SUMMARIZING,

PARAPHRASING AND
SYNTHESIZING
SUMMARIZING, PARAPHRASING AND
SYNTHESIZING

OVERVIEW
• Identifying the important material in the text

• Restating the material in own words

• Rewriting the text in the most concise version

• Comprehensive – conveys all important information

• Brief – conveys information concisely

• Accurate – correctly conveys the author’s

• Neutral – avoids arguments concerning the text’s topic

• Independent – it makes sense to someone who has not

read the source text
Summarizing. (n.d.). What is Academic Integrity? | Academic Integrity at MIT.
https://integrity.mit.edu/handbook/academic-writing/summarizing
Summarizing. (n.d.). What is Academic Integrity? | Academic Integrity at MIT.
https://integrity.mit.edu/handbook/academic-writing/summarizing
 Comprehension Questions
• What is the topic of the selection?
➢The shift in focus of universities from traditional engineering disciplines
to engineering science
• What is the author’s main point about the topic?
➢ May lead to serious decline in engineering graduates and a lack of
well-educated engineers in America
• What are the supporting points?
➢Rapidly developing economies such as China and India, as well as
other industrial countries in Europe and Asia, continue to encourage
and advance the teaching of engineering.
➢Both China and India, respectively, graduate six and eight times as
many traditional engineers as does the United States.
Summarizing. (n.d.). What is Academic Integrity? | Academic Integrity at MIT.
https://integrity.mit.edu/handbook/academic-writing/summarizing
Summarizing. (n.d.). What is Academic Integrity? | Academic Integrity at MIT.
https://integrity.mit.edu/handbook/academic-writing/summarizing
Choosing suitable reporting verbs when building your reasoned argument. (2019, March 3). University of
Bath Blogs. https://blogs.bath.ac.uk/academic-skills/2019/03/03/choosing-suitable-reporting-verbs-when-
building-your-reasoned-argument/
• Restating the material in own words

• Including all ideas in the original

• May be longer than the original

• Thorough – includes all of the author’s primary ideas

• Accurate – reflects what the author actually wrote

• Fair – uses carefully chosen or indiscriminative words

• Objective – avoids stating own opinion on the topic of

the source text
• Changing words

• Changing sentence structures

• Combining or splitting sentences

Paraphrasing. (n.d.). University of Manitoba Academic Learning Center.
https://umanitoba.ca/student/academiclearning/media/Paraphrasing.pdf
Paraphrasing. (n.d.). University of Manitoba Academic Learning Center.
https://umanitoba.ca/student/academiclearning/media/Paraphrasing.pdf
Paraphrasing. (n.d.). University of Manitoba Academic Learning Center.
https://umanitoba.ca/student/academiclearning/media/Paraphrasing.pdf
 QUOTATION PARAPHRASE

“There is nothing I believe in more strongly than

getting young people interested in science and
engineering, for a better tomorrow, for all
humankind.” – Bill Nye

“Everybody is a genius. But if you judge a fish by its

ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life
believing that it is stupid.” –Albert Einstein
“Put pieces together to see them in a new way.”

Summarizing and synthesizing: What’s the difference? — Climate change and the polar regions — Beyond
penguins and polar bears. (n.d.). Beyond Penguins and Polar Bears.
https://beyondpenguins.ehe.osu.edu/issue/climate-change-and-the-polar-regions/summarizing-and-
synthesizing-whats-the-difference
• Combines information from multiple sources

• Includes analysis of the combined information

• Emphasizes the similarities and differences among the

information from different sources

Source: https://www.bgsu.edu/content/dam/BGSU/learning-commons/documents/writing/synthesis/asked-to-
Taylor, C. (n.d.). What is a synthesis? University of Manitoba.
https://umanitoba.ca/faculties/nursing/students/What_is_synthesis.pdf
Taylor, C. (n.d.). What is a synthesis? University of Manitoba.
https://umanitoba.ca/faculties/nursing/students/What_is_synthesis.pdf
Much of the literature claims that student motivation
increases when the tasks are meaningful
(Bandura, 1997; Craft, 2005; Knowles, 1978; Rogers,
2000; Seifert, 2004).1

Taylor, C. (n.d.). What is a synthesis? University of Manitoba.

https://umanitoba.ca/faculties/nursing/students/What_is_synthesis.pdf
While satisfying the professor’s expectations can be
satisfying for the student, meaningful work
contributes to a student’s confidence (Seifert, 2004) and
persistence of a task (Bandura, 1997).

Taylor, C. (n.d.). What is a synthesis? University of Manitoba.

https://umanitoba.ca/faculties/nursing/students/What_is_synthesis.pdf
For work to be meaningful to students, tasks should
build upon their life experiences and link
new knowledge with their previous life experiences
(Knowles, 1978) or immediate needs
(Rogers, 2002). One means of achieving a meaningful
connection is through reflective journaling
tasks (Craft, 2005).

Taylor, C. (n.d.). What is a synthesis? University of Manitoba.

https://umanitoba.ca/faculties/nursing/students/What_is_synthesis.pdf
• Which sources overlap or share the same opinion/findings?
• Have you found any common traits or themes in the research literature?
• What choice have you made about this dilemma? Why did you make that choice
and not another?
• What meaning or conclusions do you draw from the data on this topic? How might
that new meaning change or reinforce your practice?
• Why is the piece of research evidence weak or strong?
• Using the statistics, facts, or knowledge in the research, what kind of story have
you crafted for the reader?
• What is your angle or your personal interpretation of the evidence?
• How have you shown the reader which parts of the argument (or which pieces of
research) are most useful or most important?

Taylor, C. (n.d.). What is a synthesis? University of Manitoba.

https://umanitoba.ca/faculties/nursing/students/What_is_synthesis.pdf
THE RHETORICAL TRIANGLE
THE RHETORICAL TRIANGLE
OVERVIEW
 LOGOS

PATHOS ETHOS
IMAGE SOURCE: The rhetorical triangle. (n.d.). Stand your ground law.
https://lawstandyourground.weebly.com/the-rhetorical-triangle.html
• The communicator’s use of credibility to obtain
the audience’s trust

• Critical reading requires looking into how an

author tries to influence the readers using this
particular element of rhetoric
• Ask the questions about the author?
• Who is the author?
• What is the author’s profession?
• Which company or organization is the author affiliated?
• What is the authority of the author on the subject of the text?
• Credible sources
• Respect for audience
• Common ground with audience
• Expertise

The argument's best friends: Ethos, logos, & pathos. (n.d.). Mesa Community College.
https://www.mesacc.edu/~paoih30491/ArgumentsBestFriends.html
• The communicator’s use of emotions to
influence the audience

• Critical reading requires looking into how an

author tries to influence the readers using this
particular element of rhetoric
• Who is the intended audience? ‡
• What is the writer-reader relationship?
• ‡
How does the author hook the intended
reader? (e.g. humor, emotion, logic)
• ‡
How does the author keep the reader
reading?
• ‡
How am I responding to these appeals?

The argument's best friends: Ethos, logos, & pathos. (n.d.). Mesa Community College.
https://www.mesacc.edu/~paoih30491/ArgumentsBestFriends.html
• Anecdotes or other narratives
• Images or other forms of media
• Direct quotations
• Humor
• Emotive words

Pathos. (n.d.). Writing Commons – The online encyclopedia for

writers. https://writingcommons.org/article/pathos/
• The communicator’s use of logic, reason, or rational
thinking in influencing the audience

• Critical reading requires looking into how an author

tries to influence the readers using this particular
element of rhetoric
• Do I find the argument convincing?
• What evidences are presented to support the writer’s
claim?
• What views and counter arguments are omitted?
• How does the author’s purpose fit with my
purpose for reading?
• Facts
• Examples
• Authority
• Deductive/Inductive Reasoning
 WRITING A
READER RESPONSE
FEATURES OF A READER RESPONSE
OVERVIEW
• two-paragraph summary and response essay

• way to express the reader’s comprehension of

the text

• way to express the reader’s critical reading of

the text
• examine, explain, and often defend personal reaction
to a reading

• explore reasons for liking the reading material,

agreeing with the author, or finding the text
informative or confusing
• is evaluated based on how the reader is able to
explain his/her reaction to the material

• is not evaluated based on the correctness of the

reaction because there is no “right” or “wrong” when
it comes to reactions
• Honest
• Informed
• Clear
• Well supported
• Focuses on sincere and thoughtful reactions to the
read text

• Answers questions as:

➢What gives rise to your reactions?

➢How do they affect your reading of the author’s work
• Responses should not be naïve, shortsighted, or
biased

• Responses are based on clear understanding of the

source text

• Responses includes information about the topic,

author or reading
• Make clear your reactions, and how your reactions
relate to the text (thesis statement)

• Provide an opening and closing section

• Use precise language

Provides textual evidence

• Examples from the text

• Quotations of some phrases or opinion the

author
 PREWRITE: Ask your self questions:
What was significant?
What do I remember?
What did I react to (like/dislike)?
Was there something I did not understand?

DRAFT: Write the summary and response.

Support your reaction with textual evidence.

EDIT & REVISE: Review your response by asking questions

Are they honest?
Are they informed?
Are they clear?
Are they well supported?
• Jot down key words

• Use punctuation marks (? ! *)

• Ask questions about author’s ideas

• Relate author’s ideas or information from text to prior

knowledge on the subject
 What was significant?
What do I remember?
What did I react to (like/dislike)?
Was there something I did not understand?

Response papers. (n.d.). Academic Writing in English, Lund University. https://awelu.srv.lu.se/genres-and-

text-types/writing-in-academic-genres/the-essay-format/response-papers/
• How do you react emotionally to what the author has
written?

• How do the ideas offered in the reading compare with

your experience or your sense of reality?

• How do the ideas offered in the source match what

others have had to say on the topic?
• What exactly has the author written that makes you feel this way?
• At what point in your reading did you have these reactions?
• Which words on the page or ideas cause this response?
• In short, what has the author done to make you respond this way?
• Examine the choices the writer made concerning content,
organization, and style.
Be familiar with the common errors in reasoning, often
called logical fallacies:

• Hasty generalization
• False cause
• Weak analogy
• Either/or
• Which of the author’s ideas do you tend to agree
with?

• Which of the author’s ideas do you tend to question

based on their match to your own experience?
Note any reactions you have based on the match
between the author’s ideas and those proposed by other
authors you have read
•Introducing and summarizing the reading
selection

•Stating and explaining your responses

clearly and concisely
• Provide the title of the text
• Identify the author
• Provide the main idea
• Provide the supporting points
• State a clear thesis in one sentence

• Provide supporting ideas for the thesis statement

• Provide specific examples from the selection

Thesis statement = topic (reading selection) + your
reaction

Reactions:
convincing, informative, enjoyable, confusing, boring,
intriguing
• Are they honest?
• Are they informed?
• Are they clear?
• Are they well supported?
• Have you tied each response to some aspect of the text?

• Have you added enough textual references to make clear the

connections between the reading and your response?

• Have you attempted to explain those connections?

• Are your opening and closing sections constructed well?

• Are you addressing one response at a time?

• Are there clear transitions between the responses you explore?

• Are your responses tied to some guiding thesis?

• Are you using terms your readers are likely to understand?

• Are you invoking a consistent tone?, not becoming too

informal, too angry, or too satiric when that does not
match the tone of your response as a whole?
Harvard College Writing Center. (2017). Retrieved August 3, 2-17, from

https://writingcenter.fas.harvard.edu/pages/resources

The Purdue Online Writing Lab. (2016). Retrieved August 3, 2017, from https://owl.english.purdue.edu/

UW-Madison Writer's Handbook. (2017, March 6). Retrieved August 3, 2017, from The Writing Center@ The

University of Wisconsin - Madison: https://writing.wisc.edu/Handbook/index.html

Writing Resources . (2017). Retrieved August 3, 2017, from Harvard College Writing Center:
https://writingcenter.fas.harvard.edu/pages/resources
Axelrod, R., Cooper, C., & Warriner, A. (2014). Reading critically, writing well: A reader and guide.
Boston, MA:Bedford/St. Martin’s.
Fairbairn, G., & Winch, C. (2012). Reading, writing, and reasoning: A guide for students. New York,
NY: McGraw Hill.
Kemper, D. (2014). Fusion: Integrated reading and writing. Boston, MA: Cengage Learning.
Straus, J. (2014). The blue book of grammar and punctuation. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Torres-Gouserh, R. (2016). Intermediate English Grammar. Chicago, IL: McGraw-Hill
 Prepared by:
Helen C. Raymundo
06/25/2020