Innovations in Policy Draft Development that Saved Me Time and Tears

It was 10 p.m. on the night before the new draft of our Title IX policy was due for review by our Chief Policy Officer, the final step before it could move to President’s Council and on to Trustees for (fingers crossed) approval and adoption. It was crunch time, just a couple of weeks out from the new Title IX rule’s August 14th deadline, and I was elbows deep and hours into a heavy edit of what I was promised was the final draft from its writing committee. That’s when the emails started.

First, it was, “Just one more quick thing . . .” and “Can you change these lines, too?” then a flurry of discussions, and with it, more and more requested revisions, which I dutifully and meticulously incorporated. And then it happened. The dreaded “I made some additional changes to the draft throughout; see the attached draft.” No, no. I protested internally. That is not the Draft. I have the Draft. That is the Ghost of Drafts Past with (groan) new revisions!

If you have ever edited anything for anyone ever, you likely just visibly shuddered at the above scenario. Every editor will inevitably, at one point or—more likely—many points, experience the same sinking feeling when the sanctity of version control is casually disregarded. But with documents as important as policies (especially ones as critical and time sensitive as the one mentioned above), the balance between editorial courtesy and non-discretionary necessity becomes heavily (and rightfully) skewed toward the latter. So, what’s a policy editor to do, besides swallow her tears and play a very long, very high-stakes game of Spot the Differences? Which is, inevitably, exactly what I did for the next few hours of my evening.

The following morning, I woke from a (dismally short) sleep and decided something had to change about our editorial process. Over the past few months of remote work, our institution has embraced using Microsoft Teams to keep in touch with co-workers and collaborate on projects, but, at the time, we were still using shared Box folders to store working drafts and their numerous past versions. And while Box integrates well enough with Teams, files hosted through Box do not have the same advanced capabilities as files hosted on Microsoft’s cloud services SharePoint and OneDrive. As long as we continued to insist on keeping files scattered on Box, in emails, and on our internal drives, we truly weren’t utilizing Teams to its full potential, and we were creating a lot more unnecessary work for ourselves. Little did we realize we were needlessly complicating a system already automated and optimized through Office 365.

How it Works and How it Works for Us

Like ours, many institutions have adopted Teams for remote communication and project collaboration as we all continue to navigate the new normal of current events. But many Teams users are not aware of what happens behind the scenes of Teams. Every file (including all documents, notebooks, wikis, Planner tasks, calendar entries, and everything in between) shared or created within a Teams channel is uploaded to SharePoint (or OneDrive in the case of files shared in chats). (If you use Teams and haven’t already, I highly encourage you to take a few minutes and explore what your SharePoint site looks like. Think of it as Teams’ central repository—because it is.)

The benefits of this, besides embedded organization and easy access to needed files without leaving Teams, are the integrated collaboration and cross-app features you only get with SharePoint and OneDrive files (Microsoft hosted files play nice with Microsoft apps, go figure!). These features include automatic saving (no more losing progress), automatic version record keeping (eliminating the need for multiple version files), and, most importantly for our office, collaborative editing between multiple authors in real time (goodbye, Ghosts of Drafts Past).

By embracing and encouraging the use of Teams instead of email for sending drafts and Box for housing versions, we were able to ensure that a single working draft was always live and available for authors, editors, and reviewers. Consequently, the next round of review and revision for our Title IX policy went far more smoothly. We were able to work together, simultaneously, on a living document in real time and chat seamlessly with each other as needed, eliminating the need for tracking down relevant email chains, sending out and downloading multiple drafts, re-uploading them, and other general draft babysitting and housekeeping. The sanctity of the working draft was respected without effort. It was a game changer.

Since then, we have integrated this process into how we handle every document that comes through our office, and we continue to explore additional ways to utilize the automation, collaboration, and project management features embedded within SharePoint. It might be dramatic to say that it has revolutionized our editorial process, but it certainly has spared me a lot of extra work and frustration (not to mention, late-night tears).

For those who are interested in utilizing collaborative editing but need additional guidance, Microsoft provides tips and tutorials on their support pages, a few of which I will link below:

• Collaborate on files in Microsoft Teams
• Document collaborations and co-authoring
• Collaborate in Word tutorial

Improve your writing as you type with Editor

Note: This tutorial is for the Window's Office 365 version of Microsoft Word. If you're using Mac or an older version of Word, you may not have the same options or features. To see which version of Word you're using, click File > Account in the desktop application. 

If you’re like me and have been using Microsoft applications for years, it’s easy to stick to the same shortcuts and habits when it comes to using Word and other Office products. However, with the introduction of Office 365, Microsoft is now able to provide continual updates and improvements to their applications over time, offering new features regularly without the need for software upgrades. As such, you may not be aware and taking advantage of some of the newest features and tools available in Office 365. These features, when utilized, have the ability to improve your writing, increase productivity, enhance collaboration, and simplify accessibility compliance.

One of the best and most useful features new to Office 365 is a built-in writing assistant called Editor. Editor is a robust, real-time writing assistant that goes beyond the standard spellcheck we’re all familiar with in Word. Once enabled and configured, Editor provides enhanced proofing suggestions that identify spelling, grammar, clarity, and stylistic issues as you type, and the Editor pane helps you understand suggestions so you can make choices that improve your writing.

This tool is customizable, allowing the user to configure which issues to flag and which to ignore, from grammar issues (such as passive language and misused words) to style preferences (such as gendered pronouns and slang), and so much more depending on your office’s preferences and needs. I’ve found the punctuation convention option especially useful in flagging those pesky double spaces that sometimes sneak in following a sentence.

How to Configure Editor Settings

The following instructions will allow you to specify what grammar and style issues you would like Editor to flag.

1.       In the File pane Word, click Options > Proofing.

2.       Under When correcting spelling and grammar in Word, select Settings

3.       For Writing Style, select Grammar & Refinements.

4.       Scroll down to see all of the options available, and select or clear the rules you want. The settings apply to all the documents that you edit, not just the current one, and can be modified at any time.

You can view the Editor pane at any time by selecting the Review tab and clicking on Spelling & Grammar (or Check Document, depending on your version of Word), or by hitting the F7 key shortcut. You can also configure Editor settings directly from this pane at any time as you type.

To learn more about Editor, explore some of the articles on Microsoft Office’s Word Help & Training pages.

More Information

This post is part of an ongoing series on web accessibility and Microsoft Word optimization. For further training, see my previous posts (Word Tips one and two, and part one, two, and three of my series on accessibility.) As usual, let me know in the comments below what questions you may have, topics you would like to see addressed in future posts, challenges you face in regards to accessibility and document/template creation, or any other suggestions you have to help me tailor my posts to your unique needs. 

Part 2: Common Mistakes and How to Avoid Them

In my last post, I introduced the topic of web accessibility in relation to how we create, edit, and display policy for digital consumption. Regardless of how your institution chooses to display its policies online—whether by PDF, HTML (web layout), Word document, etc.—the content within needs to be presented in a way that conforms to accessibility standards to ensure that all users have equal access to its information. In this article, I’ll dive a little deeper into the basics of web accessibility by discussing some of the most common mistakes users make when creating web content or documents intended for web display.

The following is a summary of the three most common accessibility mistakes I see in institutional policy documents and web content: styles, links, and tables. For each item, I'll include examples of common mistakes and the rationale behind the corrections, to help you better understand the standard as it pertains to policy administration. However, this list is by no means a comprehensive guide to full accessibility compliance. For the full list of accessibility standards, you should refer to the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) 2.0.

Mistake 1: Incorrect Use of Styles

Using heading and paragraph styles incorrectly (or not at all) is perhaps the most common mistake I see when viewing digital content and documents. In a future post, I plan to delve deeper into how to best utilize styles in your document templates to quickly and effortlessly generate fully accessible documents, but for now, I’ll just cover the basics: If you're not using styles in your documents, you should be; and if you are using styles, make sure you're using them correctly.

Proper utilization of text styles (heading, paragraph, emphasis, etc.) is critical for accessible content. Screen readers have to be given instructions to know which content is most important and how it should be organized. When you use styles, you provide screen readers with this information and help visually impaired users navigate through your content more quickly. Using custom formatting in documents without styles (manually changing color, size, font, etc.) causes screen readers to read out cumbersome formatting text to their users, interrupting the flow of information. Using styles incorrectly (usually due to a preference in design over the correct style) causes confusion when screen readers improperly organize the document accordingly.

To avoid this mistake, use descriptive heading and paragraph styles (e.g., Heading 1, Heading 2, Heading 3, Paragraph, etc.) to designate content organization and hierarchy. Select an appropriate style based on its descriptive name and the content it is defining rather than on its appearance, and don’t skip levels (e.g., using Heading 1 then Heading 3). Styles can always be edited to suit aesthetic preferences or institutional standards.

Mistake 2: The Ambiguous Link

Another accessibility error I see often is non-descriptive link text, or the absence of link text entirely. Hyperlinks should contain a short description of where they are leading, not just “Click here” or the URL of the webpage.

To avoid this mistake, use descriptive link text to provide added context. See the links in my opening paragraphs above for examples of descriptive and relevant hyperlink text. Link text that describes what you are linking to helps readers scan and anticipate where they will go when clicking a link. Link text like “Click here” provides little context to where the link is actually going.

Mistake 3: The Misappropriated Table

This mistake, I am ashamed to admit, is one that my own institution had been unknowingly and egregiously committing in our policy templates and documents for years: using tables as a way to format and control design elements, rather than as a way to logically organize and present tabular information. Complex or misused tables can be difficult for readers to follow and comprehend, especially for screen reader users who have to remember the headers.

To avoid this mistake, format and use simple tables with column and row headers. Split up nested tables into simple tables, and don’t use tables to control design elements or layout. Check to ensure content can be tabbed through in proper reading order and provide alt text for all tables and images.

Other Considerations

Accessibility standards in web content are fairly new phenomena and are constantly evolving to meet the needs of new technologies and diverse groups and individuals. Many higher education institutions and universities that have been around since far before the advent of the digital world, mine included, have been scrambling to bring decades of content up to current times.

This list contains just a few of the most common accessibility issues to watch out for as you create and edit documents for digital consumption. Have you noticed any of the above mistakes or others in your own institution's policies and documents? What are some of the most common accessibility issues your institution has faced?

For more information about web accessibility, see my previous post on the Policy Matters blog: An Introduction to Web Accessibility. For the most comprehensive and current guide on web accessibility, refer to the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) 2.0.

Using Technology and Automation to Augment Your Policy Process

When I was an editing student in college, an older professor asked me to proofread a nonfiction book he had authored and get it ready for publication. He emailed me his files and a letter from his publisher that outlined their style guide, and mentioned that the publisher had rejected the files in their current state because of “formatting incompatibilities.” I didn’t know just what they meant until I attempted to format the document myself and noticed a host of bizarre issues: certain passages were locked, fonts and margins were inconsistent from page to page, and some paragraphs had collapsed entirely upon themselves into a single jumbled line of incomprehensible text. The most frustrating part was the more I attempted to fix the formatting through the normal Word interface, the more issues and problems it would introduce.  

So how does this apply to what we do in policy and the vastly unique roles of our individual policy offices? Little did I know (but would quickly learn), that underneath the text we see on a digital screen is an extensive web of coded language that instructs the program how to respond to a user’s inputted action (keystroke, voice, touch, etc.). This code can act in unwanted ways when a user inadvertently introduces invisible instructions to the program (usually through formatting marks, bookmarks, styles, etc.). In the case of my professor, he had unknowingly used some formatting options that had left invisible, residual coded marks after the original text was deleted in earlier drafts. By exposing these marks through advanced formatting options in Word and then eliminating them through the outline view, I was able to fix the coding issues. This was the moment I learned that Word is so much more than a word processor; that it, and other Microsoft Office products (Excel, Publisher, OneNote, OneDrive, etc.), contain a pre-coded network of untapped potential for application, productivity, and automation solutions that most casual users never know is even there. And with a little instruction, these and other programs that we already use can be customized and applied in individualized ways to solve the unique demands of our offices.

For example, my position in my university’s Policy Office involves editing policy drafts and completing research for policy writers. These writers, while incredibly intelligent subject-matter experts in their field, come with varying levels of technological proficiency. When I first started, I would email out our university’s template files for policy drafts, summaries, comments, etc. to writers, and what I would get back would sometimes be barely recognizable as our own template. A lot of my time was spent fixing accidental formatting errors caused by inexperienced users, multiple authors/drafts, or general human error: fixing fonts, sizes, and margins; moving stray lines and logos back where they belong; and just generally enforcing our university’s style guide (e.g., fixing section numbers, alphabetizing). All manual, repetitive, and tedious—but necessary—tasks.

Through a little Googling and dabbling in some of the advanced capabilities and developer options of Word (VBA), I was able to create a template that does not allow a writer to do anything I don’t want them to and automates the stuff I don’t want to do. The design is locked down. The styles, locked. The numbering and alphabetizing is all automated and customized to our style guide. They cannot misnumber a section; my template won’t let them. They cannot move, alter, erase, or change anything other than the sections they need to. And that was just template version 1. Using that template, I am currently creating a custom UserForm app (all through Microsoft Word using its existing features as intended) that will automate all the templates that we use in our office. Upon completion, a writer will be able to simply fill in the UserForm fields and submit, and the template will be generated and auto-populate with their answers.

The above is just one example out of the countless customizable solutions that anyone can create with just a little advanced insight and know-how. By understanding and harnessing the full capabilities of these programs, advanced users easily automate repetitive tasks, eliminate user error, increase efficiency and productivity, seamlessly enforce institutional standards and styles, and create better, cleaner documents and spreadsheets that enhance their policy and research processes.

The purpose of this post then is to gauge interest for a reoccurring segment on the Policy Matters blog (alongside its other fabulous editorial content) that that will educate interested ACUPA members on different ways they can optimize their own policy process by creating simple solutions customized to the unique needs of their office. This segment would consist of short, beginner-friendly tricks and tips for utilizing the popular office programs that we already own and use to their full potential, tailored to a policy administration environment.

Now, I’d like to hear from you. Do you think this information might be helpful or applicable in you and your office’s functions and roles? What unique administrative challenges do you face that you would like to find solutions for (anything, seriously!). Is there anything else in particular you would like this segment to cover?