Summarising documents without losing the plot
Listen to this lesson
Nigerian voice narration
Fictional training case. Adeyemi has 8 long public reports on AI productivity and two weeks to produce findings. This lesson covers producing structured, comparable summaries under fixed headings and building a synthesis table that turns comparison into evidence. Work through the example, identify the evidence needed and practise the method with cleared or synthetic inputs. Any additional figures in the explanation are separate practice examples, not claimed rows in a downloadable file.
Worked example
For each of the 8 reports, Adeyemi pastes the public text and asks AI to summarise under fixed headings: Objective, Method, Key findings, Gaps, Relevance to her research question. One report (a fictional international research note) yields 'Method: online survey of 400 officers across 2 countries; Gap: no Nigeria-specific data.' After all 8 summaries, she asks AI to build one synthesis table: source, finding, how it compares to the others. The table reveals that 6 of 8 sources report productivity gains only for drafting tasks, never for decision-making tasks — a gap across all sources that becomes her own study's unique contribution.
The method
Use identical fixed headings for every document so summaries are directly comparable, then convert the set of summaries into one synthesis table (source/finding/comparison) rather than leaving them as separate disconnected write-ups.
Worked practice and common mistakes
Compare date, population and method before combining sources. A fictional international survey is not direct evidence about Nigerian officers. Keep excerpts and references in the synthesis table. Several sources repeating one original study do not constitute independent confirmations. Preserve disagreements and transferability limits instead of averaging different designs into an unsupported single conclusion.
Review before using the result
Only summarise public or properly cleared documents. Fixed headings make summaries comparable. A synthesis table turns scattered findings into evidence; gaps across sources become your research opportunity.
Your workplace practice
Use the recommended free assistant with this lesson's fictional example. Summarise this document under: Objective, Method, Key findings, Gaps, Relevance to my research question: [question]. Then repeat for the next documents and build a synthesis table comparing findings. Keep a copy of the input and draft. Compare the result with the verification steps above, record any correction, and retain placeholders where evidence is missing. The expected result is a checked draft for human review, not an automatically approved decision. Course examples and practice responses are fictional; amounts, dates, rules and thresholds are not official guidance or supplier quotations.
Open NotebookLM (free tier) and paste this prompt there. Supports source-grounded summaries of cleared documents; verify references because errors and omissions remain possible.
Summarise this document under: Objective, Method, Key findings, Gaps, Relevance to my research question: [question]. Then repeat for the next documents and build a synthesis table comparing findings.
Why this tool: Supports source-grounded summaries of cleared documents; verify references because errors and omissions remain possible.
Hit a free limit? Switch to ChatGPT or Gemini and continue — the prompt works in any assistant.