Writing a formal Synthesis Essay

1
Writing a formal Synthesis Essay
2
What is a synthesis essay?

• An essay that discusses a question about two
  pieces of literature in a formal and organized
  way
• A synthesis essay develops an argument about the
  literature being studied
• It may compare and/or contrast the two pieces of
  literature

3
How are they written?

• Using formal language
• Using present tense
• Using evidence (quotations) from the literature

4
How are they organized?

• Synthesis essays follow a predictable pattern
• They are generally four paragraphs long
• They have a thesis statement (or topic sentence)
  that includes the titles of the work and the
  author's names
• They develop ideas using evidence from the story
  and discussing that evidence explaining how it
  develops the thesis

5

• Paragraph 1 Introduction
• title, author, thesis statement, hook, brief
  overview of discussion (should include two major
  points of discussion for which you provide
  evidence in the body paragraphs) , transition to
  body paragraph
• Paragraph 2 Body paragraph
• Discussion of major point with evidence
• Transition sentence to next body paragraph
• Paragraph 3 Body paragraph
• Discussion of major point with evidence
• Transition sentence to next body paragraph
• Paragraph 4 Conclusion
• Restates thesis, authors, titles, summarizes
  major points of discussion

6
Can you show me?

• Sure.
• Lets say you need to write a synthesis essay on
  the theme unit we just completed The Nature of
  Happiness.
• You might come up with a thesis statement that
  looks something like this
• For the Dalai Llama in The Art of Happiness,
  happiness is something that one must cultivate
  from within whereas for Dan Gilbert in The
  Surprising Science of Happiness, happiness is a
  state of being that occurs when we react to
  events that happen in our lives.

7
So then what?

• You may want to include a hook at the beginning
  of your essay.
• A hook is something that grabs the readers
  attention about your topic.
• It might be a famous quote or a general statement
  about your topic.

8
Can you show me?

• Sure.
• It might look something like this
• It seems that, more than ever, modern society is
  on a frantic quest for happiness. We sell
  happiness in the forms of pills, destination
  resorts, clothing, and any number of material
  things. For the Dalai Llama in The Art of
  Happiness, happiness is something that one must
  cultivate from within whereas for Dan Gilbert in
  The Surprising Science of Happiness, happiness is
  a state of being that occurs when we react to
  events that happen in our lives.

9
So then what?

• You will add the major points of discussion that
  you will explore in your essay

10
Can you show me?

• Sure.
• It might look something like this
• It seems that, more than ever, modern society is
  on a frantic quest for happiness. We sell
  happiness in the forms of pills, destination
  resorts, clothing, and any number of material
  things. For the Dalai Llama in The Art of
  Happiness, happiness is something that one must
  cultivate from within whereas for Dan Gilbert in
  The Surprising Science of Happiness, happiness is
  a state of being that is interpreted by our brain
  when we react to life events. These two authors
  appear to contrast in their exploration of how we
  attain happiness. One focuses on the internal
  creation of happiness from a spiritual
  perspective, while the other pays close
  attention to outside influences and the science
  behind how we interpret those factors. However,
  both understand that it is our internal
  interpretation of our environment that plays a
  role in how we experience happiness.

11
So then what?

• Well, you try to make some POINTS to develop that
  argument.
• Your first body paragraph will explore your first
  major discussion
• Your second body paragraph will explore your
  second major discussion

12
Can you show me?

• Sure. Your first body paragraph may talk about
  the similar ways that the Dalai Llama and Dan
  Gilbert explore happiness.
• While Dan Gilbert and the Dalai Llama appear to
  be on wildly opposite ends of the spectrum when
  it comes to exploring the topic of happiness,
  they both understand that it is an internal
  process that createsor does not
  createhappiness. Dan Gilberts TED talk is based
  on scientific research about how happiness is
  created, and about the creation of happiness he
  says that synthetic happiness is what we make
  when we dont get what we wanted (Gilbert). He
  suggests that there is a natural occurrence that
  happens in our brains which allows us to overcome
  dissatisfaction and this enables us to turn a
  less than ideal situation into one that makes us
  happy. In fact, he suggests that if we focus on
  the fact that we did not get what we wanted
  (which would be a source of natural happiness),
  we are mistaken in our thinking. Synthetic
  happinessthe one that we create out of any
  situationis just as valuable as natural
  happiness. Similarly, the Dalai Llama purports
  that our happiness comes from within, but he
  suggests that we must train the mind and spirit
  in order to eliminate suffering. He says that by
  bringing about a certain inner discipline, we can
  undergo a transformation of our attitude, our
  entire outlook and approach to living (Dalai
  Lama). Both thinkers talk about the internal
  nature of happiness however, their methods for
  understanding happiness contrast.

13
So then what?

• You will then start body paragraph 2
• This paragraph will discuss your second major
  discussion point.

14
Can you show me?

• Sure.
• Dan Gilbert asks his audience to view several
  scientific experiments to help them understand
  how he has come to his conclusions about
  happiness. In light of these experiments, he
  concludes that We should have preferences that
  lead us into one future over another. But when
  those preferences drive us too hard and too fast
  because we have overrated the difference between
  these futures, we are at risk (Gilbert).
  Similarly, the Dalai Llama believes that we
  should make choices that lead to our happiness.
  When we set about gradually eliminating those
  factors which lead to suffering and cultivating
  those which lead to happiness. That is the way
  (Dalai Llama), we can achieve true happiness.
  Both authors suggest that we can make choices
  towards happiness however, these choices may be
  counterintuitive to the way that North American
  culture has set out to accomplish it. Material
  possessions and Natural happiness may be
  counterproductive paths to happiness.

15
So then what?

• Time to conclude.
• Summarize your key points.
• Title, authors, and restate your argument.

16
Can you show me?

• Sure
• Both the Dalai Llama and Dan Gilbert agree that
  our paths to happiness may be counter to what we
  have thought in mainstream society. Getting
  material possessions and getting what we want in
  life may not be the only sources of happiness.
  While the Dalai Llama suggests that it is through
  internal discipline and spiritual searching that
  we attain this lofty achievement, Dan Gilbert
  suggests that we can synthesize happiness when
  our choices are limited. That said, there are
  many paths to happiness, and perhaps both authors
  give their audiences possibilities that they can
  explore.

17
Okay. How about the whole thing? Sure.

• John Smith NOTE THE USE OF DOUBLE SPACING
• English 12 Block C NOTE THE PAGE LAYOUT
• Tuesday, March 12th, 2013
• The Paths to Happiness
• It seems that, more than ever, modern society is
  on a frantic quest for happiness. We sell
  happiness in the forms of pills, destination
  resorts, clothing, and any number of material
  things. For the Dalai Llama in The Art of
  Happiness, happiness is something that one must
  cultivate from within whereas for Dan Gilbert in
  The Surprising Science of Happiness, happiness is
  a state of being that is interpreted by our brain
  when we react to life events. What Gilbert is
  more interested in is our mistaken perception on
  the quality of our happiness and how we think
  that we attain it. These two authors appear to
  contrast in their exploration of how we attain
  happiness. One focuses on the internal creation
  of happiness from a spiritual perspective, while
  the other pays close attention to outside
  influences and the science behind how we
  interpret those factors. However, both understand
  that it is our internal interpretation of our
  environment that plays a role in how we
  experience happiness.
• While Dan Gilbert and the Dalai Llama appear to
  be on wildly opposite ends of the spectrum when
  it comes to exploring the topic of happiness,
  they both understand that it is an internal
  process that createsor does not
  createhappiness. Dan Gilberts TED talk is based
  on scientific research about how happiness is
  created, and about the creation of happiness he
  says that synthetic happiness is what we make
  when we dont get what we wanted (Gilbert). He
  suggests that there is a natural occurrence that
  happens in our brains which allows us to overcome
  dissatisfaction and this enables us to turn a
  less than ideal situation into one that makes us
  happy. In fact, he suggests that if we focus on
  the fact that we did not get what we wanted
  (which would be a source of natural happiness),
  we are mistaken in our thinking. Synthetic
  happinessthe one that we create out of any
  situationis just as valuable as natural
  happiness. Similarly, the Dalai Llama purports
  that our happiness comes from within, but he
  suggests that we must train the mind and spirit
  in order to eliminate suffering. He says that by
  bringing about a certain inner discipline, we can
  undergo a transformation of our attitude, our
  entire outlook and approach to living (Dalai
  Lama). Both thinkers talk about the internal
  nature of happiness however, their methods for
  understanding happiness contrast.
• Dan Gilbert asks his audience to view several
  scientific experiments to help them understand
  how he has come to his conclusions about
  happiness. In light of these experiments, he
  concludes that We should have preferences that
  lead us into one future over another. But when
  those preferences drive us too hard and too fast
  because we have overrated the difference between
  these futures, we are at risk (Gilbert).
  Similarly, the Dalai Llama believes that we
  should make choices that lead to our happiness.
  When we set about gradually eliminating those
  factors which lead to suffering and cultivating
  those which lead to happiness. That is the way
  (Dalai Llama), we can achieve true happiness.
  Both authors suggest that we can make choices
  towards happiness however, these choices may be
  counterintuitive to the way that North American
  culture has set out to accomplish it. Material
  possessions and Natural happiness may be
  counterproductive paths to happiness.
• Both the Dalai Llama and Dan Gilbert agree that
  our paths to happiness may be counter to what we
  have thought in mainstream society. Getting
  material possessions and getting what we want in
  life may not be the only sources of happiness.
  While the Dalai Llama suggests that it is through
  internal discipline and spiritual searching that
  we attain this lofty achievement, Dan Gilbert
  suggests that we can synthesize happiness when
  our choices are limited. That said, there are
  many paths to happiness, and perhaps both authors
  give their audiences possibilities that they can
  explore.

18
Is that all?

• Not quite
• Although not needed in test situations, I would
  like you to practice completing a Works Cited

19
Oh boy! Can you show us?

• Sure. Here is the Works Cited for this synthesis
  essay
• Works Cited
• "Dan Gilbert The Surprising Science of
  Happiness." TED Ideas worth Spreading.
  N.p.,n.d. Web. 12 Mar. 2013.
• "Excerpt from The Art of Happiness by His
  Holiness The Dalai Lama, Howard C. Cutler, M.D.
  BookBrowse.com. N.p., n.d. Web. 12 Mar. 2013.