Below are two pieces of writing on Web 2.0, the first is an academic paper, the second is text from a book. The are both quoted directly with appropriate citations.

Source 1

“The most recent generation of Web applications and Web sites have been considered by some to be fundamentally different from the ones found on the early Web, these have been grouped together under the term Web 2.0, and while the name is arguably misleading (implying a designed version and a discrete evolution) the concepts beneath it provide a valuable insight into the way in which the Web has evolved. The Web 2.0 concept is probably still too intangible for a solid classification, however it can be said that the Web 2.0 approach emphasises interaction, community and openness”.

Source 2

“Let’s close by summarizing what we believe to be the core competencies of Web 2.0 companies:

• Services, not packaged software, with cost-effective scalability
• Control over unique, hard-to-recreate data sources that get richer as more people use them
• Trusting users as co-developers
• Harnessing collective intelligence
• Leveraging the long tail through customer self-service
• Software above the level of a single device
• Lightweight user interfaces, development models, AND business models”

Quoting

A poor student might breach academic integrity by including the following in their report

Using sources 1 and 2 together

The Web 2.0 concept is probably still too intangible for a solid classification, however it can be said that the Web 2.0 approach emphasises interaction, community and openness. Web 2.0 systems have the following characteristics:

• Services, not packaged software, with cost-effective scalability
• Control over unique, hard-to-recreate data sources that get richer as more people use them
• Trusting users as co-developers
• Harnessing collective intelligence
• Leveraging the long tail through customer self-service
• Software above the level of a single device
• Lightweight user interfaces, development models, AND business models

This is not acceptable and would be considered a breach of academic integrity, it copies the original text and does not acknowledge the sources with any references or citations.

A slightly better attempt using direct quotations might be

“The Web 2.0 concept is probably still too intangible for a solid classification, however it can be said that the Web 2.0 approach emphasises interaction, community and openness.” [1] Web 2.0 systems have the following characteristics (taken from [2]):

” * Services, not packaged software, with cost-effective scalability
* Control over unique, hard-to-recreate data sources that get richer as more people use them
* Trusting users as co-developers
* Harnessing collective intelligence
* Leveraging the long tail through customer self-service
* Software above the level of a single device
* Lightweight user interfaces, development models, AND business models”

The example above is a simple re-presentation of two sources which acknowledges the sources through the citations.
A better example could make the list into a table with a clear label acknowledging the source. This would make it doubly clear that it was not the author’s original work.

The next section takes you through a worked example of paraphrasing which you can use as a means to enable you to reword the text and add some of your own understandings