The key idea
Group sources by shared themes, compare their claims, and explain which conclusions the evidence supports.
What is it for?
Learn to combine information from several texts by theme and evaluate their ideas.
What you need to know
- A clear theme that connects information from different sources.
- Accurate accounts of each source's main claims and supporting evidence.
- Comparisons showing agreement, disagreement, or partial agreement.
- Your own evaluation of the strength and limits of the evidence.
- A final link explaining what the combined information suggests.
1. Synthesise ideas instead of listing texts
A summary reports the main ideas of one text or several texts.
A synthesis connects ideas across texts and explains their combined meaning.
Organise your writing by theme, not by the order of your sources.
- Identify shared themes before writing.
- Bring related claims together in the same paragraph.
- Show what the sources reveal when read together.
- Add your own judgement, supported by the available evidence.
Source A praises flexible hours. Source B warns about staff shortages.
These statements report two sources separately.
Flexible hours may improve staff satisfaction, but shortages could limit their benefits.
This sentence connects both sources around one theme.
2. Plan by grouping claims
Read each source and record its main claims and evidence.
Group related points under themes, such as cost, time, or staff wellbeing.
Then decide what the combined evidence supports and where it remains weak.
- Use a table with one column for each source.
- Record agreement, disagreement, and missing evidence.
- Choose themes that answer your writing question.
- Decide your position before drafting the synthesis.
A: shorter weeks reduce travel costs. B: shorter weeks increase staffing costs.
Both claims concern costs, so they belong together.
C: results depend on staffing needs and workload.
This claim adds a condition to the cost debate.
3. Compare relationships clearly
Sources may agree, disagree, or address different parts of an issue.
Choose linking phrases that show the exact relationship.
Avoid saying that sources disagree when they discuss different concerns.
- Agreement: Both sources suggest that...
- Contrast: Whereas Source A argues that..., Source B maintains that...
- Partial agreement: Source C accepts this point but questions...
- A middle position: Source C offers a compromise between these views.
Whereas Source A supports shorter weeks, Source B stresses service risks.
Whereas signals a contrast between the two positions.
Source C takes a middle position by supporting limited trials.
This sentence identifies a position between two opposing views.
4. Evaluate the combined evidence
Do more than repeat what the sources claim.
Consider the quality, range, and limits of their evidence.
A confident opinion needs clear support, not just strong language.
- Check whether a source gives figures, examples, or personal opinions.
- Notice when a claim applies only to one workplace.
- Explain why one view has stronger support.
- Use cautious language when the evidence is incomplete.
Source A's figures provide stronger support than Source B's personal account.
This sentence evaluates the evidence behind two claims.
The findings suggest that shorter weeks may work best in some roles.
Suggest and may express a careful conclusion.
5. Build a connected synthesis paragraph
Start with a sentence that names the main theme.
Bring in relevant claims from at least two sources.
Compare their positions and evaluate the evidence.
End by explaining what the combined findings suggest.
- Theme sentence: name the issue shared by the sources.
- Source evidence: present related claims together.
- Evaluation: explain the strength or limits of the evidence.
- Link: connect the findings to your overall position.
The financial effects remain disputed across the three sources.
The opening sentence establishes a shared theme.
Although A reports savings, B identifies extra staffing costs.
The sentence combines evidence and shows a contrast.
C's wider approach is more convincing because it considers both costs.
The final evaluation explains why one approach is stronger.
How to do it, step by step
- Read all sources and record their main claims.
- Group related claims under shared themes.
- Compare agreements, contrasts, and middle positions.
- Evaluate the strength and limits of the evidence.
- Write connected paragraphs that support your overall position.
Formulas and key language
| Use it for | Example | Another example |
|---|---|---|
| Both Source A and Source B suggest that + claim | Both Source A and Source B suggest that flexible hours help staff. | Both texts indicate that clear schedules reduce confusion. |
| Whereas Source A argues that + claim, Source B + contrasting verb | Whereas Source A supports shorter weeks, Source B warns of delays. | Whereas A reports savings, B identifies extra costs. |
| Source C offers a middle ground by + -ing | Source C offers a middle ground by recommending a short trial. | Source C proposes a compromise by keeping essential services open. |
| This view is more convincing because + reason | This view is more convincing because it considers both costs. | This argument is stronger because it uses figures from several workplaces. |
| The evidence suggests that + cautious conclusion | The evidence suggests that shorter weeks may suit some teams. | The findings indicate that flexible schedules could reduce travel costs. |
| A limitation of this claim is that + weakness | A limitation of this claim is that it covers one office. | A weakness in this evidence is that it excludes part-time staff. |
| Taken together, the sources indicate that + combined finding | Taken together, the sources indicate that careful planning matters. | Taken together, the findings suggest that results depend on the job. |
| This supports the view that + position | This supports the view that shorter weeks need careful planning. | This supports the argument that trials should include different teams. |
UK / US: Both British and American English use synthesis writing. Spelling may differ, such as organise (UK) and organize (US).
Level up: Replace basic words (good, very, nice) with stronger ones. See our A2 to C1 upgrades page.
Model text
Should workplaces adopt a four-day week?
Source A: Staff wellbeing
A fictional survey of 120 office workers found that 78 preferred a four-day week. Many reported better sleep and more time with their families. However, the survey included only office staff, so its findings may not represent every workplace.
This source supports shorter weeks but has a limited sample.
Source B: Business costs
A fictional report from twelve small shops found mixed results. Some shops reduced electricity and travel costs. Others paid more for temporary workers during busy periods. The report concluded that savings depended on opening hours and customer demand.
This source questions whether shorter weeks always reduce costs.
Source C: A practical compromise
A fictional workplace adviser recommends six-month trials before permanent changes. Managers should track staff absence, customer waiting times, and total costs. The adviser argues that different jobs need different schedules.
This source offers a flexible approach and suggests ways to measure results.
Synthesis paragraph
The evidence suggests that a four-day week can improve staff wellbeing, but its financial effects remain uncertain. Source A reports strong staff support and better sleep, although its office-based sample limits wider conclusions. Source B offers a more mixed picture: some shops save money, while others face higher staffing costs. These findings are not necessarily contradictory because offices and shops have different operating needs. Source C offers a practical middle ground by recommending measured trials rather than immediate, permanent changes. Its approach is particularly convincing because it considers staff wellbeing alongside service quality and costs. Taken together, the sources support testing shorter weeks, provided that each workplace measures the results carefully. A successful trial should therefore examine both staff experiences and business performance before managers make lasting decisions.
This paragraph groups evidence by theme, compares findings, and evaluates a practical solution.
Common mistakes
✗ Source A supports shorter weeks. Source B reports higher costs. Source C recommends trials.
✓ Staff wellbeing and costs remain central. A supports shorter weeks, B reports higher costs, and C recommends trials.
The corrected version groups the sources around a shared theme.
✗ Both sources agree that shorter weeks always save money.
✓ Both sources discuss costs, but they report different results.
Discussing the same theme does not mean sharing the same view.
✗ Source A is right because I agree with it.
✓ Source A is more convincing because it provides relevant survey figures.
A personal preference is not enough to evaluate evidence.
✗ Source B reports higher costs, Source C recommends trials.
✓ Source B reports higher costs, whereas Source C recommends trials.
The linking word shows how the two points relate.
✗ The sources prove that every workplace needs a four-day week.
✓ The sources suggest that some workplaces may benefit from shorter weeks.
Limited evidence cannot support a claim about every workplace.
Plan it, then check it
Plan
- Write each source's main claims in a short list.
- Group related claims under two or three themes.
- Mark agreement, contrast, and any middle position.
- Choose the strongest evidence and state your own conclusion.
Check
- Does each paragraph focus on a theme?
- Have I combined claims from different sources?
- Have I shown how the sources agree or disagree?
- Have I evaluated evidence instead of giving only opinions?
- Does my conclusion follow from the combined evidence?
Practice
Choose the best synthesis sentence
Choose the sentence that combines sources around one theme.
1.Source A reports less stress. Source B reports better sleep.
The second option connects both findings through staff wellbeing.
2.Source A reports lower bills. Source B reports higher staffing costs.
The first option combines the opposing financial findings.
3.Source A supports immediate changes. Source B recommends trials.
The third option clearly compares the different positions.
4.Source A uses a survey of 200 workers. Source B gives one worker's opinion.
The second option evaluates the difference in evidence.
5.Source A supports shorter weeks. Source B says job type matters.
The third option combines support with an important limitation.
6.Source A reports staff support. Source B reports longer customer waits.
The first option brings both findings into one balanced conclusion.
Match the source relationship
Match each relationship with the phrase that shows it.
1.Two sources support the same idea
2.Two sources present opposing views
3.A source partly agrees but adds a concern
4.A source proposes a balanced solution
5.One claim has stronger evidence
6.Several sources point to one conclusion
Complete the comparison or evaluation
Write the missing phrase in each sentence.
1.Source A supports shorter weeks, whereas Source B takes the view.
Opposite clearly signals that the two sources disagree.
2.Source C offers a middle between the two positions.
Middle ground describes a position between opposing views.
3.This view is more convincing it uses evidence from several workplaces.
Because introduces the reason for the evaluation.
4.Taken , the sources suggest that results depend on the job.
Taken together introduces a conclusion based on several sources.
5.The evidence that shorter weeks may improve staff wellbeing.
Suggests expresses a careful conclusion rather than complete certainty.
6.A limitation of this claim is it covers only one office.
That introduces the specific weakness in the claim.
Improve the synthesis
Correct the single mistake in each sentence.
1.Source A support shorter working weeks.
The singular subject Source A needs the verb supports.
2.Both sources suggests that staff need more rest.
The plural subject sources needs the verb suggest.
3.Whereas Source A supports trials, Source B supports trials.
Whereas signals contrast, so the second claim must differ.
4.The evidence suggest that shorter weeks may reduce stress.
The singular noun evidence takes the verb suggests.
5.Source A reports lower costs, Source B reports higher costs.
A contrast link clearly shows the relationship between the findings.
Now write
Your task
Write a synthesis paragraph of 120-160 words about four-day work weeks. Use the three fictional sources below. Source A: A survey of 150 office workers found that 75% preferred four-day weeks. Many reported less stress and more family time. The survey included office workers only. Source B: A report from ten small shops found mixed financial results. Some shops saved on electricity, but others paid more for temporary staff. Customer demand affected the results. Source C: A workplace adviser recommends six-month trials. Managers should track staff wellbeing, customer waiting times, and costs. The adviser says different jobs need different schedules. Group the evidence by theme. Compare the sources and evaluate their claims. Finish with your own evidence-based conclusion.
Word bank
staff wellbeingfinancial effectsmixed resultssurvey findingsstaffing costscustomer demandlimited samplesupport the viewtake a middle groundstronger evidencea key limitationtaken togethersuggest thatmeasured triallong-term decision
Sentence starters
- The main issue raised by the sources is...
- Both Source A and Source B suggest that...
- Whereas Source A focuses on..., Source B...
- A key limitation of this evidence is...
- Source C offers a middle ground by...
- Taken together, the sources suggest that...