Structuring an argument

Build an argument map and an outline in which every section and paragraph does a clear job for your thesis.

Do this first

Write your working thesis at the top of a page. Underneath, list three reasons it holds, the main evidence for each, and the strongest objection a sceptical reader would raise. That page is the first version of your argument map.

Steps

0 of 6 steps done

Map the argument
Put your thesis in a box, then draw the reasons that support it, the evidence under each reason, and the main objection with your response. Paper or sticky notes work as well as software. Gaps show up at once: a reason with no evidence, or evidence that supports nothing.
Choose an order with a logic
Order reasons so each builds on the last: background before interpretation, simpler before more complex, or the sequence in which a process happens. Place the main objection where readers would naturally raise it, often after your core case. If you could swap two sections without loss, the order is not yet doing any work.
Outline in claims, not labels
Write each planned paragraph or section as a full-sentence claim: “Tariffs raised costs more for small importers than for large ones”, not “Tariffs”. These sentences become your topic sentences. Read them in order; together they should summarise the whole argument.
Build paragraphs as claim, evidence, analysis, link
Open with the claim (the topic sentence), present the evidence (data, quotation, example or source), analyse it by explaining how it supports the claim, then link back to the thesis or forward to the next point. Analysis is usually the longest part and the part most often missing. Aim for one main claim per paragraph; if you find two, split it.
Use the structure your genre expects
Many essays follow introduction, body and conclusion; empirical papers often use IMRaD (Introduction, Methods, Results and Discussion); theses and dissertations add a literature review and chapter-level arguments. Look at a model from your department or target journal before outlining. Each section still needs a clear claim it contributes to the whole.
Signpost the route
Tell readers in the introduction how the argument will unfold. Use transitions that state logical relations (however, therefore, as a result) rather than mere sequence (also, next, another). In longer documents, headings that state the point of each section help readers who skim.

Templates

Argument map (text version)

Thesis: [your main claim]

Reason 1: [claim]
  Evidence: [data, quotation, example or source]
  How it supports the thesis: [your analysis]
Reason 2: [claim]
  Evidence: [evidence]
  How it supports the thesis: [analysis]
Reason 3: [claim]
  Evidence: [evidence]
  How it supports the thesis: [analysis]

Objection: [strongest counterargument]
Response: [concede, limit or rebut, with evidence]

Paragraph frame: claim, evidence, analysis, link

Claim: [Topic sentence stating what this paragraph shows.]
Evidence: According to [source], [quotation, paraphrase or data] ([citation]).
Analysis: This suggests [interpretation] because [reasoning]. [What the evidence reveals that is not obvious.]
Link: This supports [part of thesis] and leads to [next point].

Topic sentence starters

[Factor, case or example] matters because [claim].
Although [opposing view], [your claim].
A second reason [thesis claim] holds is that [claim].
[Finding or text] complicates the view that [view] by [how].

Check your draft

0 of 7 done

Can I draw my argument as thesis, reasons, evidence and objection on one page?
Does every section or paragraph support a specific part of the thesis?
Is each topic sentence a claim rather than a topic or a bare fact?
Read alone and in order, do my topic sentences summarise the argument?
Does each paragraph explain its evidence, rather than just presenting it?
Have I addressed at least one serious counterargument or limitation?
Would swapping any two sections weaken the logic?

In your field

Papers usually follow IMRaD, so the argument lives mainly in the introduction (gap and aim) and the discussion. A common discussion structure is: main finding, comparison with earlier studies, explanations, limitations, then implications.

Common mistakes

Organising by source (one paragraph per article) instead of by claim, which produces summary rather than argument.
Writing topic sentences that state a fact or topic (“The study surveyed 200 nurses”) instead of a claim.
Presenting evidence without analysis, so the reader has to guess why it matters.
Ignoring counterarguments, which makes an argument look unaware rather than confident.
Linking every paragraph with “also” or “another”, which hides how the points relate.

Go further

UNC Writing Center: ArgumentWhat counts as an argument in academic writing, with advice on claims, evidence and counterarguments.
Harvard College Writing Center: Anatomy of a body paragraphA worked example of a paragraph built from topic sentence, evidence and analysis.
UNC Writing Center: ParagraphsHow to plan, develop and organise paragraphs, including a step-by-step method.
Harvard College Writing Center: Tips for organising your essayBreaking a thesis into sections, using subheadings and checking the structure of longer essays.