We all have horror stories we can tell about proofreading errors, about those times when, despite our best efforts, something slipped past our vigilant gaze.

Sometimes these lapses are relatively harmless. Other times, if we’re lucky, our readers don’t even notice. All too often, however, the errors are obvious and painfully embarassing.

Four years ago this May, for example, the University of Wisconsin awarded nearly 4,000 diplomas with the name of the state spelled “Wisconson.” Amazingly, six months passed before anyone noticed and brought it to the University’s attention. “We do proofread the diplomas,” said one official, “but we concentrate on the name and the degree. We usually consider that the standard information is correct. It just didn’t occur to us that this could happen.” But it did happen, and the printing company ended up paying for replacements.

Once during my days as an administrator at the University of Minnesota I was serving on a search committee. Of the more than 130 applications, one stood out. The application letter began with a reference to the position of “associate vice president for student affairs at the University of Minnesota” and concluded with a statement about “the real reason I want to come to the University of Maryland is . . .” The committee members recognized the gaffe as a word-processing error, an illustration of both the power and the risk of electronically produced text, and we had a good chuckle. Needless to say, however, the applicant didn’t get the job.

In fairness to word processors, it must be acknowledged that these wonderful machines and their marvelous spell-checking programs have led to a dramatic reduction in mispellings. No longer is it commonplace, for example, to see “accommodate” spelled with one “m,” “commitment” spelled with a double “t” after the “i,” or that formerly much-abused word, “occurrence,” misspelled three different ways in a single attempt: with one “c,” one “r,” and an “a” rather than an “e.” But even the wizardry of computers won’t prevent you from using the wrong word, correctly spelled – like “effect” when you mean “affect,” or “complement” when you mean “compliment.”

In other words, affective proofreading is still an important and necessary skill. To help you sharpen that skill, I recommend the following techniques:

1. Read slowly and fixate on each word.
2. Sub-vocalize (or, better yet, read out loud).
3. Read one line at a time (try holding a ruler or sheet of paper beneath each line as you read it).
4. When you find an error, reread the entire sentence (for some reason, we tend to assume that a sentence will have no more than one error).
5. Check for consistency in format (in headings, spacing, punctuation, layout, etc.)
7. Watch for common errors (like “it’s” for “its,” or missing quotation marks and parentheses – especially the closing marks.
8. Pay special attention to headings (their authoritative appearance can fool you).
9. Check not only for typographical errors but for common word-processing errors like repeated, missing, repeated, and misplaced text.
10. Have someone who was not involved in the preparation of your text check it over.
11. Because certain errors can be caught more readily by the author, be sure to proofread your own copy when someone else is doing your typing.

Finally – as recommended in 1978 by the National Secretaries Association – “Proofread tomorrow what you worked on today.”

Now, as you have doubtless noticed, this column is studded with errors. I did this intentionally to give you some practice applying the proofreading techniques I am recommending. Not counting “Wisconson” for “Wisconsin,” there are nine – at least, I think that’s how many there are. (Let me know if you find more!) Can you find all nine? Work with a colleague if you like. Answers will appear in next weeks column.

Happy hunting!