Make the
sentences connect.
Cohesion, transitions, and learning to read a draft like an editor, yours and a partner's.
Last week, in brief.
- One paragraph = one idea; the topic sentence is a promise.
- LEAF: Lead, Evidence, Analysis, Finish, two-thirds is your analysis.
- Paraphrase usually, quote rarely, cite both, and look away from the source.
Your paragraph, Writing #1.
Make the sentences connect, cohesion, transitions, then peer-review before you submit.
This week.
- Cohesion vs coherence
- Old-to-new information flow
- Transitions by function
- Choppy → connected
- Submit the paragraph
- Feedback that's specific & kind
- The reviewer's checklist
- Structured peer review
Workbook Ch 9 & 18, cohesion (p. 40), formatting (p. 79), and the transitions list in Appendix A.
Paragraph.
Writing #1.
One polished commentary paragraph on your topic: a LEAF structure, two-thirds analysis, a paraphrased source, correctly cited and formatted.
The paragraph self-check.
- A topic sentence that makes a claim
- LEAF shape, lead, evidence, analysis, finish
- Roughly two-thirds your own analysis
- Evidence paraphrased & cited (APA or IEEE)
- Sentences connect, old to new
- Formatting clean: font, spacing, citation style
Accepted up to one week late at −5% per day; nothing after a week. Visit the Writing Clinic before you submit if you can.
Sentences that
hold hands.
Good ideas in a bad order read as confusion. Cohesion is the invisible craft that makes a paragraph feel inevitable.
Cohesion and coherence.
The surface connection, transitions, pronouns, repeated key terms. Sentence-to-sentence glue.
The deep connection, ideas in a logical order the reader can follow. Paragraph-level sense.
You need both. Transitions on a jumbled argument are lipstick, fix the order first, then add the glue.
Start with the known. End with the new.
Each sentence should open with information the reader already has, then introduce something new. That new thing becomes the next sentence's “known.”
“Coupang built warehouses. These warehouses sat close to customers, which made overnight delivery possible. That speed is what rivals could not copy.”
Notice the hand-off: each bold idea is picked up at the start of the next sentence. The paragraph pulls itself forward.
Transitions, by the job they do.
| To… | Use |
|---|---|
| Add | furthermore · in addition · moreover · what's more · beyond this |
| Contrast | however · by contrast · yet · on the other hand · nevertheless · conversely |
| Show cause | therefore · as a result · consequently · hence · for this reason |
| Compare | similarly · likewise · in the same way · equally |
| Give an example | for instance · notably · to illustrate · in particular · namely |
| Concede | admittedly · granted · of course · even so · it is true that |
| Conclude | in short · ultimately · taken together · on balance · overall |
A transition names a relationship, use the one that's true; “however” promises a contrast you must then deliver. One or two per paragraph, no more, and vary them across the essay.
See how few you actually need.
In real prose the marker sits at the front of a sentence, once the previous idea has landed. Below, the transitions are highlighted, notice there are only one or two per paragraph.
Korea's solar capacity tripled between 2019 and 2023. Moreover, the growth was concentrated in industry, not households. For instance, the ten largest manufacturers accounted for nearly half of all new installations in 2022.
The subsidy was generous by regional standards. However, uptake stalled the moment the rate was cut. As a result, later analyses treat the subsidy, not demand, as the load-bearing factor.
The fastest way to sound mechanical is to open every paragraph with the same word, However here, However there, Moreover everywhere. Spread your choices across the whole table, and reach for a different marker each time the relationship repeats.
Same facts. Different flow.
Korea's birth rate is low. Housing is expensive. Young people delay marriage. Childcare is limited. The government offers subsidies. The rate keeps falling.
Korea's birth rate is the world's lowest, and the causes compound. Because housing is so expensive, young people delay marriage; and even for those who marry, limited childcare raises the cost of a first child. As a result, government subsidies have barely moved the rate.
Introduce the source, don't dump it.
Name the author, then pick a verb that signals your stance on their claim. The verb does quiet argumentative work.
| Stance | Reporting verbs |
|---|---|
| Neutral | notes, states, describes |
| Asserts | argues, contends, maintains |
| Supports | shows, demonstrates, confirms |
| Tentative | suggests, implies, proposes |
| Critical | overlooks, disputes, questions |
“In the article it talks about how Hallyu spread around the world. (Kim, 2022)”
Kim (2022) argues that Hallyu's global spread was a deliberate state strategy, not a cultural accident.
Present for what a source argues (Kim argues); past for what was done (Kim surveyed 400…).
Two ways to place a citation.
The citation lives inside the evidence sentence, not bolted to the end. Where you put it changes what the sentence is about.
Jin (2022) values Korea's music exports at over $10 billion, a figure that reframes K-pop as an industry.
Author in the sentence. Use when the source, method, or disagreement is part of your point.
Korea's music exports now exceed $10 billion in annual value (Jin, 2022), reframing K-pop as an industry.
Citation in brackets. Use when the fact is settled and the source is just its warrant.
A strong essay uses both, weighted toward the norm of its field. STEM leans non-integral; the humanities name the scholar freely; Business sits between.
By your major · STEM.
IEEE, numbered. STEM usually goes non-integral, the finding matters more than who found it.
| Field | Integral · author in the sentence | Non-integral · citation in brackets |
|---|---|---|
| Engineering | Park et al. [7] report that the perovskite cells retained 91% efficiency after 1,000 hours of thermal cycling. | The perovskite cells retained 91% efficiency after 1,000 hours of thermal cycling [7]. |
| Computer Sci. | Kim and Lee [12] show that the model cut inference latency by 38% on Korean-language benchmarks. | The model cut inference latency by 38% on Korean-language benchmarks [12]. |
| Life Sciences | Choi [3] found a durable antibody response in 94% of participants. | A durable antibody response was observed in 94% of participants [3]. |
By your major · Humanities & Social Sciences.
APA, author–date. HASS uses integral freely, the scholar's interpretation is part of the argument.
| Field | Integral · author in the sentence | Non-integral · citation in brackets |
|---|---|---|
| History | Cumings (2021) argues that the 1953 armistice froze, rather than resolved, the peninsula's division. | The 1953 armistice froze, rather than resolved, the peninsula's division (Cumings, 2021). |
| Sociology | Shin (2020) demonstrates that the 2016 candlelight protests drew heavily on first-time voters. | The 2016 candlelight protests drew heavily on first-time voters (Shin, 2020). |
| Literature | Jin (2022) reads the webtoon's vertical scroll as a break from the printed page. | The webtoon's vertical scroll marks a break from the printed page (Jin, 2022). |
By your major · Business & Economics.
APA, author–date. Business mixes both, sitting between the STEM and HASS norms.
| Field | Integral · author in the sentence | Non-integral · citation in brackets |
|---|---|---|
| Economics | The Bank of Korea (2023) reports that household debt reached 105% of GDP in the fourth quarter. | Household debt reached 105% of GDP in the fourth quarter (Bank of Korea, 2023). |
| Management | Porter (2019) frames vertical integration as both a strength and a constraint for the chaebol. | Vertical integration is both a strength and a constraint for the chaebol (Porter, 2019). |
| Marketing | Lee and Park (2024) find that influencer campaigns lifted brand recall by 27% among Gen Z consumers. | Influencer campaigns lifted brand recall by 27% among Gen Z consumers (Lee & Park, 2024). |
More than one author?
The name changes with the author count, the year does not. Use & inside brackets, and in a sentence.
| Authors | Parenthetical (in brackets) | Narrative (in the sentence) |
|---|---|---|
| One | (Kim, 2023) | Kim (2023) argues that… |
| Two | (Park & Lee, 2022) | Park and Lee (2022) observed… |
| Three or more | (Choi et al., 2021) | Choi et al. (2021) confirmed… |
| Group author | first (World Health Organization [WHO], 2021) then (WHO, 2021) | The WHO (2021) reports… |
| No author | (“Understanding AI,” 2020) | The piece “Understanding AI” (2020)… |
APA 7 uses “et al.” for three or more authors from the very first mention, never list all names. In IEEE the bracket number never changes: Kim [3], Kim and Lee [3], Kim et al. [3].
A few rules worth memorising.
The shape is your choice; these are not. They cover the situations that trip students up most.
| Situation | Rule | In text |
|---|---|---|
| No date | Put n.d. where the year goes. | (Statistics Korea, n.d.) |
| Direct quotation | Add a page number; use para. for unpaginated web text. | (Kim, 2023, p. 14) |
| Same author, same year | Add a, b, c after the year, matched to the reference list. | (Bank of Korea, 2024a, 2024b) |
| Same surname | Add first initials to tell two authors apart. | (J. Kim, 2020; S. Kim, 2019) |
| Secondary source | Name the original; cite the one you read with as cited in. | (Weber, 1905, as cited in Shin, 2020) |
| Several works | One bracket, alphabetical, separated by semicolons. | (Choi, 2019; Kim, 2023; Park, 2021) |
| Personal comm. | Interview, email, lecture: cite in text only, never in the reference list. | (J. Park, personal communication, May 3, 2024) |
Useful feedback
is a skill.
“It's good” helps no one. Learn to give feedback that is specific, kind, and something the writer can actually act on.
Three rules for feedback.
Specific
Point to a line, not a vibe.
Kind
Critique the writing, not the writer. Lead with what works.
Actionable
Name the next move.
Read for these, in order.
- Claim, can you state the paragraph's point in one sentence?
- Proof, is there specific, cited evidence?
- Analysis, does the writer explain, or just summarise?
- Flow, do the sentences connect old to new?
Think of a piece of feedback that actually changed your writing. What made it land?
- → Was it specific enough to act on, or just “make it better”?
- → What feedback have you given that you'd now phrase differently?
- → What's the one question you want a reviewer to answer about your paragraph?
Trade paragraphs
Swap your draft paragraph with a partner. Read silently, then respond using the checklist.
- Write the partner's claim in your own words, check you got it right.
- Mark one place the analysis could go deeper.
- Suggest one transition that would help the flow.
Every comment names a line and a next step. Revise tonight while the feedback is fresh.
Homework & what's next.
- Revise & submit the paragraph (Writing #1)
- Apply your partner's feedback first
- Start drafting the rest of your body paragraphs
Counter-arguments & voice. Answering the objection, and writing with the authority that makes a reader trush.
Today in one slide.
- Cohesion is glue; coherence is order
- Move old → new across sentences
- Pick the transition that's actually true
- Paragraph (Writing #1) submitted
- Feedback: specific, kind, actionable
- Review for claim, proof, analysis, flow
Connect it.
Week 08 · Next, Counter-Arguments & Voicens