I.
II.
III.
IV.
V.
VI.
Chapter Outline Sample
Focus Honors Research (Shuler)
Introduction: The death penalty has long been controversial. Now new medical evidence
raises the question of whether any execution method can meet the constitutional prohibition
of “cruel and unusual punishment.”
A. Begin with story of botched execution
B. Summarize core constitutional issue. Note how most the rest of the world has rejected
any form of death penalty, but U.S. accepted lethal injection as “humane”
C. Thesis: “The U.S. Supreme court has allowed the death penalty to continue based on
the belief that the lethal injection method is not cruel and unusual. While its decision
at the time was reasonable, in light of new medical knowledge, there is no method of
execution that meets the constitutional standard.”
How do you execute someone? A survey of methods
A. Previous execution methods that were rejected as morality evolved
1. Hanging
2. Electric chair: include pop culture stories from movies, haunted house
horror staple
B. Shift to lethal injection. How it works. Different drugs used and their effects. How
they kill and how they try to prevent pain.
The Counterargument: Why did we switch to lethal injection? Because it seemed more
humane.
A. Historical quotations justifying the switch.
B. Admittedly it seems to work in many instances: Cho (2008) stats.
C. Yet even proponents normally argue relatively humane (i.e. better than other
options); =admit that still not fully humane.
The PIVOT: Evidence that prisoners paralyzed but still feel pain so NOT humane
A. Describe examples botched executions
B. Summarize medical articles explaining how this can happen
C. Cannot do human experiments to resolve question definitively (research ethics!), but
evidence raises enough doubts to reasonably reject lethal injection
D. Therefore unconstitutional
Growing trend to discontinue:
A. Some states have rejected. Drug companies refusing to sell to other states.
B. Therefore this is not fringe science. Respectable. And action is possible!
Conclusion
A. Other methods have been rejected as inhumane. Medical science now suggests
lethal injection is as well.
B. Constitutionally and ethically have to admit no humane way to do death penalty.
C. Close by tie in with group thesis on need to revise U.S. law on death penalty.
Chapter Outline
Focus Seminar (Shuler)
Write a short outline of your chapter. Include your thesis, 3-7 main sections, and as much detail
on subsections as you wish. It is usually good to at least refer to the evidence that you will use
for use section. Make sure you will be addressing any conflicting ideas in your sources and
referring to specific scholars’ interpretations. The thesis may be 2 or even 3 sentences long.
Remember, you are making an argument about how to interpret your data and not just
regurgitating a heap of undigested information.
Your "State of the Conversation" chart is often your best friend in developing an interesting and
relevant thesis, and in organizing your chapter's argument. Notice too how in the sample outline,
each section takes one part of the thesis statement and just expands on it.
Think about the following questions when writing your outline:
1. How does my chapter help answer my group's overall question? How can my thesis help
make that clear?
2. What can I contribute to the "state of conversation" that I saw in my sources? How can
my thesis help make that clear?
3. What points do I need to make in order to prove my thesis? Do they need to be in a
particular order to make sense? Does each main section prove one and only one point (or
give necessary background information)?
4. Do I have evidence for each point I need to prove?
5. Where would it be most effective to describe the current state of the conversation for my
readers? Should I give an overview at the beginning, weave the discussion throughout the
chapter, or should I have a section at the end where I describe contrary interpretations or
evidence (“the counterargument”) and then explain why the counterargument is wrong
(“the pivot”)?
6. Will this chapter be understandable for an educated reader with only general familiarity
with my specific topic?
7. Are there any sections in this chapter that do NOT help prove the thesis or provide
necessary background information (such as the state of conversation or research
methodology)? If so, should I eliminate those sections or should I change my thesis?