Power-Revision Techniques: Structure-Level Revision

One of the most important ways you can review a rough draft is to check the contents. All the good transitions, good organization, and clear sentence structure in the world can't help a report that doesn't have the right information. Information in a report can be "wrong" in several ways:

• It can be missing altogether: for example, imagine that somebody wrote a report on "virtual communities" but never bothered to define what that term means. It would be tough going from the start of that report.
• It's there but not enough of it: take the same example—imagine that the writer only made a few vague statements about virtual communities. What was needed was at least a paragraph on the subject, if not a full-blown 3- or 4-page section.
• It's there but at the wrong level for the audience: It's also possible to pitch information at the wrong level in terms of readers' knowledge, background, or needs. Imagine that the writer did include a 3-page section on data caching but written for the product developer (an "expert" audience) when the report was really intended for nonspecialists.

If you can get a sense of how information is inadequate in a report rough draft, you should be well on your way to knowing what specifically to do to revise. One useful brainstorming tool is to think in terms of types of content.

Use the questions provided in document contents to review your rough draft for types of information to add or change.

There are two ways of looking at the organization of information in a document:

• one, covered in the next section, involves looking at the sequence of chunks of information, seeing if they are in the right order.
• Another has to do with levels of information. You can look at the sentences or paragraphs in a rough draft and see that some sentences go to a deeper level of discussion on the topic than others. Other sentences act like the framework upon which those deeper-level sentences depend. By looking at structure in this way, you not only check its organization but also get a lot of good ideas about how to improve the content of the text.

Much more detailed explanation is provided at coordination and subordination in paragraphs.

If you have the right information in a report, at least you've got all the "right stuff" available for readers. However, it may still not be adequately organized—like when you've just moved and everything is a mess or still in boxes. You need two essential skills for reviewing the organization of a rough draft:

• Identifying the topic of chunks of information at various levels. To assess the organization of a string of paragraphs, you start by thinking of a word or phrase to identify the topic of each paragraphs—in other words, get a handle on each one. Then you stand back from those words or phrases, considering whether they are in the right sequence. However, that's only one level. You can also look within an individual paragraph for its organization. In this case, you identify the topic of each sentence and consider the sequencing of those sentences.
• Choosing the best sequence for chunks of information. Once you know the topic of each of the chunks of information (at whatever level you are investigating), then you can decide whether they are in the right sequence. This decision involves knowing the common sequencing patterns; here are some examples:
  
  
  • General → specific: One of the most comon ways to organize is to arrange chunks of information from general to specific. For example, defining all solar collectors is a more general discussion than discussing the different types of solar collectors. And describing the operation of a specific type of solar collector is even less general. This pattern is illustrated here:
    
    
    Revision with the general-to-specific organizational pattern. it is a more natural progression to start by defining what all solar collectors do, then move on to their different types.
  • Simple, basic → complex: Another way to arrange units of a discussion is to begin with the simple, basic, fundamental ones and then move on to the more complex and technical.
  • Thing-at-rest → thing-in-motion: Another organization pattern involves first describing the thing (as if in a photograph), then discussing its operation or process (as if in a video). This approach might work well for a discussion of a fuel-injection system.
  • Spatial movement: — If you are describing the physical details of something, you might want to use some pattern of physical movement, for example, top to bottom, left to right, or outside to inside.
  • Temporal movement: — One of the most common patterns is based on movement through time; arrange the discussion of events in relation to the temporal sequence.
  • Concept → application of the concept, examples: A common organizational pattern is to discuss a concept in general terms then discuss an application of it. For example, another chapter in this book discusses proposals first conceptually then discusses examples of proposals.
  • Data → conclusions: Another means of organizing information is to present data (observations, experimental data, survey results) then move on to the conclusions that can be drawn from that data. (And this pattern is sometimes reversed: present the conclusion first, then the data that supports it.)
  • Problem, question → solution, answer: You can also organize information by first discussing a problem or raising a question then moving on to the solution or answer.
  • Simplified version → detailed version: A useful way to explain technical matters to nonspecialists is to begin by discussing a simplified version of the thing, establish a solid understanding of it, then go right back and explain it all again but this time laying on the technical detail thick and heavy!
  • Most important → least important: A more "rhetorical" method of organization is to begin with the most important, the most eye-catching, the most dramatic information first then move on to information that is progressively less so. (And this pattern can be reversed: you can build up to a climax, rather than start with it.)
  • Most convincing → least convincing: — Similarly, you can start with the most convincing argument for your position—to get everybody's attention—then move on to less and less convincing ones. (This pattern can also be reversed: you can build up to your most convincing arguments.)

These are just a few possibilities. When the aim is informative, you arrange information so that you ensure that readers understand the basics before moving onto the complicated, technical stuff. When the aim is persuasive, you arrange things to maximize the persuasive effect on the readers, for example, by putting the strongest arguments first.

And in any case, you avoid mixing these approaches—for example, throwing out some data, then stating a few conclusions, and then doing this back and forth in a haphazard way. Keep the apples separate from the oranges!

One of the best things you can do is go back through a rough draft and check to see if you can insert topic sentences and overviews at key points. When we write, we're not normally sure exactly where a paragraph or section is going in terms of its content and logic. Once it has "gotten there," it is often necessary to go back to the beginning and add some sort of overview or modify what's already there to make the overview clearer. Readers need to know where they are going in a report, what's coming up next, and for that matter where they've just been.

Having an overview in a report is like having a map when you're in a new city. Topic sentences and overviews offer a perspective on what's where: the topic, the subtopics, the purpose of the upcoming discussion, its relation to the previous section and to the document as a whole. (Now some of this involves transitions, which is the next element to review for.)

For detailed treatment of this topic, see topic sentences and overviews.

You can have the right information in a report and have it organized properly, but something important can still go wrong. Readers can miss the "flow" of the ideas, have a hard time sensing how the chunks of information are related or connected to each other. What readers need is continuous guidance—which is what you the writer provide. And what you use to provide that guidance is called transitions—various devices that help readers along through a document. There is (or certainly should be) a logic that connects every sentence in a document and that dictates a certain sequence to those sentences.

See the chapter on coherence and transitions for detailed discussion and examples.

One last way to review your rough draft at the structure level is to check how you have defined the paragraph breaks. Paragraphs are odd creatures—some scholars of writing believe they don't exist and are just arbitrary break points that writers toss in whenever and wherever they damn well please. Sorry—in technical writing, the paragraph is a key player in the battle for clarity and comprehension. Although not always possible, paragraphs should occur where there is some shift in topic or subtopic or some shift in the way a topic is being discussed.

On a singlespaced full page of writing, look for at least one to four paragraph breaks—there's nothing magical about that average so don't treat it as if it were law. Just take a second look at those long paragraphs, and check for the possibility of paragraph breaks.

I would appreciate your thoughts, reactions, criticism regarding this chapter: your response—David McMurrey.