Cutting a 92-Word Summary to 60 Words
A 320-word expository passage presents a school district's proposal for a four-day week. It gives three reasons: transport savings of about 12 percent, a 9 percent rise in teacher applications, and improved attendance on the remaining days. It then presents one counterpoint: working parents may face childcare costs. The passage ends by saying the evidence is promising but limited to one year. A student must write a 60-word summary in English. Her draft is 92 words and includes a personal anecdote about her cousin's school, the exact 12 percent figure, and the opinion that the plan is 'clearly the best choice.' The task instructions say: summarize the passage's main points objectively; do not add outside information or opinion.
1. Identify what must be deleted from the draft and why, referring to the summary's purpose and the instruction constraints.
Read the worked answer
Three deletions are required. First, the cousin anecdote is outside information; a summary reports only the source passage, so the anecdote violates the task even if it is true. Second, 'clearly the best choice' is evaluative opinion; the passage says the evidence is promising but limited, so the draft overstates the source and breaks objectivity. Third, the exact 12 percent figure is probably too granular for a 60-word limit. A summary needs the proportional significance of the savings, not every number. The 9 percent teacher-application rise and the attendance improvement should be compressed into a single phrase such as 'reported staffing and attendance gains.' The childcare counterpoint and the one-year limitation must be kept because they qualify the proposal; deleting them would make the summary one-sided. The governing test is: does the detail carry a main point that the source itself emphasizes?
2. Write a 60-word summary that satisfies the instructions. Then explain your word-count decisions.
Read the worked answer
Model summary (59 words): 'A school district proposes a four-day week, citing transport savings, more teacher applicants, and better attendance on remaining days. The passage also notes that working parents may face childcare costs. It concludes that the evidence is promising but limited to one year, so the proposal should be viewed cautiously.'
Word-count decisions: the three claimed benefits are compressed into a list rather than explained, because the passage treats them as reasons, not as separate arguments. The childcare counterpoint gets one sentence because it is the only opposing consideration. The final sentence carries the source's own qualification ('promising but limited'), which is essential to an objective summary. I omitted the exact percentages because they consume words without changing the main points; 'transport savings' preserves the claim. I omitted the cousin and the opinion entirely. The summary follows the passage's order: proposal, reasons, counterpoint, qualified conclusion.