Antigone has a clean, memorable plot, which is part of the problem. A student can retell the whole thing in a paragraph and feel like they have written something. Teachers know the feeling of reading a page of accurate plot description with nothing to score on the analysis row.

Summary is not a character flaw in student writers. It is a safe move. Retelling events shows you read the play, and it avoids the risk of being wrong about interpretation. Students do it because it has worked before.

To move them, feedback has to make the difference concrete. Explain that summary answers "what happened" while analysis answers "what does this mean and how do we know." Show the difference using one scene from the play, so the contrast is visible on the page.

For example, the burial scene can be summarized in a sentence. It can also be analyzed for how the guard's fear, Antigone's calm, and Creon's reaction show competing ideas about authority. Only the second version has an argument in it.

A simple test students can run on their own

Give students a short self-check they can apply to any paragraph. If deleting a sentence would leave the argument unchanged, the sentence is probably summary. If every sentence supports a claim, the paragraph is doing its job.

• Underline every sentence that only describes what happens
• Circle every sentence that explains why it matters
• Count both, and aim for more explaining than describing
• Rewrite one summary sentence as a claim about the character or theme
• Ask a peer to read the paragraph and say what it is arguing

Comments that push toward analysis

Generic notes like "add more analysis" rarely help. Students do not know what analysis would look like. A better comment names the move, like asking the student to explain what Antigone's choice of words here shows about how she sees Creon.

Even better is a comment that starts the sentence for them. Providing the first few words of an analytical sentence, such as "This detail suggests that...", gives a student a bridge from description into interpretation. After a few tries, most stop needing the bridge.

Grading the summary problem

Your rubric should treat summary as a weakness, not a neutral choice. Make sure the highest-scoring descriptors reward explanation of evidence, and the lowest describe retelling. Students read the rubric to learn what counts.

It helps to give partial credit for accurate summary, since it shows comprehension. Cap it, though. That message is honest and it keeps students from relying on it.

Scaling the feedback

The same handful of comments show up on nearly every paper, which is where AI feedback earns its place. GraideMind can flag summary-heavy paragraphs and offer a targeted prompt for revision. Students get direction on the exact paragraph that needs it, not a note at the bottom.

The result is a class that learns to ask what their evidence means. That is the skill every literature course is really trying to teach. It carries over to history, science, and everything else they write.