Choose a section of the text that you want to paraphrase.
Start by selecting an appropriate amount of source material to paraphrase. It’s difficult to paraphrase a single sentence, but if you select too much of the original source, it will be challenging to prioritize the most important ideas. Aim for a few sentences at least and a couple paragraphs at most.
Reread the section you want to paraphrase.
To paraphrase effectively, you need to know and understand the source material well enough to put it in your own words. Before you begin paraphrasing, re-read the source material you’ve chosen several times. Be sure to look up words that you don’t know. Identify the context for the source: Think about the audience for the text and why the author wrote the text.
Select the ideas that are most relevant to the purpose of your essay.
Break the source material down into a few key ideas. Create a list where each bullet point is an idea from the text. Decide which ideas are most relevant to your paper, and omit information that is repetitive or outside the scope of your paper. Only include what you really need in your paraphrase. Remember that you’ll need to justify the significance of each idea when you analyze the source material to show how it develops your argument.
Identify the author’s claim and evidence.
Because academic writing is centered on making and supporting arguments, it’s important to communicate the value of a source through the lens of argument. Readers will assume that any source material you include serves a purpose in relation to your central argument. When deciding to use outside research, think about the role that research will play in your paragraph and in your paper as a whole:
The role of source material in your paragraph and in your paper as a whole should influence the way you present the information. Regardless, you need to know the author’s argument and the evidence they use to support that argument before you can use their claim in a sentence.
When you’re ready to start drafting the paraphrase, put the source away. After a few minutes, start rewriting the information from memory; this is a helpful strategy for distancing yourself from the source. Once you’ve written a draft of your paraphrase, return to your list of key ideas from the source material. If you included each idea, then you’re in a good spot. If not, then try to incorporate the missing ideas into your paraphrase. Once your draft includes all the ideas you need, you can focus on differentiating your paraphrase from the author’s words.
Identify key features of the author’s writing style.
To paraphrase effectively, you need to be familiar with the author’s writing style. Pay attention to features like:
By pinpointing the unique characteristics of an author’s style, you can identify the ways in which your writing style differs, or you can adapt your writing style to avoid imitating the author.
Once you’ve finished paraphrasing, it’s important to compare your draft to the original source material to make sure it’s not too similar. If you’ve familiarized yourself with the author’s argument, evidence, and writing style and taken steps to distance your paraphrase from the original source, then you probably won’t have many revisions to make.
When comparing your paraphrase to the original, look for places that are too similar. As previously mentioned, it’s okay if you use two to three keywords from the source, but if you notice similarities in phrasing or sentence structure, consider revising your paraphrase. There are also other tools that will help you avoid plagiarism when you paraphrase. Try running your draft through Turnitin to get a similarity score. If you notice a lot of overlap between your draft and the original source, then you should re-examine how you present the author’s ideas.
To better understand the concepts discussed here, review the following excerpt from Fareed Zakaria’s book, The Post-American World and The Rise of the Rest. Then, compare the original source material to the two sample paraphrases.
Original Source Material:
“The traditional mechanisms of international cooperation are relics of another era. The United Nations system represents an outdated configuration of power. The permanent members of the UN Security council are victors of a war that ended sixty years ago. The body does not include Japan or Germany, the world’s second- and third-largest economies at market exchange rates, or India, the world’s largest democracy, or any Latin American or African country. The Security Council exemplifies the antique structure of global governance more broadly. The G-8 does not include China, already the world’s fourth-largest economy, or India and South Korea, the twelfth and thirteenth. By tradition, the IMF is always headed by a European and the World Bank by an American. This ‘tradition,’ like the customs of an old segregated country club, may be charming and amusing to insiders, but to outsiders it is bigoted and outrageous” (Zakaria, 2008, p. 37).
First Draft of Paraphrase:
According to Zakaria (2008), international cooperation requires modern mechanisms that are willing to incorporate non-western nations with global influence. Existing institutions privilege western powers, like European nations and the United States. Countries like Japan, India, China, and South Korea, which have robust economies, would be obvious candidates for involvement, yet their influence has not yet been acknowledged in the form of inclusion in the United Nations, the International Monetary Fund, or the World Bank. It is also worth mentioning that the aforementioned institutions fail to include any African or Latin American countries. While traditional world powers might see their leadership in these institutions as unquestionable, rising powers view continued western leadership as a continuation of the status quo (Zakaria, 2008, p. 37).
Second Draft of Paraphrase:
According to Zakaria (2008), international cooperation requires modern institutions that incorporate industrialized nations with global influence. The United Nations, International Monetary Fund, and World Bank privilege western powers, like European nations and the United States. As a result, the influence of other industrialized nations, like Japan, India, China, and South Korea, has not yet translated to inclusion in these intergovernmental organizations. Latin American and African powers are also overlooked. While western world powers might see their control over these institutions as conventional, excluded world powers view continued western leadership as a bigoted preservation of the status quo (Zakaria, 2008, p. 37).