COMPONENTS)OF)A)SUCCESSFUL)ESSAY)

1.)Thesis:""an"essay’s"main"proposition."A"thesis"should"not"be"confused"with"a"topic,"which"
represents"only"the"subject"area"of"an"essay."A"good"thesis"must"be"arguable;"there"must"be"
intelligent"ways"to"disagree"with"it."Arguability"distinguishes"a"good"thesis"from"a"fact"(clearly"
demonstrable"in"the"text)"or"an"observation"(an"interpretation"so"obvious"that"no"intelligent"
reader"would"challenge"it)."Although"writers"often"wish"to"delay"announcement"of"the"thesis,"good"
academic"writing"generally"states"the"thesis"explicitly"on"the"first"page,"then"returns"to"a"more"
nuanced"and"complex"form"of"it"later"in"the"text."

2.)Problem)or)Question:""the"intellectual"context"in"which"your"thesis"matters."In"academic"
essays,"the"problem"usually"arises"from"a"current"misunderstanding"of"an"important"issue."The"
author"of"an"essay"promises"to"clarify"something"that"would"otherwise"remain"obscured"or"
mistaken."Establishing"the"problem"or"question"is"the"primary"role"of"an"essay’s"first"few"
paragraphs."If"it"doesn’t"promise"to"illuminate,"deepen,"or"solve"a"problem,"an"essay"risks"
irrelevance."

3.)Evidence:""the"material"a"writer"works"with"in"exploring"a"thesis."Evidence"that"has"been"
overlooked"or"previously"undiscovered"may"serve"toprove)a"thesis."Frequently,"however,"
academic"writers"reGexamine"evidence"that"others"have"looked"at"before,"in"which"case"the"
evidence"is"more"likely"to"suggest"or"persuade"readers"that"the"writer’s"approach"is"a"fruitful"one."
Since"a"good"thesis"must"be"arguable,"academic"writers"are"especially"obligated"to"
consider"counter0evidence,"to"grapple"directly"with"facts,"patterns,"or"passages"that"resist"or"
complicate"the"essay’s"main"argument."Writers"must"orient"readers"to"the"source"of"the"evidence,"
which"must"be"cited."

4.)Analysis)&)Reflection:""the"work"a"writer"does"to"turn"evidence"into"argument,"to"show"the"
reader"how"the"evidence"supports,"develops,"or"extends"the"essay’s"thesis."Since"a"thesis"must"be"
arguable,"no"evidence"in"a"good"academic"argument"can"speak"for"itself—all"of"it"must"be"
processed"by"the"writer."Typical"moves"of"analysis"are"to"highlight"significant"details"of"the"
evidence"and"to"name"patterns"that"might"otherwise"be"undetected."When"working"with"written"
evidence,"it’s"good"to"observe"the"rule"of"two:"the"writer"should"supply"at"least"two"words"of"
analysis"for"every"word"of"a"citation,"and"usually"more."

Analysis"generally"refers"directly"to"the"evidence"(“Describing"his"actions"with"such"words"as"
‘growled’"and"‘stalked’"suggests"an"underlying"animal"savagery”),"while"reflection"builds"upon"
analysis"to"support"larger"claims"(“This"imagery"seems"to"contradict"the"narrator’s"stated"
assessment"that"Paul"is"a"‘gentle"soul’”)."Other"moves"that"indicate"reflection"are"consideration"of"a"
counterGargument,"definitions"or"refinements"of"terms"and"assumptions,"and"qualifications"of"
previous"claims."Reflection"is"important"throughout"an"essay,"but"should"be"especially"rich"and"full"
in"between"sections"of"the"argument"and"in"the"essay’s"conclusion."

5.)Structure:""how"the"sections"of"an"essay"are"organized"and"stitched"together."College"essays"are"
frequently"organized"either"by"repetition"(where"each"paragraph"develops"evidence"of"the"same"
proposition:"“X"is"clearly"present”)"or"by"chronology"(where"evidence"appears"in"the"essay"in"the"
same"order"that"it"appears"in"the"text):"both"of"these"patterns"are"inadequate."Sections"of"a"good"
argument"proceed"in"a"logical"way,"but"also"develop"the"implications"of"a"thesis"more"deeply"as"the"
essay"progresses."The"reader"should"understand"how"each"new"section"extends"the"argument"
that’s"come"before"and"prepares"for"the"argument"that’s"still"to"come."Reflective"sentences"at"
moments"of"transition"often"guide"this"review/preview,"and"complex"essays"frequently"include"1G
2"sentences"of"this"type"in"their"introductions."
"

GEssay"adapted"by"Alfred"E."Guy"Jr.,"Director,"from"“Elements"of"the"Academic"Essay,”"by"Gordon"Harvey,"Harvard"University"
Yale College Writing Center www.yale.edu/writing

WRITING PERSONAL STATEMENTS FOR GRADUATE SCHOOL

The graduate school personal statement is your opportunity to convey what you might be like as
a future colleague and professional within your discipline. It is your chance to articulate the
passion that will make you a motivated scholar and teacher, as well as your familiarity with the
field and your potential research interests. An interesting, well-written, and polished personal
statement represents the confident, intelligent, and grounded professional you will become.

Initial Preparation:
• Thoroughly research the schools and departments to which you plan to apply. Other than
business, law, medical or other professional schools, most graduate programs enroll twenty
or fewer students each year. Graduate admissions committees want to know why you are the
best fit for their program/department. Each department is unique, and your statement should
reflect your knowledge of the department’s research strengths.
• Clarify your motivations and goals for pursuing a graduate degree. Keep in mind that
graduate school prepares you for a specific profession: why do you want to join that
profession?
• Talk to current graduate students and professors about the environment and expectations of
the field you want to enter. Consider how your skills and experience have prepared you for
success in this field.
• Read recent journal articles and other scholarship in the field that is close to your scholarly
interests.

Goals for the Personal Statement:

• Demonstrate your intellectual passion for the field—what thrills or excites you about the
research you’ve done or you would like to do?
• Provide concrete examples of your skills, interests, and previous research in the field, and
how they might inform the research you would like to pursue in your graduate studies.
• Show that you are familiar with the procedures and expectations of scholarship and
professional training in your field, and that you have the character, qualities and experience
to thrive. Use the professional language of the field to describe your scholarly interests.
• Graduate school is extremely challenging—intellectually, emotionally, and financially.
Convey that you have the energy and perseverance to succeed through examples of
challenges you’ve faced and how you’ve overcome them.

What to avoid:
• Cliché: Statements like, “I’ve always wanted to help people,” “I have always loved reading
novels,” etc., are both overused and uninteresting to graduate admissions committees. Using
vague, clichéd phrases to explain your interest in the field undermines the seriousness and
professionalism of the scholarly endeavor. Instead, try to provide a specific anecdote that
illustrates what sparked and sustains your passion.
• Personal statements can have moments of humor that reflect your character/personality, but
the primary purpose isn’t to show how clever you are in composing the essay; it’s to present
yourself as an interesting and potentially inspiring future colleague. For example, writing a
humorous piece about how you want to study psychology because you were inspired by
watching The Sopranos (which might be acceptable for an undergraduate personal statement)
wouldn’t be useful for the graduate school application.

Adapted from Purdue University’s Online Writing Lab (OWL) by Karin Gosselink © 2011
• Lists of accomplishments: This is what the rest of the application is for. Instead, focus on
just one or two experiences that illustrate the qualities and interests that will make you a good
potential scholar.

Drafting the Personal Statement

Questions to prompt your writing:

• What event or experience inspired your decision to seriously pursue studies in your field?
• What research, scholarship, or experience in the last few years reflects your future scholarly
interests? How does it show your knowledge, skills, and passion about the field?
• What specific line of inquiry or areas of research would you like to pursue as a graduate
student/future scholar? Why are those issues of particular interest to you? Why might they
be important to the field as a whole?
• What experience illustrates your ability to meet the rigors and challenges of graduate study?

General suggestions for organization:

• Begin with a story: Use the first paragraph to tell a narrative that illustrates your intellectual
passion and personal commitment to the field.
• Use the middle section of your essay to focus on your intellectual experience with the field
and your goals for future research.
• Conclude with why you would excel in your studies, especially at the particular institution to
which you are applying.

Revising and polishing your statement:

• After writing an initial draft, set up an appointment with a Residential College Writing Tutor
to discuss the content and organization of the draft.
• Revise the draft and then arrange a meeting with a professor/mentor in the field to look over
your statement and offer suggestions.
• Revise your draft again and meet with a Residential College Writing Tutor to polish the
essay in terms of structure, style, and grammar.

Other things to keep in mind:

• Tailor each statement to the question asked by each graduate school.
• Tailor each statement to reflect your knowledge of that particular program and professors.
For example, is there an archive at the university that you would like to take advantage of?
Are there particular laboratories or specialties among the graduate faculty that would give
you an opportunity to pursue your interests?
Yale College Writing Center www.yale.edu/writing

INTRODUCTION ANALYSIS

Stable Context – The author opens by offering what seems to be the most obvious reading of William Wordsworth’s “Nutting”: the
poem as an allegory “for man’s ‘rape’ of nature.” She does not simply state that this is the most obvious reading, but shows her
reader why it is by providing a wealth of sexual language from the poem as evidence. However, the author does not use this initial
reading as the main claim of her essay; she uses it to highlight how her argument does not pursue the most obvious avenue of
investigation, choosing instead to read “Nutting” as “Wordsworth’s reinterpretation of the Fall of Man.” By using her opening
sentences to suggest an approach that she quickly undermines, the author puts herself in a position to convey why her position is not
obvious, thereby sparking the reader’s interest.

Destabilizing Condition – After

establishing the seemingly stable position
that “Nutting” is “an elaborate sexual
metaphor for man’s ‘rape’ of nature,” the At first blush, William Wordsworth’s “Nutting” appears to be an
author immediately complicates this
claim by providing evidence— elaborate sexual metaphor for man’s “rape” of nature. The poem is
“Wordsworth’s spiritual treatment of
nature in his other works”—that littered with the sexual language of rape: the “virgin scene” of hazels
Wordsworth’s depiction of nature
transcends the merely sexual. In essence,
she argues that to read “Nutting” in this
rising “tall and erect” is “tempting” to the boy who finally “[rises]
way is severely limiting, as Wordsworth
presents man’s relationship to nature in a up” to “ravage” the trees in the bower he has visited. Yet in light of
“more ambitious” spiritual context. By
offering two competing readings of the Wordsworth’s spiritual treatment of nature in his other works,
poem—one sexual, the other spiritual—
the author has illustrated the problem of nature’s “tempting” man cannot be merely sexual; he may have had
interpretation that her argument will
respond to. By presenting plausible a more ambitious agenda when writing “Nutting.” Just as his
formulations of each reading, the author
demonstrates how her essay engages a
genuine question and that her answer
“Prelude” is often perceived to be a rewriting of Milton’s Paradise
pushes beyond the obvious as a result.
Lost, “Nutting,” too, can be read as Wordsworth’s reinterpretation of
Consequence or Motive – The author the Fall of Man. But rather than merely presenting man’s fall from
does not merely present the problem of
two competing interpretations, she God’s grace, Wordsworth traces the protagonist’s transformation
justifies her essay’s engagement with that
problem by clarifying what is at stake in
its resolution. She suggests that if we
from humility before Nature to a narcissistic sense of entitlement to
accept her reading of the poem, then
“Nutting” takes on a more profound its riches, the psychological process that brings about the boy’s sin
spiritual significance that places it on the
same level as noted epics like against Nature and subsequent Fall.
Wordsworth’s “Prelude” and John
Milton’s Paradise Lost.

Main Claim or Thesis – Though her stance has emerged steadily as the paragraph has progressed, the author concludes her
introduction with a clear statement of her position that “Nutting” traces the fall of man in relation to nature. Her main claim goes
beyond simply affirming her stance that man falls by taking a position on how he does: by abandoning his initial humility before
nature and taking its wealth for granted. Looking forward, this claim previews the argument that will unfold in the body of her
essay, but it also responds directly to the problem of interpretation that the author established at the outset. She engages with the
competing interpretations of Wordsworth’s poem—spiritual vs. sexual—by settling on one. However, the author does not reject the
sexual reading outright; she simply suggests that her spiritual interpretation is both more elusive and more weighty.

Written by Ryan Wepler, © 2011 Source: Eliana Dockterman, “Paradise Lost, Again”
 WRITING SUCCESSFUL INTRODUCTORY PARAGRAPHS
In the most abstract sense, the function of an introductory paragraph is to move your reader from the world
of daily life into the textual and analytical space of an essay. In a more concrete sense, an introduction
performs three essential functions: 1) it articulates the question or problem that you will address in your
essay; 2) it motivates that problem by suggesting why it is consequential or interesting; and 3) it states,
clearly and directly, your position on this topic or question (i.e. your main claim).

Conceptual Components
Ethos – While reading your introduction, your audience will begin to make assumptions about you as an
author. Be sure to present yourself as a thoughtful, knowledgeable, and nonbiased writer capable of dealing
effectively with the complexities and nuances of your topic. Your introduction should set the tone that will
remain consistent throughout your essay. In addition to emphasizing the uniqueness of your approach to your
subject matter, you should seek to draw your reader into your essay with the gracefulness of your prose and
the rational demeanor you project as a writer.
Problem – A question becomes a problem when your reader feels a stake in resolving it. Your introduction
should convey not simply that your essay will provide an answer that your reader may not have considered,
but that he or she will benefit from this answer with practical knowledge or increased understanding. Writing
problems are typically generated by establishing a seemingly stable position (“At first blush…”) and then
calling that initial position into question by presenting complicating or conflicting evidence (“Yet in light
of…”).

Structural Components
Stable Context – In addition to grabbing the reader’s attention, the opening sentence of an essay sets up the
structure of the introductory paragraph. Because the larger goal of an introduction is to demonstrate what the
reader might learn from an essay, argumentative essays typically open by establishing a seemingly stable
position that is then complicated or destabilized soon afterward, thereby exposing a gap in understanding for
the essay to address.
Destabilizing Condition – After establishing a plausible understanding of an essay’s subject, the author then
invokes a condition—an alternative explanation, an unassimilable fact—that destabilizes that initial position.
This destabilizing condition works in tandem with the stable context to establish a problem that needs
resolved, thereby establishing the topic of the essay.
Consequence or Motive – The mere existence of a problem is not enough to justify an investigation if the
audience doesn’t see anything at stake in its resolution. As a result, an author must be certain not only to
establish a genuine problem, but to outline its stakes. What is gained by a clearer understanding of this
problem? What additional areas might it allow us to investigate?
Main Claim or Thesis – The main claim of an essay should not simply state the topic of investigation; it
should articulate a clear stance on that topic. As a claim, it must take a position that resolves the problem
generated when the initially stable context becomes destabilized. The strongest thesis statements are as
specific as possible, typically highlighting some of the evidence to be used in the body of the essay and, in
some cases, previewing the structure of its longer argument.

*To read Eliana Dockterman’s complete essay on Wordsworth’s “Nutting,” please visit the Yale College Writing Center’s collection of model papers from the disciplines:
http://writing.yalecollege.yale.edu/model-papers-disciplines.
Yale College Writing Center www.yale.edu/writing
BODY PARAGRAPH ANALYSIS

Topic Sentence – The paragraph’s opening sentence clearly establishes the claim that will be argued throughout: Swift undercuts Gulliver’s rejection of
humanity by using his authorial power to turn the hero of his novel into a comical figure of pity. This topic sentence reproduces the tension at the heart of
the essay’s thesis that “there is an ironic disconnect between Swift as author and Gulliver as narrator and critic of humankind.” The topic sentence also
forges a subtle transition. The reference to “Gulliver’s negative view of humankind” refers back to the central claim of the previous paragraph.

Transitions (Movement) – The logical

movement of this paragraph is announced by the
word “devolve” in the topic sentence. As the
author presents and analyzes the novelistic
evidence of Gulliver’s mental unraveling, he Swift undermines Gulliver’s negative view of humankind by
makes the logic of his argument clear to his
reader through the use of effective transitions. making his hero devolve, in the grip of that view, into an irrational
The author inserts sentences and phrases into his
paragraph that trace Gulliver’s path from and sadly comic character, unable to appreciate acts of genuine
disillusionment, to sociopathia, to antisocial
pathology. The author’s transitions also expose human goodness. Upon leaving the Houyhnhnms at the end of the
the logic of Swift’s changing attitude toward
Gulliver. It is worth noting that these transitions story, Gulliver’s disillusionment with humanity and desire for
are fully integrated into the author’s analysis,
simultaneously serving as conclusions to one withdrawal seem, at first, understandable, if not darkly humorous.
argument as they form introductions to the next.
For example, the line “this disillusionment He wants to find some “small Island uninhabited” in which to
escalates into sociopathia” sums up the section of
the author’s analysis dealing with Gulliver’s isolate himself from human society, “so horrible was the Idea…of
disillusionment while introducing the following
section that focuses on his sociopathia. returning to live in the Society and under the Government of
Yahoos” (248). But this disillusionment escalates to sociopathia.
Evidence – Note how the evidence about
Gulliver’s welcome by his wife is introduced; the When he returns home to his wife and children, “the Sight of them
author tells the reader what to look for in the
evidence—Gulliver’s loss of touch with human filled [him] only with Hatred, Disgust, and Contempt; and the
feelings, values, and priorities—before
presenting it. This makes the paper easier to read more, by reflecting on the near alliance [he] had to them” (253).
because the reader is able to assess the adequacy
of the evidence while reading it. In addition, the Just as Gulliver is disgusted with humanity, by this point Swift is
author is careful to present all of the necessary
evidence—both the wife’s welcome and
Gulliver’s reaction—before moving on to
clearly disgusted with Gulliver. Once affably curious, after his
analysis. Note, in the use of phrases like “odious
Animal,” how the author is careful to reproduce departure from the Houyhnhnms Gulliver loses touch with natural
the specific pieces of Swift’s language that will
be relevant for his later analysis. human feelings, values, and priorities. His wife welcomes him
home with love, patience and, forbearance, taking him “in her
Analysis – The burden on the author to analyze
is lightened significantly by the way in which he arms and kiss[ing]” him (253). Instead of embracing her in return,
introduces his evidence. However, he is still
careful to reflect analytically on the material he Gulliver falls into a “Swoon” for having been touched by such an
has quoted. His assessment of “odious Animal”
as a “shameful epithet for a loved one” goes “odious Animal” (253)—a shameful epithet for a loved one.
beyond simply explicating the obvious meaning
of this phrase; he also succinctly relates what the Rather than trying to integrate himself into human society,
use of the phrase “odious Animal” says about
Swift’s attitude toward Gulliver. In addition,
note how the author’s analysis mingles Gulliver pathologically withdraws from human contact and spends
illuminatingly with his presentation of new
pieces of evidence. The “pathological his time talking to a pair of stable horses (254). Here Swift shows
withdrawal from human contact” that the author
interprets from Gulliver’s reaction to his wife is us the danger of an excessive sensitivity to human failings.
reinforced by the description of Gulliver’s
proclivity to socialize with his horses.

Conclusion – The author makes sure the reader understands the main argument of the paragraph by restating it before moving on. However, the author
does not simply reproduce his initial contention that Swift undermines Gulliver’s antihumanism at the end of Gulliver’s Travels. He pushes his prior claim
one step further by turning Swift’s rejection of Gulliver into a social commentary. This subtle addition serves as a transition to the following paragraph in
which the author discusses Swift’s attitude toward human society.

Written by Ryan Wepler, © 2013 Source: John Hulsey, “Shifting Targets in Gulliver’s Travels”
 CONSTRUCTING EFFECTIVE BODY PARAGRAPHS
A paragraph is a collection of related sentences dealing with a single topic. This handout breaks the
paragraph down into its conceptual and structural components. The conceptual components—direction,
movement, and bridges—form the logical makeup of an effective paragraph. The structural elements—
topic sentence, transitions, evidence, analysis, and conclusion—are identifiable parts of strong body
paragraphs.

Conceptual Components
Direction – The entire paragraph should work toward proving a single idea. In other words, its analysis
should move in one direction toward proving the claim laid out in the topic sentence. If a paragraph begins
with one point of focus, it should not end with another or wander between different ideas.
Movement – It is useful to envision body paragraphs as links in the chain of reasoning that forms the overall
argument of your essay. In order to get to the next link, each paragraph must establish a claim that moves
your overall argument one step closer to its ultimate goal (i.e. proving its thesis). Though the topic sentence
will announce your paragraph’s direction, the movement of your analysis within the paragraph will consist of
pushing this claim from being unproven at the outset of the paragraph to logically compelling at the end.
Bridges – Bridges establish the coherence that makes the movement between your ideas easily
understandable to the reader. Logical bridges are created by moving from established ideas to new ones,
lending cohesion to your argument as it unfolds. Verbal bridges use language—repetition of keywords and
synonyms, use of transitions, &c.—that makes the logical connections between your ideas clear to your
reader.

Structural Components
Topic sentence – The first sentence in a paragraph should clearly announce the main claim that will be
supported by the content of the paragraph. Effective topic sentences will often link these paragraph-level
claims to material in the preceding paragraph or the overall thesis of the essay.
Transitions – Transitions are verbal bridges in which you use language to make the logical movement and
structure of an essay clear to the reader. The topic sentence will often contain a transition that links the
argument of the paragraph to the one made in the previous paragraph. This is most often accomplished by
opening the paragraph with a prepositional phrase or by retaining some important language from the previous
paragraph. The final sentence of a paragraph may also suggest a logical link to the argument to come.
Transitions do not always link adjacent paragraphs. Good writers will refer back to relevant points made
several paragraphs earlier. Especially long or complex papers will often contain several sentences (even
entire paragraphs) of transitional material summarizing what the essay has sought to establish up to that point.
Evidence – Quotations, summaries, examples, data, testimony, &c. should be cited as evidence in support of
each claim you make in your argument. In order to avoid generalization, you should strive to use evidence
that is as specific as possible. Evidence should be preceded by an introduction to its source and relevance
and followed by analysis of its significance within your overall argument.
Analysis – Evidence alone does not make your argument for you. Claims and evidence require analysis to
turn them into an argument. Analyzing effectively requires showing or explaining how the evidence you
have cited actually supports the larger claims your essay is making, both on the paragraph level and the thesis
level. Because analytical sections are the places where your essay does real argumentative work, they should
constitute the bulk of your paragraph (and essay).
Conclusion – Like the conclusion to the essay as a whole, the final sentence of a paragraph is a chance to
sum up and solidify for your reader that your paragraph has established the claim it set out to. A concluding
sentence will revisit the material from the topic sentence, but with an enhanced perspective.
Yale College Writing Center www.yale.edu/writing
RESEARCH PARAGRAPH ANALYSIS

Evidence – The author quotes three Topic Sentence (summary of the field) – This essay’s thesis is: “Taking advantage of their
different sources as evidence for her claim multi-ethnic identities, [Margaret] Cho and [Carlos] Mencia introduce a new version of ethnic
that traditional ethnic humor relies on humor that does not promote a cultural hierarchy, combining traditional superiority humor with
assertions of cultural superiority. comic correction by mocking the majority and the minority in the same routine.” Since the
However, she does not simply cite three author seeks to argue that Cho and Mencia create “a new version of ethnic humor,” she is
roughly identical quotes. She evolves her committed to demonstrating agreement about the old version in order to show how their routines
ideas, thereby broadening the reader’s work differently. This scholarly consensus is what she seeks to establish in this, her first body
perspective and giving herself more source paragraph. As a result, the topic sentence makes a straightforward claim about traditional
material to work in the later stages of her approaches to the field that she can then support in the body of the paragraph using material from
argument. She begins by citing a broad her secondary sources.
version of the superiority theory before
turning to a second quote that situates that
theory within her more specific context of Commentators have conventionally approached ethnic jokes
ethnic humor. In the final quotation, she
increases the specificity of her ideas yet using the superiority theory of humor, which claims that people
again by introducing a version of the same
theory that identifies “polar opposite laugh when a joke makes them feel above the object of ridicule.
adjectives” as the linguistic mechanism of
superiority-based ethnic humor. The
trajectory of ideas in this paragraph moves
Thomas Hobbes characterizes this emotion as “sudden glory arising
from broad to specific, establishing an
initial overview and then working toward from some sudden conception of some eminency in ourselves, by
additional clarity.
comparison with the infirmity of others, or with our own formerly”
(47). Applying this concept to ethnic humor, John Morreall states
Stitching – In the lead-ins to her quotes,
the author is careful not only to prepare
her reader to understand each idea, but
that people derive this “sudden glory” from “mocking [immigrants]
also to link those ideas to the ones that
came before. Having just introduced a
in great detail about their race, accent, clothing, ugliness, etc.” (10).
theory of humor based on superiority, the
author forges a conceptual link by telling
Leon Rappoport further clarifies how stereotypes and ethnicity-
her reader that the ensuing quote will
apply this concept to the more specific based mockery embody the superiority theory by explaining that
case of ethnic humor. After using that
quote to establish that ethnic humor these disparaging jokes often employ “polar opposite adjectives...[so
conventionally relies on assertions of
cultural superiority, she indicates that her that] only [the] negative end of the pair is emphasized [and] the
next quote “further clarifies” the issue,
which it does by identifying opposed positive end always remains implicitly understood as characteristic
adjectives as the precise mechanism of
superiority-based ethnic humor. of the ‘superior’ joke teller” (33). With these jokes, the overt
debasement of immigrants simultaneously elevates the person
Citation – The author uses in-text
parenthetical citations, which are making the joke. Consequently, the opposing adjectives noted by
conventional in most academic fields
(history tends to be the exception). She Rappoport suggest a hierarchy between the person who tells the joke
identifies the name of each source before
quoting it so that the reader knows who is and the people at the butt of the joke.
speaking when the source’s voice enters
her argument. Because she has been
careful to give each source’s name in her Conclusion (evolved summary) – Having worked through a context of carefully chosen sources,
text, she only needs to note the page the author does not end her paragraph with the final quote. Instead she returns to the claim she
number in the parentheses. Citing the established in the first sentence, this time in an evolved form. The sources she has quoted
name of each source allows the reader to throughout her paragraph allow her to move beyond a simple restatement of her initial claim that
locate its title in this essay’s list of works conventional ethnic humor asserts the superiority of the joke teller’s ethnicity. In her discussion
cited (alphabetized by author’s last name), of the adjectives that allow for simultaneous elevation of one culture and debasement of another,
and the page numbers allow the reader to the author furthers her initial claim that ethnic humor establishes a cultural hierarchy by
locate the specific quote within that text. demonstrating how.

Written by Ryan Wepler, © 2011 Source: Wenjing Dai, “The Politics of Ethnic Humor”
 WRITING AN EFFECTIVE RESEARCH PARAGRAPH
Writing in all disciplines requires a researcher to place his or her ideas in conversation with other
positions in the field. In order to do this, the writer is responsible for making a claim about the field and
then persuasively defending that claim using evidence from published research on the same topic. This is
the goal of a research paragraph. A successful research paragraph will effectively convey both the scope
of the investigation and the state of the field. Its composition will consist of a topic sentence, evidence
taken from sources, stitching that effectively links those sources to one another, a citation for each
source, and a conclusion.

Conceptual Components
State of the field – In order to make a claim about how your argument contributes to a given field, you
must first demonstrate to your reader what the scholarly conversation in that field looks like: settled
arguments, unresolved debates, gaps in investigation, &c. Establishing the state of the field early in your
essay will allow you to motivate your argument by showing how your ideas expand or challenge our
current understanding.
Scope – Any argument will be more meaningful to some fields than it is to others. The range of sources
you include in your research paragraph conveys which fields your argument is most relevant to. A broad
collection of sources will suggest that your argument has a wide scope, that it engages and contributes to
a variety of subject areas. A narrow set of sources will suggest a more limited—though not necessarily
less important—contribution to the field.

Structural Components
Topic sentence (summary of the field) – The goal of any topic sentence is to make a claim that you will
defend in the body of the paragraph. Since the goal of a research paragraph is to offer a summary of the
field, the topic sentence should assert a clear position about the state of current research.
Evidence – In order to persuade a reader, any claim about the state of a particular field must be supported
using evidence from published work in that field. In the sciences and social sciences, this evidence often
takes the form of summaries of major positions (often backed up with multiple citations). The humanities,
on the other hand, tend to rely more on direct quotation of relevant sources.
Stitching – Simply quoting a variety of sources in succession will not produce a persuasive argument
about the state of your field of research. You must convey how the ideas in each source are related to one
another. This type of argument demands the use of active verbs, clear explanation of each author’s key
terms, and nuanced description of the conceptual links between each source’s ideas.
Citation – Citing the evidence you offer conveys the source of your ideas and saves you from the
dishonest practice of passing others’ ideas off as your own. In-text parenthetical citations are conventional
in most fields (history, which uses footnotes, is one exception). In this method of citation the source
author’s name and the page number of the idea and are included in your text and refer the reader to a full
entry in your list of works cited should he or she want to seek out more information. In the sciences and
social sciences, in-text citations also include the source’s date of publication.
Conclusion (evolved summary) – As you approach the end of your research paragraph, your evidence
will have supported the claim made in your topic sentence about the larger field from which those sources
were drawn. As a result, you will want to revisit that initial claim at the end of the paragraph for some
additional discussion. Returning to the ideas in your topic sentence at the conclusion of your paragraph
serves two primary purposes: 1. to state an evolved—more nuanced or specific—version of your initial
claim in light of the evidence you have offered and 2. to remind your reader of this claim as you move
into the next paragraph that will, presumably, build upon these ideas in some way.
Yale College Writing Center
CONCLUSION ANALYSIS
Limitation – While this statement is more of
a concession to his opposition than an
acknowledgement of an argumentative
limitation, the admission that progress
towards tolerance has been made by working
within the capitalist system works against the
author’s overall claim that capitalism itself
must be opposed. This bolsters the author’s
credibility by showing his reader that, though
he ultimately rejects them, he has genuinely
considered opposing viewpoints.
Evolved Motive – The motive of the
conclusion takes the same form as the one the
author employs in the introduction to his
essay: the truth is not what it would appear to
be on a first reading. However, the motives in
the intro and conclusion differ significantly in
function. In the introduction, the author
argues that, ―contrary to what a quick stroll
through the GAP or five minutes of watching
Queer Eye for the Straight Guy would tell you
about homosexuality’s exalted status in
modern consumer culture, the history of the
relationship between homosexuality and the
capitalist mode of production has been a
complex and troubled one.‖ The motive in the
introduction ushers the reader into the world
of the text by motivating an issue of
interpretation. The motive in the conclusion
ushers the reader back into the world of daily
life by motivating an issue of political action,
which is the overall goal of the essay. This
incitement to action derives from the author’s
claim that, though it may seem that
homosexuals are making progress towards
tolerance by working within the system of
capitalism, the only way to truly achieve
tolerance is by resisting capitalism itself.
Look Ahead – While the author does not
pose a new question directly, he suggests a
further realm of inquiry. Having established
in his essay that homosexuals cannot achieve
tolerance by working within the system of
capitalism, he looks to the next logical set of
questions which require an examination of
how to most effectively resist capitalism.
While the author does devote some space in
the latter part of his essay to sketching out
some possibilities, these ideas are not as fully
realized as his argument about the
impossibility of full tolerance of homosexuals
within capitalism. Thus, this new question is
also an implicit acknowledgement of a
limitation in the author’s previous arguments.
Written by Ryan Wepler, © 2011
www.yale.edu/writing
Evolved Thesis – The opening sentence of the conclusion restates the essay’s
thesis that ―homosexuality has occupied positions both inside and outside the
capitalist system‖ but that ―a common element throughout this dynamic
relationship…is the capitalist control of homosexuality and homosexuals in
increasingly insidious ways.‖ It also reestablishes the tension inherent in this
thesis between the shifting function of homosexuals within capitalism and their
static position within the system. The opening sentence also effectively sums up
the essay by using terms—―nuisance,‖ ―industrial capitalism,‖ ―tool,‖ ―late
capitalism‖—that have been given specialized meanings within the body of the
paper. Restating the thesis in the opening sentence of the conclusion allows the
author a chance to explore the essay’s broader implications, as he does in the
sentences that follow.
While the status of homosexuality within American
capitalism has evolved from nuisance under industrial
capitalism to tool of late capitalism, the interests of
capital have always in some way been in opposition to
those of the gay community. While, admittedly, progress
has been made in the realm of tolerance, it has not been
enough; capital has simply found new and more insidious
ways to manipulate, marginalize, and oppress
homosexuals. If America’s gays and lesbians desire
liberation and authenticity, then they must align
themselves with the enemies of capitalism and employ
new theories and strategies in their struggle. The
American gay community has nothing to lose but their
overpriced Diesel jeans. They have a world to win.
Final Thought – The author’s reference to the ―overpriced Diesel jeans‖
functions as more than a sort of witty gimmick. As the author moves the reader
from the highly theoretical arguments that comprise the majority of his essay
into the real world of the reader’s daily life, he concretizes his abstract concepts
using an object from that world. In addition, the reference to giving up Diesel
jeans is juxtaposed with the idea that homosexuals have ―a world to win‖
through resistance to capitalism. When placed in these terms, the sacrifice of the
material object seems pithy in comparison with the toleration that the author
argues homosexuals stand to achieve by aligning themselves against capitalism.
Source: Nicholas Martin Arrivo, ―Selling Sexuality‖
 WRITING EFFECTIVE CONCLUSIONS
Though the final paragraph in an essay is commonly referred to as the conclusion, it is not traditionally
the place in which the author draws new conclusions that were not mentioned previously in the essay.
Rather, the goal of an essay’s conclusion is to bring the paper full circle by revisiting the large-scale
ideas stated in the introduction, but with the refined perspective created by the preceding arguments in
the body of the paper. Conclusions often return to the thesis—which the preceding essay has attempted
to make compelling—in an attempt to briefly assess its significance in some larger context.

Conceptual Components
Revisiting the Thesis – Just as the preceding body paragraphs have drawn more general conclusions
from specific pieces of evidence, the concluding paragraph of an essay reestablishes the essay’s main
claim, which has been built on the more specific sub-claims argued throughout the body. Though the
thesis is generally reintroduced in the first sentence of the conclusion, the remainder of the paragraph
should ensure that its content moves beyond simply restating the ideas in the introduction.
Recontextualization – Just as your introduction acts as a bridge that transports your readers from their
own lives into the textual space of your analysis, your conclusion provides a bridge to help your readers
make the transition back to their daily lives. This is done most effectively by emphasizing a context for
your ideas that makes them relevant or meaningful for your reader. This can include summarizing how
your argument contributes to existing research, identifying a new question for further inquiry, or
suggesting a new course of action based on your findings.

Structural Components
Evolved Thesis – Using different language than the introduction, most conclusions restate the essay’s
main claim in the first sentence. This allows the concluding paragraph to avoid simply reproducing the
introduction in which the thesis is usually stated near the end. Restating the paper’s overall argument at
the beginning of the conclusion sets up a brief exploration of your essay’s larger context or broader
implications in the final paragraph.
Evolved Motive – In guiding your readers out of the textual space of your paper, it is important to
remind them why your arguments are significant. You don’t want your readers to finish your paper
thinking ―so what?‖ To prevent this, use your conclusion to reestablish the significance of your thesis.
Limitation – Qualifying or acknowledging the limitations of your argument, while optional, can be an
effective way of clarifying the scope of your thesis, particularly in an essay that defends a rather
ambitious claim. Acknowledging that there are questions that need further research or that your
argument is unlikely to convince those who approach the topic with a different set of assumptions is also
a useful strategy for bolstering your credibility.
Look Ahead – Because an essay is a small part of a larger discourse on its topic, a common move made
in conclusions is to describe how the main claim may serve as a stepping stone for further research.
Implicitly you are saying, ―Now that I have proven the thesis of my essay, what new questions can we
ask about this topic?‖ In a way, looking ahead to a new question does the work of the three previous
components: proposing new areas of inquiry reinforces that you have proven your thesis; showing that,
with further research, your claims could have broader implications remotivates your argument;
acknowledging that other questions still remain acknowledges the limitations of your central claim.
Final Thought – Since it is the last thing they will read, you want your final sentence to stick in your
readers’ minds. Whether you choose to end with emphasis, wit, or wonder, your final sentence should be
memorable in some way without departing significantly from the overall tone of your essay.
Yale College Writing Center www.yale.edu/writing

MOTIVATING MOVES
An effective argument will not simply demonstrate that its main claim is true; it will also show why
that claim is meaningful or important. Motive is the moment that occurs early in your essay where you
show your audience not what you will argue, but what is at stake in that argument. More specifically,
motive statements highlight a problem, confusion, tension, or gap in our existing understanding. Put
differently, writers motivate their arguments by suggesting in their introductions how those arguments
reconsider, critique, or even challenge the status quo.

Match the “motivating moves” at right with writing samples from the disciplines at left.

Published Writing from the Disciplines Some Motivating Moves

Sociology: How does one explain the seeming 1. The truth isn’t what one would expect,
inconsistency between the responses by the Hispanic or what it might appear to be on first
community to the 1992 poll, on the one hand, and the reading.
general pride that most Americans express about their
immigrant roots, on the other?1 2. The knowledge on the topic has
heretofore been limited.
History: The rescuing of Armenian genocide 3. There’s a mystery or puzzle or
survivors was at once a critical moment in the question here that needs answering.
definition of modern international humanitarianism
and human rights and a site of resistance to the 4. Published views of the matter conflict.
colonial presence in the post-Ottoman Eastern
Mediterranean.2 5. We can learn about a larger
phenomenon by studying this smaller
Environmental Science: Although the origin of these one.
sources [of oxygenated organic compounds] is still
unclear, we suggest that oxygenated species could be 6. This seemingly tangential or
formed via the oxidation of hydrocarbons in the insignificant matter is actually important
atmosphere, the photochemical degradation of or interesting.
organic matter in the oceans, and direct emissions
from terrestrial vegetation.3 7. There’s an inconsistency,
contradiction, or tension here that needs
explaining.
Psychology: While social psychologists and
experimental psychologists generally agree that 8. The standard opinion(s) need
deception should be a last resort and is sometimes challenging or qualifying.
unnecessary, there are underlying issues in this
debate that need to be discussed.4

1
Simon, Rita J. “Old Minorities, New Immigrants: Aspirations, Hopes, and Fears.” Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social
Science 530 (Nov. 1993): 61. Print.
2
Watenpaugh, Keith David. “The League of Nations’ Rescue of Armenian Genocide Survivors and the Making of Modern Humanitarianism.”
American Historical Review 115.5 (Dec. 2010): 1318. Print.
3
Singh, Hanwant. “Evidence from the Pacific troposphere for large global sources of oxygenated organic compounds.” Nature 410 (26 April
2001): 1078. Print.
4
Cook, Karen S. and Toshio Yamagishi. “A Defense of Deception of Scientific Grounds.” Social Psychology Quarterly 71.3 (Sept. 2008): 215.
Print.

Adapted from the work of Kerry Walk by Ryan Wepler, ©2011

Yale College Writing Center www.yale.edu/writing

EIGHT STRATEGIES FOR USING SOURCES

Scholars use sources in academic writing as a means of entering a larger conversation about their
subject. As with a conversation you have in class or among friends, there are different strategies
for injecting your voice. The way you position yourself in the discussion will depend on how the
conversation has unfolded so far and what you hope to achieve by entering it. By describing
eight ways of putting sources to work in your paper, this handout can help you better understand
your specific purpose each time you bring another person’s ideas to bear on your argument.
Having a clear sense of purpose when you use sources will help you sharpen your ideas and
express those ideas with greater precision.

1. Drawing battle lines

Present a pre-existing disagreement among scholars. This can be a debate that others have
recognized, or it can be one you are identifying for the first time. Enter this debate by either
choosing a side or proposing some middle position. The following example presents two
competing scientific hypotheses:
There are two main hypotheses for how Brightest Cluster Galaxies [BCGs]
formed: monolithic collapse and hierarchical building (Collins et al.
2006). Under the monolithic collapse model, the stars in the BCG formed
all together, so the ages and metallicities of the stellar populations
across the galaxy are relatively uniform. Meanwhile, according to the
hierarchical building model, the galaxy built up through a number of
smaller galaxies merging together. In this model, the different regions
of the galaxies have varying ages and metallicities, since they formed
in different parts of the Universe at different times.1

Establishing this larger debate early in her paper allows the author to demonstrate her specific
contribution to the field when she elaborates her findings later in the essay.!
!
2. Picking a fight
Establish a stable position on your subject in order to challenge it later. This could be the view of
a single major scholar, a position many scholars have agreed on, or even a buried assumption
that most scholars simply take for granted. In the following example, the author seeks to revise
the consensus interpretation of a work of literature:
No scholar denies that Beckett has modeled the protagonist Krapp after
a clown of some sort. When determining which type of clown, scholars
rarely stray from the interpretation that Krapp is a mime (Bryden 360,
Gruber 89, Levy 181). The fact that this reading perfectly explains
Krapp’s “self-mimetic” tape-listening, has kept scholars from realizing
that it only explains so much about his story. No scholar seems to have
considered it, but analyzing Krapp as a different kind of clown—a
harlequin—opens a wellspring of insight into a greater portion of his
situation.2

This author uses sources to demonstrate precisely why his interpretation is important. It doesn’t
just present a reading of the play; it corrects a common misreading, which revises our broader
understanding of the play in turn. It is also worth noting how using sources sharpens the author’s
ideas. Introducing a context in which scholars are already talking about the protagonist as a
clown pushes the author to propose what kind of clown and explore the broader significance of
classifying Krapp as a harlequin.

Written by Ryan Wepler, © 2014 !

3. Piggybacking
Back up one of your points by showing that another scholar has argued the same thing. You
won’t want to use this strategy for your thesis, because citing a source whose main claim is the
same as yours suggests that your argument doesn’t contribute anything new to the academic
conversation. But for an argument in a smaller section of your paper, piggybacking on another
scholar’s ideas can help strengthen your case. Consider how the author of this example uses a
source to bolster a claim she is making about Huck Finn’s tendency to follow others:
After years of experience dealing with Pap, his violent and overbearing
father, Huck has learned that “the best way to get along with his kind
of people is to let them have their own way” (131). So Huck’s assent to
Tom’s proposal is not uncharacteristic by any means. Richard Hill notes
that just as Huck deferred to Pap, the king, and the duke in order to
prevent any conflict, so he does with Tom (499).3

Note that the author doesn’t substitute the source’s ideas for her own thinking. She uses evidence
from the text to make her case before backing up that case by citing another scholar who has
reached a similar conclusion.
!
4. Leapfrogging
Use previous research as a jumping-off point for asking a new, more far-reaching question. You
leapfrog when you approach your paper with the mindset: “Now that we know what this source
has shown us, what new question can we ask?” Consider how the author of this example uses
previous experiments to propose a new study that builds on their results:
Studying the extent and nature of octopus cognition offers a new angle by
which we can examine the evolution of intelligence. Previous studies of
octopus intelligence have focused mainly on learning capabilities through
classical conditioning techniques (for review, see Boal 1996), whereas
the research proposed herein will use the methodology of past studies of
octopus cognition (e.g. Bierens de Haan 1949, Walker et al. 1970, Boal
1996) to study two inter-related characteristic markers of higher
cognition. Specifically, the proposed study will seek to determine
whether octopuses have the capacity for delay of gratification, and
whether octopuses will use play as an effective self-distracting coping
mechanism.4

Here the author proposes using the methodology of previous studies not to investigate octopus
cognition (as those studies have done), but to study the more complex issue of octopus
intelligence. Because she takes the methods and results of these previous studies to be correct,
she can build them into a new study that pushes beyond them.

5. Matchmaking
Make new knowledge by placing previously unacquainted sources in conversation with each
other. This strategy can take two different forms: 1. you can seek a new understanding of your
subject by examining it through a theoretical lens (e.g. what Henri Bergson’s theory of humor
can show us about why Seinfeld is funny), or 2. you can bring ideas from one academic field to
bear on another (e.g. what findings in psychology can show us about how individuals make
economic choices). The author of this example turns to religious studies to shed new light on a
literary text:
Citing harsh portrayals of religious officials in the Canterbury Tales,
scholars often conclude that the text is “fundamentally anti-religious”
 (Condren 75). These scholars’ views, however, fail to consider
Catholicism within its historical context. Religion scholar, Gabriel
Daly, claims that because religions evolve over time, one must
distinguish between the “Catholicism of Medieval times and Catholicism
at its inception” (Daly 778). Theologian Richard McBrien takes this
argument even further . . .5

This author argues that looking at The Canterbury Tales using the terms of literary analysis has
limited scholars’ perspective. He shakes up his subject by using knowledge from the field of
religious history provide a more complete understanding of Chaucer’s take on religion.

6. So what? So this.
Give context that shows why your subject is interesting or important. This context motivates
your essay by showing how your subject thwarts expectations or departs from the status quo in a
way that makes it worthy of deeper inquiry. Consider how the sources presented in the example
below set up the author’s argument that Margaret Cho and Carlos Mencia “introduce a new
version of ethnic humor that does not promote a cultural hierarchy”:
Leon Rappoport further clarifies how stereotypes and ethnicity-based
mockery embody the superiority theory by explaining that these
disparaging jokes often employ “polar opposite adjectives...[so that]
only [the] negative end of the pair is emphasized [and] the positive
end always remains implicitly understood as characteristic of the
‘superior’ joke teller” (33). With these jokes, the overt debasement of
immigrants simultaneously elevates the person making the joke.
Consequently, the opposing adjectives suggest a hierarchy between the
person who tells the joke and the people at the butt of the joke.6

Here the author cites sources who argue that traditional forms of ethnic humor rely on a cultural
hierarchy. This context allows her to demonstrate the groundbreaking significance of her claim
that the comedy of Cho and Mencia does away with these traditional hierarchies.

7. Defining keyterms
Use sources to define and illustrate key concepts you will use in your paper. Because scholars
are experts in their fields, their definitions will be more detailed and more authoritative than
those in standard dictionaries. Using sources to define keyterms can also make your ideas clearer
by allowing you to illustrate abstract concepts with concrete examples, as this author does:
The phenomenon of evil laughter is not new. Indeed, many instances of
the “evil laughter” of “mockers” appear throughout the Holy Bible.
Roger Poudrier highlights one passage that could easily apply to the
villains in a popular action movie, “They laugh at my fall, they
organize against me . . . If I fall they surround me . . . those who
hate me for no reason. They open wide their mouth against me saying:
Ha, ha!” (Ps 35:15-21; qtd. in Poudrier 23). The righteous narrator
describes the mockers as people who attack him and his faith for no
reason, and laugh in a particularly immodest way. Roy Baumeister
observes the same characteristic in cartoon programs of the 1980s,
citing how “they . . . ”7

To illustrate what he means by “evil laughter,” this author cites examples from sources as diverse
as the Bible and 1980s cartoons.
8. Changing the question
Argue that scholars of your subject have been taking the wrong approach or asking the wrong
question. Changing the terms of a scholarly debate can be a useful way of resolving a stalemate
or advancing a field whose results have grown stagnant. Essentially you are saying: “the
traditional questions have only taken us so far, but approaching the subject in a new way can
produce more far-reaching results.” Consider how the following author seeks to reframe the
standard approach to Jane Austen’s Pride and Prejudice:
[T]here has been a remarkable consensus about the terms which ought to
be used to describe [Pride and Prejudice’s] antitheses. Again and again
. . . we come upon some variation of the terms “individual” and
“society.” [quotes from three sources that read Pride and Prejudice in
these terms] In the face of such a long-standing consensus of
interpretation it may seem merely ingenious at this point in time to
question either the essential validity or the usefulness of this
description of the novel. But in at least two important respects it
seems open to objection.8

This author does not reject the conclusions previous scholars have reached about the relationship
between individual and society in Pride and Prejudice; he rejects the convention of analyzing the
novel in these terms. In pointing out how he has changed the question, the author expands the
scope of his essay. Its significance is not just factual, but methodological.

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Some!of!the!strategies!described!in!this!handout!are!drawn!from!Mark!Gaipa’s!“Breaking!into!the!Conversation:!How!
Students!Can!Acquire!Authority!in!Their!Writing,”!Pedagogy!4.3!(2004):!419P37.!
1!Hannah!Alpert!’15,!“Determining!the!Ages,!Metallicities,!and!Star!Formation!Rates!of!Brightest!Cluster!Galaxies.”!
2!Vincent!Mitchell!’16,!“Beckett’s!Krapp!as!a!Harlequin:!Still!a!Clown!of!Cosmological!Comedy.”!
3!Bianca!Yuh!’12,!“The!Limited!Potential!of!True!Reform.”!!
4!Dakota!McCoy!’14,!“Research!Proposal:!Do!Octopuses!Think!Like!Vertebrates?!A!New!Comparative!Test.”!
5!Alex!Goel!’13,!“Corruption!and!Purity:!Chaucer’s!Portrayal!of!Catholicism!in!the!Canterbury.Tales.”!
6!Wenjing!Dai!’14,!“The!Politics!of!Ethnic!Humor.”!
7!Spencer!Katz!’13,!“Muahaha!:!Defining!Evil!Laughter.”!
8!James!Sherry,!“Pride.and.Prejudice:!The!Limits!of!Society,”!Studies.in.English.Literature.19.4!(1979):!609P22.!
Yale College Writing Center www.yale.edu/writing

THINKING YOUR WAY TO AN ESSAY TOPIC: FINDING A GOOD QUESTION

“What people think of as the moment of discovery is really the discovery of the question.” –Jonas Salk

Readers will be interested in your paper if it teaches them something they care about that they don’t
already know. Sparking this interest is fundamentally tied not just to the claim your paper presents, but
to the question it asks. A good question convinces readers that there is a gap in their understanding and
that something significant is at stake in that gap. But a good question is more than a rhetorical device for
provoking readers’ interest; good questions advance knowledge by guiding research in a new way.
An essay’s guiding question is most often found at the beginning of the introduction. The question is
typically presented in two parts. In the first part you establish some stable context or status quo by
making an assertion that is or seems true. You then challenge that seemingly stable notion by presenting
a destabilizing condition that complicates or calls it into question. Though the example below focuses
on a work of literature, the technique of generating a promising essay question by isolating a tension or
paradox works equally well for analyses of nonfiction, visual art, and even data sets.

Stable context: Given his passionate focus on resisting sin, it is
!
no surprise that the speaker of Donne’s “Holy Sonnet XIV” asks
! keep him chaste.
God to
Destabilizing condition: Yet he yearns for that chastity in a
shockingly sexual way: by asking God to “ravish” him. How is it
possible to be both chaste and ravished? How do we make sense
of the speaker’s notion that forced sexuality can make him pure?
Stable context: In “Holy Sonnet XIV,” Donne’s speaker
seeks to avoid sin by being taken captive, asking God to
“imprison” and “enthrall” him.
Destabilizing condition: Yet the speaker simultaneously
suggests that this state of captivity will make him “free.”
How can we make sense of the speaker’s idea that
abandoning his will to God increases his freedom?

Holy Sonnet XIV

Stable context: Donne’s
“Holy Sonnet XIV” is a
poem of worship in which
the speaker tells God,
“dearly I love you.”
Destabilizing condition:
Yet this seemingly
reverential speaker adopts a
demanding tone, suggesting
that he blames God for not
doing enough to protect him
from sin. How is it possible
for the speaker to blame God
for his corrupt condition and
worship God at the same
time?
Stable context: In “Holy
Batter my heart, three-person'd God, for you Sonnet XIV,” Donne’s
As yet but knock, breathe, shine, and seek to mend; speaker presents himself
That I may rise and stand, o'erthrow me, and bend as extremely passive,
repeatedly asking to be
Your force to break, blow, burn, and make me new. acted upon by God.
I, like an usurp'd town to another due, Destabilizing condition:
Labor to admit you, but oh, to no end; Yet the speaker makes
Reason, your viceroy in me, me should defend, these requests in an
But is captiv'd, and proves weak or untrue. extremely demanding
Yet dearly I love you, and would be lov'd fain, tone of voice, directing
God to “batter,”
But am betroth'd unto your enemy; “o’erthrow” and
Divorce me, untie or break that knot again, “divorce” him. How do
Take me to you, imprison me, for I, we reconcile the
Except you enthrall me, never shall be free, speaker’s passive stance
Nor ever chaste, except you ravish me. with his demanding tone
of voice?
-John Donne

Stable context: The initial octet of Donne’s “Holy Sonnet XIV”

develops an elaborate military metaphor. Using language like
“batter,” “o’erthrow,” “usurped town,” and “viceroy,” the speaker
likens God to an army battling the sin within him.
Destabilizing condition: But the poem’s final sestet abruptly
shifts from the language of war to the language of a romantic
relationship, using terms like “love,” “betrothed,” divorce,”
“chaste,” and “ravish.” How does this shift in metaphor reflect
the speaker’s changing vision of his relationship with God?
Stable context: As a religious poem, John Donne’s “Holy
Sonnet XIV” asks spiritual questions about redemption
from sin.
Destabilizing condition: But extended references to war
and sexuality pose these spiritual questions in a
surprisingly physical way. How do we reconcile the
poem’s deep spirituality with its intense physicality?

Written by Ryan Wepler © 2014

Yale College Writing Center www.yale.edu/writing

COMPOSING AN EFFECTIVE TITLE

'
Titles are labels that convey what a piece of writing is or what it is about. After reading your title,
your readers will begin to make assumptions about your creativity, preparation, and expertise, so it
is important to spend some time crafting a good one. Titles typically highlight the central question
an essay investigates, and most will hint at the author’s stance on that question.
Although every paper you write for class will have a title, titling conventions vary by discipline.
Your readers’ initial sense of your authority in a particular subject area will be shaped, in part, by
how your title demonstrates your understanding of the conventions in that field.
You should read all of the sections below, as titling strategies in the other disciplines may help you
form ideas that would be useful in your field.

Titles and Subtitles

It is common for pieces of academic writing to have both a title and a subtitle. In these works, the
title is presented first and separated from the subtitle by a colon. For example:
Nixonland: The Rise of a President and the Fracturing of a Nation

The “title: subtitle” format is rarely obligatory in academic writing, but it is prevalent, in part,
because it allows for a greater range of possibilities than using a title alone.

Titles in Humanities Papers

Titles of academic works in the humanities tend to identify both the subject area and the text(s) the
paper will analyze (“Representing ‘Other’ Diasporas in Recent Global Canadian Fiction”). When
analyzing a specific work, it is conventional to include both the author’s name and the title of the
work (“Going Wendigo: The Emergence of the Iconic Monster in Margret Atwood’s Oryx and
Crake and Antonia Bird’s Ravenous”). Including the author’s name is unnecessary if the work you
are analyzing is widely known (e.g. Twelfth Night, Moby Dick, &c.). Titles of humanities papers
tend to employ more vibrant, vivid language than titles in other disciplines.
The following title demonstrates several higher-level techniques:
Strange Fruits in the Garden: Surveying the Properties of Lynching

When humanities papers employ the “title: subtitle” structure, the title is usually more suggestive,
and its meaning may not become fully clear until the audience has read the paper. Here the author,
Sandy Alexandre, makes two allusions, one to “Strange Fruit,” a Billie Holiday song about
lynching, and another to The Machine in the Garden, an influential book of literary criticism. Even
if the audience isn’t familiar with these allusions before reading Alexandre’s work, their meaning
will become clearer while reading, thereby bolstering readers’ sense of Alexandre’s cleverness,
attention to detail, and, in turn, her authority.
The subtitle of a humanities paper typically states the subject more directly, as Alexandre’s title
does. However, by punning on surveying and properties Alexandre employs an additional strategy
for conveying her cleverness. When used as jokes, puns in titles can backfire by suggesting that
your approach to your subject is unserious. But when employed as Alexandre does here, puns can
convey an author’s sensitivity to her subject’s many layers of meaning.

Written'by'Ryan'Wepler,'©'2013.'
Titles in Science Papers
Titles of academic works in the sciences should present their subject with specificity and do so
using as few words as possible. The title should provide details specific enough to distinguish the
project undertaken in the paper from other studies on the same topic. Consider these examples taken
from Jan Pechenik’s A Short Guide to Writing About Biology:
NO: Factors controlling sex determination in turtles
YES: Roles of nest site selection and temperature in determining sex ratio in loggerhead sea
turtles
NO: The control of organ development in fish
YES: The novel gene “exdpf” regulates pancreas development in zebrafish
Be economical with your language, but don’t be so economical that it limits your specificity. The
ACS Style Guide offers these guidelines for the language of scientific titles: “Choose terms that are
as specific as the text permits, e.g., ‘a vanadium-iron alloy’ rather than ‘a magnetic alloy.’ Avoid
phrases such as ‘on the,’ ‘a study of,’ ‘research on,’ ‘regarding,’ and ‘use of.’ In most cases, omit
‘the’ at the beginning of the title. Avoid nonquantitative, meaningless words such as ‘rapid’ and
‘new.’”

Titles in Social Science Papers

Titles of academic works in the social sciences present the subject of the paper as simply and
directly as possible. According to the APA style guide, the title “should be a concise statement of
the main topic and should identify the actual variables or theoretical issues under investigation and
the relationship between them.” To better understand what this looks like, consider this title:
Effect of Context on Performance Approach Orientation

Read in light of the APA’s style principles, we can see how this title concisely states the paper’s
main topic (performance approach orientation), indicates the variable under investigation (context)
and states the relationship between the main topic and the variable (the effect of one on the other).
Note that the principle of concision extends all the way to cutting the initial the. These style
principles also hold when the “title: subtitle” format is employed, as in the following:
The Sacralization of the Individual: Human Rights and the Abolition of the
Death Penalty

As its title clearly signals, this paper will investigate how the abolition of the death penalty (variable
under investigation) affects our understanding of the sacralization of the individual (main topic).

Titles in Non-Academic Works (journalism, creative nonfiction, writing for the web)
Titles of non-academic works must account for the audience’s purpose in reading. Are readers
hoping to be informed? To have their ideas challenged? Are they seeking an experience? If your
audience is reading for information, your title should be direct and informative (“Inland Oil Spill
Raises Detection Concerns”). If your audience is reading for an experience, you should strive to
compose a title that enhances the way they experience your subject. You might, for example,
choose a title that works in conversation with your text, a title whose meaning expands and
develops as your essay progresses.

A note on formatting
It is conventional in all academic disciplines for the title to be centered at the top of the first page and formatted in plain
text (not bold, italic, or underlined). Rules of capitalization vary by discipline. In humanities titles is conventional to
capitalize the first and last word of a title as well as all “principal words” (nouns, pronouns, verbs, adjectives, adverbs,
and subordinating conjunctions). Most social science papers capitalize these same words in the title that appears at the
beginning of a paper, but capitalize only the first letter of titles that appear in the reference list at the end. Science titles
tend to capitalize only the first word and proper nouns. None of these capitalization guidelines are universal within each
field, so you may want to clarify the expectations with your instructor.
Yale College Writing Center www.yale.edu/writing

STITCHING: SIGNAL WORDS

Signal words alert the reader to how the ideas in an argument relate to one another. Use them to make the
logic of your explanations clearer to your audience. It is important to note that these phrases signal a link
between your ideas; they do not create one. For example, just saying “however” does not produce a
complication of preceding ideas; it merely indicates that such a complication is forthcoming.

ADDING
Additionally Another First Second
Also Besides In addition Third

CAUSE AND EFFECT

Accordingly Because (of) In consequence Provoked by
After Due to Next Since
As a result (of) If (not)…, then Prompted by

COMPARE AND CONTRAST

As well as In much the same way Likewise Similarly
Compared to Just as On the one hand Unlike
In contrast Juxtaposing __with __ On the other hand

CONCLUDING
Consequentially In conclusion In the final analysis Thus
Finally In consequence Therefore Ultimately
From __ it follows that In the end

COUNTERING
But In contrast On the contrary Still
Even if we grant that Instead of On the other hand While
However Nevertheless Rather (than) Yet

EXTENDING
Beyond Furthermore Moreover Pushed even further
By extension Indeed Not only…, but also What is more

INTRODUCING DETAILS
Examined more closely For instance In particular Specifically
For example In fact In the case of __ To choose one example

LINKING
As alluded to As we have seen Given that In this way
As discussed previously Before we __, we must Having established that Ironically
As mentioned earlier By analogy In order to Paradoxically
As noted above Considering (the above) In parallel Relative to
As…, so… Counterintuitively In relation to The aforementioned

Written by Ryan Wepler with help from the Yale College Writing Partners, © 2011
QUALIFYING
Admittedly Distinguished from In theory Theoretically
Although Even though ___ notwithstanding To be sure
At the very least Hypothetically Provided that To the extent that
Conceding that Insofar as Seemingly While
Despite In spite of Supposing that

SUMMARIZING
All told In essence In short Put differently
In brief In other words In sum To sum up
Yale College Writing Center www.yale.edu/writing

PUTTING SOURCES IN CONVERSATION: VERBS AND CLAUSES

When incorporating sources into a researched argument, it is important not only to present each
author’s ideas fairly and accurately, but also to indicate how they relate to surrounding ideas.
Academic writers often highlight these connections using carefully chosen verbs and signal phrases.
Using the words below to enhance the precision of your language will allow you to synthesize your
presentation of individual authors’ ideas into your larger argument, which can include both developing
a cohesive account of the field and situating your own original ideas alongside those of others.

OPENING CLAUSES
Accordingly For example In particular More specifically
As a result Furthermore In response Nevertheless
Consequently However In this way On the contrary
Contrary to In addition Likewise On the other hand
Conversely In contrast More importantly Similarly

STATING
avers declares observes says
avows discusses offers states
believes expresses opines summarizes
characterizes mentions points out supports
comments notes presents writes

ARGUING
acknowledges avers (de)emphasizes invokes
adds (to) claims explains maintains
asserts concludes hypothesizes posits
argues contends insists proposes

SHOWING
analyzes elucidates furnishes sheds light on
constitutes exemplifies illuminates shows
demonstrates exhibits illustrates supplies
displays expounds reveals testifies to

SUGGESTING
alludes to gestures at indicates might
appears to hints at infers seems to
deduces implies insinuates suggests

COUNTERING
calls into question contrasts with interrogates reconsiders
casts doubt on counters objects to rejects
challenges destabilizes overturns refutes
complicates disavows problematizes responds to
contradicts distinguishes between queries reverses
condemns goes against questions undermines

Written by Ryan Wepler with help from the Yale College Writing Partners, © 2011
EXPANDING/ SIMPLIFYING
augments elucidates expounds parses
broadens expands extends reduces
builds on explicates furthers renders
elaborates explores minimizes simplifies
Yale College Writing Center www.yale.edu/writing

WORKING WITH QUOTATIONS 1: THE LEAD-IN

To effectively support an argument, a quotation requires three parts: lead-in, citation, and analysis.
This handout covers how to introduce a quotation with an effective lead-in. For guidance on
citation and analysis, see Working with Quotations handouts 2 and 3.

The lead-in prepares your reader for the source material you are about to reproduce. Its primary role
is to orient the audience by providing the context necessary to understand the quotation and the way
it is being used to support your argument. This context can include:
o The author’s name: Give the author’s full name in your first quotation, with the exception of
famous authors—Shakespeare, Freud, Einstein, &c.—whose last name will suffice. After that,
use the last name only. Social and natural science papers that include literature reviews are an
exception and typically refer to their source authors by last name only.
o The author’s background: When the author’s background is relevant or is not widely known,
you may want to include it in your lead-in (e.g. “Intel co-founder Robert Noyce”)
o The quotation’s relationship to the surrounding argument: This can include linking the
quotation to the essay’s main claim, to the topic sentence of the paragraph, or to a previously
cited piece of evidence.

Identify and introduce quotations smoothly, using one of the following methods:
o Verb and comma (most common): The object of Twain’s ridicule shifts from American con
men to the citizens who enable their success when the undertaker declares, “All you’ve got to
do is just be ca’am and stack it up—they’ll stand the racket” (353).
o Introductory phrase: Though Vonnegut declares that jokes function by “hooking people with
little barbless hooks and letting them off again” (Fates 185), I would contend that this and
most of his other humor operates in a significantly different, even antithetical, way.
o Subordination using that: Anthropologist Mary Douglas’s contention that “laughter is a
unique bodily eruption which is always to be taken as a communication” (86) suggests that a
laugh can be interpreted as a text.
o Introduction and colon: Charlie Chaplin describes his humor as having a primarily realist
effect on its audience: “I make them conscious of the reality of life. ‘You think this is it, don’t
you?’ I say. ‘Well, it isn’t, but this is—see?’ And then they laugh” (qtd. in Eastman 273).
o Interrupted quotation (less common): Joking about money has been one way the culture has
grappled with its greedy tendencies. “At our worst,” the critic Louis Kronenberger has
expounded, “we have made humor the handle of our acquisitiveness, a trick way of getting our
foot in the door” (163).

Finally, your quotations should flow smoothly within the syntax of your sentence. Fit quotations
into your sentence’s grammatical structure by:
 crafting your sentence structure to fit the quotation,
 using only part of the quotation,
 deleting words that impede the grammar and replacing them with ellipses, or
 adding words in square brackets to aid the grammar.

Written by Ryan Wepler, © 2012

What you’re Leading-in to: Quotation vs. Summary

Conventions governing when to quote a source and when to summarize it vary greatly by
discipline:
o Humanities: It is conventional to quote both primary and secondary source material.
Summary can be permissible when a source’s specific wording is not relevant to your
argument, but scholars in the humanities tend to favor reproducing the exact language of a
source so that the audience can judge whether it has been interpreted fairly.
o Social Sciences: It is conventional to quote primary sources and summarize secondary
sources. In order to provide the clearest possible picture of their object of study, social
scientists tend to quote material from non-numerical primary sources like interviews,
observation, and questionnaires. Writing in the social sciences tends to emphasize thorough
coverage of a field in a small space. As a result, it privileges summary of secondary sources
over direct quotation.
o Natural Sciences: It is conventional to summarize secondary sources. Quotation of primary
sources is rare in the natural sciences since this material typically takes the form of
numerical data. Like the social sciences, writing in the natural sciences tends to be highly
condensed, and it is conventional to summarize secondary sources in order to present the
current field of research as thoroughly as possible in a small space.
Summaries and paraphrases of source material do not typically require the same kinds of lead-ins
used to set up direct quotation.
Yale College Writing Center www.yale.edu/writing

WORKING WITH QUOTATIONS 3: ANALYSIS

To effectively support an argument, a quotation requires three parts: lead-in, citation, and analysis.
This handout covers how write analysis that illuminatingly links quotations to larger claims. For
guidance on lead-ins and citation, see Working with Quotations handouts 1 and 2.

An argument consists of a claim supported by evidence. Analysis is an explanation of how a

specific piece of evidence serves to support a larger, more general claim. A biology experiment, for
example, might investigate the effect of a specific protein on a human cell. The process of logical
connections, observations, and inferences that we call analysis allows us to understand how this
cellular evidence supports claims about the overall health of an entire body, or even an entire
population. Like cells, quotations are small parts of a larger body, and analysis of quotations allows
a writer to persuasively support larger claims about the body of a text or a body of knowledge.

WHEN TO ANALYZE
Most quotations require analysis when used as evidence for a larger claim, but not all of them do.
Cases in which a quotation does not require the kind of thorough analysis outlined here include:
1. When the quotation’s function is simply to note the source’s position in a particular field of
research. This is most common in literature review sections of papers in the sciences and
social sciences, fields that tend to privilege summary over quotation.
2. When the source says something that the author wants to say, but does so in language that is
more powerful or artful than the author can produce, in which case the author simply
substitutes the source’s words for her own.
Although not every quotation requires analysis, quoting a source usually indicates that its language
warrants further engagement. It suggests that the source’s words contain depth or nuance that
cannot be summarized. In essence, the very act of quoting typically implies that the quotation is
worthy of analysis.

HOW TO ANALYZE
The way a quotation supports your argument is not likely to be self-evident for your audience. If
you want a quotation to make your main claim more persuasive, you need to make the quotation do
work for your argument by analyzing it in a way that explains precisely how it bolsters the claim
you are using it to make. This can be accomplished by working your way logically from the specific
quotation to the more general claim you are trying to prove. It is useful to think of this as a three-
step process:
1. State what you understand the quotation to mean, reframing, if possible, the language of the
quotation in the terms of your argument.
2. Link the quotation to its immediate context or to the subclaim you are making locally (i.e. in
that paragraph or section of your paper).
3. Explore the deeper implications of the quotation in a larger context related to your essay’s
more general main claim (e.g. an existing hypothesis, paradigm, or section of the field).
Linguist S. I. Hayakawa has dubbed the logical path from a specific piece of evidence to a more
general claim the “ladder of abstraction.” Your might consider the steps above the three rungs of the
ladder of abstraction that you must ascend in order to explain how a quotation relates to your
essay’s main claim.

Written by Ryan Wepler, © 2012

ANALYSIS IN ACTION
As an example of analysis that walks its audience down a clear logical path from a specific quotation to a
more general main claim, consider this paragraph from an essay about Mark Twain’s novel Pudd’nhead
Wilson:
In the first of Pudd’nhead Wilson’s series of aphorisms, Twain invokes the
lie of race by comparing it to trumping in a card game. Wilson’s declaration,
“Tell the truth or trump—but get the trick” (1) puns on the word trump, which
links lying to playing the prevailing card in a card game. This advice to lie to
(or “trick”) one’s opponent in order to win is first taken up by Roxy, a slave
and nursemaid who switches her infant son Chambers with her master’s son Tom so
that her progeny may grow up to be a wealthy southern gentleman. The
interchangeability of Chambers—who is only 1/32 black—with Tom Driscoll hints
at the broader fiction of race, which seems no more a part of one’s identity
than the clothes that Roxy swaps in order to pull off the identity switch. Read
in these terms, Wilson’s initial aphorism takes on a broader meaning that frames
the entire novel. Roxy’s effort to “trump” the constraints of race suggests that
division of individuals along racial lines is not the truth, but rather a grand
“trick” perpetrated by whites to promote the grand fiction of their superiority.

Lead-in: In the first of Pudd’nhead Wilson’s series of aphorisms, Twain invokes the lie
of race by comparing it to trumping in a card game.
Quote and Citation: Wilson’s declaration, “Tell the truth or trump—but get the trick” (1)…
Analysis, Level 1: …puns on the word trump, which links lying to playing the prevailing card in
a card game. This advice to lie to (or “trick”) one’s opponent in order to win…
Analysis, Level 2: …is first taken up by Roxy, a slave and nursemaid who switches her infant son
Chambers with her master’s son Tom so that her progeny may grow up to be a
wealthy southern gentleman.
Analysis, Level 3: The interchangeability of Chambers—who is only 1/32 black—with Tom
Driscoll hints at the broader fiction of race, which seems no more a part of
one’s identity than the clothes that Roxy swaps in order to pull off the identity
switch. Read in these terms, Wilson’s initial aphorism takes on a broader
meaning that frames the entire novel. Roxy’s effort to “trump” the constraints
of race suggests that division of individuals along racial lines is not the truth,
but rather a grand “trick” perpetrated by whites to promote the grand fiction of
their superiority.

Breakdown
Level 1 restates or interprets the quotation’s language. In this case, the author clarifies several puns that
might not be apparent to the reader and conveys what he takes the quotation to mean, thereby
establishing a stable foundation on which to build his argument about its larger implications. Level 2
examines the quotation’s relationship to its immediate context, which, in this case, is the surrounding
narrative of Twain’s novel. The author argues that the quotation isn’t simply about lying, but rather is
specifically related to lying about one’s race. Level 3 analyzes the quotation’s broader or more abstract
thematic relevance. In this case, the author uses Twain’s representation of a character lying about her
son’s race to argue that Twain believes race itself to be a lie or “grand fiction.” By walking this
analytical path, the author has turned Twain’s quotation from a cynical remark about opportunism into a
far-reaching stance on race and race-relations.
Yale College Writing Center www.yale.edu/writing

RHETORICAL TERMS: THE PROCESS OF ARGUMENT

Revised Problem

Problem

Motive Initial Motive Evidence Additional Evidence

Claim

Revised Claim

Initial motive – This is the reason why you first became interested in your topic, and the
excitement and curiosity it generates should be deep enough to carry your writing to completion.
Since the cause of this early interest may be idiosyncratic or deeply personal, it may not engage
the members of your audience who could have different concerns. As you begin to compose your
essay, your initial motive should be revised in a way that emphasizes how your topic appeals
most broadly to members of your intended audience.

Problem – While a motive captures why we are interested in a topic as a whole, a problem is a
specific question for which we don’t yet know the answer. Attempting to resolve a problem gives
direction to your writing process. Like the initial motive, the first expression of your writing
problem will likely be personal or idiosyncratic and therefore require revision in order to interest
the members of your intended audience.

Evidence – If your argument engages a genuine problem—one for which we do not yet know the
answer—your evidence will help you produce an answer, thereby generating new knowledge. It
is important to remember that the meaning of your evidence is not self-evident. The facts,
concepts, theories, statistics, definitions, &c. that you cite will need to be interpreted and
analyzed it in order to show your reader how they provide a solution to your writing problem.

Claim – Careful analysis of your evidence should produce a claim or a stance that somehow
resolves your initial writing problem. The strongest claims are contestable—meaning that
someone could reasonably disagree with them—and surprising. The best way to produce a
surprising claim is by beginning the writing process with a genuine problem. If your reader does
not yet know the answer to the problem that frames your essay, then any persuasively argued
solution will be a surprise.

Motive – While your initial motive for exploring your topic may be personal, the one that
emerges in your writing needs to appeal as widely as possible to your intended readers. After all,
the persuasiveness of your analysis won’t matter much if you fail at the outset to convince your
audience that reading on will be worth their time. Early in your essay you should take care to

Adapted by Ryan Wepler from a handout by the Yale University writing faculty, © 2011
suggest why the topic you will explore is important and valuable for the field in which you are
writing.

Revised Problem – While a question may raise an issue that is of little consequence or that only
you care about, a problem expresses an uncertainty that is broadly meaningful. When you revise
your initial problem as you begin composing your essay, your primary focus should be on
emphasizing how it is a problem not just for you, but for the members of your audience (or their
discipline). Problems are most often expressed at the beginning of essays by articulating a stable
belief or set of beliefs and then presenting complicating evidence which calls that established
position into question, thereby alerting the reader to a problematic gap in his or her
understanding. To emphasize the significance of the problem, the complicating evidence is often
followed by a sentence that directly expresses what is at stake in its resolution.

Additional Evidence – Because your initial claim was likely based on only a small portion of
the available evidence, you will want to consider additional facts and ideas in order to ensure that
that claim withstands scrutiny from your audience. In examining more evidence you not only
want to pay attention to reasons and data that support your position, but also to complicating
evidence which calls that position into question. Accounting for counterevidence may force you
to revise or qualify your main claim, but it is essential for bolstering your credibility and
producing the most persuasive argument possible.

Revised Claim – To ensure that your main claim will hold up under the scrutiny of skeptical
readers, you must become a skeptical reader of your own work. Considering potential objections
and complicating evidence will allow you to revise or qualify the main claim of your argument in
a way that fends off these challenges to your position before your readers get a chance to
formulate them.
Yale College Writing Center www.yale.edu/writing

REVISING EFFICIENTLY AND EFFECTIVELY

Because revision is a complex process that involves many steps, it can be tough to figure out where to
get started. The most efficient strategy typically involves moving from broad elements that govern the
construction of an entire essay to more local concerns that affect only a portion of its argument. After
all, it is discouraging to spend time carefully revising the language in one part of your essay only to cut
that section upon realizing that the argument needs reorganized. This handout can help you manage
your approach to revision by guiding you through a series of argumentative levels that proceed from
the most expansive components of your essay through increasingly narrower ones.

Level 1: Claim and Problem

The initial paragraph of an essay generally introduces a meaningful writing problem and then makes a
claim about how that problem might be resolved. Given these tasks, some questions you might ask
yourself during revision include:
Does my essay clearly motivate my writing problem by demonstrating why my intended
audience would be interested in discovering the answer?
Does my essay’s main claim (i.e. its thesis) straightforwardly resolve the writing problem I
have proposed?
Are the claim and problem I articulate at the beginning of my essay the same as the claim and
problem I am engaging—possibly in an evolved form—at the end?

Level 2: Organization
An essay should be organized according to the evolving logic of its argument. Even the most
sophisticated arguments are built on a series of simpler claims that progress toward greater complexity.
Put differently, the earlier paragraphs of your essay should persuasively establish the ideas that will be
essential components of later portions of your argument. To successfully execute this developmental
structure, some questions you might ask during revision include:
Does my essay proceed from simpler, more foundational claims to more complex arguments
that build upon those earlier claims?
Is every section of my essay clearly focused on pursuing a resolution to the problem I have
articulated in my introduction?
Are the sub-claims I articulate in my topic sentences logically related to my essay’s main
claim?
Does each new step in my argument proceed logically from the ideas in the preceding section?

Level 3: Argument
Argument is the level at which local elements are linked to the whole of the essay. Since essays argue
for different sub-claims at different moments, some portions of your argument will likely be more
persuasive—and thus require less revision—than others. But because each sub-claim makes up a
portion of your essay’s larger argument, any revision of the parts will affect the persuasiveness of the
argument as a whole. Often the most effective way to revise is to imagine a skeptical reader who is
inclined to question each conclusion and the logic of the argument the produced it. Revision questions
that can help you persuade such a skeptic include:
Do my paragraphs begin by making a claim and then offer evidence for that claim followed by
analysis of the evidence offered?
Is each piece of evidence clearly attached to a specific claim?

Written by Ryan Wepler, © 2011

 Does my analysis demonstrate how my evidence serves as proof for its corresponding claim,
why I am warranted in drawing the conclusions that I do from the evidence I offer?
Are there any reasonable counterarguments that my analysis has failed to account for?
Are there moments in which I state my claims too strongly? How might I qualify my
overstatements in these instances?

Level 4: Language
Though we may be accustomed to seeing language as subservient to the ideas in an essay, it is
language that generates those ideas in the mind of the reader. As a result, even subtle linguistic
changes can greatly influence how your argument is received. Like argument, language can often be
revised effectively by imagining a skeptical reader, an individual inclined to question any logical
connection that is not highlighted effectively or interpret every ambiguity in your language in a manner
you did not intend. Revising your language with the following questions in mind can help you manage
the reception of your argument:
Does my language clarify for my reader how the different portions of my argument—on both
the sentence level and the paragraph level—are logically related to one another?
Are there places in which I can improve my clarity by replacing a passive construction or a
form of “to be” with a more active verb or phrasing?
Have I effectively defined the keyterms in my argument? Does the language I use to identify
important concepts remain consistent throughout my argument?
Does the structure of each sentence emphasize the logical flow and evolution of my argument
by presenting old information—facts or concepts from earlier in the essay—before introducing
new ideas?
Can I cut any of my language without affecting the overall clarity or precision of my argument?

Level 5: Grammar and Punctuation

In some cases, mistakes in grammar and punctuation can obscure the clarity of your ideas. However,
even errors that don’t affect your meaning still influence your reader’s perception of your credibility as
a writer. An essay with grammar and punctuation errors makes you appear sloppy and can lead the
reader to assume that your ideas are sloppy as well. A meticulously proofread and carefully formatted
essay suggests a similarly diligent treatment of the essay’s argument. The following questions can help
your writing project such diligence:
Are there any lingering typos or punctuation errors that I haven’t caught during revision?
Is my essay formatted according to the guidelines of my professor or my discipline?
Have I read my essay aloud in order to fine tune its grammar, precision, and linguistic flow?