Abstract

There has been much interest recently in researching the changes editors, supervisors, and other language brokers make to the writing of L2 researchers who are attempting to publish in English. However, studies focused on the presubmission proofreading of students’ university essays are rarer. In this study of student proofreading, 14 UK university proofreaders all proofread the same authentic, low-quality master’s essay written by an L2 speaker of English to enable a comparison of interventions. Proofreaders explained their interventions by means of a talk aloud while proofreading and at a post-proofreading interview. Quantitative and qualitative analysis of the data reveals evidence of widely differing practices and beliefs, with the number of interventions ranging from 113 to 472. Some proofreaders intervened at the level of content, making lengthy suggestions to improve the writer’s essay structure and argumentation, while others were reluctant to do more than focus on the language. Disturbingly, some proofreaders introduced errors into the text while leaving the writer’s errors uncorrected. I conclude that the results are cause for deep concern for universities striving to formulate ethical proofreading policies.

Journal
Written Communication
Published
2018-10-01
DOI
10.1177/0741088318786236
CompPile
Open Access
Closed
Topics
Export

Citation Context

References (42) · 3 in this index

  1. Adams R. (2015, June 15). Cheating found to be rife in British schools and universities. Guardian. Retrieved …
  2. Baty P. (2006, April 7). Fluency can be all yours . for a small fee. Times Higher Education Supplement. Retri…
  3. Theses and dissertations: Checking the language
  4. Written Communication
  5. 10.1080/03075071003777716
Show all 42 →
  1. 10.4324/9780203856338
  2. 10.1016/j.esp.2003.09.004
  3. 10.1016/B978-1-84334-666-1.50009-6
  4. Presentation to the Mediterranean Editors and Translators Meeting
  5. 10.1016/B978-1-84334-666-1.50011-4
  6. 10.1007/s10805-017-9278-x
  7. 10.1080/02602938.2017.1336746
  8. Teaching L2 composition: Purpose, process, and practice
  9. 10.1016/j.jslw.2016.03.004
  10. 10.1016/j.jslw.2009.05.002
  11. 10.1016/j.esp.2009.08.004
  12. 10.1080/03075079.2010.531462
  13. 10.1007/s10805-017-9299-5
  14. 10.2989/16073614.2010.519110
  15. Lancaster T. (2016, October 19). “It’s not a victimless crime”—the murky business of buying academic essays. …
  16. 10.1016/j.jslw.2012.01.001
  17. Academic writing in a global context: The politics and practices of publishing in English
  18. 10.1080/02602938.2015.1013919
  19. 10.1016/j.jslw.2016.06.005
  20. Written Communication
  21. Marsh S. (2017, October 9). Universities urged to block essay-mill sites in plagiarism crackdown. Guardian. R…
  22. 10.3390/publications4030026
  23. Guidance & Counselling
  24. 10.4324/9781315767130
  25. 10.2307/377047
  26. NU Ideas Journal
  27. Times Higher Education Supplement
  28. Shaw C. (2014). International students are turning to proofreading agencies to get support. Retrieved from ww…
  29. Written Communication
  30. Society for Editors and Proofreaders. (2005). Code of practice. Retrieved from www.sfep.org.uk/assets/files/p…
  31. Ethics in applied linguistics research: Language researcher narratives
  32. University of Essex. (n.d.). University policy and guidance on proofreading of student texts. Retrieved from …
  33. 10.1515/9783110883527.457
  34. 10.1016/j.esp.2012.04.001
  35. 10.1016/j.jeap.2012.10.007
  36. 10.1016/j.jslw.2014.09.010
  37. 10.1016/j.jslw.2014.03.002