Support Role 3.3: Half Manuscript Developmental Edit
At the end of Year 1, Unit 8 (4 months into the project) each individual author hands in one chapter draft, which adds up to roughly half the manuscript. The Developmental Editor reads the first chapter drafts for consistency across chapters and provides actionable, encouraging feedback to the Project Manager and the author team. The feedback is provided to the authors during Year 1, Unit 9 (5 months into the project; Unit 9 is a three-month unit).
The first developmental edit is a critical checkpoint for catching issues with the manuscript to keep each book on track with respect to the project’s criteria for success. The Developmental Editor will provide suggestions that encourage each chapter to improve in the four areas of our criteria for success: learner focus, representation of diverse voices, accessibility, and Oregon context.
The Developmental Editor will prepare global feedback for the entire team using the {Course #} Half Manuscript Draft Developmental Edit Feedback [Google Doc] template provided. Please include a minimum of 4 narrative comments in each individual chapter document to identify issues related to the criteria for success, and suggest how to resolve them. Aim for one narrative comment per rubric category and show how a revision can improve each passage. The narrative comments are exemplars for issues that you pull together in your summary feedback.
The Developmental Editor meets with each author team and the Project Manager to share the feedback in the second month of Year 1, Unit 9 (beginning of month 6). The authors use your recommendations to create an action plan to address revision priorities and complete revisions by the end of month 7. After the first developmental edit and revision, the author team has complete chapters that can serve as models for the other chapters that they will write.
Using the {Course #} Half Manuscript Draft Developmental Edit Feedback Template
The template is pre-populated with messages for author teams. Please feel welcome to make it your own.
Half manuscript draft developmental edit rubric
The rubric you’ll use corresponds to the categories of the project’s criteria for success.
| Characteristics for Review | Well-Developed | Developing | Needs Development |
|---|---|---|---|
| Learner Focus | This manuscript knows its audience and speaks directly and clearly to them at an appropriate level. The chapter has all required parts and the elements are aligned to support student learning. | This manuscript shows progress towards a learner focus and will benefit from work on readability and reducing word count. With more time invested the chapter elements will align to support the learning outcomes. | This manuscript needs to be refocused on the student audience. Chapter elements are missing or lack clarity on connection to learning outcomes. The drafting process is incomplete and outline elements are showing up in the chapter. |
| Representation of Diverse Voices | This manuscript demonstrates an exemplary focus on lifting up diversity, equity, and inclusion through examples, spotlights, and citations. | This manuscript discusses the elements of diversity, equity, and inclusion and will benefit from additional research or inviting new contributors to represent minoritized identities. | This manuscript can do more to support the diversity, equity, and inclusion goals of this project. |
| Accessibility | This manuscript does an excellent job of anticipating the needs of all learners, including students with disabilities. | This manuscript follows some accessibility practices and will benefit from a review to make sure that all learners can use the whole text. | This manuscript will not be accessible to all learners as written. |
| Oregon Context | This manuscript will be relevant and engaging to current, diverse Oregon students. | This manuscript has started to develop its Oregon context and can do more to connect with current, diverse Oregon students. | This manuscript is missing an Oregon context. |
Readability at a glance:
- Word count: In Google Docs, go to Tools and select the “Word count” tool from the drop-down menu.
- Calculate average reading time by dividing the total word count by 138.
- Run a readability analysis Readability Scoring System [Website]. This is a clunky tool that can only handle 3,000 words at a time, so if the chapter is longer, you’ll have to divide it into multiple sections and run each section separately to obtain a readability score. The consensus score will be the average of all sections. If there are substantial differences in readability +/-3 points, or sections that exceed grade 12, please note this under the Comments section.
Reading chapters and making comments
For each chapter, please provide feedback on each category assessed with the rubric. Use the bullet points in our criteria for success to show authors how to revise their chapters in alignment with project goals.
Your feedback should show substantial engagement with the chapter author’s plans and ideas for their work, no matter how rough the draft. Because the authors are directed to the criteria for success at multiple points during their training, you do not need to create a checklist or point out what is incomplete at this stage. Instead, offer specific recommendations that encourage authors to complete their chapters while focusing on the criteria for success.
Use the comments feature of Google Docs to highlight at least one example per rubric category that corresponds to the recommendations you make in the feedback document. This can be something the author is doing well that you’d like to see more of; or something that the author needs to bring more attention to in revision.
Use the provided shorthand in comments to call in-line attention to issues you plan to discuss when you meet with the author team. Please add or edit the shorthand to reflect the comments you leave, and make sure that your comments stay aligned with the project’s criteria for success.
Remember, the author team works with the Project Manager to develop an action plan for revision based on your recommendations. You do not need to make a plan for the team. Instead, your feedback will focus the authors’ revision efforts on the project’s criteria for success.
Most importantly, your feedback will help the authors feel prepared and supported to continue their hard work on this project.
Licenses and Attributions for Half Manuscript Developmental Edit
Open content, original
“Half Manuscript Developmental Edit” by Open Oregon Educational Resources is licensed under CC BY-NC-SA 4.0.
Open content, shared previously
“Half Manuscript Developmental Edit” is adapted from Developmental Review Process by Stephanie Lenox for Chemeketa Press, licensed under CC BY-NC-SA 4.0.
