Example (from sample paragraphs for analysis of paragraph development):
Question: Should richer nations stop giving aid to poorer ones?
Point: As much as economic progress is a strong reason for aid to continue, political stability is no less crucial.
• Related to stand and question
• Contains keywords from the question or related words found using word association) Corresponding words can also be used.
(In the e.g.: The word "aid" appears in the question, and also in the point and the stand. The usage of the word "continue" in the point corresponds with the word "stop" in the question.)
• Link back to point stated in previous paragraph
(In the e.g.: It shows that the author's stand is that no, the richer nations should not stop giving aid to poorer ones. This is because there are economic reasons for doing so, as discussed in the previous paragraphs. This paragraph will instead be moving on to elaborating on political reasons.)
Brainstorming of points:
• Use SPECTRUM as all the points will be easier to link to each other
(In the e.g.: The author has used the political segment to talk about politics and economics, which are linked to one another)
• Must be "tight" by anticipating questions the reader might have about the point
• Includes keywords from the question and the point it is supporting
• After each part, the next line must answer the previous claim and its anticipated questions
(E.g. Every major event hosted by a country invariably brings about a boom in infrastructure development within the country. (Questions anticipated: Why is there a boom in infrastructure development? What about this boom?) A large international competition where thousands will be spectating, imposes the need for urbanisation, to make it seem more modern and impress the world. (Explains the question: Why is there a boom in infrastructure development?) These changes will not only serve to fulfil the demands of the sports competition, it also serves to benefit the people of the country. (Link back to the point about infrastructure boom))
• Link it to the point and question by using similar/paraphrased keywords
(In the e.g.: The Soviet Union example is more relevant as it is stated that it was an aid issue, where their political instability was evidently caused by their lack of aid. For the Nazis' example, nothing about aid was mentioned, so it was not considered to be linked back.)
• Check for irrelevance by fitting the keyword(s) from the question into the example. If they cannot be fitted into the example properly, it is highly possible that the point is not relevant
(In the e.g.: The author is supposed to fit in both "political instability" and "aid")
Done by Carven and Jamie :D