DEVELOPING AN ARGUMENTATIVE THESIS
An argumentative essay presents an argument about something. Thesis-driven essays are most
common in the Humanities and some Social Sciences. An argumentative textual analysis essay will
present a claim about how the ways a text presents its ideas are significant to the ideas themselves,
how the presentation affects our understanding of the text’s ideas about the world. For a position
paper, your essay will present a claim about the world itself, either as it is, or as it should be.
General Tips
A strong argumentative thesis usually has three elements:
 general summary of evidence (what sorts of data you’ll use to develop your argument)
 assertion (what you’re arguing about the effects of the evidence)
 larger context or significance (your argument’s importance for the larger conversation)
These three elements provide a “road map” for your paper—your reader should know where the
paper is going (rough organization, type of examples, etc.), just by reading your thesis.
An argumentative thesis should promote meaningful disagreement; that is, your reader should not
automatically agree with you before reading your excellently analyzed proof. For textual analysis,
this means the thesis should say something arguable and specific about the text’s message; if you
can “prove” your thesis by summarizing the plot or the author’s explicit argument, your thesis is
neither arguable nor specific. For a position paper, this means the thesis should say something
arguable and specific about the way the world works; if you can “prove” your thesis by
summarizing data, or if most people would nod and say, “Yes, that’s true; so what?” your thesis is
neither arguable nor specific.
Avoid content-free theses. Your thesis should be specific to the material you’re working on; if you
could substitute different examples and still prove the same thesis, work to tie your thesis more
closely to the specific issues or text(s) it addresses.
Avoid a “list-y” thesis (“A, B, and C together prove alakazaam.”) by laying out the summary of
evidence in your introduction, and tying it to your assertion and “so what” in a sentence or two at
the end of the paragraph.
Tailor the scope of your thesis to the length of your paper. Consider how much page real estate you
want to dedicate to each step of proving your argument, how long an academic paragraph usually is
(about two-thirds to three-fourths of a page, double-spaced), and how much ground you can
reasonably cover in a single paragraph.
Embrace the complex thesis. It’s okay (and often more interesting) to argue that a text doesn’t
clearly take a side on a particular issue; or that a particular passage in the text generates ambiguity;
or that there are grey areas of an issue; or that in some specific cases, one thing is true, and in other
specific cases, something else applies; neither texts nor the world consistently give us neat answers.
If multiple data points present the same idea in similar ways, the context of each one likely provides
some nuance, and dealing with subtle differences between two similar examples can lead to useful
insights. The more specific you can be in laying out your thesis, the easier it will be to develop and
organize your analysis; consider whether your thesis has components that can each be proven to
contribute to the big picture of your argument.
Kathryn Tucker, Ph.D.
Textual Analysis Tips
Use your thesis to assert something about the text’s meaning or contribution to the larger
conversation; how does your analysis of the text reveal something about the importance of the text
for discussions of the issues it addresses? Alternatively, assert how your analysis of the text reveals
something new and important for broader scholarship of the text; how have others talked about this
text, and how does your understanding of it change the conversation (this version requires some
acknowledgement of other scholars’ work on the text in your essay)?
When analyzing persuasive writing, avoid framing your thesis in terms of readers' responses to the
text, as it is not possible to prove readers actually respond in any particular way. When analyzing
creative writing (fiction or nonfiction), avoid assertions that will lead to interpretive plot summary,
especially assertions about characters’ motivations; these assertions may be useful in proving your
thesis, but are usually not enough for a thesis themselves.
Examples from Student Writing
“In the final moments of both Noises Off and Nothing On, chaos has taken over the actors, and with
the entire cast of Noises Off making their way onto the stage, both the cast and crew of Nothing On
must work together to restore order and raise their fallen director in a moment of great humor and
great collaboration. ... Noises Off, however, manages to reconcile these two seemingly contradictory
objectives, laughter and harmony, by achieving both. In the play, because the harmony is brought to
life by failure, the two work together in the humorous and harmonious ends of both Nothing On and
Noises Off.”
--Jody Goldberg, “Laughter in Nothing On, Harmony in Noises Off”; Sands Award Winner 2008
“In the cases of Rowling, Stoker, and Poe, the fear of animals has been extended beyond the
human’s primal instinct of bodily preservation. The animals that these authors utilize do not
necessarily serve as aggressors, but instead as symbols or manifestations of the negative human
qualities that they represent. ... The animals that represent fear in supernatural literature are
effective because they personify human qualities that reflect the characters’ own faults back to
them; these creatures become terrifying because of the depravity and darkness that they reveal, not
in the animal world, but in the human one.”
--Annika Anderson, “Creatures in the Looking Glass: Origins of Animal Dread in Literature”;
Sands Award Winner 2011
“Resistance to Hellenization during the late Roman republic focused on countering the perceived
corrupting effects of Greek culture. However, resistance failed to stamp out the strong desire for
Greek sophistication. Rome’s interest in the integrity of the Republic, on the one hand, and its
desire for acculturation, on the other, led to a dualistic approach to the Greeks where the people and
their virtues were scorned, yet the trappings of civilization were largely tolerated.”
–Alex Krimkevich, “Saving the State: Roman Resistance to Greek Influence”; Boothe Prize
Winner Spring 2007