Teaching Inclusivity in Editing: Time for a Change?

It’s time to adjust how we teach new editors. How can we better incorporate inclusivity in traditional guidelines?

Editing is classically known for its adherence to traditional usage rules, and it shows this loyalty through professional editing pedagogies that are still taught today. While these traditional pedagogies have been instrumental in training the current editor workforce, language change is constant, and effective communication often requires adjustment. Particularly, editing for inclusivity is a continuous concern for editors in today’s world. Are the teaching models that we use now ready to support teaching editing for inclusivity?

THE RESEARCH

Sedona Benjamin and Joanna Schreiber of Georgia Southern University sought to understand editing teaching methods and their effectiveness. In their 2021 research “Updating Technical Editing Models for Accessibility and Advocacy,” the authors conducted a survey to analyze the quality and content of editing instruction. 

In the survey, editors and editing instructors were asked questions regarding the editing pedagogies they use in an attempt to highlight the occurrence of inclusive topics. The survey included questions about editing models, diversity, and accessibility.

Upon analyzing the responses, Benjamin and Schreiber found that instructors are invested in teaching topics relating to inclusivity. However, the results suggest that traditional editing models do not sufficiently address these topics, and change is needed. While older methods are still functioning in an educational setting, there is a need for adaptability within these models. One such method is the Van Buren and Buehler model—one of the first modern editing processes—which was reported to be used by most of the instructors surveyed. This model was created in the late 70s and has not undergone substantial updates since then, signifying it does not adhere to new-age terms of the twenty-first century. Benjamin and Schreiber commented that “more research is needed, but we think this model continues to be covered because there is little to replace it” (2021, 29).

THE IMPLICATIONS

Without change, the editing models we use to teach students could, at best, cause them to ignore or underappreciate inclusivity in writing. At worst, these models could maintain a system of communication that diminishes our ability to connect with those around us and excludes entire groups of people. “Inclusion (and exclusion) can happen systemically in process-oriented work like editing,” said Benjamin and Schreiber. “We need social justice and advocacy to infuse all editing tasks” (2021, 29). 

Changes to editorial instruction methods are needed to cultivate an inclusive and open-minded professional and literary world. Until teaching models undergo changes, editors and teachers must supplement their editorial guidance and teaching to incorporate inclusivity as an editorial priority and as a benefit for the next generation of editors.

To learn more about editorial model changes, read the full article:

Benjamin, Sedona, and Joanna Schreiber. 2021. “Updating technical editing models for accessibility and advocacy.” Proceedings of the 39th ACM International Conference on Design of Communication (SIGDOC ‘21) 26–30. https://doi.org/10.1145/3472714.3473619.

—Amelia Anderson, Editing Research

FEATURE IMAGE BY GERALT

Find more research

Take a look at Zarah C. Moeggenberg, Hannah L. Stevens, Rebecca Walton, and Jamal-Jared Alexander’s article about editing strategies for inclusive writing: 2022. “Inclusive Editing: Actionable Recommendations for Editors and Instructors.” IEEE International Professional Communication Conference (ProComm) 267–276. https://doi.org/10.1109/ProComm53155.2022.00055.

Read Sam Clem and Ryan Cheek’s article addressing the construction of technical editing and writing: 2022. “Unjust Revisions: A Social Justice Framework for Technical Editing.” IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication 65 (1): 135–150. https://doi.org/10.1109/TPC.2021.3137666.