As I was drafting my research argument essay, I was finding it incredibly hard to make my own claims. It seems as though after conducting extensive research on the need for reformation of undergraduate biology curriculum, every idea has been thought of, proposed, rejected or implemented. So how am I supposed to make a thesis in which my own original argument is proposed?
This is an issue I have come across in almost all writing tasks I’ve been assigned. I feel as though I am regurgitating others’ ideas or completely lacking in creativity. It is during these times that I feel mediocre in my writing, and wish that I had the talent that so many others do of coming up with unorthodox or insightful ideas. Even in conversation, whether it be debating controversial topics or even just proposing an alternative idea rather than In-n-Out for lunch, this obstacle has always hindered me.
It wasn’t until after I had written the skeleton of my draft (which was only deciding which sources from my annotated bibliography I wanted to use to make sure I covered the most area of my topic) that I realized I had a thesis in my mind all along. More importantly, I realized that since my argument was part of an ongoing conversation amongst experts, scientists, national science organizations, and department heads at institutes of higher education, my thesis did not have to be so cut and dry.
There is room for challenge and acceptance in forming an original argument when entering a current conversation. And so, I could call for the rejection of certain ideas and the acceptance of others, then use my sources to provide examples upon which I could argue in support of or rejection of. In this way, my ideas for why I agree or disagree are original as it is my own personal viewpoint, and my reasoning is formed by not only my research, but also my experience as an undergraduate biology major.
As a result, my paper did not only consist of my own original arguments, but it was strong in its structure as it included background, examples, analysis and coherent, structural flow of my arguments.
-FH