Guidelines for Giving Feedback on Writing

Overall goal: to equip someone with the tools they need to improve their piece.

Work hard to point out specifically what the author has done well.

Why?

If your only feedback is negative, then you’re communicating to the author that everything they’ve done is bad. Why should they work to improve something that has no redeeming qualities?

Positive feedback can help authors reinforce their existing good habits. For example, is they’ve described Concept A very clearly, maybe they can use that same technique or skill to describe Concept B.

Writing is vulnerable work. If the author feels like a failure with bad ideas, they’re probably not going to share those ideas any better next time.

Even if the piece is “not as good” as you expect it to be, the author is still expanding their skill set by writing the piece. Recognize that the author is accomplishing things within the level they are at.

Give specific feedback

For example, instead of “make this clearer,” try, “I’m not sure how Point A connects to Point B.”

Give piece-centered feedback instead of author-centered feedback.

For example, instead of “I don’t know why you wrote this,” try, “How does this piece fit into existing conversations on this topic?”

Try to understand why someone made the choices they did.

For example, instead of “this paragraph isn’t needed,” try, “I think that this paragraph has some valuable support for Point A, but some of these ideas have already been mentioned. Could you instead summarize the evidence here and move it to the first paragraph about Point A?”

Distinguish between major and minor feedback.

Major- obvious key ideas, complete overall story, engaging introduction, clear arguments

Minor- grammar, sentence structure, easy organization fixes. Basically everything on the self-eval worksheet.

Don’t harp on repeated errors.*

Especially for minor errors. Trust that your author is competent enough to fix the error (or will ask for clarification). For example, you can simply write, “Check that the series in this piece are parallel” instead of giving detailed criticism of each sentence that includes a series.

*It can be hard to find a balance between giving specific feedback without harping. As an analogy, imagine you are trying on clothes with a friend in a department store. It would be useful for your friend to say “I don’t think those pants fit you well.” It would be disconcerting and vague for your friend to say, “Meh.” It would not be useful for your friend to point out every place on your body where the pants looks bad, and why. Try to give the first style of feedback. It’s specific and opens up room for more questions if asked.

If you don’t know how to change something, be honest.

It doesn’t make you a bad editor to say things like “I got confused in this paragraph and I’m not sure why.” or “I’m not sure what to change, but I’d like to feel a stronger resolution at the end of the piece”

Overall:

Your peer feedback is so valuable to the writing process. You’re helping to translate the thoughts in someone’s head into thoughts that will fit into their audience’s heads. That process isn’t easy. I think the main challenge of giving feedback is to try to separate your ego from the editing process. You can still give valuable feedback even if you think you’re “not as good” as this writer. Alternatively, it doesn’t matter if you (think you) could have written the piece better. All that matters is that the actual writer is empowered to make the changes you suggest.