you-know-who, here in the U.S., there is a standard format used for peer editing. There are certain symbols that denote whether something is missing, a capitalized letter needs to not be capitalized, a word is spelled incorrectly, etc. The person who wrote the paper would be the one to rewrite the words and insert the commas, but the notations help guide them. It's actually quite a good system. (Obviously this is better for a physically printed paper.)
If a peer editor sees a mistake, they could mention how it could be fixed. Suggestions are the heart of editing, otherwise how could the writer possibly see through his/her own biased eyes?
Sheesh...um, this may be out of nowhere, but um...
so this brilliant plan of hi-lighting in different colors...how do you propose we do that here...online...where there is no paper or hi-lighters...0_o?
I'm in a University lit class, and it's the method we all use because it's always better to correct your own mistakes than having someone do it for you. I mean, you do your own math homework too, right, and then someone might point out where you've gone wrong? It's not like they do it for you and then say "this is how I did it..."
Maybe it's because I'm in a college lit class, but that's not the proper channels for essay proof reading. But, I do not want to continue littering this lovely journal with my comments, this will be my last Good luck with your..."brilliant" method
I can understand that, however, I would not want my students to do that. Nor would I want to do that either. A better method is to highlight the errors in different colors. Red for grammar and green for spelling - for example. That way you know exactly where the errors are but have to figure out what they are on your own. It's a brilliant method.
Sorry, no hard feelings, maybe I should have clearified, when you "fix" the mistake, the other person (whose paper you are proof reading) is there too and you show them how you "fixed" it.... That's what I meant
I never called you a cheater. I wondered if it would be called cheating. And of course I don't know you, so I have to go from what I read. If you worded it wrong that's one thing, and now it's been cleared up. But I cannot be expected to know that, and I did react on the way you'd worded it.
Good luck with your essay though.
v. Proof reading and fixing is not the same thing.
Okay, so I worded it incorrectly? And now you're here calling me a cheater when that the last thing I want. I don't want them fixing it, like I said I worded it wrong, I just need someone to point it out to me. The wonderful community on Mibba is excellent with grammar and like I have said before need someone to SHOW it to me so I know what fix. I just worded it wrong.
I am already a teacher, but thanks. (A sub, but a very well-liked one at that.) And I'm again, aware of that, but then someone should point the mistakes out for them and not 'fix' them. How are you otherwise supposed to learn?
Again, I understand that. "Fixing grammar, spelling, etc" usually does not mean "point out my errors so I can correct them" but "fix all my mistakes for me". That is not the same thing, and as a teacher I wouldn't allow it. That's just me though, I don't know what your teachers say.
You-know-who: it's just proof reading. My college lit teacher encourages us to proof read and point out and fix grammar/spelling mistakes in our classmates essays and papers. It's really not a big deal, it's not like we're writing the paper for them
I understand that, but doesn't the paper get judged also on grammar etc? Then you would be required to write all of it yourself, however with a friend perhaps just pointing out flaws etc?
If one of my students did it and I found out I'd have to fail them.
I'm not talking about editing information or inputting any information. I'm just talking about pointing about grammar and spelling errors. I never pick them up in my own writing and my grammar is awful. They wouldn't be WRITING my paper.
If a peer editor sees a mistake, they could mention how it could be fixed. Suggestions are the heart of editing, otherwise how could the writer possibly see through his/her own biased eyes?