Research Paper

[Barnpreacher]

Can a research paper have an intro, 2 main points, and a conclusion? Or does the paper need to have three main points along with an intro and conclusion?

Thanks.

 

[Barnpreacher]

Come on, some of you seminary students or recent college grads, you know this answer. Help me out, please.

 

[Archlute]

If your two main points are sufficient to establish your thesis, and are well grounded with supporting arguments, then I don't see why not. Although, Dr. Clark will want to make certain that at least one section in that paper addresses arguments found in the secondary literature, and that preferably within the first two pages of your paper!

 

[Barnpreacher]

If your two main points are sufficient to establish your thesis, and are well grounded with supporting arguments, then I don't see why not. Although, Dr. Clark will want to make certain that at least one section in that paper addresses arguments found in the secondary literature, and that preferably within the first two pages of your paper!

Thanks, Adam. For some reason I was thinking that when I was in school you had to support your thesis with at least three main points. Thanks for clearing that up for me.

 

[toddpedlar]

Can a research paper have an intro, 2 main points, and a conclusion? Or does the paper need to have three main points along with an intro and conclusion?

Thanks.

Let's see... does a sermon need 3 main points, an intro, and a conclusion? The answer is the same - quality, not structure, is key.

 

[Barnpreacher]

Can a research paper have an intro, 2 main points, and a conclusion? Or does the paper need to have three main points along with an intro and conclusion?

Thanks.

Let's see... does a sermon need 3 main points, an intro, and a conclusion? The answer is the same - quality, not structure, is key.

I understand what you're saying, brother. Although there have been many times I have been preaching and I didn't make it past my intro and 1st point. I don't think that would fly with a research paper.

 

[weinhold]

If your two main points are sufficient to establish your thesis, and are well grounded with supporting arguments, then I don't see why not. Although, Dr. Clark will want to make certain that at least one section in that paper addresses arguments found in the secondary literature, and that preferably within the first two pages of your paper!

Agreed. The structure of your argument must fit the contingencies of your rhetorical situation. I find, however, that it is sometimes helpful to begin with a formula. Here are two for your convenience. One is rather common, the other I take from Scott Crider's excellent guide to academic writing, Office of Assertion.

Formula #1: The Five Paragraph Essay

A. Introduction - Broad generalization narrowing into your thesis.
B. Proof 1
C. Proof 2
D. Proof 3
E. Conclusion - Restatement of thesis opening into broader conjectures.

Formula #2: Classical Oration Model

A. Introduction
B. Statement of Circumstance (Background information required for your readers to understand the argument)
C. Outline of Proofs (A "roadmap" to the proofs of your argument)
D. Proof #1
E. Proof #2
F. Proof #3, etc.
G. Conclusion

All the Best! - PW

 

[weinhold]

Let's see... does a sermon need 3 main points, an intro, and a conclusion? The answer is the same - quality, not structure, is key.

I hope you will not consider it pedantry for me to assert that structural quality is actually an important component of an argument's final quality.