Synthesis Plan Template

Module 4, Lesson 4.4 · the plan Entry 3 of the capstone log is drafted against · concept

What this is. The six-part synthesis plan from Lesson 4.4. A synthesis brief is not drafted freehand from a pile of sources; it is drafted against this plan. The plan is what separates synthesis from aggregation.

How to use. Write this by hand after you have 5–8 opened-and-confirmed sources and a triangulation table. 45–75 minutes of honest work here makes the draft that follows comparatively fast and avoids the three synthesis failure modes (false voice, fact-free connector, single-source-as-consensus).

Safety norm — copy verbatim to the top of every plan.

Every source in the evidence map below must be status opened-and-confirmed in source-list.md. The synthesis brief drafted against this plan inherits that discipline.

Header

Student
Date drafted · Date last revised
Topic folder

Part 1 — Question

Part 1 · Question

Copy from your scoping brief if it has not changed, or rewrite if Module 4 work has sharpened it.

Question
Has the question changed since the scoping brief?

No Yes — briefly, how and why:

Part 2 — Thesis

Part 2 · Thesis

One sentence. Your answer, stated as an argument the brief will defend.

Thesis
Self-check
It is one sentence.
A reader could disagree with it. (“X is complicated” is not a thesis.)
Every paragraph of the brief will argue toward this sentence, not around it.

Part 3 — Structure

Part 3 · Structure

The brief as an outline — section headings or paragraph purposes. Three to six is typical.

Self-check
Each section has a purpose, not just a topic — “what work this section does toward the thesis.”
The last section connects back to the thesis. No section is a detour.
I can defend the order. (“Why does section 2 come before section 3?”)

Part 4 — Evidence map

Part 4 · Evidence map (the heart of the plan)

For every load-bearing claim the brief will make, name which sources support it. If a claim has no source tagged, either find a source or drop the claim.

Claim Section Sources (by source-list # ) Support type

Support types: primary-direct (source states the claim) · primary-supporting (source supports indirectly) · secondary-interpretive (source interprets primary material) · triangulated (two or more independent sources converge).

Self-check
Every claim has at least one source.
Load-bearing claims have more than one independent source where possible.
No row says “my own reasoning” for a claim that would look like a fact to a reader.
Every source is status opened-and-confirmed. None are not-yet-opened.

Part 5 — Uncertainty ledger

Part 5 · Uncertainty ledger

What the brief will explicitly say it does not know, or where the sources disagree. Naming uncertainty is honest synthesis, not weakness.

Disagreements between sources

Disagreement
Sides
How the brief handles it (take a side with reasons, or present both and decline to adjudicate, with reasons)
Disagreement
Sides
How the brief handles it

Claims I cannot confidently make

The boundary of my sources (date range, geographies, populations)

Self-check
I did not hide disagreements to make the brief tidier.
The uncertainty ledger would be recognizable to someone who has read my sources.

Part 6 — Reader-next

Part 6 · Reader-next

What the reader can do with the brief after reading it. Synthesis that leaves the reader nowhere is incomplete.

Who is the reader?
What decision or action can they take after reading?
What question would be natural to ask next?
Self-check
The reader-next is specific — not “think about this more.”

Closeout

All six parts filled in.
Every source in the evidence map is status opened-and-confirmed.
I ran this plan past an agent as a critic (Session Type A) before drafting the brief.
I applied the critique edits I agreed with, and saved the revised plan.
I am ready to hand this plan to the drafting session (Session Type C) with “do not add claims not in the evidence map.”

A note on honesty

The single best predictor of whether a synthesis brief will hold up is whether the evidence map in Part 4 was filled in honestly before drafting. A draft written first and then back-filled with sources is the archetypal failure mode. If you find yourself drafting a paragraph and realize you have no source for its central claim, stop the draft, not the plan. Go back to the evidence map, find a source (or drop the claim), then resume.

Print this page. Use it.