In the context of written composition, drafting refers to any process of generating preliminary versions of a written work. Drafting happens at any stage of the writing process as writers generate trial versions of the text they're developing. At the phrasal level, these versions may last less than a second, as writers compose and then delete trial sentences; as fully developed attempts that have reached the end of a stage of usefulness, draft documents may last for perpetuity as saved "versions" or as paper files in archives.
For example, in a book that became popular in the 1950s, The Elements of Style, Strunk and White characterize a first draft as a less-edited version of the final draft with the purpose of "foresee[ing]...the shape of what is to come and pursue that shape".[1] In Writing Without Teachers, a more recent take on the role of draft documents, Peter Elbow characterizes a draft less as a first attempt at a predetermined final point and more as an attempt at exploring and where a final version might end up. As he puts it, "[w]riting is a way to end up thinking something you couldn’t have started out thinking."[2] According to Elbow, the best way to accomplish this is a series of drafts which come together to produce an emerging “center of gravity” that then translates into the main focus on the work—a holistic process, in other words, rather than the linear process envisioned by Strunk and White and early writing process theory. Elbow reasoned that if a writer "learns to maximize the interaction" among their "ideas or points of view, [they] can produce new ones that didn’t seem available."[3]
Process
When drafting, a writer is most likely not scared of failure. Draft after draft, a writer can experiment on their work without being penalized for it. The more a writer drafts, the more they see as to what works and doesn't work for their writing. In a bad draft, the writer can reflect on the problems and fix them. As Brandie Bohney in Fail Forward! states, "mistakes are a success as long as you learn from it".
Empirical studies of writers at work indicate that writers can be doing any or all of the following during phases of drafting:
pausing to make adjustments to spelling, word-choice, and syntax[6]
Computers vs pen and paper
With the rise of technology in the 20th century, most writing is done on computers. Unlike with pen and paper, computers make it easier to compose new drafts thanks to word processing software that makes it easier to fix local, grammar and spelling errors.
However, drafting on a computer does not signify better drafts. Before word processing, when writers created a new draft, it was an investment of their time dedicated to completely rewriting the entirety of their work. When using word processors, it causes a writer to only correct minor grammar mistakes the computer points out and miss mistakes that affect the entirety of the work (global mistakes), in comparison to when writers create physical, handwritten drafts, as in physical writing they have to constantly reread or revisit their work, making more corrections based on ideas.
In order to benefit from both, it is possible to type drafts on a computer and then print them to make physical revisions. By typing on a computer, it allows the writer to fix the minor mistakes the word processor points out and revise the printed copy, while also allowing the writer to make global revisions. Thanks to the computer, the process of drafting, which includes creating numerous drafts, can save the writer time instead of having to physically rewrite the entirety of their drafts.
Drafting and peer review
When drafting, a major part of the process is allowing others to check over and revise the work. Through peer review, other people can give feedback to the writer, allowing said writer to fix previously unseen errors. Peer review of a draft is not exactly the same as proofreading, as peer review is not limited to only fixing spelling mistakes, but rather allows people with different worldviews to oversee a work, giving the writer greater insight as to the purpose of the work. Peer review can also point out sentence structure errors to the writer, potentially causing the draft to be entirely rewritten. Professional writers may use peer review while drafting for the previously stated reasons, although it is a time-consuming process.
^The Elements of Style Fiftieth Anniversary Edition (2009), p. 15, ISBN978-0-205-63264-0
^Elbow, Peter. Writing Without Teachers. 2nd ed. New York: Oxford UP, 1973, 1998. p.15
^Elbow, Peter. Writing Without Teachers. 2nd ed. New York: Oxford UP, 1973, 1998. p.50
^Leijten, Mariëlle; Van Waes, Luuk (2013). "Keystroke Logging in Writing Research: Using Inputlog to Analyze and Visualize Writing Processes". Written Communication. 30 (3): 358–392. doi:10.1177/0741088313491692. S2CID145446935.
^Flower, Linda; Hayes, John R. (1980). "The Cognition of Discovery: Defining a Rhetorical Problem". College Composition and Communication. 31 (1): 21–32. doi:10.2307/356630. JSTOR356630.
^Leijten, Mariëlle; Van Waes, Luuk; Ransdell, Sarah (2010). "Correcting Text Production Errors: Isolating the Effects of Writing Mode From Error Span, Input Mode, and Lexicality". Written Communication. 27 (2): 189–227. doi:10.1177/0741088309359139. S2CID145049948.
Eckstein, Grant, Jessica Chariton, Robb Mark McCollum. (2011). Multi-draft composing: An iterative model for academic argument writing. Journal of English for Academic Purposes 10.3, 162-172.
Further reading
Dave, Anish; David R. Russell. (2010). Drafting and revision using word processing by undergraduate student writers: Changing conceptions and practices. Research in the Teaching of English 44.4, 406-434.
Owens, Kim Hensley. “Teaching ‘the Six’-and Beyond.” Pedagogy : critical approaches to teaching literature, language, culture, and composition 9.3 (2009): 389–397. Web.
Bohney, Brandie (Guest Editor). (2018). Fail Forward! [Teacher to Teacher column]. Journal of Teaching Writing 33.2, 65-66.
Becker, Anne. (2006). A review of writing model research based on cognitive processes. In Horning, Alice; Anne Becker (Eds.), Revision: History, theory, and practice; (Reference guides to rhetoric and composition); West Lafayette, IN: Parlor Press (pp. 25-49).
