Introduction and conclusion

Intuition [Beginner]

The introduction and conclusion are the most-read and least-written-well parts of most essays. The introduction either pulls the reader in or loses them. The conclusion either leaves a lasting impression or trails off. Both deserve more attention than they typically get.

The introduction has three jobs:

1. Get the reader's attention (the hook).
2. Provide necessary context or background.
3. State the thesis.

The standard pattern is the funnel: start broad, narrow down, end with the thesis. Open with something that makes the reader want to keep reading -- a surprising fact, a provocative question, a vivid anecdote, a bold claim. Then provide enough background so the reader can follow the argument. Then state the thesis.

The conclusion does NOT just restate the introduction. Its jobs:

1. Remind the reader of the argument's core point (but not by copying the thesis word for word).
2. Show why the argument matters -- the "so what?"
3. Leave the reader with something to think about.

Good conclusions do one or more of the following: point to implications, call the reader to action, suggest further questions, or return to the opening hook (creating a satisfying circular structure).

Things to avoid in introductions:

• "In this essay I will..." (Announce the topic; do not describe the essay.)
• "Since the dawn of time..." (Vague, overblown openings.)
• "Webster's dictionary defines X as..." (Padding, not a hook.)

Things to avoid in conclusions:

• Introducing new evidence or arguments. If it matters, it belongs in the body.
• "In conclusion..." (The reader can see it is the last paragraph.)
• Simply restating the thesis verbatim. The reader just read the whole essay; they do not need a photocopy of the first paragraph.

Visual [Beginner]

Introduction funnel:

  Broad opening (hook)
       |
  Context / background
       |
  Narrow to specific topic
       |
  Thesis statement (typically last sentence)


  Hook strategies:
  +----------------------------------------------------------+
  | Surprising fact:  "The average American spends 11 hours   |
  |                    per day looking at screens."            |
  |                                                           |
  | Vivid anecdote:   "When Maria Gonzales opened her         |
  |                    electricity bill in January, the        |
  |                    number was three times what she         |
  |                    expected."                              |
  |                                                           |
  | Provocative claim: "Standardized testing does not         |
  |                    measure learning; it measures           |
  |                    socioeconomic status."                  |
  |                                                           |
  | Question:         "What would happen if every student     |
  |                    in America had access to the same       |
  |                    quality of education?"                  |
  +----------------------------------------------------------+


Conclusion strategies:

  Implication:    "If this trend continues, X will happen."
  Call to action: "The data demands a policy response."
  Further question: "This raises the question of whether Y."
  Return to hook:  Close by circling back to the opening.
  Synthesis:      Show how the argument's parts fit together.

Worked example [Beginner]

Example 1: Funnel introduction

Hook: In 1969, the Cuyahoga River in Ohio caught fire. Not a metaphorical fire -- the river, thick with industrial waste, literally burned for thirty minutes.

Context: The Cuyahoga fire became a symbol of the environmental degradation that prompted the creation of the Environmental Protection Agency and the passage of the Clean Water Act. For decades, these regulations reduced water pollution across the United States.

Thesis: Today, however, a new category of water contamination -- per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances, or PFAS -- threatens to undo much of that progress, and current regulations are not equipped to address it.

The opening is vivid and specific. The context bridges to the current situation. The thesis states a clear, arguable claim.

Example 2: Conclusion that returns to the hook

If the essay opened with the Cuyahoga River fire, the conclusion might close by referencing it: The Cuyahoga does not burn anymore. The river that once made national news for catching fire now supports fish populations and attracts kayakers. But the PFAS crisis shows that the fight for clean water is never finished -- it simply takes new forms. The question is whether we will respond as decisively to this generation's contamination as the previous generation did to theirs.

Example 3: What NOT to do

Weak introduction: In this essay, I will talk about water pollution. Water pollution is a big problem. There are many types of water pollution. I will discuss PFAS. (Padding, no hook, announcement instead of engagement.)

Weak conclusion: In conclusion, PFAS is bad. As I have shown in this essay, PFAS causes many problems. We should do something about it. Thank you for reading. (Verbatim restatement, empty call to action, "in conclusion" flag.)

Example 4: Conclusion with implication

The regulation of PFAS will cost industry billions of dollars. The cost of not regulating it -- in increased cancer rates, contaminated water supplies, and degraded ecosystems -- will cost far more. The history of environmental regulation in the United States is a history of industries claiming that compliance will destroy them, followed by compliance that does not destroy them. The question is not whether we can afford to regulate PFAS. It is whether we can afford not to.

Check your understanding [Beginner]

Formal definition [Intermediate+]

The introduction is the opening section of an essay or article, typically one or more paragraphs, whose functions are to establish the topic, engage the reader, provide necessary context, and state the thesis. Its formal structure follows a funnel pattern: from broad (the general topic or hook) to narrow (the specific thesis).

Components of an effective introduction:

1. Hook: An opening sentence or sentences designed to capture the reader's attention. Effective hooks include surprising facts, vivid anecdotes, provocative claims, and resonant quotations. Ineffective hooks include dictionary definitions ("Webster's defines..."), vague generalizations ("Throughout history..."), and meta-commentary ("In this essay I will...").
2. Context / background: Information the reader needs to understand the argument. May include historical context, key definitions, the current state of debate, or a summary of the problem.
3. Thesis: The essay's central claim, typically appearing as the last sentence of the introduction in academic writing.

The conclusion is the closing section of an essay, whose functions are to synthesize the argument, demonstrate its significance, and provide closure. Effective conclusions perform one or more of the following:

• Synthesis: Show how the essay's individual arguments combine to support the thesis. Not a point-by-point summary but an integration that reveals the whole.
• Implication: Explain what follows from the argument -- what it means for policy, practice, or further research.
• Call to action: Urge the reader to do something specific in response to the argument.
• Further question: Raise a question that the essay's argument opens but does not answer, suggesting directions for continued inquiry.
• Return to hook: Circle back to the opening image, anecdote, or fact, creating structural closure.

Circular structure (also called frame structure) is a technique in which the conclusion returns to the introduction's opening, creating a sense of completeness. The opening raises a question or presents a scene; the body answers the question or analyzes the scene; the conclusion returns to the opening with new understanding.

Key concepts [Intermediate+]

• Funnel introduction: Broad opening narrowing to thesis. The standard pattern for academic and expository writing.
• Hook strategies: Surprising facts, vivid anecdotes, provocative claims, resonant quotations, direct questions. The hook must be relevant to the argument, not merely attention-grabbing.
• Thesis placement: Typically the last sentence of the introduction. Placement signals to the reader that the context-setting is finished and the argument is beginning.
• Synthesis in conclusion: Integrating the essay's arguments into a coherent whole, not summarizing them point by point.
• Implication / "so what?": The conclusion's job of showing why the argument matters beyond the essay itself.
• Circular / frame structure: Opening and closing with the same image, anecdote, or question. Creates structural satisfaction.
• Forbidden moves: Announcing the essay ("In this paper I will..."), restating the thesis verbatim, introducing new evidence, padding with "In conclusion."

Rhetorical theory [Master]

The introduction and conclusion correspond to two of the six parts of the classical oration as described by Cicero and Quintilian: the exordium (introduction) and the peroratio (conclusion). The exordium's function was to make the audience benevoli (well-disposed), attenti (attentive), and dociles (receptive to instruction). The peroratio had two functions: recapitulatio (summary of the argument) and affectus (emotional appeal, designed to move the audience to the desired response).

Cicero distinguished between the exordium directum (a straightforward opening appropriate when the audience is already favorable) and the exordium insinuatio (an indirect opening used when the audience is hostile or skeptical, in which the speaker subtly works their way into the audience's confidence before revealing the argument). This distinction has modern parallels: a writer addressing a sympathetic audience can open directly with the thesis, while a writer addressing a skeptical audience may need to build credibility and common ground before revealing the argument's direction.

The concept of kairos -- the opportune moment -- applies to introductions. An effective introduction establishes not only the topic but its timeliness: why this argument matters now. This is why the most effective hooks often reference current events, recent data, or pressing problems. They establish kairos.

Modern composition scholars have complicated the classical model. The process movement's emphasis on revision led to the observation that many experienced writers compose their introductions last, because they do not fully understand their argument until they have written the body. This practice inverts the reader's experience (thesis first) while respecting the writer's process (thesis last). The pedagogical implication is that the introduction should be taught as something to be drafted and revised rather than as a formula to be applied.

Genre studies have shown that introduction and conclusion conventions vary sharply across disciplines. In the natural sciences, introductions typically follow a "CARS" (Create a Research Space) model identified by John Swales: establish the territory (what is known), identify a gap (what is not known), and occupy the niche (what this paper will do). In the humanities, introductions are more likely to open with a textual or conceptual puzzle. Legal writing begins with a statement of the issue. Business writing opens with an executive summary. Teaching a single model (the funnel) across all genres misrepresents the diversity of rhetorical practice.

Historical context [Master]

The classical oration's six-part structure (exordium, narratio, partition, confirmatio, refutatio, peroratio) dominated Western rhetorical education for two millennia. The exordium and peroratio were understood as the oration's emotional bookends: the exordium prepared the audience to listen sympathetically, and the peroratio moved them to act.

In the medieval and early modern periods, sermon structures inherited the classical pattern. The preacher's introduction established the text and its relevance; the conclusion applied the doctrine to the congregation's lives and called for repentance or virtue. This structure carried into secular prose: the essay form, as practiced by Montaigne and Bacon, features introductions that engage the reader and conclusions that deliver a final insight.

The modern academic introduction-conclusion pair emerged in the nineteenth century alongside the standardization of university writing instruction. The funnel introduction and summary conclusion became the default model, a simplification of the classical pattern that served the needs of mass education.

In the twentieth century, both the process movement and genre studies challenged the standardized model. Process theorists argued that introductions should be revised (often rewritten entirely) after the body is complete. Genre theorists showed that different disciplines have different introduction and conclusion conventions. And the rise of digital writing introduced new considerations: web readers scan introductions quickly and often skip to conclusions, making both sections more important and more compressed than in print.

The concept of the hook is relatively modern. While classical rhetoricians discussed ways to secure the audience's attention, the term "hook" and the pedagogical emphasis on crafting attention-grabbing openings emerged in twentieth-century composition textbooks, influenced by journalism's emphasis on the "lead" and advertising's emphasis on capturing attention in the first seconds.

Bibliography [Master]

• Cicero. De Inventione. On the parts of an oration.
• Quintilian. Institutio Oratoria. Books IV and VI on exordium and peroratio.
• Swales, John M. Genre Analysis: English in Academic and Research Settings. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1990.
• Fahnestock, Jeanne, and Marie Secor. A Rhetoric of Argument. 3rd ed. Boston: McGraw-Hill, 2004.
• Williams, Joseph M., and Gregory G. Colomb. The Craft of Argument. New York: Pearson, 2003.
• Rankin, Elizabeth. "Seeing Yourself as a Writer." In Writing Ourselves into the Story, edited by Sheryl I. Fontaine and Susan Hunter, 19-34. Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press, 2004.