Methods of writing a conclusion
Summarize
Restate the main points made in the body paragraphs.
Ex. Television violence is a problem that isn’t going to just go away. History has shown that.
From its very beginning, violence has captured the attention of the viewer, given him
entertainment, and provided an outlet for stress. These may be valid reasons for keeping it on,
but the negative effects are part of the price. Whether viewers are imitating violent behavior or
just becoming desensitized to it, the impact is great. Unless parents, city councils, and the federal
government take measures, this problem is just going to become worse.
Use a quotation
Find a quotation that captures the general theme of your paper and wraps it up nicely
Ex. Society can only hope a solution is inevitable. If this is not the case, television will
become, in the words of Marshall McLuen, “a vast wasteland” (Quotepage). conclusion
continues . . .
Discuss the future
Project ideas about your topic in terms of what might happen if the issue is/isn’t addressed.
Ex. Back in 1972, television censors where much more lenient than they are today. This would
account for the graphic depiction of rapes and murders. However, this has started to come back
into programming. Shows that go for realism, like NYPD Blues and ER, may seem realistic, but
they are for escapism, not a constant reminder of the quality of our social setting. It is projected
that in the next five years, there will be the capability to accommodate five hundred television
channels. In 1972, there were only four or five, and censors had their hands full. Multiply that
by one hundred, and it becomes apparent that there is a mess for which society is headed.
General Ideas:
1. Make sure all of the information in the conclusion is relevant to what you have proven in
your paper.
2. DO NOT include new ideas (such as main paragraph topics, theme, etc.—topics that were
not in your body paragraphs). You may include new information to support established
topics.
3. DO NOT use phrases such as: “In conclusion”, “I hope you learned as much as I did
from this paper”, “In this paper”, etc.
4. A good order for your conclusion:
a. Transition out of the last body paragraph—(Make that final jump)
b. Restate the thesis directly or refer to it in different words
c. Summarize the main points of all of the body paragraphs
d. End with something distinctive (fact/remark/etc.) the reader will remember (a
clincher)—but make sure it ties to your paper (not random)
Student Examples:
Student A: (GOOD) Thesis/Preview-- (Stats with a reference to a Colorado wildfire) William
Shakespeare vividly tells of intentions foiled by circumstances through dramatic acts of murder.
Shakespeare uses a technique of situational specifications shaping actions to produce remarkable
tragedy by way of murder.
Body Paragraph focus: 1. murder of Polonius by Hamlet 2. Rosencrantz and Guildenstern’s
execution 3. Laertes’ scheme to kill Hamlet
Conclusion: Finally, when all the foiled plots and tragic murders are compiled, the tragedy
contrasts and compliments, thus creating a beautiful cloche of action. When seen from a larger
perspective one can finally appreciate the immensity of it all, this is Tragedy of Hamlet Prince of
Denmark. In this vividly told play, William Shakespeare tells of foiled intentions and their
manifestations of misfortune. The murder of Polonius happened because Hamlet’s plot to avenge
his father’s death failed. Hamlet was to kill Claudius, but because of the arras, Polonius was
killed. The wall tapestry foiled Hamlet’s plot. In addition, Rosencrantz and Guildenstern’s plan
to diligently follow the king’s orders was thwarted by their own betrayal of Hamlet. Thusly,
Hamlet exploited their simple-minds and sent them to their own execution. Laertes as well had
his own mischance. He was foiled by his own poisoned foil. It is evident that Shakespeare’s
foiled intent method of tragedy works effectively and has stood the test of time. Nature seems to
lose its sense of time amongst its randomness and preciseness. In the forest a sapling, not a
couple inches high is evident against the charred remains of the forest. Its hope and desire to live
enlightens the blackness around it. Nothing should grow there for several years still. This is the
area of the hottest fire and all has been sanitized. Against intention, a sapling is growing,
showing that actions really are shaped by the environment: not intention.
Commentary: This conclusion is very solid with its structure and language. It transitions
quickly out of the final paragraph and into a mild restatement of the thesis. This is followed by a
quick summarization of body paragraphs and is finalized with a reference to wildfires-a topic that
was used to introduce the paper. This style allows for closure.
Student B (Needs major work):
Conclusion: Hamlet is a deeper play than it appears on the surface. It foils readers and critics
alike, for Shakespeare in all his genius utilized subtlety to create one of the most deep and
complex tragedies ever. This essay only scratched a bit beneath the surface. Ultimately,
appearance covers up reality on many levels. Sane or insane? Indecisive or idealistic? Beneath
all of these questions lies the theme of societal pressure. What is the right balance?
Commentary: Well, where do we start? The first aspect to mention is that this conclusion
comes from a five page paper. Parallel paragraph structure is important; this paragraph does not
do justice-in fact, this commentary is longer than this author’s conclusion is. Next is content: one
area being the lack of relation to the established thesis (uncertainty of insanity), and another being
a lack of general reference to constructed ideas in each paragraph. Without this, the paper is not
tied together in an effective manner. Finally, there is an [italicized] reference that the author
makes about the essay. This is not proper practice of voice and actually takes away from the
credibility of the essay because the conclusion starts with a general reference to Hamlet being a
deep/complex play. If the author can barely scratch the surface, then is he/she competent in
understanding, or is his/her research not up to par? The reader can make their own judgment.