Paragraph Development
Develop Paragraphs with Evidence & Analysis
Embedded Files
Paragraph
Paragraph
Definition: A paragraph is a distinct section of writing that typically deals with a single theme or idea. It is a building block of prose composition and is used to organize and structure writing to make it more readable and coherent.
A paragraph usually consists of several sentences, though it can be shorter or longer depending on its purpose and content.
Focuses on a single idea first expressed in the topic sentence. All of a paragraph's sentences should relate to the idea voiced in the topic sentence.
Components of a Paragraph
Components of a Paragraph
(Elements of a No-Specific Paragraph)
Although there are numerous types of paragraphs, virtually all paragraphs contain the following elements:
Topic Sentence: Often the first sentence of the paragraph, it expresses the main idea, claim, argument, or point of the paragraph and serves as a concise summary of the content that follows, providing readers with a clear understanding of what the paragraph will discuss or explain.
See Topic Sentences for detailed information regarding the characteristics and components of an effective topic sentence.
Supporting Sentences: These sentences develop the main idea by providing evidence, examples, explanations, or details.
See Evidence (EV) & Analysis (AN) in the template to follow.
Concluding Sentence: The concluding sentence wraps up the paragraph, often summarizing the main point or providing closure to the idea presented.
Unity: A well-written paragraph should maintain unity by focusing on a single idea. All sentences should relate to the topic sentence and contribute to a single theme.
Coherence: A coherent paragraph is logically organized and flows smoothly. Transitions between sentences make it easier for readers to follow the progression of ideas.
Paragraph Template
Paragraph Template
(General Use Paragraph Template)
Develop each paragraph with a clear, direct topic sentence (TS) followed by a minimum of three (3) pieces of textual evidence (EV), each followed by several sentences of scholarly analysis (AN) that explain how the quote, paraphrase, or detail proves the topic sentence's claim. Well-developed paragraphs are long and drive their points home with ample evidence and persuasive scholarly arguments. A well-developed model paragraph conforms to the following template pattern:
TS, (EV-AN-AN-AN), (EV-AN-AN-AN), (EV-AN-AN-AN), (EV-AN-AN-AN)
Paragraphs are adequately developed when they contain the following required elements and conform to the template pattern listed below:
Topic Sentence (TS): A clear, direct, comprehensive, controlling statement as the first sentence of the paragraph. The topic sentence should make a claim and explicitly state what the paragraph will prove and/or cover.
Textual Evidence (EV): Three pieces of evidence from the primary text (i.e. the literary selection being analyzed). Evidence can be a direct quotation, paraphrase, detail, fact, statistic, example, case study, experiment, expert opinion, anecdote, etc. When analyzing literature, the evidence is taken directly from the primary text(s) and from outside peer-reviewed literary criticism journal articles from the JSTOR database. Note that research Essays require outside source evidence as well.
Scholarly Analysis (AN): Several persuasive analytical sentences following each piece of evidence that explain HOW that quote, paraphrase, or detail proves the claim made in the topic sentence, which in turn helps prove the primary claim made in the thesis.
Minimum Paragraph Template: A moderately-developed paragraph mirrors the MINIMUM pattern below.
TS, (EV-AN-AN-AN), (EV-AN-AN-AN), (EV-AN-AN-AN)
Model Paragraph Template: A well-developed model paragraph mirrors the preferred pattern below.
TS, (EV-AN-AN-AN), (EV-AN-AN-AN), (EV-AN-AN-AN), (EV-AN-AN-AN)
Example #1: Rhetorical Analysis
Example #1: Rhetorical Analysis
(Plain Text)
Hooked on Hooking Up
In the 2010 Contexts journal article titled "Is Hooking Up Bad for Young Women?" Armstrong, Hamilton, and England attempt to use pathetic appeals, credible sources, and logical reasoning to rebuff contemporary hookup culture, but they ultimately fail to persuade due to self-contradiciton, personal bias, and flawed logic. Contexts is a quarterly magazine that strives to make cutting-edge social research accessible to general readers. As such, their audience primarily consists of undergraduate sociology students and young readers interested in sociology. However, as tenured professors in their forties, Armstrong, Hamilton, and England boldly claim, "Young people today are not having more sex at younger ages than their parents" (23). But they fail to support that argument with valid evidence. Instead, they present a National Health and Social Life Survey study, which shows increased sexual activity in people born after 1942 compared to those born a decade earlier. This argument fails to consider the post-WWII baby boom and the sexual decline of later decades. Next, the authors levy weak and confusing pathetic appeals that contradict their own position. At one point they state, "The costs of bad hookups tend to be less than the costs of bad relationships: bad hookups are isolated events, but bad relationships wreak havoc with whole lives" (Armstrong, et al. 26). This emotionally charged ignoratio elenchi–a conclusion that is irrelevant to the matter at hand–actually contradicts their own argument that relationships are better than hookups for young women. Self-contradictions like this masqurade through the piece like damaged lovers seeking retribution on today’s young women with the newfound ability to “hook up.” Moreover, the inclusion of personal anecdotes of women who have had "bad relationships" fouls the article with jaded, off-topic, and irrelevant viewpoints. Finally, the authors conclude with a hasty generalization that proclaims building traditional courtship among young adults should “go hand-in-hand with efforts to decrease intimate partner violence and to build egalitarian relationships that allow more space for other aspects of life - such as school, work, and friendship" (Armstrong, et al. 27). This glittering generality falsely equates hookup culture with dating violence, which is, by definition, more associated with traditional relationships than momentary hookups. With their failed pathetic appeals, frequent self-contradiciton, obvious personal bias, twisted relics of logic, Armstrong, Hamilton, and England ultimately fail to persuade their audience of aspiring young sociologists to turn away from hookup culture in favor of traditional, long-lived romantic entanglements. (Word Count 395)
Work Cited
Armstrong, Elizabeth A., et al. “Is Hooking up Bad for Young Women?” Contexts, vol. 9, no. 3, 2010, pp. 22–27. JSTOR, www.jstor.org/stable/41960773. Accessed 2 Aug. 2023.
Example #1: Rhetorical Analysis
Example #1: Rhetorical Analysis
(Illustrated Text)
Illustrated Elements
Topic Sentence (TS): Underlined Red Audience Analysis: Orange Italics Evidence (EV): Plain Blue Analysis/Argument (AN): Italic Green
In-text Citations (MLA): Bold Purple
Hooked on Hooking Up
In the 2010 Contexts journal article titled "Is Hooking Up Bad for Young Women?" Armstrong, Hamilton, and England attempt to use pathetic appeals, credible sources, and logical reasoning to rebuff contemporary hookup culture, but they ultimately fail to persuade due to self-contradiciton, personal bias, and flawed logic. Contexts is a quarterly magazine that strives to make cutting-edge social research accessible to general readers. As such, their audience primarily consists of undergraduate sociology students and young readers interested in sociology. However, as tenured professors in their forties, Armstrong, Hamilton, and England boldly claim, "Young people today are not having more sex at younger ages than their parents" (23). But they fail to support that argument with valid evidence. Instead, they present a National Health and Social Life Survey study, which shows increased sexual activity in people born after 1942 compared to those born a decade earlier. This argument fails to consider the post-WWII baby boom and the sexual decline of later decades. Next, the authors levy weak and confusing pathetic appeals that contradict their own position. At one point they state, "The costs of bad hookups tend to be less than the costs of bad relationships: bad hookups are isolated events, but bad relationships wreak havoc with whole lives" (Armstrong, et al. 26). This emotionally charged ignoratio elenchi–a conclusion that is irrelevant to the matter at hand–actually contradicts their own argument that relationships are better than hookups for young women. Self-contradictions like this masqurade through the piece like damaged lovers seeking retribution on today’s young women with the newfound ability to “hook up.” Moreover, the inclusion of personal anecdotes of women who have had "bad relationships" fouls the article with jaded, off-topic, and irrelevant viewpoints. Finally, the authors conclude with a hasty generalization that proclaims building traditional courtships among young adults should “go hand-in-hand with efforts to decrease intimate partner violence and to build egalitarian relationships that allow more space for other aspects of life - such as school, work, and friendship" (Armstrong, et al. 27). This glittering generality falsely equates hookup culture with dating violence, which is, by definition, more associated with traditional relationships than momentary hookups. With their failed pathetic appeals, frequent self-contradiciton, obvious personal bias, twisted relics of logic, Armstrong, Hamilton, and England ultimately fail to persuade their audience of aspiring young sociologists to turn away from hookup culture in favor of traditional, long-lived romantic entanglements. (Word Count 395)
Work Cited
Armstrong, Elizabeth A., et al. “Is Hooking up Bad for Young Women?” Contexts, vol. 9, no. 3, 2010, pp. 22–27. JSTOR, www.jstor.org/stable/41960773. Accessed 2 Aug. 2023.
Example #2: Literary Analysis
Example #2: Literary Analysis
(Plain-Text)
Evocative Meter in Shakespeare's "Sonnet 129"
In “Sonnet 129” William Shakespeare uses forced meter, evocative diction, and the fading distinction between humanity and beasts to illustrate the idea that humans go mad in the pursuit of--and eventually in the possession of--the objects they desire. Shakespeare's sonnet charges into motion with forced meter in its first line: “Th' expense of spirit in a waste of shame” (Shakespeare 1). The syllables “th'” and “ex” rush together forming a line of iambic pentameter out of what would otherwise be eleven syllables of thought. Thus, from the poem's very inception, the reader feels a sense of eagerness and begins to anticipate the sonnet's larger theme of barbaric lust and desire. Next, the poet goes on to explain that until one achieves the object of his lust, he is “murderous,” “bloody,” “full of blame,” “rude,” “cruel,” and “savage” (3-4). These highly suggestive words evoke images of Machiavellian-style brutality and reinforce the idea that when one covets, he becomes uncivilized and feral. He is willing to do anything--even beyond the boundaries of his own ethics--to attain the object of his affection. But Shakespeare takes his argument to its ultimate conclusion by explaining that even after an enchanted object has been attained, it is not “bliss” that follows but “woe” (11). Once conquered, that man, woman, material object, or entity which was once so desperately pursued becomes despised and hated. There is much truth to the old axiom that “People always what they cannot have.” This is why the things in our actual possession rarely provide any lasting sense of happiness or relief. Finally, the objects for which we lust, Shakespeare explains, are “Past reason” (6); they exist in an absurd realm of foolishness and insanity. Therefore, lust brings one to madness and thereby destroys the chief distinction between humanity and animals: reason. The ability to reason is vital to the human condition--part of that same human “spirit” Shakespeare venerates in his very first line. So, to desire and covet is to murder one's own vitality, one's own spirit, and one's own humanity. When we lust, we become like animals--beasts who cannot enjoy our conquests, even in victory. We have lost all reason and perspective, and we merely set our sights on a new object of desire and continue our mad, never-ending pursuit for happiness. (Word Count 390)
Work Cited
Shakespeare, William. “Sonnet 129.” The Norton Anthology of English Literature. edited by Stephen Greenblatt and M. H. Abrams. 9th ed., vol. B, Norton, 2018, pp. 154-69.
Example #2: Literary Analysis
Example #2: Literary Analysis
(Illustrated Text)
Illustrated Elements
Topic Sentence (TS): Bold Underlined Red Evidence (EV): Plain Blue In-text Citations (MLA): Bold Purple Analysis (AN): Italic Green
Evocative Meter in Shakespeare's "Sonnet 129"
In “Sonnet 129” William Shakespeare uses forced meter, evocative diction, and the fading distinction between humanity and beasts to illustrate the idea that humans go mad in the pursuit of--and eventually in the possession of--the objects they desire. Shakespeare's sonnet charges into motion with forced meter in its first line, “Th' expense of spirit in a waste of shame” (line 1). The syllables “th'” and “ex” rush together forming a line of iambic pentameter out of what would otherwise be eleven syllables of thought. Thus, from the poem's very inception, the reader feels a sense of eagerness and begins to anticipate the sonnet's larger theme of barbaric lust and desire. Next, the poet goes on to explain that until one achieves the object of his lust, he is “murderous,” “bloody,” “full of blame,” “rude,” “cruel,” and “savage” (lines 3-4). These highly suggestive words evoke images of Machiavellian-style brutality and reinforce the idea that when one covets, he becomes uncivilized and feral. He is willing to do anything--even beyond the boundaries of his own ethics--to attain the object of his affection. But Shakespeare takes his argument to its ultimate conclusion by explaining that even after an enchanted object has been attained, it is not “bliss” that follows but “woe” (line 11). Once conquered, that man, woman, material object, or entity which was once so desperately pursued becomes despised and hated. There is much truth to the old axiom that “People always what they cannot have.” This is why the things in our actual possession rarely provide any lasting sense of happiness or relief. Finally, the objects for which we lust, Shakespeare explains, are “Past reason” (line 6); they exist in an absurd realm of foolishness and insanity. Therefore, lust brings one to madness and thereby destroys the chief distinction between humanity and animals: reason. The ability to reason is vital to the human condition--part of that same human “spirit” Shakespeare venerates in his very first line. So, to desire and covet is to murder one's own vitality, one's own spirit, and one's own humanity. When we lust, we become like animals--beasts who cannot enjoy our conquests, even in victory. We have lost all reason and perspective, and we merely set our sights on a new object of desire and continue our mad, never-ending pursuit for happiness. (Word Count 390)
Work Cited
Shakespeare, William. “Sonnet 129.” The Norton Anthology of English Literature. edited by Stephen Greenblatt and M. H. Abrams. 9th ed., vol. B, Norton, 2018, pp. 154-69.
Text Structures
Text Structures
(Paragraph Organization Patterns)
Definition: Text Structures are common organizational patterns used to structure paragraphs and entire essays. For example, this paragraph development template above is a text structure called: Exemplification. Also known as methods of development, patterns of organization, and rhetorical structures, each of these templates serves a different purpose and is chosen based on a writer's rhetorical context, purpose, and needs.
Writing: Choose the right text structure to present information clearly and logically, ensuring the reader can understand the text, argument, or narrative.
Types: See Text Structures or visit the links below text structure paragraph templates & examples
Sequence/Chronological
Problem & Solution
Definition
Page updated
Report abuse