Revising Your Paper
Paul Lewis
With thanks to Mark Weal
Today’s plan
Summary review recap
Your reviews
How to read reviews
Revising your paper
How we will mark your paper
What those marks will mean
Summary Reviews
 Find a consensus from the reviews of the paper
 It’s irrelevant whether you agree with the reviewers
 Shouldn’t introduce new points
 Avoid adding your own opinion where possible
 Deal with clear conflicts from reviewers
 Highlight important revisions for the author
 Give a clear recommendation to the committee
Reviews
 You should submit three reviews.
 The reviews you do should be considered, insightful,
constructive, and of a high standard.
 When you get the reviews of your paper back, you
should assume the same to be true.
How to read reviews
 Your reviewers will have tried to be constructive
 They want to help you
 It’s not personal
 Use them to your advantage
Interpreting reviews
 Often comments will be unambiguous.
 “you’ve not included reference (Millard, 01)”
 Sometimes they won’t be quite so clear cut.
 You may have to read between the lines.
What did they mean?
“I don’t really understand what the problem is.”
 Your introduction doesn’t set the scene properly
 You try to cover too much too quickly
 You’ve left out something important without realising it
What did they mean?
“I didn’t understand why this diagram was here.”
 Is it in an inappropriate place?
 Do you explain in the text what the diagram is and why
it is there?
 Does it add anything to the argument? Could it easily
be removed?
What did they mean?
“I thought it was going to provide a comparison but then it
just became a technical description of the technology”
 Have you been clear to the reader about what the intentions
of the paper are?
 Does your argument change half way through the paper?
 Have you focussed too much on the technical details at the
expense of your argument?
Revising your paper
 Read you paper critically
 Write down your main argument (elevator test) on a
piece of paper
 For each section / paragraph
 Does the reader need this information?
 Does it directly address your argument?
 Could it be removed and not affect the main argument of
your paper?
Revising your paper
 Look at the structure
 Is it relevant to the topic?
 Is the topic covered in depth?
 Are the appropriate elements there?
Revising your paper
 Assess the originality
 Have you made interesting points?
 Have you demonstrated creative thought?
Revising your paper
 Do you construct a clear argument?
 Have you presented your evidence well?
 Does your argument develop logically through the paper.
Revising your paper
 Check your sources?
 Have you clearly acknowledged all of your sources?
 Have you correctly cited all your sources in the body of the
paper?
 Have you provided full references for all your sources?
 Are there citations with no matching reference, or
references that aren’t cited?
Revising your paper
 Thinking critically about your paper, what is the weakest
part?
 How can you make it better?
 Would restructuring help?
 Do you just need more content?
Revising your paper
 Think critically about your style of writing?
 Are you succinct?
 Does the paper flow well?
 Are your sentences grammatically correct and
unambiguous?
 Are all your figures and tables appropriate and correctly
used and referred to?
Revising your paper
 Get someone to proof read it for you
 To check it is understandable.
 To find spelling, grammar, punctuation problems.
How will we mark your paper
 10% - Presentation (writing, paper structure, grammar,
spelling, use of figures and tables, formatting)
 20% - Literature (context, related work, references)
 10% - Intellectual performance (originality,
independence and creativity)
 40% - Professionalism (technical content, research
methodology, evaluation methods, contribution)
 20% - Argument (logical structure, use of evidence,
reflection and conclusions)
What your marks will mean
80%+ prize worthy
(excellent paper, could be submitted to a conference…)
70% - 80% 1st
(very well written, clear originality, excellent understanding…)
60% - 70% 2.1
(well written, good understanding, clear argument…)
50% - 60% 2.2
(average paper, adequate references, some understanding…)
40% - 50% 3rd
(satisfactory paper, some background reading…)
Less than 40% - Fail
(poorly written, barely understood topic…)
Questions?