Question

When should evidence be quoted directly and when should it be paraphrased? Identify which approach the student in each scenario should use.

Answer 1

Sally should paraphrase the evidence

George should paraphrase the evidence

Addison should quote the evidence

Alex should quote the evidence

Step-by-step explanation:

The question is not complete since it does not present the scenarios. The question refers to the scenarios presented in the picture attached.

There are to ways of presenting the evidence when the information coming from the original source is going to be included in the final paper, Quoting the evidence is to add pieces of information as they are in the original but giving full credit to the original author while paraphrasing is to take the information to analyze it and rewrite it in different words and style without affecting the meaning.

Answer 2

Utilize the direct quotation in particular if the specific stating of the first material is urgent to your point. On the off chance that you can reword the thought in your own words, do as such.

Step-by-step explanation:

Pick a direct quote when it is bound to be precise than would outlining or summarizing, when what you're citing is the content you're breaking down, when an immediate statement is progressively succinct that a synopsis or rework would be and compactness matters, when the creator is a specific power whose accurate words would loan trustworthiness to your contention, and when the creator has utilized especially compelling language that is simply too acceptable to even think about passing up.

Decide to paraphase when you need subtleties and particularity. paraphrasing lets you underscore the thoughts in source materials that are generally identified with your research project or article rather than the specific language the writer utilized. It additionally lets you streamline complex material, at times revamping to utilize language that is progressively justifiable to your peruser.