Connection of Ideas between Sources
Objectives
- Use two sources to support a claim or point
- Use transition words to clearly show the relationship between the two sources
Synthesis
Why do we use external sources to support our ideas? We do this to add strength to our ideas. By showing we are not alone in our opinions, we can increase the power of the argument. By using the words and ideas that someone else said in a way better than we could say it ourselves, we show respect for other thinkers and add interest to our points.
This idea was introduced in the lessons Speaking Strategy: Supporting an Opinion with Reported Speech and Speaking Strategy: Summarize, but we will take this strategy a step further in this lesson. Before we talked about summarizing, but now we will begin to synthesize.
The word synthesis (noun; synthesize as a verb) means the combination of different ideas into one. At BYU, there is a musical group called Synthesis. This group combines different musical styles such as jazz, blues, swing, and Latin together. Not only that, but the combination of different instruments works together to create something greater than the individual parts. This is an excellent example of what the word truly means. You bring different parts together into something new.
In this sense, a synthesis is more than a summary. A summary is a restatement of what someone else said. Sometimes this is followed by a reaction or commentary, but the summary itself is just the same ideas in new words. A synthesis goes beyond that. A synthesis requires you to take in information from multiple sources (written or spoken) and find connections between them. As the speaker, you are creating a unique combination of those ideas and your own. You may do this by drawing similarities between them, pointing out contrasting perspectives, or showing a gap in the conversation you want to explore. The words and phrases from the lesson Speaking Strategy: Organization & Transitions can be used to make these connections between sources clear to your listener.
If a synthesis is done correctly, your final product of combined ideas will be far more powerful than the individual parts, just like the musical group.
So how do you synthesize? It begins by listening to and reading about the topic. Go to various sources. Explore what other people have to say about the topic. Don't be afraid to listen to conflicting perspectives. Practice summarizing those separate ideas as described in the previous lessons listed above.
After you have explored the ideas of others, consider what you want to say about the topic.
- What do you find most interesting at this intersection of information?
- What do you think would be most meaningful to highlight about this pool of information you have learned from others?
- Consider your supporting ideas for your main idea. What combination of source material would best demonstrate what you want your listener to understand?
Exercise 1: Listen & Speak
Here is a section of a speech given by Judge Thomas B. Griffith, a federal judge on the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit at the time of the address. As you listen to him speak, listen for the way he takes four sources and synthesizes them into the ideas he is presenting. Again, these are individually interesting and complete ideas, but they are combined in a way that strengthens his point about the role of personal beliefs and the practice of law.
Transcript - Marked Sources
The sources have been added and bolded.
When More asks the grounds for the arrest, he is told that Rich is a “bad” man.
More: There is no law against that.
Roper: There is! God’s law!
More: Then God can arrest him.
Roper: Sophistication upon sophistication!
More: No, sheer simplicity. The law, Roper, the law. I know what’s legal not what’s right. And I’ll stick to what’s legal.
Roper: Then you set man’s law above God’s!
More: No, far below; but let me draw your attention to a fact—I’m not God. The currents and eddies of right and wrong, which you find such plain sailing, I can’t navigate. I’m no voyager. But in the thickets of the law, oh, there I’m a forester. (Robert Bolt, A Man for All Seasons: A Play in Two Acts (New York: Vintage Books, 1990), 65–66; emphasis in original)
When I do, I reinforce the most fundamental principle that undergirds the Constitution: that “we the people” (U.S. Constitution, preamble) decide the rules of our society through our elected representatives.
As Professor Amar observed, “No liberty was more central [to the Framers of the Constitution] than the people’s liberty to govern themselves under rules of their own choice.”(Amar, America’s Constitution, 10)
Judges who replace the judgments expressed in the words of the Constitution with their own views of what is right, what is fair, and what is just take from “we the people” the liberty that is most fundamental: to create government “of the people, by the people, for the people.” (Abraham Lincoln, Gettysburg Address, 19 November 1863; http://avalon.law.yale.edu/19th_century/gettyb.asp)
Speaking Practice
- Judge Griffith uses these sources to support his point of view on focusing on the law itself rather than his own views when acting as an official judge. What are your thoughts about this idea? Do you think people can (or should) separate their personal beliefs from their roles in public service? Are their roles in the government where it would be acceptable to make decisions based on your personal beliefs? Why or why not?
- The supporting ideas are from a variety of sources. One is a play, two are well-known lines from official famous US documents, and the other is a "biography" about the US Constitution. Why do you think the speaker chose to combine these particular sources?
- Part of the speech (not included in this video section) talks about the difficulty of practicing law with different views on how to apply the Constitution, a document written a long time ago. Griffith explains that some people believe it should be interpreted based on the original meaning, while others believe that it should be interpreted according to the modern world. What is your opinion on this topic? Should important texts be viewed fully in the context in which they were written, or should we approach them with modern eyes?
Exercise 3: Partner Activity - Synthesis Switch
- You and your partner will be assigned a topic.
- Choose a video source on the topic and a written source. TED videos are best because they come with a transcript.
- Identify a section of the video and a section of the written text that could be used for a synthesis.
- You and your partner will give those sections to another partnership in exchange for their isolated sources.
- Together with your partner, take the sections of the original source you received from the other group and synthesize them to support a point about the topic.
- Present your synthesis to the other partnership.
- Listen to how they combined the sources you provided for them.
- Give feedback on their synthesis.
*Teacher note: You can build off of the Partner Activity - Model Paragraphs from the lesson Speaking Strategy: Connecting Ideas between Paragraphs by having students use that video and summary as one of their sources for this activity.
Exercise 4: Group Activity - Speech Writers
- The teacher will assign your group a topic. Your group will act as the speech writing team for a politician who will speak to the community about this topic tomorrow.
- As a team, create an outline for a 2-3 paragraph length speech on the topic. Make sure to focus on important details and to combine narration and description together.
- You will need to include a synthesis of 3-4 external sources in your speech.
- Work together to create a well-organized speech that you can present to the whole class.
This content is provided to you freely by EdTech Books.
Access it online or download it at https://edtechbooks.org/advanced_mid_listening__speaking/connecting_ideas_between_sources.