Abstract
Abstract This article presents a research-based stakeholder tool informed by a study of the various types of changes proofreaders may make when proofreading a student text. Whilst the tool can be used to advise higher education students, (non-)professional proofreaders/editors, English for Academic Purposes (EAP) lecturers, writing centre tutors, and university policy makers as to appropriate forms of third-party intervention, it is primarily intended to be used as a framework that assists academics in deciding which kinds of third-party intervention are un/ethical when allowing their students to have work proofread. As such, the stakeholder tool serves a heuristic purpose in that it: 1) displays the various types of interventions proofreaders could make for an academic to consider which interventions they wish to allow, from the lightest-touch (e.g., correcting typos or spelling errors) to the heaviest-touch (e.g., substantial, wholesale rewriting of the text by the proofreader at the level of content); 2) advises academics about un/ethical forms of proofreading intervention; 3) confirms an academic has given permission for a student to seek out proofreading support whilst specifying what in the academic’s opinion is un/ethical in terms of proofreading intervention; and 4) educates and trains stakeholders in academically sound proofreading practices. This stakeholder tool is timely when considering that some current university proofreading policies are poorly worded and ambiguous, and when considering the lack of clarity about or knowledge of university proofreading guidelines by stakeholders such as staff and students.