This week’s session focused on the differences between quoting, paraphrasing and summarising in academic writing. We discussed when each approach should be used and how they can help support an argument while avoiding plagiarism. One of the main points was that paraphrasing should be used most often, as it demonstrates an understanding of the source material while allowing the writer to maintain their own academic voice.
The lecture also explored situations where direct quotations are appropriate, such as when using definitions, statistics or specific wording that would lose meaning if rewritten. In contrast, summarising was presented as a way of giving a broad overview of a topic rather than providing detailed evidence. Although I was already familiar with these concepts, the session helped clarify the different purposes they serve within academic writing.
As I begin researching for my literature review, this session felt particularly relevant. I often find myself relying too heavily on quotations when taking notes, so it was useful to be reminded that paraphrasing is generally more effective in demonstrating understanding and building a stronger argument. Going forward, I want to focus on engaging more critically with sources rather than simply repeating what authors have said.