Decisions and Revisions: The Planning Strategies of a Publishing Writer and Response of a Laboratory Rat or Being Protocoled QDJ 1,2,3, and 4

1.What was your impression of Murray's writing processes as they're described here? How do they compare to yours? What do you do the same or differently?
3. How did this study change Berkenkotter's understanding of writing processes, particularity planning and revision?
4.What problems with existing methods for studying writing process does Berkenkotter identify? If you read Perl, did you notice any of these problems in her methods? What do you think they might mean for Perl's findings? In what ways is Berkenkotter's newer approach to studying writing processes able to solve the weaknesses in other methods? Do any weaknesses remain?

1.I really thought his process was too much. He takes a lot of notes and does too much editing and revising his work.  I don't do a lot of editing. I usually just reread my paper and fix mistakes and add stuff as I go. I do make some revising changes, I'm not as thorough as Murray though.

3. Berkenkotter's study showed that you needed more time to do the planning and revisions than really necessary to complete those tasks. Revisions may take as long as possible to create a paper.

4. The time management with the revising and editing process. Berkenkotter addressed the problems people have with editing. He says that you should do more editing than actually writing the paper. Weaknesses still do remain because not everyone is going to take the approach.