Integrating Two Sources in a Synthesis Paragraph
Ms. Brennan's class is writing a paragraph that synthesizes two sources about planting shade trees in the school parking lot. Source 1 is a one-page city press release stating that shade trees can lower surface temperatures on asphalt by up to 20 degrees and describing a tree-planting grant. Source 2 is a science article explaining that tree roots can crack pavement and that young trees need watering for two years. A student survey about favorite trees is on the desk but is not one of the two assigned sources. Three drafts are on the table. Draft A: "Both texts show trees are good. The press release says they lower temperatures by 20 degrees. Trees are important for schools." Draft B: "The city says trees cool pavement by up to 20 degrees, but the science article warns that roots can crack pavement and young trees need two years of watering, so the school should plan for both benefits and costs." Draft C: "The science article says trees need water, which proves the city is wrong about the grant." Ms. Brennan has 30 minutes before the paragraph is due and must decide which draft meets the standard for integrating information from two texts, and what to say to the other two students.
1. Which draft best meets the standard for integrating information from two texts on the same topic, and what exactly is missing or wrong in the other two?
Read the worked answer
Draft B is the only one that integrates. It draws a claim from each source - the press release's temperature figure and the science article's cautions about roots and watering - and puts them into a relationship ("but... so") that produces a new idea: plan for both benefits and costs. That relationship is what integrating information means; the writer has not just placed two facts side by side but has used one source to qualify the other.
- Draft A draws from only one source, then editorializes ("Trees are important"). Two texts are named in the topic sentence but only one is used.
- Draft C does name both, but misuses the second: needing water does not contradict a claim about shade cooling, so "proves the city is wrong" is unsupported. C also assumes synthesis means one source wins, a common shortcut.
Ms. Brennan should hold up B, then ask the class to underline the sentence where the writer talks about both sources at once.
2. Draft C's author believes she has synthesized because she mentions both texts. What revision instruction would move her, and how would Ms. Brennan check in the remaining minutes that the revision actually integrated?
Read the worked answer
The instruction should target the relationship, not the sentence polish. Ask her to fill a two-column note-catcher: what each source says about trees in parking lots, then a third column labeled "How these fit: agree, disagree, or one adds a caution." Filling column three usually forces the discovery that the two sources are not in conflict-the science article adds a condition to the city's claim. Then give her a frame: "The city says ___. The science article adds that ___, which means the school should ___."
The frame is deliberately relational; it cannot be completed by reporting one fact.
To check integration in the time left, Ms. Brennan should read only the sentence containing the word "but," "however," or "so" and ask: does this sentence require both sources to be true? If yes, the paragraph integrates. If every sentence still stands alone as a fact about trees, the revision has not happened yet.
3. Two students ask to add a fact from the student survey because it is "about trees too." How should Ms. Brennan respond?
Read the worked answer
She should say no, and explain why in terms students can reuse. The task asks for a synthesis of two named sources, and a paragraph that pulls in a survey is no longer answering that question, however interesting the fact is. More importantly, the survey measures preference, not temperature or pavement, so it does not bear on the claim under discussion.
The teachable idea is relevance: a fact can be true, on-topic, and still not support this claim. Ms. Brennan can make that concrete by asking, "Which sentence in our paragraph would the survey fact support?" If students cannot point to one, the fact belongs in a different piece of writing.
She can honor the interest without derailing the task by offering a short extension: students who finish early write a one-sentence note explaining why the survey is not useful for this paragraph. That keeps the judgment visible and gives her quick evidence of who understands source selection.