Analysis Of Kill The Five-Paragraph Essay

The five-paragraph essay is perhaps the only kind of essay many students hear about. Argumentative essays, research papers, and even book reports have a tendency to fall into that formula strictly and allow for little flexibility. This can be a tedious and boring process, as John Warner’s fervent argument insists. However, Kerri Smith demonstrates a stronger argument with her defense of the five-paragraph essay by emphasizing throughout that it is simply a building block for more elaborate essays and by using credible influencers that prove her point effectively.

Warner’s “Kill the 5-Paragraph Essay” has many valid points that do make sense and could make his argument effective. It is true that in many high school classrooms, students are simply writing from a “list of rules handed down by their teachers … including specific “good” transition words and limits on the number of sentences per paragraph or words per sentence.” This

phenomenon occurs in far too many classrooms and encourages students to write bland, uniform essays. While it is something certainly worth beginning an argument over, Warner goes on to use heavy definitive statements that could turn a hesitant reader away by stating that “it is a spirit killer” and insisting that writers should free themselves from the essay. He is making the assumption that his audience already agrees with these attacks instead of elaborating and explaining himself fully. More gentle, appealing qualifications would be more efficient in this essay rather than pushing his opinions forward as solid facts while generating little credibility for himself.
Kerri Smith uses a more professional approach in her essay, “In Defense of the Five-Paragraph Essay.” She addresses that the style of the essay is good for tests and few other things; however, she then goes on to disprove this statement and describe the five-paragraph essay as a “foundational form” that should be built upon.

She reiterates her point multiple times, comparing the structure to that of the scientific method in its “hypothesize, test, conclude” approach and breaks the five-paragraph essay down into the simple idea of an introduction, argument, and conclusion. The fact that there are three body paragraphs is not something that should be strictly enforced, more of a guideline to produce a stellar piece. Smith uses credible examples of her own teachers and professors and emphasizes her own credibility when she states that she majored in English at UC Berkeley. To make her point even stronger, she concludes by pointing out that the essay she just wrote is, in fact, five paragraphs, and proves to be extremely

effective.
Kerri Smith’s defense of the five-paragraph essay is more effective compared to Warner’s as it uses multiple credible personal experiences and continues to gently link her evidence back to the main point of the essay format being a simple building block. While both present strong arguments on opposite ends of a scale, oftentimes more is needed than simply a will and an eager opinion. Smith proves that use of information and elaboration can be utilized, even if that information is scrutinized.