Final Paper 700 words - 7 references

School of Liberal Arts

University Writing Center “Because writers need readers”

Cavanaugh Hall 427 University Library 2125 (317)274-2049 (317)278-8171

www.iupui.edu/~uwc

Literature Review: Synthesizing Multiple Sources The term “synthesis” means to combine separate elements to form a whole. Writing teachers often use

this term when they assign students to write a literature review or other paper that requires the use of a

variety of sources. When writing teachers use this term, they often hope that students will write papers

that make a variety of connections among source material so that their papers are not organized source-

by-source but are organized topic-by-topic to create a whole text. This handout is designed to help

students better use synthesis in their writing and will offer strategies in the areas of:

(1) pre-writing,

(2) writing,

(3) recognizing and

(4) revising for synthesis.

A common strategy for planning a synthesis paper is to create a “grid of common points.”

To create a grid follow these steps (note: be sure to see example grid on next page):

1. As you read your source material, take note of words or ideas that repeat themselves.

2. As you read your source material, also make note of conflicts or contradictions in the

information.

3. Based on the repetitions and contradictions you notice, write down the main research question

that the source material answers. A good research question should be open-ended.

4. Make a list of the key ways the research answers the question. Make sure your answers

account for both the contradictions and repetitions you discovered. Turn these answers into

“categories.”

5. Create a grid using authors’ names and categories as organizing features.

6. Fill in the grid with details from source material.

A grid of common points is a heuristic that allows a writer to group source material

into specific categories. These categories can help the writer organize the paper.

1. Planning a Synthesis Paper 1. Planning a Synthesis Paper

Sample Literature Review Grid of Common Points

Research Question: What role does capital punishment play in American society?

Possible Answers: Capital punishment plays the roles of deterrence, revenge, oppression, and

political leverage.

Author’s Names Deterrence Revenge Oppression Political

Leverage

Author A

Author B

Author C

Author D

Author E

Author F

In the blank boxes above, the writer would write down what each author

said about each category. Some boxes might be blank, but the more

complete the writer can make the boxes, the more well developed the final

paper will be.

TIP: When creating your grid, avoid creating only two categories. Try to create categories that represent concerns that get repeated again and again in the source material.

1. Planning a Synthesis Paper (cont’d)

Once you have completed a grid of common points, you can begin writing your paper. When

you begin to write the body of the paper, you may want to follow these steps:

1. Select one common point and divide it into sub-topics that represent paragraph size “chunks.”

For example, capital punishment literature on the issue of deterrence has the following

sub-topics: (1) the public’s impression that capital punishment does deter crime,

(2) researchers’ impressions that capital punishment does not deter crime in most cases,

and (3) researchers’ impressions that capital punishment can lead to more crime.

2. For each “chunk” create a topic sentence that both (1) synthesizes the literature to be

discussed and (2) describes the literature to be discussed. Here are some example topic

sentences:

Much of the literature points out that while capital punishment does not deter crime, most

Americans still believe that it does deter crime.

(The first highlighted section synthesizes the literature, the second highlighted section

describes the literature).

Not only does the literature agree that capital punishment does not deter crime, some

literature suggests that capital punishment may in fact cause more crime.

(The first two highlighted sections synthesize the literature and the third highlighted

section describes the literature.)

3. Support the topic sentences you created in #2 with quotes and paraphrases from source

material. As you incorporate source material, make sure to use clear transitions that relate the

sources to each other and to your topic sentences.

(For more information about using and citing sources in text, see the Center’s handouts on MLA

format, APA format, and integrating sources.)

2. Writing a Synthesis Paper

The following are two parts of a student’s literature review. The first example is an early draft

of the literature review. The second example is a revised version. Notice how the student’s

revision makes better use of synthesis at both the paragraph and sentence level. The revised

example is also more accurate in its portrayal of the literature.

Unrevised Paragraph:

Much of the literature agrees that capital punishment is not a crime deterrent. According

to Judy Pennington in an interview with Helen Prejean, crime rates in New Orleans went up in

the eight weeks following executions. Jimmy Dunne notes that crime rates often go up in the

first two or three months following an execution. “Death and the American” argues that

America’s crime rate as a whole has increased drastically since the re-instatement of the death

penalty in the 1960s. This article notes that 700 crimes are committed for every 100,000

Americans. Helen Prejean cites Ellis in her book to note that in 1980 500,000 people were

behind bars and in 1990 that figure rose to 1.1 million.

Revised Paragraph(s):

The literature on capital punishment suggests that it fails as a deterrent in two key ways.

First, much of the literature suggests that capital punishment does not lower the crime rate. Helen

Prejean, in Deadman Walking, clearly notes that capital punishment does little to lower the crime

rate. Prejean argues that the “evidence that executions do not deter crime is conclusive […] the

U.S. murder rate is no higher in states that do not have the death penalty than those who do”

(110). Prejean’s point is reiterated from a historical perspective in “Death and the American.”

Here, the author notes that despite the social and economic upheavals that occurred from the

1930s to the 1960s, the crime rate barely changed (2). However, after the reinstatement of the

death penalty in the 1960s, the author notes that “crime rates soared” (2). Steven Hawkins points

out that law enforcement officials also agree that the death penalty has failed to stop crime. He

explains that a 1995 Peter D. Hart Research Associates survey found that police chiefs believe

the death penalty to be “the least effective way of reducing crime” (1).

Some of the literature suggests that, in addition to failing to lower the crime rate, capital

punishment can lead to more crime. In an interview with Helen Prejean, Judy Pennington notes

that in 1987, the crime rate in New Orleans went up 16.3 percent in the quarter following eight

executions (7). In Deadman Walking, Prejean elaborates on her position that capital punishment

can be related to an increase in crime. She notes that in Canada in 1975, the murder rate peaked

“one year before the death penalty was abolished” (110). Capital punishment opponents like

Thurgood Marshall and Donald Cabana agree with Prejean that capital punishment has failed as

a deterrent and cite similar statistical studies as evidence for this position (Fitzpatrick 3; Hawkins

1). Fitzpatrick also explains that Marshall would remind “us that the question with respect to

deterrence is not whether the death penalty is a deterrent but whether it is a better deterrent than

life in imprisonment” (53). The literature reviewed seems to overwhelmingly suggest that

capital punishment is not the better deterrent.

3. Recognizing Synthesis

4A. Improving Synthesis at the Paper Level 4B. Improving Synthesis at the Paragraph

Level

1. Write down the paper’s thesis or main 1. Select a paragraph to work with.

research question.

2. Highlight the synthesizing topic 2. Highlight the topic sentence.

sentence of each paragraph.

3. If a topic sentence is missing, draw 3. In every sentence highlight words

a star (*) next to the paragraph. that link the topic sentence and

source material.

4. Using pages 3 & 4 as guides, write 4. If links are missing, draw a slash (/)

topic sentences for every star. in front of the sentence.

5. If necessary, re-organize and combine 5. Where slashes appear, add transitions.

source material to fit with new topic sentences.

Handout created by T.B. Henning—Updated February 2011

Sources Consulted include:

Corn, Kevin, et al. Research and Argumentation. 2 nd

ed. IUPUI: HarperCollins, 1994. Print.

“Death and the American.” The Economist 21 June 1997: 1-2. Web. 1 Aug. 1997.

Fitzpatrick, Tracy B. “Justice Thurgood Marshall and Capital Punishment.” American Criminal Law Review 32.4

(1995): 1-17. Web. 1 Aug. 1997.

Hawkins, Steven. “Death at Midnight…Hope at Sunrise.” Corrections Today Aug. 1996: 1-2. Web. 1 Aug. 1997.

Pennington, Judy. “Helen Prejean.” The Progressive Jan. 1996: 1-9. Web. 1 Aug. 1997.

Prejean, Helen. Deadman Walking. New York: Random House, 1992. Print.

SCHOOL OF LIBERAL ARTS INDIANA UNIVERSITY University Writing Center

IUPUI

4. Revising a Synthesis Paper

Research Paper Rubric

Component 100% 75% 50% 25% 0

Basic Requirements

Formatted correctly, at least 500 words in length, citation page and internal citations correct (APA format), at least 2 cited peer reviewed sources.

Does not meet required page length, and/or does not have 2 cited peer reviewed sources.

Thesis Statement

Engaging, challenging, and clearly focuses the paper. Effectively stated in the introduction and carried throughout the paper.

Clear and articulate, engaging and clearly focuses the paper, but is not challenging. Is effectively carried throughout the paper.

Clearly stated in the introduction, attempts to be engaging, is adequate, but lacks insight and focus, and is carried through the paper.

Included in the introduction, but is vague. Lacks insight, focus, and is not carried throughout the paper.

Is vague or may be lacking in the introduction; is not focused and lacks development; is not carried throughout the paper.

Introduction Strong and effective, it is engaging and clearly defines the thesis, as well as provides a foundation for the body of the paper.

Effective and engaging, defines the thesis and provides foundation for the body of the paper.

Introduces the topic of the paper and builds a connection between the topic, the thesis, and the body of the paper. Informative but not engaging or strong.

Introduces the topic of the paper loosely and includes the thesis statement. Provides little information regarding the topic.

Includes little more than the thesis and shows no demonstrable knowledge of the topic of the paper.

Content

Strongly and vividly supports the thesis and is reflective of strong, thorough research. Illustrates extensive knowledge of the topic. Every aspect of the thesis is supported by quality academic research.

Strongly supports the thesis and is reflective of good, thorough research. Illustrates knowledge of the topic, but could be extended. Most aspects of the thesis are supported by quality academic research.

Supports the thesis and reflects research, and illustrates adequate knowledge of the topic. Could be extended and shows some gaps in understanding of the topic. Although there may be some inconsistencies with support from quality academic research.

Related to the thesis but reflects inadequate research and knowledge of the topic, and demonstrates a lack of understanding. There may be a lack of support from quality academic research.

Does not convey adequate understanding of the topic, the research, or the thesis. There are many unsupported aspects of the thesis and the research lacks quality sources.

Organization Effectively organized. Logical structure of points and smooth transitions convey both understanding of topic and care in writing.

Well organized, but may lack some transitions between ideas. Logical structure of most ideas conveys understanding of topic and composition.

Ideas are logically structured, but may lack transitions between ideas. Could benefit from reorganizing 1 or 2 ideas.

Some significant gaps in organization are present but the basic framework of ideas is logical. Overall organization could be improved.

Much of the paper lacks organization of ideas, making it difficult to understand the ideas expressed in the paper.

Citation Format APA format is used accurately as needed throughout the entire paper.

APA format is used throughout the entire paper, but may show variations or slight inconsistencies of format.

APA format is used throughout the entire paper, but may be noticeably inconsistent in format.

APA format is used inaccurately and inconsistently in the paper.

APA is not used (regardless of the number of sources or citations).

Conclusion Strongly and clearly connects the thesis statement to the research to draw a specific conclusion that does not leave the reader with questions regarding the thesis.

Clearly connects the thesis statement and the research to draw a clear conclusion that draws the research to a logical close.

Connects the thesis statement and research to draw a conclusion regarding the research. Restates the topic statements throughout the paper.

Restates the thesis and the topic statements, but does not draw any specific conclusion about the research or the thesis.

There is no conclusion; it restates the thesis at best.

Conventions Conventions of standard written English are used with accuracy; there are few, if any, minor errors.

Conventions of standard written English are used; there may be several minor errors of usage.

Conventions of standard written English are used; however, there may be a few major errors and few minor errors of usage.

Conventions of standard written English are used with numerous major errors and several minor errors of usage.

The paper shows significant errors in conventions of standard written English.