Revising a Paragraph That Drifts from Its Thesis
A student’s draft body paragraph begins: “Cities should fund more night-shift bus routes. My cousin works at a hospital and sometimes waits forty minutes after midnight. The bus system’s budget increased last year. Many riders own cars but choose transit for environmental reasons. Night routes would help workers who cannot afford cars get home safely.” The thesis of the essay is that late-night public transit is a safety and equity issue. The teacher says the paragraph has one relevant example, one irrelevant fact, and one claim that needs a causal link. The student has ten minutes to revise.
1. Identify the irrelevant sentence and the claim that needs a causal link. Explain how each affects the paragraph’s support for the thesis.
Read the worked answer
The irrelevant sentence is “The bus system’s budget increased last year.” A budget fact could matter, but without a comparison or a link to night service it does not support the thesis about safety and equity. The claim needing a causal link is “Many riders own cars but choose transit for environmental reasons.” It introduces a different motive (environmentalism) and does not explain why night routes are a safety/equity issue; it may even undercut the equity argument by suggesting riders have alternatives. The cousin example is relevant but anecdotal; it supports the safety/equity thesis only if the paragraph frames the forty-minute wait as a safety risk or an equity burden. The revision should cut the budget and car-owner sentences, or subordinate them, and connect the example to the thesis.
2. Revise the paragraph so it stays focused on the thesis. Keep the cousin example and add one sentence that makes the safety/equity link explicit.
Read the worked answer
Revised: “Cities should fund more night-shift bus routes because late-night transit is a safety and equity issue. My cousin works at a hospital and sometimes waits forty minutes after midnight; for a worker without a car, that wait can mean standing on an unlit corner or paying for a ride they cannot afford. Riders who depend on the bus are not choosing transit for environmental reasons-they are choosing between an unsafe wait and an expensive alternative. Night routes would help workers who cannot afford cars get home safely.” The budget sentence is cut because it does not advance the thesis. The car-owner sentence is replaced with a direct equity claim. The added sentence explicitly links the cousin’s wait to safety and affordability, so the example functions as support rather than anecdote.