Which option describes how to integrate multiple sources into a debatable claim?

• A. Integrate evidence from multiple sources to support a debatable claim while avoiding counterarguments.
• B. Present a central claim that is supported by synthesis and acknowledges counterarguments.
• C. List sources with no synthesis or claim.
• D. Argue a claim that is universally accepted and needs no sources.

Answer: (B)

The key idea here is weaving evidence from several sources into a claim that can be debated. To do this well, you present a central claim and support it through synthesis—pulling ideas from different sources together to show how they connect, challenge each other, or build toward a new understanding rather than simply listing quotes or paraphrases.

A strong debatable claim also shows you’ve considered opposing viewpoints. Acknowledging counterarguments demonstrates you’ve weighed other perspectives and strengthens your position by addressing objections, either by refuting them or explaining why your claim still holds.

That’s why the best option describes a central claim supported by synthesis and acknowledges counterarguments. It combines integrating evidence across sources with the thoughtful handling of opposing views.

Why the other approaches don’t fit as well: focusing on evidence without building a debatable claim misses the point of synthesis, since there’s no central argument being tested. Listing sources with no synthesis leaves you with a pile of information rather than a coherent claim. And arguing a claim that everyone agrees with and needs no sources isn’t debatable or analytical, so it doesn’t require integrating multiple sources.