I’m a sociologist with research and teaching specializations in interdisciplinary fields of environmental studies, animal studies, food studies, pedagogy, cultural studies, and social movement studies.

My developmental editing is informed by direct experience on both sides of the developmental editing relationship. I hired a developmental editor for my second book, which was a game-changer for me in terms of the quality, precision, and supportiveness of the feedback I received. When my developmental editor, Laura Portwood-Stacer of Manuscript Works, offered a course on developmental editing for academics, I jumped at the opportunity, and upon completing her course, I started offering developmental editing services for academic authors.

My journey to developmental editing began nearly two decades ago when I was in graduate school and received teacher training in “Writing Across the Disciplines” which was, hands down, the best teacher training I ever received. We learned how to respond to student writing in holistic ways that build student confidence, rather than bogging students down in copyedits. Looking back, we were learning a type of developmental editing, teaching students how to write and build an argument in a specific discipline, rather than just marking up their paper for grammar, typos, and errors.

After graduate school, I started my tenure-track position in sociology in 2009, during which time I gained more experience in academic publishing as an author of a variety of types of texts. In addition to publishing several peer-reviewed journal articles and chapters in edited volumes, I have published two academic monographs with two different academic and university presses, as well as one critical edition book with a university press. My publishing background helps me understand authors’ experiences with journals and academic presses, including how to navigate the publishing process more generally.

In this vein, I’ve also gained experience as a book review editor and as a peer reviewer for academic journal articles, book proposals and manuscripts, as well as grant applications. This has given me more insight into academic publishing, and even more evidence that peer review is not, shall we say, the most encouraging feedback that authors receive. My goal is to be the opposite of the proverbial “reviewer #2,” who seems to only give negative feedback that makes you wonder if they even read your manuscript. I strive to provide the most useful and supportive feedback you have ever received, rooted in a close reading of your work, and that gives you the confidence and energy to continue to work on your manuscript.