• According to Thury & Drott, in the analytic summary, you speak in your own person, explaining what the author of the work you are summarizing said, and speaking of the author as a separate person. In a paraphrase-summary, as in a paraphrase, you pretend to be the author of the work and speak from her or his point of view.
• According to Thury & Drott, the meaning of the source beeds to be reflected in at least two aspects of the summary:
  • the opening or introductory overview
  • the proportions or scale
• According to Thury & Drott, to determine the meaning of the source, you look for the "Benchmarks for Meaning." These are:
  • what is the subject of the source? (Subject)
  • what audience is it written for? (Audience)
  • what assumptions does the source suggest about the audience? (Audience Assumptions)
  • what style of writing does the source suggest is appropriate for the audience? (Style of Writing)
  • what kind of evidence does the source present? (Kind of Evidence)
  • what are some attitudes, beliefs, actions that the text encourages? (Attitudes/Beliefs/Actions Encouraged)
• The benchmarks help you to write the introductory overview of the summary.
• However, Thury and Drott say that you should not put the benchmarks directly into a summary, because that will turn it into a kind of analysis, and confuse your reader about what you are writing.

Writer:

• Give copies of your summary to members of your writing group.
• Read the summary aloud to them, as they follow along on their copies.

Group members:

• As the writer reads, listen for the following.
  • the introductory overview
  • the main topics of the rest of the summary
• Underline or circle any relevant sections of the summary.

Discussion:

• Is this an analytic summary? (That is what the assignment called for.)
• Take turns explaining what you identified as the writer's (that is, the writer of the summary, not the author of the source) introductory overview.
• Take turns explaining what you identified as the author's (that is, the author of the source, not the writer of the summary) meaning as found in the introductory overview.
• Discuss which of the "benchmarks for meaning" (see above) are represented in this opening.
• Make sure that the benchmarks do not appear in the summary as a whole.
• Take turns discussing the main topics of the rest of the summary. Do these topics fit with the meaning of the summary as defined in the introductory overview?
• Consider how the writer can improve the summary.

Final points:

As a group, consider:

• The coherence of the paper. Are there transitions between the points of the summary?
• The development of the ideas in the summary. Are there transitions to the main point of the summary, which is also the main point of the source, as explained in the introductory overview?
• Use of source material:
  • Has the writer given proper credit to the source?
  • Is there too much quotation of the source?
• Does the summary fulfill the length requirements called for in the assignment?