Examkin

Question

Difficulty: HardSource Synthesis and Integration

A student is writing an AP Spanish argumentative essay responding to the prompt: 'Should urban centers ban personal vehicles?' The student's thesis is: 'Vehicle bans ultimately benefit cities both environmentally and economically.' They must integrate the following sources:

- Fuente 1 (Print Article): Argues that while pedestrian zones improve air quality, they often cause immediate financial losses for local businesses.
- Fuente 2 (Audio Interview): A mayor explains that despite initial protests, his city experienced a 20% increase in local business revenue a year after banning cars.

The student's current draft in Spanish merely summarizes the sources without connecting them to the argument:
*"La Fuente 1 explica que prohibir los vehículos ayuda al medio ambiente pero daña la economía local. Por otro lado, en la Fuente 2, el alcalde dice que en su ciudad la economía mejoró un 20%."*

Which of the following revisions best synthesizes these sources to support the thesis, rather than just summarizing them?

  1. The revision that uses a concessive clause to place the sources in dialogue: "Aunque la Fuente 1 advierte sobre las posibles pérdidas económicas, la experiencia del alcalde (Fuente 2) refuta este temor, demostrando que los ingresos comerciales pueden aumentar un 20%."Answer
  2. B
    The revision that lists the sources chronologically without analytical connection: "Primero, la Fuente 1 explica que hay beneficios ambientales y daños económicos. Después, la Fuente 2 dice que la economía mejoró un 20% en su ciudad."
  3. C
    The revision that presents the synthesized facts but fails to cite any sources: "Prohibir los vehículos es beneficioso porque la calidad del aire mejora y los ingresos de los negocios locales pueden aumentar hasta un 20%."
  4. D
    The revision that focuses only on the print source and ignores the audio's counter-evidence: "Como afirma la Fuente 1, prohibir los vehículos ayuda al medio ambiente, pero lamentablemente siempre daña la economía de los negocios locales."

Answer

The revision that uses a concessive clause to place the sources in dialogue: "Aunque la Fuente 1 advierte sobre las posibles pérdidas económicas, la experiencia del alcalde (Fuente 2) refuta este temor..."
The correct answer successfully synthesizes the information by placing the two sources in direct conversation. It uses a concessive clause ('Aunque la Fuente 1...') to acknowledge the print source's economic concerns, and then immediately integrates the audio source ('la experiencia del alcalde...') to refute those concerns. Furthermore, it accurately cites both sources, demonstrating a high-level integration that directly supports the student's thesis.

Step-by-Step Solution

1
Analyze the student's thesis and the content of both sources.
The thesis argues that vehicle bans are economically beneficial. Fuente 1 claims they harm the economy, while Fuente 2 (audio) claims they boost the economy by 20%.
Understanding the relationship between the sources is necessary to evaluate which synthesis best supports the argument.
2
Evaluate the options for true synthesis rather than mere summary.
Options that list 'First, Source 1 says X. Second, Source 2 says Y' are summaries. True synthesis places the sources in conversation to create a new, unified point.
The AP rubric requires synthesis, which involves analytical connections between texts.
3
Verify that the chosen synthesis includes proper citation and addresses all relevant sources.
The correct revision acknowledges the print source's concern (Fuente 1) and uses the audio source's data (Fuente 2) to refute it, citing both accurately.
Effective synthesis requires both accurate attribution and the integration of multiple pieces of evidence.

Key Concept

Synthesizing Print and Audio Sources in Argumentative Writing
Rate this question

Topics

Source Synthesis and Integration

More questions from this topic