What do you need to attend to your article’s structure?
Usually there are two levels of your articles structure, according to Wendy Belcher’s Writing Your Journal Article in 12 Weeks (2019)
Macrostructure: the outline of the article/coherence
- Macrostructure is the superstructure, the overarching meaning working down through the entire article to organize it, with argument being the main organizing principle. You have a coherent macrostructure when each section, subsection, and paragraph of your article is organized argumentatively into an overall logical structure.
Microstructure: diagrams of the articles’ paragraphs and sentences /cohesion
- Microstructure is the focused meaning working up from the paragraph and sentence level, with clarity as the organizing principle. You have a cohesive microstructure when each sentence is clear and grammatical, leads logically to the next sentence, and adds up to a paragraph that has a unifying concept and hangs together.
Part A: Overall Argument and Structure
In academic settings, there are several kinds of arguments. Nearly all of them focus between a previous scholar/body of work and you. Arguments are about establishing and creating a space for research by thinking about your present study’s relationship with previous work. Visually, you might think about it like this:
You make arguments at the Macro level about the broader field as well as the micro level about specific issues that you address.
At the macro level, arguments are usually made at the beginning and ending of sections or chapters. At the micro level, they are usually made at the beginning and ending of paragraphs (see part B).
What often happens is that students create arguments that are either A) not explicit enough or B) not in their own words.
Example of argument paragraph from Laura Shubert’s dissertation (lit review, pg 15):
GAP: Current literature in composition does not study the connection between students’ mindsets and their writing. Although psychologists have explored how mindsets influence students' performance in fields that many students perceive as difficult, such as mathematics (Blackwell, Trzesniewski, & Dweck, 2007) and foreign language learning (Mercer & Ryan, 2010), only one published study has examined how students' mindsets affect their writing (Limpo & Alves, 2014). GAP: Research such as the study presented here is needed because understanding the connection between mindsets and writing can inform and influence compositionists' pedagogical practices, tutor education materials, and writing across the curriculum initiatives, among other potential implications. CONTRIBUTION: Therefore, this study helps writing center practitioners and compositionists understand how students’ mindsets affect them as writers. Additionally, the study investigates meaningful tutoring outcomes (i.e., mindset changes), which would allow writing center practitioners to demonstrate that tutors do more than improve students’ grades and retention rates.
Part B: Topic Sentences and Argument Building Sentences in Paragraphs
Now we will look at how arguments are built, step by step, through individual paragraphs. Let’s look at two such paragraphs.
Sample Paragraph A:
Straub’s (1997) study found that students preferred positive, explicit response from teachers, which motivated them to revise. Straub suggested that all responses from teachers be framed as positively as possible to improve written success. Several other studies found that FYC students also reacted positively when receiving praise (Daiker,1989; Smith 1989; Tregalia, 2008). Adding to this conversation of positive reactions to praise, O’Neil and Fife (2006) found that individual college level writing students processed written response based on a range of criteria including: previous experiences with comments, teacher ethos, and how teachers taught response. Furthermore, Callahan (2000) discovered that English Education students with particular Myers-Briggs personality types responded to teacher response on reflective writing better than other students.
Sample Paragraph B (revisions in bold):
Limited research in Composition has explored how students in various courses and at various levels react to teacher’s response to their writing. Straub’s (1997) study found that students in first-year writing courses at one university preferred positive, explicit response from teachers, which motivated them to revise. Straub suggested that all responses from teachers be framed as positively as possible to improve written success. Several other studies found that FYC students also reacted positively when receiving praise (Daiker,1989; Smith 1989; Tregalia, 2008). Adding to this conversation of positive reactions to praise, O’Neil and Fife (2006) found that individual college second language writing students processed written response based on a range of criteria including: previous experiences with comments, teacher ethos, and how teachers taught response. These studies, suggest that not only do certain kinds of responses elicit different reactions—and revision processes—but also that teachers have a role in how students read and use response. However, these studies studied mainstream first-year writing students, and did not address second language writers’ needs. The proposed study, therefore, seeks to develop a “response” intervention that helps language students better understand the nature and purpose of response in multi-lingual writing courses.
Principles
- Each paragraph should clearly indicate (in general terms and in plain English) the overall topic of the paragraph. This is the paragraph’s topic sentence (see first sentence, paragraph B). Including these aids the reader in your overall argument and is an organizational tool to keep you on topic.
- Each paragraph should have one central or controlling idea (the topic sentence). Each paragraph should be a synthesis of multiple studies unless one study is very, very important—it warrants its own treatment in the literature review.
- Conclude the paragraph with a summary sentence that builds your argument and furthers your own work. This can be a general statement about the nature of the research but one that is in line with your own study goals (paragraph B)
- Synthesis and arguments should be in your own words and with your own voice. Don’t let others do the talking for you!
- For certain paragraphs (but not all), usually the paragraphs that come at the end of a section, include a final sentence that shows the direct relationship of your study to the previous research (paragraph B).