summary vs. analysis

 What is the difference between summary and analysis? My understanding of the difference betwee these two
techniques is that one is simply a book report, and the other is a technique that challenges you to breakdown the text and reveal in your opinion what  the text is saying. After watching the lecture and actually understanding the true difference between these two techniques, it seems to me that they could also be one in the same. NOt in the event that summary could be analysis but in the situation that analysis is an opinionated summary. It goes back to what week talked about last week in what makes a good reader or writer. That simply everyones vague summary of a script would be the same. However when asked to break the text down and argue what the text truely means to you, then every ones defintion of the text will be different.

   What is the summary? I think as humans in this modern time we dont look at summary as something we take out of an event, situation, or even literature. In my opinion we look for summary before we even consider what we do. For example, when choosing a book to buy, we dont just pick it up and say i am going to read this one. we dont even consider it until you read the quip summary it gives you on the back. It is almost that we have lost the adventure. We want to know what is going to happen before we ever go do it.

  What is analysis? Now this is where I feel we are lost. As i said in the previous parargraph, we look for summary before hand. Then after the fact when asked to summarize the event we use almmost the exact same text that we read or heard before and just add detail. Instead of searching for more we are satisfied with enough. For example, when you attend a sporting event. When leaving that event, you are asked what happened? You simply add who won, by how much, and maybe who played well. Instead of analysing deeper. A win or loss is dictated in many different ways. You never find yourself asking if that team were to play again tommorrow night would it be the same out come. No, because at the summary of the first event you did not ask yourself why? Why did that team win? whay did that player play bad? Why didn't that player play? Instead you simply tell what happened  and go on with life until the next week you ask wow that team didn't play that well last week.

   So there is a very big difference betweeen the two. I as a coach struggle to try to relay this to my players.
That when something good happens, or when something bad happens to remain positive and take all the aspects in. There is many victories that come out of defeat. As there are just as many defeats that come out of victory.


image cite:http: //www.easportsworld.com/en_US/news/VirtualPlaybookNominations

here is a good site for analyzing techniques:http://www.ibm.com/developerworks/rational/library/1107.html