論題（テーゼ）の書き方

論証 / 政策論文：

[具体的な証拠]があるから、[誰]は[通常の代替案]ではなく[具体的な行動]をすべきである。

文学または資料の分析：

[テクスト]において、[著者]は[解釈]のために[Xをする]。それが重要なのは、[作品の読み方がどう変わるか]だからである。

研究論文（目的。授業用の論題ではない）：

本研究は、[集団]において[変数A]が[変数B]を[増加させる / 減少させる / 影響しない]かを検証する。理由は[このデザインが埋められるギャップ]である。

tells the reader how you will interpret the significance of the subject matter under discussion.

is a road map for the paper; in other words, it tells the reader what to expect from the rest of the paper.

directly answers the question asked of you. A thesis is an interpretation of a question or subject, not the subject itself. The subject, or topic, of an essay might be World War II or Moby Dick; a thesis must then offer a way to understand the war or the novel.

makes a claim that others might dispute.

is usually a single sentence near the beginning of your paper (most often, at the end of the first paragraph) that presents your argument to the reader.

Your thesis is the central claim in your essay—your main insight or idea about your source or topic.

A strong thesis is arguable, which means a thoughtful reader could disagree with it and therefore needs your careful analysis of the evidence to understand how you arrived at this claim.

You arrive at your thesis by examining and analyzing the evidence available to you, which might be text or other types of source material.

A strong thesis will be arguable rather than descriptive, and it will be the right scope for the essay you are writing.

Almost all of us—even if we don’t do it consciously—look early in an essay for a one- or two-sentence condensation of the argument or analysis that is to follow.

Almost all assignments, no matter how complicated, can be reduced to a single question.

Keep in mind that not all papers require thesis statements.

Makes an argumentative assertion about a topic; it states the conclusions that you have reached about your topic.

Makes a promise to the reader about the scope, purpose, and direction of your paper.

Is focused and specific enough to be “proven” within the boundaries of your paper.

Is generally located near the end of the introduction; sometimes, in a long paper, the thesis will be expressed in several sentences or in an entire paragraph.

Every paper requires one. Assignments that ask you to write personal responses or to explore a subject don’t want you to seem to pre-judge the issues. Essays of literary interpretation often want you to be aware of many effects rather than seeming to box yourself into one view of the text.

A thesis statement must come at the end of the first paragraph. This is a natural position for a statement of focus, but it’s not the only one. Some theses can be stated in the opening sentences of an essay; others need a paragraph or two of introduction; others can’t be fully formulated until the end.

A thesis statement must be one sentence in length, no matter how many clauses it contains. Clear writing is more important than rules like these. Use two or three sentences if you need them. A complex argument may require a whole tightly-knit paragraph to make its initial statement of position.

You can’t start writing an essay until you have a perfect thesis statement. It may be advisable to draft a hypothesis or tentative thesis statement near the start of a big project, but changing and refining a thesis is a main task of thinking your way through your ideas as you write a paper. And some essay projects need to explore the question in depth without being locked in before they can provide even a tentative answer.

A thesis statement must give three points of support. It should indicate that the essay will explain and give evidence for its assertion, but points don’t need to come in any specific number.

A thesis statement is a sentence that makes an assertion about a topic and predicts how the topic will be developed. It does not simply announce a topic: it says something about the topic.

UWの予告（悪い）対主張（良い）：

Good: X has made a significant impact on the teenage population due to its . . . Bad: In this paper, I will discuss X.

A purpose statement announces the purpose, scope, and direction of the paper. It tells the reader what to expect in a paper and what the specific focus will be.

“This paper examines . . .,” “The aim of this paper is to . . .,” and “The purpose of this essay is to . . .”

UWの目的文（Sahelの教育例）：

This paper will examine the ecological destruction of the Sahel preceding the drought and the causes of this disintegration of the land. The focus will be on the economic, political, and social relationships which brought about the environmental problems in the Sahel.

Do I answer the question?

Have I taken a position that others might challenge or oppose?

Is my thesis statement specific enough?

Does my thesis pass the “So what?” test?

Does my essay support my thesis specifically and without wandering?

Does my thesis pass the “how and why?” test?

Is the thesis truly arguable? Does it speak to a genuine dilemma in the source, or would most readers automatically agree with it?

Is the thesis too obvious? Again, would most or all readers agree with it without needing to see your argument?

Is the thesis complex enough to require a whole essay's worth of argument?

Is the thesis supportable with evidence from the text rather than with generalizations or outside research?

Would anyone want to read a paper in which this thesis was developed? That is, can you explain what this paper is adding to our understanding of a problem, question, or topic?

Social media impacts public awareness in both positive and negative ways.

Because not every voice on social media is reliable, people have become much more critical consumers of information, and thus, more informed voters.

論題ではない（鑑賞）：

Mark Twain’s Huckleberry Finn is a great American novel.

観察。まだ異論の余地が足りない：

In Huckleberry Finn, Mark Twain develops a contrast between life on the river and life on the shore.

論題（その対比の解釈）：

Through its contrasting river and shore scenes, Twain’s Huckleberry Finn suggests that to find the true expression of American democratic ideals, one must leave “civilized” society and go back to nature.

記述的（異論の余地なし）：

While Sandel argues that pursuing perfection through genetic engineering would decrease our sense of humility, he claims that the sense of solidarity we would lose is also important.

広すぎる（異論の余地はあるが支えにくい）：

Michael Sandel’s arguments about genetic engineering do not take into consideration all the relevant issues.

異論の余地のある分析的主張：

While Sandel argues persuasively that our instinct to “remake” (54) ourselves into something ever more perfect is a problem, his belief that we can always draw a line between what is medically necessary and what makes us simply “better than well” (51) is less convincing.

異論の余地のある規範的主張：

Given Sandel’s argument against genetic enhancement, we should not allow parents to decide on using Human Growth Hormone for their children.

An analytical paper breaks down an issue or an idea into its component parts, evaluates the issue or idea, and presents this breakdown and evaluation to the audience.

OWLの分析的論題：

An analysis of the college admission process reveals one challenge facing counselors: accepting students with high test scores or students with strong extracurricular backgrounds.

An expository (explanatory) paper explains something to the audience.

OWLの説明的論題：

The life of the typical college student is characterized by time spent studying, attending class, and socializing with peers.

An argumentative paper makes a claim about a topic and justifies this claim with specific evidence. The claim could be an opinion, a policy proposal, an evaluation, a cause-and-effect statement, or an interpretation.

OWLの論証的論題：

High school graduates should be required to take a year off to pursue community service projects before entering college in order to increase their maturity and global awareness.

The thesis statement or main claim must be debatable

議論不可能（論題ではない）：

Pollution is bad for the environment.

議論可能：

At least 25 percent of the federal budget should be spent on limiting pollution.

これも議論可能：

America's anti-pollution efforts should focus on privately owned cars.

広すぎる：

Drug use is detrimental to society.

より狭い：

Illegal drug use is detrimental because it encourages gang violence.

事実または定義：

While some pundits have framed a four-year college education as something necessary for adult success, this notion should not be treated as a given.

因果：

Federal student loan policies have contributed to widespread growth in college tuition.

価値：

The student debt crisis is one of the most serious problems facing the country today.

解決策または政策：

Rather than encouraging all students to attend four-year colleges, we should instead emphasize the validity of two-year colleges, technical schools, and trade schools as well.

トピック。論題ではない：

Sugar consumption.

より狭いトピック。まだ主張なし：

Reducing sugar consumption by elementary school children.

曖昧な立場：

More attention should be paid to the food and beverage choices available to elementary school children.

具体的な事実。まだ論題ではない：

Experts estimate that half of elementary school children consume nine times the recommended daily allowance of sugar.

論題（主張プラス支え）：

Because half of all American elementary school children consume nine times the recommended daily allowance of sugar, schools should be required to replace the beverages in soda machines with healthy alternatives.

弱い（立場なし。教室用製品）：

There are some negative and positive aspects to the Banana Herb Tea Supplement.

強い（立場 + メカニズム）：

Because Banana Herb Tea Supplement promotes rapid weight loss that results in the loss of muscle and lean body mass, it poses a potential danger to customers.

弱い（観察だけ）：

My family is an extended family.

強い（経験対広く受け入れられた見方）：

While most American families would view consanguineal marriage as a threat to the nuclear family structure, many Iranian families, like my own, believe that these marriages help reinforce kinship ties in an extended family.

弱い（結びつかない二つの考え）：

Companies need to exploit the marketing potential of the Internet, and Web pages can provide both advertising and customer support.

強い（二つ目の考えが一つ目に仕える）：

Because the Internet is filled with tremendous marketing potential, companies should exploit this potential by using Web pages that offer both advertising and customer support.

陳腐：

Shakespeare was the world’s greatest playwright.

興味を引く：

The success of the last scene in Midsummer Night’s Dream comes from subtle linguistic and theatrical references to Elizabeth’s position as queen.

予告 + 評決：

This essay will show that the North American Free Trade agreement was a disaster for the Canadian furniture industry.

主張 + 方法 + 年代：

Neither neo-protectionism nor post-industrial theory explains the steep reversal of fortune for the Canadian furniture industry in the period 1988-1994. Data on productivity, profits, and employment, however, can be closely correlated with provisions of the North American Free Trade Agreement that took effect in the same period.

大雑把で曖昧：

Having an official policy on euthanasia just causes problems, as the Dutch example shows.

適切に複雑（Torontoの文言。「Hamarckian」を含む）：

Dutch laws on euthanasia have been rightly praised for their attention to the principles of self-determination. Recent cases, however, show that they have not been able to deal adequately with issues involving technological intervention of unconscious patients. Hamarckian strategies can solve at least the question of assignation of rights.

The goal of this paper is to examine the effects of Chile’s agrarian reform on the lives of rural peasants. The nature of the topic dictates the use of both a chronological and a comparative analysis of peasant lives at various points during the reform period. . . The Chilean reform example provides evidence that land distribution is an essential component of both the improvement of peasant conditions and the development of a democratic society. More extensive and enduring reforms would likely have allowed Chile the opportunity to further expand these horizons.

広すぎる：

World hunger has many causes and effects.

IUの教育例（架空の国）：

Hunger persists in Glandelinia because jobs are scarce and farming in the infertile soil is rarely profitable.

弱い（andで結ばれた二つの主たる考え）：

Healthcare reform must be addressed because so many Americans are uninsured or without adequate coverage, and politicians must work together to ensure new legislation is passed.

強い（一つの考え）：

Politicians must work together to reform healthcare because too many Americans are without sufficient coverage.

Banning cigarette smoking in public places is an effective intervention to improve the public’s health by helping to reduce the dangers of second-hand smoke on non-smokers, encouraging current smokers to quit, and reducing healthcare costs.

• OWLの論文の種類（分析的、説明的、論証的）に一致している
• 課題が実際に尋ねた問いに答えている（UNC）
• 思慮ある読者が異論を唱えられる（Harvard / UNC / OWLの「debatable」）
• 解釈であり、トピック名ではない（UNCのWorld War II / Moby Dick判定）
• このページ数で証明できるほど具体である（Indiana / OWLの「narrow」）
• 一つの主たる考えを表し、結びつかない二つの主張ではない（Indiana / Purdue Global）
• 「so what?」と「how and why?」を通る（UNC）
• 予告、問い、または事実ではない（Toronto / Indiana / UW / OWL）
• 必須の三点リストではない（Toronto）
• 本文の各セクションがその一片を稼いでいる（UNC）
• 下書きのあと、文がなお論文と一致する（UNC / OWL tip 4）
• IMRaD論文なら、代わりに目的または仮説を書いた（UW–Madison）