How do you stay on the analysis side of the summary line, and use sources without copying their wording?
Avoiding summary and plagiarism: recognizing the line between summarizing a source and analyzing it, the over-copying that the Part 2 directions warn against, and using your own words to present evidence so the response argues rather than retells.
How to avoid summary and over-copying on the Regents: the line between summarizing a source and analyzing it, why the directions warn against simply summarizing the texts, and using your own words to present evidence so the response argues rather than retells.
Reviewed by: AI editorial process; not yet individually human-reviewed
Have a quick question? Jump to the Q&A page
Jump to a section
What this skill is asking
The Part 2 directions warn explicitly: do not simply summarize the texts. Summary, retelling what a source says instead of using it to argue, is the single most common ceiling on both written responses. A related issue is over-copying: lifting a source's wording without quotation marks blurs the line between the text and your own analysis. This page covers recognizing the summary line, converting summary into argument, and using sources in your own words. The transferable skill is keeping your own voice and argument in control, with the sources as evidence rather than as the content itself.
The summary line
The most repeated warning on this exam is to analyze, not summarize.
The tell-tale sign of summary is a paragraph that walks through the sources in turn, reporting each one's content. The tell-tale sign of analysis is content that is immediately attached to a reason or an idea. Whenever you write what a source says, the next clause should say why it matters to your claim.
Converting summary into argument
The fix for summary is mechanical and reliable.
This is the same point-evidence-explanation discipline that runs through the argument and text-analysis pages, viewed from the summary side: evidence without the explanation is summary; evidence with the explanation is analysis. Train the habit of never leaving a piece of source content without saying why it matters.
Using sources in your own words
The second issue is the line between quoting and copying.
Try this
Q1. What is the difference between summary and analysis in a Part 2 essay? [Recall]
- Cue. Summary retells what a source says ("Text 1 describes a program"); analysis attaches the content to a claim ("Text 1's program cut waste, which supports expansion"). Analysis answers what you argue and how the text supports it.
Q2. How do you convert "Text 2 describes a city's recycling program" into argument? [Short explanation]
- Cue. Attach it to a reason with a linking clause: "Text 2's program cut landfill waste by a third (Text 2), which shows expansion works, supporting my claim that the city should expand recycling."
Exam-style practice questions
Practice questions written in the style of NYSED exam questions on this dot point, with worked answer explainers. The year tag is the paper they imitate, not the source.
Regents ELA (Part 2, style)4 marksSource-based argument. The directions say 'do not simply summarize the texts.' Explain what summarizing looks like in a Part 2 essay and how to convert a summary sentence into argument. (Rescoped to a 4-mark conceptual task.)Show worked answer →
Summarizing in Part 2 looks like retelling what each text says in turn ("Text 1 explains the history of recycling. Text 2 describes a city's program. Text 3 lists the costs.") without using the content to support a claim. It answers "what do the texts say?" instead of "what do I argue, and how do the texts support it?"
To convert a summary into argument, attach the content to a reason: "Text 2's city program cut landfill waste by a third (Text 2), which shows expansion works, supporting my claim that the city should expand recycling." Markers reward content marshalled toward a claim; the fix is to follow every piece of evidence with how it supports your position.
Regents ELA (Part 3, style)4 marksText-analysis response. Explain the difference between quoting a phrase (with quotation marks) and paraphrasing in your own words, and why copying a source's wording without quotation marks is a problem even on a timed exam. (Rescoped to a 4-mark conceptual task.)Show worked answer →
Quoting reproduces the source's exact words inside quotation marks; paraphrasing restates the content in your own words. Both are acceptable when the source is acknowledged. Copying a source's distinctive wording without quotation marks presents the author's words as your own, which is a form of plagiarism and also blurs the line between the text and your analysis.
On a timed exam the standard is the same: quote exact wording inside quotation marks, or paraphrase fully in your own words. Markers reward a clear distinction between the text and your voice. The safe habit is to either quote a short phrase accurately or restate the idea entirely in your own words, never half-copy.
Related dot points
- Selecting relevant textual evidence: choosing the smallest specific detail or quotation that proves the exact point, distinguishing relevant evidence from merely true or broadly on-topic detail, across Part 1 evidence questions and both written responses.
How to select textual evidence on the Regents: choosing the smallest specific detail that proves the exact point, and distinguishing relevant evidence from detail that is merely true or broadly on-topic. The Command of Evidence criterion rewards specific, relevant evidence in both written responses.
- Embedding and quoting evidence: integrating a short quotation into the grammar of your own sentence rather than dropping it in, choosing the smallest quotation that carries the point, and following every quotation with the explanation that links it to the claim or central idea.
How to embed and quote evidence on the Regents: integrating a short quotation into your own sentence rather than dropping it in, quoting the smallest phrase that carries the point, and always following a quotation with the explanation that links it to the claim or central idea.
- Citing sources by text number: attributing every piece of evidence in the Part 2 argument to its source by text number (and line where helpful), why citation is a scored expectation, and how to cite smoothly without breaking the sentence.
How to cite the Regents Part 2 sources by text number: attributing every piece of evidence to its source (and line where helpful), why citation is a scored expectation under Command of Evidence, and how to cite smoothly without breaking the sentence.
- Integrating evidence from multiple sources: selecting specific and relevant evidence from at least three of the four texts, weaving it across paragraphs organized by reason rather than by source, and explaining how each piece supports the claim, as the Command of Evidence criterion requires.
How to integrate evidence from at least three Regents Part 2 sources: selecting specific and relevant evidence, organizing paragraphs by reason rather than by text, and weaving evidence from several sources into one point. The Command of Evidence criterion rewards highly effective use of specific evidence from multiple texts.
- Understanding the text-analysis task: the Part 3 task (one text, identify a central idea, analyze how one writing strategy develops it), why it is a two-move analytical task rather than a summary, and what each part of the directions requires.
What Part 3 of the Regents ELA exam asks: one text, identify a central idea, and analyze how one writing strategy develops it. Why it is a two-move analytical task rather than a summary, and what each part of the directions requires of a top-band response.
Sources & how we know this
- Regents Examinations in English Language Arts — NYSED (2025)
- Educator Guide to the Regents Examination in English Language Arts — NYSED (2025)