When editing your own work, be very critical. Be very, very critical. Always ask yourself whether the meaning of what you have written will be instantly clear to the reader. Put yourself in the position of the reader (who is not as familiar with the material as you are) and then read what you’ve written. Any sections with even slightly ambiguous meanings should be re-worked.
One step, or line of thinking, must logically follow the preceding one; i.e. there must be a “train of thought”.
Unconnected content will confuse the reader.
Consecutive paragraphs must be in a logical order, and you must make the connections between them clear to the reader. Transitional words can help e.g. “however,” “also,” “yet,” “although” etc. However, make sure that transitional words are used correctly.
There must be sufficient supporting details for the reader to follow, and be convinced by, your line of reasoning.
It doesn’t matter if the individual sentences make sense as stand-alone sentences; if there is no logical progression of thought within the paragraph, then the paragraph doesn’t work.
For example: change “during the course of” to “during” and “few in number” to “few”. Similarly, avoid using the phrase “It has been shown that…”; simply describe the thing that has been shown. After all, if you are describing it then it must have “been shown” (and don’t forget to add a reference for the information).
Strive for a maximum information content of sentences, which in turn will reduce the total number of sentences and total number of words.
Before editing - two sentences
Lamb and Chopp (2010) examined the foraging behaviour of bumblebees on fireweed. They showed that the bumblebees foraged in a manner consistent with the “optimal foraging” model.
After editing - same information - less words - one sentence.
Bumblebees foraging on fireweed exhibit a pattern consistent with the “optimal foraging” model (Lamb and Chopp 2010).
Before editing - two poorly connected sentences
Table 1 shows the chlorophyll and carotenoid contents of iron-sufficient and iron-limited algal cells. Iron-sufficient algal cells exhibited greater total pigment content, but a lower carotenoid:chlorophyll ratio.
After editing - one clear sentence
Iron-sufficient algal cells exhibited greater total pigment content than iron-limited cells, but a lower carotenoid:chlorophyll ratio (Table 1).
Instead of writing “there was a major stimulation in growth due to auxin application,” write “there was a two-fold stimulation in growth due to auxin application.”
Reviewing the writing of others is a good way to improve your own writing; it’s easier to see errors in someone else’s writing than it is to see errors in your own. Getting feedback and suggestions for improvement from your peers before you hand in a report for grading is extremely valuable. Not only that, but peer review is something real scientists do. Anonymous peer review is part of the process involved in publishing one’s research.
The first step in reviewing a paper is similar to the strategy used to understand a journal article.
On your second read, examine the overall organization of the assignment.
Does the assignment you are reviewing meet the criteria set out in the criteria document or rubric?
Make sure you are respectful in your tone.
Remember, the comments are not about you, they are about the writing! We all get very attached to our writing and tend to feel personally attacked when someone makes a lot of negative comments, but try to remember: the comments are there to help you improve.