Summarising a Source Without Copying It
You must write a 200-word response to a source text about urban trees. The source says: 'Street trees lower surface temperatures by up to 5°C in summer, reduce stormwater runoff by intercepting rainfall, and improve air quality by trapping particulates. However, maintenance costs can exceed planting costs within a decade, and poorly chosen species can damage pavements and pipes.' Your draft currently reads: 'Street trees lower surface temperatures by up to 5°C in summer, reduce stormwater runoff by intercepting rainfall, and improve air quality by trapping particulates.' You have written 45 words and have 155 left.
1. Identify the problem with the draft and explain how to fix it while staying within the word limit.
Read the worked answer
The draft copies the source's sentence almost word for word. That is not a summary; it is reproduction, and it also uses 45 of 200 words to restate only the benefits, leaving out the costs entirely.
The fix has two parts. First, paraphrase: restate the ideas in your own words and sentence structure, e.g. 'Trees in streets cool surfaces in hot weather, soak up rain that would otherwise run off, and filter dust from the air.' Second, rebalance: the source gives benefits and drawbacks, so a fair summary must include both. The costs - rising maintenance and damage from unsuitable species - are essential, not optional.
A workable plan: about 90 words on benefits, 70 on costs, and 40 on the source's overall point that tree planting needs careful planning. That fits the limit and represents the source honestly.
2. The source says maintenance costs 'can exceed planting costs within a decade'. Explain why a summary that drops the word 'can' would be inaccurate.
Read the worked answer
'Can' signals possibility, not certainty. The source claims that maintenance costs may overtake planting costs within ten years in some cases. If a summary says maintenance costs do exceed planting costs within a decade, it turns a possibility into a universal fact, which the source does not claim.
This matters because the source's overall argument is about trade-offs and careful planning, not about trees being a bad investment. Overstating the cost claim would distort the source's position and could mislead a reader into thinking street trees always cost more than they are worth.
When summarising, keep hedging words - can, may, often, up to, in some cases - because they carry the writer's level of certainty. Dropping them is one of the most common ways a summary becomes inaccurate even when every other word is paraphrased.