This paper addresses how academic integrity resources assist students in avoiding plagiarism, both intentional and unintentional. It defines and distinguishes three core citation methods — direct quotation, paraphrasing, and summarizing — and demonstrates each technique using the same source passage on Kolb's Learning Style Inventory. By working through concrete examples, the paper illustrates how students can engage responsibly with source material while accurately crediting original authors.
Citation resources help students uphold academic integrity by teaching them to understand the difference between appropriate and inappropriate use of source material. More specifically, they define and distinguish verbatim quotations from paraphrasing and from merely referencing or crediting the ideas of another author. Perhaps the most valuable aspect of such material is that it helps students avoid plagiarizing unintentionally — in cases where they do not realize their intended use of a source is prohibited.
A summary consists of an original, brief synopsis of the ideas found in the referenced material. A direct quote consists of reproducing the exact words of the referenced material enclosed in quotation marks; if the quoted passage is longer than a few lines, it is also indented and italicized. Paraphrasing consists of rewording the ideas in the referenced material entirely in one's own words.
Understanding these distinctions is central to responsible academic writing. All three methods require proper attribution to the original source; the key differences lie in how closely the language mirrors the original and how much of the source content is represented.
The following is a direct quote from the original text:
"LSI is based on Kolb's Experiential Learning model. In this model, knowledge is created from grasping and transforming one's experiences (Kolb, 1984). LSI was designed to place people on a line between concrete experience (CE) and abstract conceptualization (AC); and active experimentation (AE) and reflective observation (RO). The very brief explanations are as follows: Concrete Experience: Looking at things as they are, without any change in raw detail. Abstract Conceptualization: Looking at things as concepts and ideas, after a degree of processing that turns the raw detail into an internal model. Active Experimentation: Taking what they have concluded and trying it out to prove that it works. Reflective Observation: Taking what they have concluded and watching to see if it works." (Akkoyunlu & Soylu, 2008, p. 185)
The following is a paraphrase of the same original text:
"Reworded version of the Kolb LSI passage"
"Brief synopsis of Kolb's Learning Style Inventory"
You’re 64% through this paper. Sign up to read the remaining 2 sections.
Sign Up Now — Instant Access Already a member? Log inAlways verify citation format against your institution’s current style guide requirements.