The introduction of your research paper is arguably its most important part. In the introduction, you tell your readers what your paper argues and why it is important. You also direct your readers’ attention to what they should be looking for they read the paper. It is thus incredibly important! You should work very hard on making your introduction a solid piece of writing. You should work harder on your intro than on anything else. (See guidelines below for introductions).
But of course to write a good introduction, you have to know what you are arguing – you have to know your thesis. Thus by the time this assignment comes due, you should have developed a clear idea of your thesis. It will probably not be the last word on your thesis – undoubtedly you will revise it based on my comments and those of your peers, as well as your own rethinking of your ideas. But you need to have a good idea of where you would like to go.
This means by November
2, you should already have made significant progress on your research
paper, or else you are painfully if not inescapably behind.
What we will do:
For this particular assignment, you must email me your draft introduction by 4pm on Friday, November 2. I will then circulate all the introductions to the class via email. (As for the email, a simple Microsoft Word attachment is preferred.) Before class on Monday (Nov. 5), you should read all the introductions written by your classmates, and come prepared to discuss them. Please do remember the course rule: no late assignments are accepted. So meet the time deadline. And preferably, get it in early.
Peer review:
When our class meets on the 5th, we will discuss all the introductions as a class. Each person will be charged with beginning the discussion of one of the introductions written by another student. Thus, you will also be assigned to comment on an introduction written by one of your peers. Your task will be to help your friend write a better, stronger introduction. You will be asked to speak for about 5 minutes on your partner’s introduction. In this presentation, you should:
Principles of Introductions:
Many historians have different ideas of what a good introduction should do or what it should contain, but here is how I envision a solid introduction:
Length: Length will vary, but you want to strike a balance between an introduction that is too short and does not explain its argument fully, and an introduction which is too long, or dwarfed by unnecessary background information, or redundant. As a general rule only, I would recommend thinking of your intro as having 3-4 paragraphs, about 1-2 pages. Think of the following as a guide:
1. Introductory “hook”
and summary of your thesis.
Usually it is a good idea to begin your paper with an illustrative anecdote, or compelling introductory concept. Perhaps recount a speech, describe a picture/cartoon/advertisement, highlight an incident, etc. THEN, use that illustration to introduce your topic. E.g. “This ___ illustrates the broader problem of ____.” And conclude this first paragraph with a short one-sentence version of your thesis.
You do not usually want to go into a lengthy summary of all the background information here. You certainly want to give the reader enough to go on so that they identify the basic issue, but you don’t want to retell the entire history here. For example, if you are writing on Emmett Till murder. You would want to begin with a “hook” that identifies the incident as a major and significant event in the history of African-American civil rights struggle, and include a sentence or two that reminds readers what happened (boy was brutally murdered and it became a national media event), but you don’t want to go into all the details here (the circumstances surrounding the murder, the trial, etc.). That you will do later, if necessary. Here you are setting the stage and specifying your argument. Generally, this kind of background narrative will appear after the introduction identifies the main thesis of your paper.
2. Discussion of “the
problem” and “methodology”:
Here is where you go into detail on what the existing issue is, and where others who have written on it stand. You explain how other historians have interpreted this issue, and suggest how your explanation differs. E.g. “David Halberstam explains Truman’s firing of MacArthur in such and such a way, and some other historians explain it another way, but I explain it this way.”
You may also hear clarify the precise scope of your essay by identifying the methodology, chronology, etc. that informed your research. So, for example, if you chose to write an essay on how the press responded to news of the Soviet atomic bomb, you might explain such things as: (1) that you are focusing on press reactions to this event, not on other questions like how they developed an A-bomb; (2) that you have used such and such newspapers, and list them, and state why they are revealing. Or, if you are writing on Eisenhower’s views on nuclear weapons during the 1953-1954, you would identify and defend your decision to focus only on this one year (e.g. “I am looking at Eisenhower’s view on nuclear weapons from 1953-1954, because during the crucial first year of his presidency he established important precedents that would come influence his policies throughout his presidency.”
3. Elaboration of thesis, or “thesis paragraph”:
Here you explain in full the main principles of your
argument. You want to lay everything out
as comprehensively as you can. Do not
leave your readers in suspense! For
example, do not say, “In this paper I will discuss why Truman fired
MacArthur…” Instead, say
“In this essay I argue that Truman fired MacArthur because of
___.” Then explain exactly why it is you think so. In the body of your paper, you will present
the evidence to prove this thesis. But for now, you need to let your readers
know what you are going to prove, and why.
Miscellaneous Notes:
A note on using “First Person”: You may use first person in writing such
an introduction, but it is often preferable to try and do without it if you can
manage. E.g. Instead of saying “I
argue __.” Say, “This essay
argues ____.” Or, better yet,
state your argument directly: “Although most historians think Truman
fired MacArthur because of the ludicrous military strategies he advocated in
A note on defining “essay structure”: Sometimes it is desirable to divide your essay into sections and to let your reader know what to expect. For example, “In the first part of my essay, I focus on the background of the Emmett Till murder … In part 2 I focus on the trial … And in part 3 I focus on how the national news media responded to the event…” This can be useful because it tells your readers what to expect as they plow through your twenty page masterpiece. It lets readers know what you and do not talk about, and it helps provide guidance to your organization. However!!! You should not use such an explanation as a substitute for your thesis! You must still elaborate and say exactly what your essay argues in the pages that are forthcoming. Again, do not lead your readers in suspense! Show them the money right up front.
Return to K.
Osgood’s Home Page