Below, we define many of the Key Terms and techniques that appear throughout our Revision Strategies Guide. Each term below links to its corresponding entry in the Index, which lists the Revision Strategies pages where the term or technique appears.
To return to the anchor-linked alphabet below click: 
A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z
A.
Abstraction is a strategy that writers use to help readers understand complex concepts more concretely, or to shift their attention to details that the writer views as the most important dimensions of larger categories and systems. A writer might begin with a specific example and then “abstract” a broader set of rules, concepts, or ideas from it, or, alternatively, discuss the abstraction and then zoom in on a specific example that helps readers understand it. For instance, in defining “non-human actors,” Bruno Latour first discusses the term in the abstract and then uses the example of a speed bump to help readers link it to something tangible and relatable.
Academic language differs from non-academic language in the degree to which it needs to deal with very precise and rigorously defined meanings. It uses terms with agreed-upon meanings within the discipline and often involves defining terms in specific ways that differ from that word’s everyday meaning. The overall effect of these efforts at communicating with precise technical meanings is language that is noticeably distinct from everyday language, and that can sometimes feel intimidating to writers who are new to the field until they gain a better understanding of key terms. Academic language is a specific form of technical communication that exists to advance the goal of collective knowledge-building.
The process of scrutinizing evidence — a book, scientific results, etc. — in order to draw a conclusion from that evidence. Analysis leads to an opinion supported by sources and, unlike summary, makes an argument based on the available evidence.
The reader or readers who will be engaging with a writer’s work. Depending on the content, this could be a specialist (e.g. a professor reading the writer’s work for class or a colleague in their field) or a non-expert (e.g. a hobbyist, someone in a different field, etc.) A writer’s audience affects how much (or little) background information they need to provide.
B.
C.
When we talk about claims in academic writing, what we are really talking about are truth-claims. Truth-claims are assertions about what is true, or real, or factual about the world around us. At the end of the day, all academic writing exists to assert and evaluate the validity of truth-claims. Think of it this way: in every academic discipline, scholars seek to understand various aspects of the world around us, to understand what is true about that world. When scholars make claims, they are claiming that their assertion is true. If another scholar has reasons to doubt that claim, they may feel obliged to refute the other scholar’s truth-claim and to offer an alternative claim of their own. Only truth-claims lead people to argue and debate the facts of the world around us.
The quality of being easy to understand as a result of clear communication. This can be achieved through word choice, signposting, grammatical correctness, and/or background context, among other components. A work has clarity when its intended audience can understand its purpose, claims, and intentions without excessive rereading.
Complimentary claims support the primary claim without necessarily following from it. Their secondary emphasis comes not from their logical subordination to the primary claim, but from your authorial decision about the scope of the project. In other words, these are claims that support your primary claim, but are not the focus of your argument.
You may see phrases like: “On a related note…” “It also merits mention…” “It is worth noting…”
The part of a writer’s thesis or main claim that narrows their topic to one concept or idea and conveys their approach to it.
Any and all background information that ensures that readers understand the writer’s central claim and its importance as well as the other claims they make in their paper and their analyses. For example, in a scientific paper, context might refer to previous experiments, which have contributed to the building of the writer’s own experiment. In the humanities, context might refer to a description of a historical moment, information about a piece of literature the writer is unpacking, or the position of various critics with whom they are engaging. In the social sciences, context might refer to background information regarding the writer’s ethnographic site, previous data sets they are considering, or various phenomena they are describing.
Contravening claims complicate the primary claim. They may appear superficially opposed to your argument, but, when interrogated, add nuance or supportive detail. They are often introduced as anticipated reader objections in order to answer questions the reader might have about your own argument. In the sciences, we often address claims of this kind in our discussion and/or conclusions when addressing the limitations of our studies or pointing to future research projects.
You may use language like: “The reader may object that… I contend, however…”
If an argument lays out a line of reasoning that supports the validity of a particular claim or conclusion, then a counterargument lays out a line of reasoning that supports the invalidity of that same claim or conclusion. At times, a writer will mount a counterargument against another scholar’s argument. At other times, a writer will voice and refute a counterargument that they anticipate some people raising against their own argument; this is done in order to demonstrate that the writer has carefully considered alternative perspectives and has clear reasons for dismissing them, providing further defense for their own claims.
D.
A clash between two incompatible elements, whether in tone or in the content of two parts of an argument. Dissonance in argument prevents the reader from understanding the main claim and purpose of the work. There can also be dissonance between the meaning of the written text in a draft and the intended meaning a writer is trying (but still failing) to convey. Looking for dissonance is an essential element of revision. If a writer doesn’t see a dissonance-related problem, then they can’t fix it.
E.
Evidence is the source material a writer is analyzing and using to make their argument. Evidence can refer to a wide array of pieces of information: data from an experiment, a quote from a book or article, a historical fact, a graph or chart, a painting or artifact, observations they have made in the field, etc.
F.
First developed in the 1970s by Peter Elbow, free writing is a versatile exercise intended to help writers clarify their thinking about a particular aspect of their project. Free writing gives the writer time and space to get their ideas down on paper without the pressure of producing something intended for an external reader. The writer sets a timer for a specific length of time, typically 10 or 20 minutes, and writes uninterrupted for the entire duration without editing or attending to grammatical or structural concerns. In Elbow’s original conceptualization of the practice, which he links to “automatic writing,” he emphasizes the importance of never lifting pen from paper (or fingers from keys) even when the writer feels stuck. Instead, if the writer can’t think of a word or isn’t sure what to say, Elbow instructs them to just keep writing and repeat “I can’t think of what to say…” over and over until they find a way through (or the timer goes off).
The specific goal of a free write depends on the writer’s needs at that moment. For instance, if a writer is in the brainstorming stage and does not have a clear sense of what they want to write about, they might use a free write to capture their ideas and then use whatever writing they produce as a starting point for an outline or draft. If a writer is having trouble articulating their argument, they might use the free write to think through what they are trying to communicate to their audience and then turn back to key moments like their introduction and conclusion paragraphs and use what they produced to revise those sections. If a writer is struggling to understand how thinking from different scholars is connected to their own project, they might use the free write to sketch out some of the ways that their ideas, keywords, and projects intersect, and then use that as the starting point for their literature review. Ultimately, free writing is an exercise that uses writing to think; it is a means for a writer to take a step back from the project, clarify their thinking, and make strategic decisions about how to move forward.
Funneling, or the “funnel method,” is a technique that helps writers think about the broadest and narrowest dimensions of their argument, as well as how the smallest components of their writing (e.g. words, phrases, and sentences) work together to support the largest components of their writing (e.g. paragraphs, sections, and chapters). It is commonly used to help less experienced writers structure their introduction and conclusion paragraphs by asking them to envision the sentences as having the same shape as a funnel; in the introduction, the first sentence sets out a broad statement about their topic and the following sentences gradually move readers to a narrow statement of their thesis. In the conclusion, the first sentence presents a narrow restatement of the thesis and the following sentences gradually move readers to a broader statement about the real-world implications of their claim.
Yet, funneling can also serve as a reading strategy that asks the writer to think about their argument in increasingly finer detail, which is how we use it in Revision Strategies. The writer begins at the broadest level by rereading their draft and summarizing their main argument in a few sentences. Then, they reread the introduction paragraph and compare it to their summary to see if the two align. Next, the writer moves to the paragraph level, rereading each paragraph to make sure it works to support the main argument. Finally, the writer moves to the sentence level, rereading each sentence within each paragraph to make sure it works to support the claim of that paragraph. In working through this process, the writer gains a better understanding of each layer of their argument, and can revise to make sure their writing has a consistent focus and that all the parts work together to support the whole.
G.
H.
I.
J.
When academic writing employs technical terms either incorrectly or without defining them for the reader, the result is jargon. Often, people make the mistake of using the term “jargon” as a synonym for “academic writing.” It isn’t. Jargon is more accurately understood as the name for academic writing that uses a great deal of technical terminology, but in a way that leaves readers feeling very unclear of what is actually being said. In some cases, jargon happens when a writer with a firm command of the material simply fails to define their terms. In other cases, it happens when a writer with less command of the material uses jargon to intimidate their readers, to make their readers feel that they are at fault for not understanding. Good academic writing defines the meaning of all the technical terms it uses, thereby ensuring that readers are able to understand and follow the argument.
K.
L.
A literature review is a summary and analysis of existing research on a specific topic. It is a tool that demonstrates a writer’s understanding of a field and can be used to support a thesis or research question. A literature review is also written for the benefit of readers who are less familiar with the existing scholarship on the topic under discussion.
The organization of claims and the transitions that connect them, which results in an ordered progression of ideas. This allows the reader to follow your argument’s development and stakes. If the reasoning does not make sense to readers, they experience a “logical gap” in the writer’s thinking that can make the argument less persuasive.
M.
The method or methods that a writer uses to (1) gather their evidence and (2) analyze their evidence. For example, writers in the sciences or social sciences might use data analysis, modeling, focus groups, or case studies while writers in the humanities might use critical analysis, rhetorical analysis, archival work, or close reading, among other methods. Academic writers typically include a methods section in their projects to help readers understand how they approached and worked with their object(s) of study and demonstrate why the methodology they selected was appropriate and generative.
Mind mapping is a versatile technique for the visual organization and representation of information that can be useful at many stages in the writing process. To make a mind map–whether on paper or using a software program–the writer typically starts with a single main item they wish to explore: a concept, term, claim, theme, topic, chapter heading, etc. They put this item in the center of the map and then draw branches out from this center that they fill in, in turn, with items related to the one in the center. This branching process can be iterated as much as the writer needs. Some mind maps end at this stage and are mainly text-based representations of hierarchical information. However, the writer can also use their mind map to elucidate more complex relationships between items through categorizing items by color, connecting items via logical symbols, adding icons or illustrations, etc.
Mind maps allow the writer to work with their material in a new modality that clearly shows its most important components and how they are connected. The shift from verbal to visual thinking can spark fresh ideas for the writer or help them re-imagine options for presenting existing ideas. The writer might use a mind map early in their process to brainstorm everything they want to cover and begin to arrange this information. A mind map may help them improve their comprehension of a source they consult during their research by capturing, say, both the evidence for each claim its author makes and how those claims work together to build an argument. Before starting a draft, the writer could plan the overall structure and organization of their work by mapping out sections and subsections (a process similar to storyboarding). Using a mind map in this way can help writers easily visualize and decide between different possible arrangements of the sections. Mind mapping can also help the writer think through their work on a macro scale, whether they are considering major structural changes to an existing draft or wish to step outside of the writing itself to plan out what they need to get done for the project.
Mirror outlining is a strategy intended to help writers remember what they wanted to say and compare it to what they’ve actually written. To apply this strategy, the writer creates an outline of their current draft from memory without looking at the text. The purpose of this step is for the writer to capture what they think they are saying (or what they want to be saying) in each paragraph. Next, they create a reverse outline of the draft by rereading each paragraph, summarizing the main point in one or two sentences, and putting those sentences in a bulleted outline. This step captures what the writer is actually doing in each paragraph. Finally, the writer compares the two outlines to see if the documents “mirror” each other. If they do, this means that the writer has a clear understanding of their argument and is effectively communicating their ideas. If not, the writer may need to revise their work so that it more accurately reflects their intentions. Like reverse outlining, this is an adaptable strategy that can be applied to a whole text or to shorter sections of text depending on the writer’s needs.
There are several advantages to mirror outlining. In trying to remember what they said without reference to the draft, writers often discover (or rediscover) important points that they want to include but might have forgotten about when immersed in the writing process. Additionally, it helps writers identify what ideas should be most memorable to their readers and create a revision plan that will put those ideas front and center. Mirror outlining can be a generative tool for longer projects, where writers are prone to lose track of their claims throughout the drafting process, and can also be helpful with shorter projects like application materials where it is vital for writers to decide what key claims about their skills and abilities they want to communicate to potential employers.
N.
Narrative is the story a writer tells about their object of study. Storytelling is a particularly useful “off the page” framing paradigm that reminds writers to consider their audience and what orienting information that audience needs to know to understand the movements of the writer’s ideas and insights – the “plot” of their story. Often, a sound narrative renders a writer’s argument in a clear, logically coherent arc.
O.
P.
What a paragraph is intended to accomplish within the larger scheme of the text. For instance, a paragraph might provide readers with context, offer a concrete example to elucidate a key concept or claim, or address a counterargument that complicates the previous paragraph(s). Having a clear sense of a paragraph’s purpose can help the writer make strategic choices about how to frame that paragraph for readers in the topic sentence.
A statement that is assumed to be true and from which a conclusion can be drawn. Sometimes, a piece of writing will identify the premises that underlie a particular claim. Other times, the premises of a statement are left unstated. The logic of an argument is strong only if the premises that underlie it are valid.
Q.
R.
Reverse outlining is an adaptable strategy that makes the structure of a text more visible. Whereas writers create outlines in the pre-drafting stage to move from ideas to a draft, they create reverse outlines at varying points in the revision stage to help them take a step back from a completed draft and make key decisions about structure and content. There are different ways to approach reverse outlining, but the basic exercise involves reading through a completed draft, summarizing each paragraph in one or two sentences, and putting those sentences in a bulleted outline to create a skeletal version of the text. This helps writers assess how readers might experience their current structure, as well as whether each paragraph is making the claim that they think it is and includes sufficient evidence. Sometimes, writers use reverse outlining on a smaller scale to understand the structure of a particular section of their writing (e.g. a chapter in a book or a section in an article), or even to think through how they are structuring sentences within a single paragraph.
If a writer has concerns about a specific dimension of their project, they can create a reverse outline with that in mind. For instance, if a writer wants to understand what role their sources are playing in the current draft, they might create sub-bullets for each paragraph that capture all their evidence and color-code it so that they can see when and how they are using each source. Alternatively, if a writer wants to assess whether they are effectively connecting their sub-claims to their central claim, they might use sub-bullets to capture all the sentences where they forge those kinds of connections so that they can spot places where they might need to do more of that work. Reverse outlining can also be used as a reading strategy; creating a reverse outline of someone else’s text can help the reader more readily understand the parts of the argument and how they work together to support the claim.
A paragraph, often positioned towards the end of the introduction, that clearly lays out the major arguments and takeaways to help the reader navigate the structure. The roadmap paragraph is ultimately a kind of signposting and is common in many disciplines. Some writers use the roadmap paragraph as a kind of outlining, including it in their early drafts as a means of helping them articulate and think through the different sections of their project, and then refining or removing it as they revise.
S.
Signal phrases help readers transition between the ideas presented by the writer and the ideas drawn from their sources, creating a greater sense of continuity and connection between the different voices within a piece of writing. Signaling not only helps readers understand who/where ideas are coming from, but also allows writers to maintain control over their evidence by framing quotations and paraphrases within the specific context of their project. A signal phrase might be as simple as “X explains that…” or could more actively position the writer’s thinking in relation to the source by saying something like “X aptly claims that…”
Words, phrases, and transitions that guide the reader through a piece of writing, letting them know which claims are most important and where the argument changes focus. Signposting can be very straightforward (e.g. “Having established x, I will now go on to discuss y”) or it can be more subtle as with bridge sentences that connect two paragraphs with a transition word like “but”, “however”, or “nevertheless.” Signposting is a scalable concept, which means it occurs in different places to different degrees throughout a piece of writing. It might appear in the form of a short phrase (i.e. signal phrases), in the form of a topic sentence or transition sentence, or even in the form of an entire paragraph or section (i.e. a roadmap paragraph). Ultimately, signposting helps the reader understand why the writer has arranged their ideas in a certain way so that they can focus more on the evidence and argumentation.
Storyboarding is a visual and/or text-based strategy that helps writers organize their argument with particular attention to the narrative arc or plot that they want to establish for readers. It can be used at many points in the writing process, and can take different forms depending on the writer’s needs. If a writer is moving from brainstorming to drafting, they create a storyboard by putting each of the points they want to make and/or evidence they want to use on separate index cards (or the digital equivalent), and arranging them to create a logical sequence that culminates in their argument. If a writer has completed a draft, they might use storyboarding as a kind of reverse outlining, writing the main point of each paragraph and/or any evidence they use on index cards (or the digital equivalent) and rearranging them to explore other possible narrative structures. The level of detail that writers attend to in creating their storyboards often depends on the narrative complexity of their project. For instance, writers working on longer projects where they must think about narrative not only at the level of sentences and paragraphs but also at the level of sections and chapters, might generate more detailed storyboards than writers working on shorter projects.
This multimodal strategy originated in the film industry, where it has long been used to help writers and directors consider how to communicate complex ideas to a broad audience with varied levels of knowledge and a diverse set of needs. While many writers perform text-based versions of storyboarding, sometimes using color-coding to help them visually distinguish between major and minor claims, evidence from different sources, etc., some writers create visual representations (i.e. drawings) of their main points instead to help them think through their ideas in a different medium. Ultimately, this strategy helps writers think through structure and hierarchy so that they can figure out what sequence of claims will tell the most compelling and fluid story for their intended audience.
Style is an umbrella term for the vast array of writing choices that inflect both the form and content of basic statements. This includes, but is not limited to, word choice, sentence structure, sentence length, rhetorical techniques, figuration, and tone. Writers use different styles to create different kinds of experiences for their readers.
Subordinate claims logically follow, or otherwise derive from, a primary claim. These are secondary claims that your primary claim entails as a matter of course. These may be introduced as component parts or notable consequences of your core argument.
Subordinate claims begin with language like this: “As a consequence…” “It follows, then…” “Incidentally, this suggests…”
Summative claims restate the preceding claims of a section in a condensed way. These are not entirely new claims, but rather restatements of already established claims in a new, synthesized way. These may be introduced in the closing paragraphs of a section, or in the conclusion to an article or chapter.
Summative claims use language like: “To restate the argument to this point…” “So far, I have established…” “In sum…”
T.
An argumentative statement that can’t be answered with yes or no, but rather requires argumentation through examples and analysis to be defended. In the humanities, the thesis usually comes at the end of the introduction. This can also refer to your paper’s main claim as a whole (its thesis).
Tone names the attitude with which writers speak to their reader. Most commonly, people think of tone in academic writing in terms of the spectrum from formal to informal, but there are examples of many different tones being deployed in academic writing—playful, mocking, strident, conciliatory, beseeching, lamentory, and urgent, among others. Like style, tone plays a key role in shaping how readers experience a text.
A topic sentence is the sentence at the beginning of a paragraph that helps readers understand its purpose or argument in the context of the larger project, connecting the claims that the writer makes in individual paragraphs to the argument as a whole. Revising topic sentences is thus one of the most effective ways to make the writer’s argument more visible and to reshape the reader’s experience of that argument. If a reader skims topic sentences, they should be able to gain a clear sense of the argument and understand the structure of that argument.
A transition is any moment where the writer is shifting the reader’s attention to something new and unfamiliar. We often think about transitions happening between paragraphs, sections, and chapters, but writers might also use transitional phrases (e.g. as a result, despite, on the other hand, before, after, etc.) within sentences or paragraphs to establish the relationship between two or more ideas. Transitions are crucial moments in any project because if the reader does not understand the logic behind how things are structured, they might feel lost or frustrated, and, consequently, be less likely to find the writer’s argument persuasive. To help readers navigate these moments, writers might offer context to familiarize readers with whatever new ideas, terms, and concepts they are presenting and/or use signaling language and signposting to clearly articulate the logic behind the structure (e.g. Building on this section’s claim that X, the next section investigates Y in order to demonstrate Z). One strategy for testing whether a transition is effective is reading the last and first sentences of subsequent paragraphs, sections, or chapters aloud to see if the structural logic is evident.
U.
V.
The Vacuum is a conceptual space for writers to isolate one idea or part of their work – a Key Term, piece of evidence, claim, or other object of study – and develop their thinking about it and/or what they are communicating to their reader about it. Academic writing must do many complex things at once, and writers may find themselves overwhelmed while trying to think through these many aspects all together within their main working draft. When this happens, the writer can choose one element to focus on exclusively for a time, bringing it into the Vacuum, a different writing environment, by shifting from their draft to a new blank document. Having done this, the writer can then develop and refine this chunk of their work free from the distractions of the surrounding writing or additional elements interconnected with the one they have isolated. This refined work can then be brought back out of the Vacuum and returned to its context within the writer’s draft.
In addition to the benefit of breaking the revision process into smaller and more manageable tasks, “writing through the Vacuum” may also change a writer’s attitude towards the blank page, turning it from an imposing reminder of the difficult task ahead into a welcoming place to get unstuck while in the thick of the work.
Venn diagrams are a tool for comparing and contrasting two or more terms, concepts, or topics. The writer draws overlapping circles, one for each of the objects they are comparing. They then list the characteristics unique to the particular object in the regions that have no overlap and list the aspects that objects have in common in the regions where the corresponding circles overlap. These diagrams were originally developed in the field of mathematical logic as a way to visually represent the relations between different sets of elements. In line with this origin, they can help writers in any discipline add precision and rigor to the way they use terms or concepts that have some overlap. They may be used at many different stages in the writing process as a tool to clarify the writer’s thinking, but may also appear in the finished piece of writing as a powerful way to visually communicate the interrelationships between different objects under discussion.
As a thinking tool, the writer may use a Venn diagram in various ways. For instance, they might use one while brainstorming to help them decide whether two candidates for key terms with overlapping meanings also have important distinctions relevant to their argument or should be collapsed into one term. If the writer identifies logical or conceptual ambiguities in the way they have used two concepts, they might use a Venn diagram while revising to clarify how the two are related. These diagrams might also be used to think about what the writer is communicating to their audience, perhaps by comparing what the writer knows with what the implied reader knows. Overall, Venn diagrams help writers clarify how they are thinking about related ideas, whether for themselves during writing or for their reader as part of the final product. The visual format can also help the writer shift thinking modes if they are stuck, or make thinking about their core argument easier by temporarily narrowing their focus to the keywords and ideas central to their claim.
The term ventilation was first introduced by scholar Eric Hayot in his 2014 book The Elements of Academic Style, where he defined it as “how your writing breathes.” Writers can achieve more ventilation in their projects along many axes. At a granular stylistic level, writers can build in wider variation in their sentence length, registers in diction, or changes in tone. At a larger-scale structural level, writers can increase ventilation by shifting more between, say, the conceptual and the anecdotal, strategic use of figurative language, or simply variety of topic and information density within or between chapters
Importantly, greater ventilation is not, as one’s intuition might suggest, a matter of consistently slowing the pace of presenting new information, using a more personal voice, or tending towards a less formal register. More ventilated writing is more varied writing. It employs strategic and intentional shifts in tone, style, use of figurative language, jokes, etc., to change things up and hold the reader’s attention.
Ventilation can make writing both more engaging to the reader and also easier to comprehend, two interrelated goals in academic writing. By holding the reader’s attention and interest more fully, the writer encourages the kind of sustained cognitive engagement crucial to following the thread of a layered and intricate argument extended over a section, chapter or book.
In the context of writing, the term “voice” is used to name the pattern of stylistic choices that together make a given author’s writing feel distinctive and recognizable. Many writers never develop a clear voice, though the best always do. While graduate-student writers should not expect themselves to develop their mature academic voice right away, attending to matters of voice can still be very important, especially when it comes to the common problem of mimicking the voice of another scholar they admire.
W.
A word cloud (also called a tag cloud and first popularized as a “Wordle”) is a way to visualize and thus easily spot the most frequently occurring words in the text it is generated from. In the word cloud, words that occur more often are bigger. While writers can generate these word clouds by hand, there are several easy-to-use software tools that make the process faster and automatically filter out “stop words” like “the” that would be the most frequent words in any text but are usually unimportant for an analysis of its content.
The advantage of using a word cloud is that it allows writers to visually identify the keywords they use most often – whether intentionally or not – so that they can make more intentional choices about the language that they use. The writer might realize that they have not rigorously defined a term that appears frequently in their work or are relying too much on a common-sense understanding of it and choose to add it to their Key Terms. A writer wanting to ensure consistency in how they talk about their core ideas might check the word cloud for frequent terms with similar meanings and decide if there is a need to clarify how they distinguish between these terms or eliminate superfluous ones. At the level of style, the writer can check for words they may overuse in their prose or simply gain awareness of their unconscious patterns of language use. Ultimately, word clouds offer a visual means of identifying trends within a writer’s project that can help them more actively attend to their diction and define their core concepts.
