Re: Rate editorial review quality
I'm looking for ideas on how I could measure the quality of an editorial review. Not the quality of the content that was reviewed, but the review itself.
The thought that immediately comes to mind is something that programmers call "bebugging". That's not debugging, removal of bugs, but insertion of them. Slip in some deliberate errors of the kind the editors are expect to find and correct. Some people may consider this technique unethical. Also, it fails to detect problems that were not considered beforehand.
In the larger view, you can look for matching certain objective standards. If, for example, the review is supposed to find major blunders in presentation, such as "incorrect audience" or "missing explanations" but instead focuses solely upon nit-picking the grammar, it ought to be considered a poor review. If you have a sufficiently astute bunch of people to read the reviewed material, they might be able to perform a subjective analysis: "Wow! This is so tremendously better than the original! The editor deserves five stars. *****"
Visit TechWhirl for the latest on content technology, content strategy and content development | https://techwhirl.com
You are currently subscribed to TECHWR-L as archive -at- web -dot- techwr-l -dot- com -dot-
To unsubscribe send a blank email to
techwr-l-leave -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com
Send administrative questions to admin -at- techwr-l -dot- com -dot- Visit
http://www.techwhirl.com/email-discussion-groups/ for more resources and info.
Looking for articles on Technical Communications? Head over to our online magazine at http://techwhirl.com
Looking for the archived Techwr-l email discussions? Search our public email archives @ http://techwr-l.com/archives
- Re: Rate editorial review quality, Kathleen MacDowell
Rate editorial review quality: From: Dawson, Ayesha (Nokia - IN/Bangalore)
Search our Technical Writing Archives & Magazine