Tellingly, college students benefit by simply providing them with 8 minutes of instruction to revise globally before they are asked to start a second and final draft of a text (Wallace, Hayes, Hatch, Miller, Moser, & Silk, 1996). Although this could be interpreted to mean that the students lack the knowledge that revision entails more than local changes, the results of Myhill and Jones (2007) with 13-14 year olds render such an interpretation unlikely. An alternative interpretation is that, when left to their own devices, college students invest their available working memory resources as best they can, but still fail.
