiction 10%
Memoir 10%

31. Tier Three
0 1 2 3
1st Draft
2nd Draft
3rd Draft
4th Draft
5th Draft
Average Responses of Sample
MetaResponses
Responses

32. Tier Three
All E-team members responded to revisions
83% of E—team suggestions were carried
through to the 2nd drafts (posted as a revision)
66% of other responders suggestions were
carried through to the 2nd drafts (posted as a
revision)

33. E-Team Responders
Average of 22 years teaching experience
Average of 4.6 years on the E-team
50% of E-Team members believe revision is
highly important, 50% important.
Average anticipated weekly reading load (before
summer)=74 pieces, high 140, low 50

34. E-Team’s Views on
Revision
Revision is global, editing is sentence level
Revision is when the work needs more attention
than a few minor edits, for example when the
meaning or message of the piece isn’t clear
Revising involves organization and content.
Editing is mechanics.
Revising is the big stuff (fixing the car). Editing is
the little stuff (painting the car).

35. Emerging Themes from
E-Team Responses
Choice of words
Word choice was the overwhelming response to
authors
Questioning
“What if you…..”, “What do you mean by”
Through the author’s eyes
I’m trying to understand where you are coming
from
The starch in the press
Pointing out the stuff that’s hard to point out

36. Findings
Length of the response doesn’t matter
Specific things to do DOES matter, giving
examples of what a line or sentence COULD look
like
Pointing out details that the responder liked
DOES matter
Gaining their trust with “Two stars and a wish”
Envisioning
Conversation is key
Conversation is give and take, revisions were
more successful when metaresponses were high
(when the author responded to responses)

37. What’s next
Two articles in draft
Book proposal in draft

38. Shifting our
thinking….
How do these research
results and the discussion of
how responding in an online
environment influenced one
teacher/writer impact your
thinking? Take a few minutes
to record any new thoughts...

39. Questions or final
thoughts?