A follow-up to
this post:
I got some feedback for my first written piece for Sussex University's online journal
Excursions. Two reviewers had read the piece, and the editor wrote to me with their comments and required revisions before publication. This led me to reflect on how feedback feels; I've been doing a lot of marking over the last few years – how do I like being on the receiving end?
One of the reviewers was very positive about the piece, and had only a minor typo to fix. This made me feel good. It was a nice pat on the back.
The other had submitted a detailed version of my work with changes tracked and comments appended – close corrections/suggestions on style and general suggestions for trimming and expanding. In other words: a load of work. Meh, I thought initially. Mission. Do I have to?
But actually, when I got stuck in and read the comments and suggestions, I could see that this reviewer had really engaged with the work. I didn't always agree, but I felt that most changes were reasonable and helpful, and the suggestions were honest responses that deserved consideration. So I did the trimming, dug through my notes to address the suggestions, and put in the time to revise the piece accordingly.
And that actually felt better, once I'd got through the pain barrier. It was a drag initially; it felt like someone was saying: your stuff's not good enough, and there's work to do. But actually it meant: here are some thoughts on how your work can be the best it can be. And that's worth building on.
