Blog 2. Reflections on Advanced Editing Tools

What did I read or watch that surprised, delighted, or disappointed me?

What surprised me most in Val Swisher’s lecture with Dr. Kim, “Advanced Editing Tools Video Lecture," was her insight about push vs. pull style guides: most people rarely use them. Val’s blunt comment that "no one ever looks at your style guide" made me laugh because it rang true. The reality is that most writers won’t interrupt their draft to search a PDF, shaping my perspective for the rest of the lecture.

In addition, her demo of Acrolinx, the advanced editing tool that “pushes” corrections and style preferences directly into the writing environment, was equally fascinating. Seeing how it flagged terminology, tone, grammar, and even sentence length in real time was like watching a spell checker on steroids. What delighted me was the way it could unify terminology across a whole company, preventing confusion between “customer,” “client,” and “consumer.” For me, that showed just how powerful consistency can be.

How did the material influence my approach to graded work in the course?

This lecture taught me the importance of editing intentionally. I used to view editing as simply correcting typos or grammar. Now I recognize it involves balancing mechanical corrections that software can do with the deeper structural editing that requires human judgment.

Furthermore, Val and Dr. Kim emphasized that tools like Acrolinx excel at sentence-level adjustments but struggle with broader structural concerns. That reminder prompted me to evaluate my drafts more carefully, asking: Is the flow smooth? Is the sequence logical? I’ve begun separating these layers of editing—assigning AI to surface checks while I focus on improving clarity and coherence.

This perspective also changed the way I approach peer reviews. Now, instead of focusing only on grammar or word choice, I try to look deeper—considering Val’s distinction between mechanical and structural editing. During reviews, I pay attention to tone, consistency, and logical flow of ideas. This shift enables me to provide feedback that’s more meaningful than just surface-level corrections.

What was most meaningful for my career goals?

The most meaningful insight for my career goals was learning how companies use tools like Acrolinx to ensure quality, reduce translation costs, and protect their brand. This business perspective highlighted that technical communication goes beyond good writing—it is about proving measurable value.

At the same time, Val’s reassurance that “no tool can replace structural editors” clarified my thinking about the field. The key point is that human editors are essential—especially when content involves logic, organization, or unique situations. This reinforces that positioning myself isn’t just about knowing tools, but recognizing when not to rely on them.

Final Thought:
In summary, the lecture with Val Swisher and Dr. Kim helped me see editing in a new light. It confirmed that AI and advanced tools are here to stay, but it also reinforced the ongoing importance of human judgment. For me, that balance is what makes technical communication both challenging and exciting.