synthesis essay | StudyGroom

You can buy syntesis essay from us and relieve your academic stress

Our Stats

Customers

0 +

Writers Active

Av. Quality Score

4.5/5.0

Writers Online

Why Choose studygroom?

We not only promise a 24/7 support availability and timely delivery of all your papers. You also get a ton of other asuarances that our service comes with.

Need a synthesis essay written fast

Developing and crafting a synthesis essay is one of the most engaging and challenging tasks students experience. Learning institutions assign students synthesis essays purposely to demonstrate their skills to deal with extensive research, take part in broad concepts, and show their fundamental skills to make arguments. The perfect paper obtains ideas from credible sources, summarizes them, and combines them into a significant thesis statement.

What is a synthesis essay?

Developing and writing a synthesis is similar to creating any form of thesis. According to the definition of a synthesis essay, we report a synthesis paper to discuss ideas. Synthesis writing draws on two or more sources from academically written documents, speeches, fiction sources, articles, lectures, interviews, or observation.

In other words, a writer can obtain two ideas from similar sources; the writer separates the core of what you are trying to present. For, instance you might have a paper that examines the importance of smartphones and another piece on the impact of social media on teenagers’ social lives. After synthesizing the information, you come up with one combined thesis: Smartphones and Social Media are not ruining a generation.

Types of the synthesis

Argument synthesis essay: The main goal of an argument synthesis essay is to argue a specific topic and justify the claim with evidence. Argument essay writer aims at stating their position, develop a supporting claim and then provide credible evidence to support each claim.
Explanatory synthesis essay: This kind of essay help readers gets a better understanding of the subject topic. The main goal of writing an explanatory essay is to explain a particular topic, not arguing. In the body paragraphs, the writer should explain the topic using sources presenting the sources objectively, backing up each supporting claim with two or more credible sources.

How to choose a topic

The synthesis essay topic must be debatable. Depending on your writing task, you may have to choose a primary text. Select the text or book that might have opposing viewpoints.

Step 1: browse through the topic ideas and subject ideas. Try reading the sources and examining the topic lists in-depth to find whether, if any, the issues are interesting to you.

Step3: Apply the ideas from the sources onto your synthesis paper outline. Applying your ideas makes your paper writing far more straightforward and saves your time.

Synthesis essay structure

Creating a paper outline would help structure your synthesis paper and plan the whole writing process. Write and paste supporting evidence, sub-arguments, and specific claims in appropriate sections. Ascertain that every writing aspect proves the claim of your thesis. Remember, any extra paper will only make your article worse.

If the information goes against the central theme of your essay, then you should acknowledge the claim- this will make your paper stronger. Make sure you examine the credibility of the sources you choose. A rule when writing about the causes is not to summarize the reasons but analyze them. Read further for the synthesis essay outline sample; The basic synthesis essay outline template comprises of the following three major parts:

Introductory paragraph with thesis statement: An outline for the synthesis essay starts with an introduction with a brief introduction of what the paper will all be about {subject topic}. It entails the hook sentence, the background info and relevance of matter, and the thesis statement.

How to develop and write a synthesis statement is explained below. For example:

An article published by jean Twenge clearly warns the audience that the increase in smartphones in modern society is ruining teenagers’ social lives. Furthermore, the author drives a sensational claim that escalating Smartphone and social media usage is developing metaphorical earthquakes with magnitude and intensity, which has never been witnessed previously in the world. The author provides robust evidence from several sources concerning the increase in the use of smartphones in modern society and personal observation. According to Twenge, the central hypothesis that the rise in the usage of smartphones in modern society is destroying a generation is the increased use of the two platforms in mental depression and other related mental issues. This article will mainly refute the writer’s claims by focusing on the concerns raised by the work writings.

Thesis

As a rule, essay writings include a thesis, which is the fundamental argument of the entire paper. The essay thesis should be the central argument of separately sourced views.

Although technological advancement has brought tremendous changes in modern society, the use of smartphones and social media are not ruining a generation, particularly when examining the reasons as portrayed by Twenge.

The body paragraphs are comprised of arguments and counterarguments to the thesis statement. The first paragraph must present a counterargument to your thesis, demonstrating the writer’s ability to think from an opposing viewpoint- which is highly valued in higher academic institution facilities. Be sure to note that the counterargument is not potent enough to discredit your thesis statement.

Example: One of the main reasons for disagreeing with the author’s article writings and observations is that all the bits of evidence found by the author are subjective. Twenge uses and reviews studies that are inherent support to her views.

Your following paragraphs should present claims in favor of your thesis statement. Remember to structure all your body paragraphs using the following format:

Developing supporting argument
Writing topic sentence
Present evidence
Analysis of the evidence

Example: At the same time, Twenge{ the author} disregards other vital studies which have been conducted to demonstrate that the use of smartphones and social media does not have significant impacts on depression and other mental-related conditions that affect teenagers. In one argument, the researcher uses a study that contends that the more teens use social media like Facebook, the more they become depressed. However, this claim doesn’t dwell on the issue of depression, but yet the same research reveals that being depressed is the result of using Facebook. Such findings remove the blameworthiness from Facebook, as the findings portray that unhappiness and Facebook are not entirely connected- as Twenge illustrates. Furthermore, low usage of Facebook more frequently, after which they probably become unhappy. Only suggests that Facebook has not wholly swapped how; teenagers should use social media to find unconventional/alternative ways to happiness or find their way out of depression.

Conclusion

A conclusion should summarize the overall paper. Then conclude the essay with the final potent conclusive statement. In other words, restate the most critical points and address unanswered questions;

Example:

To curb various factors that signified the previous recent generation, such as increasing teen pregnancy and alcohol usage, as some the signs and indicators of how detrimental these devices are to the current generation. It is not surprising that all these issues have significantly impacted the previous generation, not to mention the affected teenagers’ future and forthcoming lives. And condensing them will signify having a more prosperous generation. Although Jean Twenge has several valid claims on the use of social media and smartphones on teenagers, there is a lot of biasiness in her article writing, thus reducing the credibility level of her article /paper. It is evident that she chooses to focus only on one side of the issue. She neglects to pay attention to the opposing ideas to her stance, which depicts that social media and smartphones can be of great use and importance to teenagers. She also deliberately or indeliberately chooses to replace various opposing sides that signified the previous generation -teen pregnancy and underage alcohol to indicate how detrimental these aspects are to the current generation. All these issues have had an impact on the previous generation have much effect and impact on teenagers’ lives, and reducing these concerns signifies having a better generation- founded on morals and values.

Essential Tips for Synthesis Essay Writing

The essential aspect of working on a synthesis article is conducting appropriate analysis of a given text or prompts. To perform successful research, you must understand the purpose of written rhetoric and the author’s argument. In other words, writing synthesis answers the question: “So what?” Then, the writer must establish their application and develop their work around this question.

Avoid titling synthesis assignment as ‘synthesis essay’ preceded/followed by a relevant title.

Remember to address your audience accordingly.
Appropriate use of vocabulary. Don’t be shy about using a dictionary.
Use a straightforward sentence structure approach. Avoid using passive voice.
Remember Proofreading and correcting errors: always cross-check your work before submission and make the necessary amendment, For example, subject-verb agreements, spelling, comma errors, possessives, plurals. Also, avoid using the word “you.”
Ensure your article citations are correct.
Remember to develop transitions from one paragraph to another.

Writing Techniques

Make use of Summarizing: Summarizing is one of the simplest methods of organizing essay ideas. Summarizing approach allows the article writer to translate the sources possessing the highest amount of significance. However, the disadvantage of this writing method is that it doesn’t include any of your autonomous thoughts.

Examples: This involves Paraphrasing source material or, in other words writing segments of sources writers-own comments. Quoting sources is highly useful under this technique. It is a highly advisable writer to cite the source document in every case of using examples.

Using multiple Reasons: Using numerous reasons – classically two – is a highly efficient method.

Strawman: This technique involves presenting one argument against the writer’s thesis statement. However, the writer should make sure that the argument is not too potent. The advantage of this approach is enlightening and teaching awareness of the other side of the argument. This kind of evidence typically presents an introduction and description. It should be followed by the opposing viewpoint and a decisive factor.

Concession: This writing technique demonstrates the opposing viewpoint and proves the optimistic viewpoint to be much stronger than the negatives viewpoint.

Compare and Contrast: The compare and contrast technique allows writers to look at and examine two sources at once. Comparing usually points out similarities, while contrasting demonstrates the differences. Illustrating in-detail analysis of the chosen topic is possible.

Synthesis Essay

Despite the long-time existence and development of science, a large proportion of the world population discredits scientific concepts and proof of life (Simis, Haley Madden, Michael, and Sara 401). Based on the deficit model, scientific knowledge remains inadequate in the society of non-believers. Seemingly, public ignorance towards technology and science results in the knowledge gap witnessed in prior and contemporary communities. However, attempts deployed to energize the adoption of science in the lives of people remain ineffective to date. It is relevant to unravel the impediments incurred by the scientist community that degrades science in society.

My social movement integrates the scientific explanation of the existence of the natural phenomenon in the world with societal, cultural beliefs. Most of the social movements devise techniques of social relationships to engage human understanding in society (Epstein 409). By endorsing the traditional models on the knowledge that relates to science in the communities, an elaborate and simple understanding ensues. My essay demonstrates why the deficit model is an inadequate concept for explaining public skepticism and hostility towards science in the context of a social movement.

Summary of the deficit model

The deficit model demonstrates inadequate information within the society as a motivating factor for the negative attitude build by the public towards science (Simis et al. 401). The shortfall of the concepts implies misunderstandings, controversies, and lack of interest by a large percentage of the world population. However, the theory recommends information transfer from the professionals to the public through science communication. Through the concept delivery approach, it is easy to teach scientific knowledge and lure people’s attention toward science-based courses. Science communication posits that misconception of scientific ideologies in the public domain leads to the underdevelopment of the science sector.

Three factors the deficit model fails to account when communicating scientific knowledge

Irrational thinking in society

In addressing the inadequate experience in the public domain, science communication assumes the existence of different credibility for the scientific concepts (Simis et al. 401). According to the rational theory applied by scientists, the human population has the same reasoning for scientific knowledge. The basis of knowledge acquisition and transfer is, therefore, objective and ignorant of the changes realized during experimental approaches. As a result, science experts fail to explain to the public the contemporary questions that arise from the community. It is impossible to introduce scientific concepts to the public with suspicion of the intended knowledge mastery. Therefore, the public continues to hold mistrust and inadequate scientific explanation on the real science concepts, as illustrated below.

AIDs activists successfully engage the public in understanding the scientific concepts by modifying the underlying experimental approaches to accommodate society (Epstein 409). Notably, the social movement strives to bridge the knowledge difference between the non-believers and the experts in the department. Irrespective of the professional norms, the campaign involves the community in the clinical and study procedures to affirm the underlying medical concepts. It is irrelevant to proclaim the efficiency of scientific knowledge in the absence of evidence. Knowledge communication should divert its understanding from the preexisting community theories and application before incorporating the factual concepts. As a result, AIDS activism brings the public close and lures them towards understanding.

According to the behaviour of the scientist within the laboratory framework, all experts should possess the same line of thinking. The procedures remain functional from the initial to the final steps. Scientists ignore the controversial observation and result gathered from research institutes across the globe. The notion of rational thinking reduces the population of followers and experts with injunctions towards scientific concepts.

Formal communication

Even though scientists receive a variety of knowledge on the scientific approaches, inadequate communication skills dominate their procedures and interaction with the public (Simis et al. 403). The professionals practice subjective reasoning while communicating with other groups of participants in the field, a condition that eliminates diversity in the research findings. Surprisingly, the laboratory procedures are preformatted to affirm an underlying scientific knowledge that would otherwise not require experimentation. Seemingly, the experts do not receive formal learning and communication skills necessary for the development of scientific knowledge. Therefore, resolving public ignorance and skepticism on scientific knowledge through science communication proves inappropriate in society. The following examples demonstrate the informal communication factor.

First, leakage of information transferred among scientific climate researchers demonstrates subjective reasoning in generating data (Ryghaug & Skjølsvold 288). Even though the incidence remains unethical, most of the data disbursed to the public social media do not reflect the experimental construction of information. According to social activists, the data indicates an alteration criterion endorsed by the experts to suit the anticipated climatic pattern. However, the conversations should capture the techniques and the procedures for determining the change of climatic aspects in the space. Furthermore, research institutes and laboratories rely on subjective processes with preformed findings that ignore other relevant evidence-based versions.

Second, a study that involved physicists captures predefined knowledge instead of public information that appears in the findings (Ryghaug & Skjølsvold 290). It is unproductive for a scientist to sideline the concepts and results from another researcher in anticipation of quality findings. Ignorance of similar but slightly different findings negates the scientific role of investigation. Ineffective communication criteria to engage proper understanding of scientific concepts scares away public trust and involvement in science.

Exclusion of the other research bodies by scientist communities

Surprisingly, scientists reject and even remain silent on the information relayed in public by non-scientist communities (Simis et al. 405). Scientists possess a general understanding of the public as a clueless body of individuals under the title ‘others.’ Insignificantly, the researchers believe in the public awareness of meaningful scientific concepts across different disciplines. Based on exclusivity notion, a large population of individuals with segments of scientific knowledge ignores science forums. Integration of the society-based ideas and informed scientific knowledge provides a broad base for the growth and development of science. The approach fails in enticing the public towards science, as demonstrated below.

In the first example, Ufologists notion on the existence of objects from the space penetrate society with no effort from the scientists to clarify (Eghigian 613). According to activists, the professionals discredit the unique-masses claims as non-evidential suggestions with no scientific proof. However, the experts isolate themselves from the public understanding leaving the task to others in society. The deal seems influential on the side of ufologists to carry on with the gospel to the entire human population. Surprisingly, the social movement has excellently reached the public domain through social media awareness strategies as opposed to the academicians.

Second, women’s movement activists considered carrying out research ignored by the medicine manufacturers and the state authorities to understand the women (Tuana 4). According to Arditti, scientists have ignored the effect and impact of contraceptives on the male population. However, making a rational decision calls for experimentation on either side of sex. It is irrelevant to draw biased conclusions on the importance of artificial birth controls with innovations on the women alone. The claims that arise from the females could substantially reduce by embracing alternatives. Though not successful, the intervention policy projected by the social activist demonstrates why the deficit model fails to enjoin science in society.

In summary, the deficit model fails to address the adoption of science in the world population despite the existence and development of science from the previous centuries. The introduction of science communication does not bear significant changes in the understanding of scientific knowledge and information. Through the social movements, several shortcomings of social interaction suffice in the contemporary world. Ignorance or irrational thinking within the world population by scientists prove detrimental in knowledge acquisition. However, the mode of communication that could internalize the scientific concepts to the public remains informal for the scientists. Besides, the professionals consider themselves unique from the rest of society, a condition that’s keeps away parties with scientific ideas.