+1443 776-2705 panelessays@gmail.com

Please make sure that it is your own work and not copy and paste off of someone work or article. Please watch out for spelling errors or grammar errors. Please read the study guide and use the APA 7th edition format.

Book Reference: Greene, S., & Lidinsky, A. (2018). From inquiry to academic writing: A practical guide (4th ed.). Bedford/St. Martin's. https://online.vitalsource.com/#/books/9781319071677 

 Greene and Lidinsky (2018) describe using peer groups in the revision process (p. 347). Peer review is a critical element in one's development as a scholar/practitioner. Have you involved or would you involve others (peers) in the review of your work? If so, did it help or hinder? If not, why? 

RCH 7302, Doctoral Writing and Inquiry Into Research 1

Course Learning Outcomes for Unit VI Upon completion of this unit, students should be able to:

2. Analyze the text of an academic document using a variety of methods. 2.1 Assess writing for revisions. 2.2 Interpret the flow of an argument(s) presented in academic writing.

4. Analyze arguments made in academic literature.

4.1 Examine arguments presented in an academic paper for clarity and validity.

Course/Unit Learning Outcomes

Learning Activity

2.1 Unit Lesson Chapter 12 Unit VI Scholarly Activity

2.2 Unit Lesson Chapter 12 Unit VI Scholarly Activity

4.1 Unit Lesson Chapter 12 Unit VI Scholarly Activity

Required Unit Resources Chapter 12: From Revising to Editing: Working with Peer Groups

Unit Lesson The topics in this unit center on writing, revisions, and editing. These are in the context of all that has been read up to this point, not really a stand-alone topic. Greene and Lidinsky (2018) delineate the differences in revisions and editing with examples for multiple steps in revising and editing of a text. The entire process of revision is centered on the premise being discussed and presented—supported by argumentation and appealing to prospective readers. The emphasis on presenting a valid argument has been discussed in the textbook, but in writing, the argument needs to be presented in a way that is acceptable and effective not only in academia but as a preparation or support for workplace writing (Ferretti & Graham, 2019). Despite the differences in the program requirements, the discussion of writing at the graduate level has been mentioned repeatedly (McBrayer et al., 2020). Highlighting the writing needs for doctoral students can not be underestimated as the authors point out the failures that are causally linked to poor writing skills. Ganly (2020) provides a ten-step process to writing. The final step, reviewing, involves ensuring you have a clear and critical analysis, spelling and grammar are accurate, flow between passages is smooth, and referencing standards are met (p. 3). Others have studied the process of revision to see where writers emphasize the process to arrive at their results (Bowen & Van Waes, 2020). Not that every writer follows such a process, but there may be some correlation to what is revised, how it is revised, and the end product. Greene and Lidinsky (2018) list seven steps to revising (p. 15). Revising individual work is dependent on extensive reading in the domain interest area since writers will rely on the extant literature to not only frame their contentions but to evaluate the research of others objectively and thoroughly. In writing the assignment for Unit V, hopefully reading was the first step in writing, as noted in the textbook and is evident in the analysis presented. After thinking about a topical area and leaving it for a while, writers often develop other thoughts or


Revising and Editing

RCH 7302, Doctoral Writing and Inquiry Into Research 2



a need for further clarification, or even a different approach to the same topic. Here, revision is the next step and is in the context of the textbook discussions of writing and critical thinking: presenting a premise and a thesis, supporting documentation and argumentation, appealing to readers, style, and more. The journey to the final product can take many twists and turns, and that is not only good, but necessary, in most cases. Often, that journey takes many different routes in arriving at a final dissertation topic and research. Although McBrayer et al. (2020) studied completion of the dissertation as it is related to exams, their research and recommendation consistently discuss writing skills and research skills. Writing skills can not only impact the current coursework or job but can impact the completion and research associated with a dissertation. Adequately revising work through a multi-step process can enhance success in all these environments. Montgomery (2017) stresses the writing of multiple drafts for dissertations to be successful, and a dissertation starts with a topical area related to the writer’s domain expertise and interest. To become knowledgeable in an area of interest and expertise, it is necessary to read extensively (Barnet et al., 2020, pp. 40–85; Greene & Lidinsky, 2018, pp. 38–63). This is not a challenge unique to a particular program or area of the world but a need for strong writing skills at the doctoral level and research into a topical area to support the idea generation for a dissertation research topic (Sala-Bubaré et al., 2018). Fetters (2020) discusses identifying, researching, and aligning topics with research design. These considerations can be extremely helpful in finding topics and revising, refining, and eventually writing about them. Involving others in reviewing writing is a standard in academic writing with peer-reviewed journal articles, but there are other options as noted in the textbook and the discussion board for this unit. Direct research has found that different forms of review are helpful in writing and revisions (Achen, 2018). Now, with social media platforms, there may be increased options to involve others in review and revisions (Scott et al., 2019). The process or review and revision is central to all writing but particularly in academic writing and research, as is evident from the sources here and those noted in the textbook. Being open to research options will assist the writer in being less restrictive at the beginning of a topic (Fetters, 2020). Gray (2018) outlines steps and suggestions in selecting topics and proposes doing a SWOT analysis on the prospective topic choices to include the relevance of the topic and the parameters to consider in doing the research (see pp. 42–67 for a complete list of steps). For the purposes here, the many considerations in selecting a topic will directly influence the revisions and drafts that will take place after the initial idea.

References Achen, R. M. (2018). Addressing the "my students cannot write" dilemma: Investigating methods for

improving graduate student writing. Journal of the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, 18(4), 71– 85. https://doi.org/10.14434/josotl.v18i4.23040

Barnet, S., Bedau, H., & O'Hara, J. (2020). From critical thinking to argument: A portable guide (6th ed.).

Bedford/St. Martin’s. Bowen, N., & Van Waes, L. (2020). Exploring revisions in academic text: Closing the gap between process

and product approaches in digital writing. Written Communication, 37(3), 322–364. https://doi.org/10.1177/0741088320916508

Ferretti, R. P., & Graham, S. (2019). Argumentative writing: Theory, assessment, and instruction. Reading

and Writing, 32(6), 1345–1357. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11145-019-09950-x Fetters, M. D. (2020). The mixed methods research workbook: Activities for designing, implementing, and

publishing projects. SAGE. Ganly, T. (2020). Approaching assignment: A recipe for reflection. AISHE-J: The All Ireland Journal of

Teaching and Learning in Higher Education, 12(2), 1–10. Gray, D. E. (2018). Doing research in the real world (4th ed.). SAGE.

RCH 7302, Doctoral Writing and Inquiry Into Research 3



Greene, S., & Lidinsky, A. (2018). From inquiry to academic writing: A practical guide (4th ed.). Bedford/St. Martin's. https://online.vitalsource.com/#/books/9781319071677

McBrayer, J. S., Tolman, S., & Fallon, K. (2020). Doctoral candidacy examination scores and time to degree

completion. International Journal of Doctoral Studies, 15(1), 181–198. https://doi.org/10.28945/4529 Montgomery, A. E. (2017, March 9–10). Writing a dissertation: Tools for success [Paper presentation]. Adult

Higher Education Alliance Annual Meeting, Orlando, FL, United States. https://eric.ed.gov/contentdelivery/servlet/ERICServlet?accno=ED577006

Sala-Bubaré, A., Peltonen, J. A., Pyhältö, K., & Castelló, M. (2018). Doctoral candidates' research writing

perceptions: A cross-national study. International Journal of Doctoral Studies, 13, 327–345. https://doi.org/10.28945/4103

Scott, C. E., Ritter, N. L., Fowler, R. M., & Franks, A. D. (2019). Developing a community of academic writers:

Using social media to support academic accountability, motivation, and productivity. Journal of Literacy and Technology, 20(2), 61–96.

  • Course Learning Outcomes for Unit VI
  • Required Unit Resources
  • Unit Lesson
    • References



Let’s take a look at one writing group in action to see the potential of this approach to writing. One student, Rebecca Jegier, worked collaboratively with three other students — Jasmine, Michaela, and Kevin — on a paper about the purpose of education and the extent to which school reforms reflect what she refers to as “a growing culture of impatience.” She explained to her group that she struggled to draw a parallel between what she sees as a worn-out factory model of education (students sitting in rows) and the story of Blockbuster, a once-successful movie rental business that failed to respond to customers’ changing needs. She also felt that she still needed to sharpen her argument.


I think we are expected to argue what we think the purpose of education should be and to place our argument in the larger context of how others have defined the purpose historically.


I am still trying to decide what I think the purpose of education should be. I sort of think that education should prepare people for a job, but we also read that article — you know, the one that said we may not even know what jobs will be available in ten years. The author wrote that schools should prepare people to be creative, innovative, critical thinkers. That other essay explained that school should help people flourish. I haven’t decided what that means.


I think the important thing we need to decide is the issue. I agree that schools don’t really prepare us to be very creative or innovative. I guess that’s the issue.

Rebecca restated her understanding of the assignment before giving Jasmine, Michaela, and Kevin a copy of her draft. This is a valuable starting point because a writer’s interpretation of the writing assignment — the task, the purpose, and the audience — helps readers understand why she is taking a particular approach. If readers disagree with the writer’s interpretation, they should discuss their differences before the writer shares the draft and determine an appropriate response to the assignment. Rebecca then read her paper aloud while her group members listened and wrote notes to indicate specific words, phrases, and ideas that they wanted to discuss.