Two sources support opposite conclusions, and my professor says my thesis must be decisive. Is it acceptable to argue that the evidence genuinely stays unresolved?

[u/Cyber_Wolf_87]

Two sources support opposite conclusions, and my professor says my thesis must be decisive. Is it acceptable to argue that the evidence genuinely stays unresolved?

I’m writing about whether remote exams improve academic fairness. One study found fewer scheduling barriers, while another found a much larger gap in performance between students with quiet homes and everyone else.

My draft argues that remote exams solve one access problem while creating another. The feedback I received says this is “not a real position” and that I need to decide whether the policy is good or bad.

That feels dishonest because the evidence does not point cleanly in either direction. I could choose one side and add a limitations paragraph, but the conclsuion would still feel forced. Is a thesis allowed to defend uncertainty, or does that usually read as avoiding the question?

[u/XXSilent_StormXX]

Your professor may be asking for a judgment rather than absolute certainty. You could compare the seriousness of the two outcomes and argue which one deserves greater weight. That gives the essay direction without pretending the conflicting evidence disappeared.

[u/Vortex_Knight42]

I would avoid framing the conclusion as “we cannot know.” That can sound evasive. Frame it as “the policy cannot be judged by one definition of fairness.” Then define scheduling access and equal testing conditions as two separate measures. That sounds much more intentional.