Studies point to the effectiveness of rewriting as a step to text improvement. However, empirical research has shown that rewriting does not always work as expected. From these observations, research activities have been carried out with teachers in training and subjects who were supposed to dominate the textual production, but showed little practice in this area, therefore requiring the didactization rewriting. The objective of this research is to identify and analyze factors that contribute (or not) to rewrite the textual of higher education. The theoretical framework involves the writing of Kato (1993), Meurer (1997) and Sautchuk (2003), and works on rewriting prepared by Jesus (1995), Ruiz (2001), Antunes (2003), among others. The methodology of interpretive inspiration follows the procedures of documentary work and exploration. The analysis has revealed the existence of two intertwined and complex factors that contribute to both the effectiveness and non-effectiveness to rewrite the text in higher education: the correction of the subject teacher and the experience of writing the subject's producer licensing. There is a tendency to fix foster passivity producer; concomitantly, there is another trend that is the reverse of this passivity, but this depends on the engagement of the producer activity in the rewrite. The data show that this tendency is less the second applicant.
rewriting; higher education; text correction