Working with writers: The case for strengths-based editing

As editors, we work with writers to fix problems. We focus on what is wrong and how it can be better. While it is satisfying to identify problems and help writers improve their work, one of the hazards of editing is focusing only on what is wrong and forgetting to acknowledge what is right.

Much of my work involves editing articles and materials for early childhood educators, and I have noticed how, as a group, they focus instinctively on strengths rather than weaknesses—the positive over the negative. This is a foundational principle in early-years settings: strengths-based teaching and learning. Rather than looking at what a child cannot do, educators look at what the child can do. They see the child’s strengths and believe in their capabilities and potential. This is a deliberate contrast to deficit-based thinking—where challenges and weaknesses dominate a child’s learning—and a strengths-based approach promotes greater engagement, confidence, and holistic development. Watching educators frame their language around each child’s potential made me realize how we editors can benefit from doing the same for writers. If we can bring that same perspective to our editing, it can enhance the editor-writer relationship and improve the writing overall.

What does strengths-based editing look like in practice?

Strengths-based editing is a shift in perspective that influences how we communicate with the writer. In crafting the editorial cover letter, for example, it means first pointing out the things that are working well before getting into any problems. Focusing on the positives first shifts the emotional register of the whole exchange. The writer arrives at the feedback feeling seen rather than defensive, knowing the work they have done so far has value.

The language used to flag problems or add queries in the draft also makes an enormous difference with the strengths-based approach. Instead of “This is disorganized” or “The structure doesn’t work,” consider, “There are strong ideas throughout; let’s find an order that lets each one land.” Instead of “This is too long,” you could say: “You’ve done thorough thinking here; now let’s distill it to its most essential form.”

Where an argument needs more support, rather than “This is weak” or “You haven’t proven your point,” you could say: “This is a compelling idea that deserves stronger evidence behind it.” Where sources are missing: “Let’s add references here; it will strengthen your credibility and give readers a path to explore further.” When a writer has a lot of repetition in their draft, you could say, “You return to this several times, which tells me it’s central to what you want to say. Let’s make it a deliberate anchor rather than a repetition.”

In addition to flagging problems, it’s also worth noting particular sentences or paragraphs that are genuinely working in a draft. When I am on the receiving end of editing, few things are more encouraging than my editor marking a passage to say something is working well.

It’s also good practice to end an email or cover letter to a writer on a positive note. Rather than summarizing all the problems, try: “This is going to be a strong piece. The work ahead is about refining, not rethinking” or “You have the hardest part done; now let’s polish it.” Ending with encouragement gives the writer energy to engage with the work ahead.

Why use strengths-based editing?

Using strengths-based editorial language helps build a positive editor-writer relationship and benefits the work itself in several ways:

• It separates the writer from the problem. The writing may need work, but the writer is capable.
• It acknowledges the hard work already invested.
• It names potential rather than only pointing out gaps.
• It assumes positive intent; it recognizes the writer is reaching for something, even when they haven’t quite found it yet.
• It honours the writer’s knowledge.
• It frames revision as refinement rather than failure. The draft is not wrong; it is unfinished.

Just as the strengths-based approach in early childhood education helps a child feel valued, confident, and open to learning, a strengths-based approach in editing helps a writer feel seen, capable, and open to revision.