Schmid 1

WP2 Revision Sheet

While the process of writing and drafting WP 1 came quite naturally to me, WP 2
certainly did not come as easily. The project builders along the way were a trial-and-error
learning process for me as far as figuring out how to focus my research and writing. I can say
with great confidence that I learned invaluable research and citation skills while doing this
project, and ended up very proud of my final product. That being said, there is certainly always
room for improvement, and in this revision sheet I will outline the ways in which I attempted to
make my essay more concise and focused.
The main issue I focused on in the revision process was length. Coming into this class,
one of my main goals was to learn strategies to become a more concise writer, as I have a long
history (both in my writing and personal life) of being quite wordy. I combed through my essay
looking for words I could take out, sentences I could combine, etc.; as a result, there are small
edits in nearly every paragraph. The two big areas that I was able to shorten were my more
transitional paragraphs: the paragraph after I talk about articles and before I move into
textbooks, and the one after textbooks and before the conclusion. In the first instance, I realized
that I was reiterating the same ideas just in different words (see my original doc, paragraph 6), so
I summarized my main points into three sentences that explain how the two disciples approach
the topic of gender differently, and prepare the reader to move into an analysis of the textbooks.
The second big edit involved combining my two final paragraphs. I thought about doing this in
my first submission, actually, but I did initially enjoy the separation of summarizing my thoughts
on the different textbooks before moving into my final conclusion. However, upon review and
after reading Prof. Speisers suggestion to try to shorten the length, I decided I could still get my
final point across in just one paragraph. To do this, I removed some of the language from my

Schmid 2
original essay that mentioned the heated political times we face today and the nations
polarization when it comes to deciding what the proper roles for males and females are.
Instead, I summarize again the differing methods used by psychologists and religious scholars,
and close with a reminder of how discourse communities create spaces that facilitate the
development of new knowledge and growth. Overall, I was able to shave down my essay by
about 1-page, and I think this was successful in that the integrity and information was not
compromised by these cuts.
As far as improving the rest of the essay, I followed the advice of Prof. Speisers
commentary. I better defined what is scientific about the methods of psychology (paragraph 2)
by mentioning data gathering, laboratory studies, and methodical testing as some examples of
scientific research conducted by psychologists. I also corrected a few simple grammatical errors,
and added some transition phrases when moving into new topics (such as my transition from the
psychology article to the religious studies article, at the start of paragraph 4).
Overall, I think I have combined and/or removed many phrases that were repetitive or
redundant in my first draft. Prof. Speisers comments, along with re-reading my essay with a
fresh pair of eyes after a few weeks away from it, were very helpful in allowing me to notice my
mistakes and improve upon them. I hope that this effort comes across in my final draft, and that
my readers find it to be an informative, enjoyable, and worthwhile paper.