WRIT 1133 - theses and analyses

1. Introductions: Summaries +
Theses

2. Overall, a strong intro lays out an original and thought-provoking
thesis: an argument for (in this case) your interpretation of the
artifact you’ve chosen.
• It begins with a summary paragraph that provides the context your
audience needs to understand your thesis— no less and no more.
• A strong thesis responds to the whole question; it doesn’t simply
restate the question or respond to parts of it.
• It’s based not on generalities but on an analysis of specific,
concrete features and details of the artifact.
• It advances a debatable claim about the meaning of the artifact;
it’s not a statement of simple fact.
• It provides the reasoning behind that claim, using concepts and
terminology from Hunt.
• It’s clear enough that its readers will understand precisely what
the writer is arguing.
• A strong thesis is complex; it logically connects all of its key ideas.
• features of a strong introduction

3. • features of a strong introduction
• Summary provides the right amount of context.
• Thesis is original and thought-provoking.
• Responds to the question — the whole question.
• Based on analysis of specific, concrete features and details.
• Makes a debatable claim about meaning.
• Provides reasoning (using Hunt’s terms and concepts).
• Suitably specific.
• Suitably complex.
• Logically connected.

4. • where people often go awry
• Summary not tailored to thesis.
• Thesis is familiar and/or uncontroversial.
• Neglects to address parts of question.
– By what means does the artifact teach?
– How is that lesson rewiring our psyches and our societies?
• Claims are disconnected

5. Analyses

6. An analysis paragraph shows how a single piece of evidence supports and develops
your thesis. You create one by presenting that (single) piece of evidence as
directly as possible; analyzing it using heuristic concepts and terms (in our case,
from Hunt); and connecting the results to the thesis.
Here’s a good way to organize a paragraph of analysis:
• State your argumentative claim. (Include a transition from the previous
paragraph).
• Quote the relevant evidence (if quotable; if not, describe it clearly).
• Use heuristic concepts/terms to dissect the evidence and show how it supports
your claim.
• Indicate how the argument you’ve made in this paragraph contributes to your
thesis overall.
Bad ways to organize a paragraph of analysis include:
• Summarizing rather analyzing.
• Neglecting to present the evidence, or at least not directly.
• Neglecting to use the conceptual terminology.
• Cramming multiple claims and/or pieces of evidence into a single paragraph.
• features of a strong analysis paragraph

7. • Argumentative claim clearly stated? YES = 
• Relevant evidence presented as directly as possible? YES = 
• Uses Hunt’s terms and concepts? YES = 
• Connects to thesis? YES = 
• More summary than analysis? YES = 
• Crams together multiple claims or pieces of evidence? YES = 
• features of a strong analysis paragraph