Coursework: Planning, Drafting and Redrafting: Question 9

Worked solution

Assessment focus

This question tests the specific redrafting judgement described in this topic’s overview: does the opening “do its job”, earning attention and previewing a position, rather than simply announcing what the essay is about. A strong response first diagnoses precisely what is missing, then produces an opening that supplies it.

Why the original opening fails (part a)

• No thesis: “there are many different opinions” and “some people like… some people do not” state the obvious without the writer taking any position, so a reader has no idea what the essay will actually argue.
• No hook: nothing in the opening is specific, surprising or vivid enough to make a reader want to continue; it could be the first line of almost any discursive essay on almost any topic.
• An empty announcement: “I am going to talk about zoos and give some points about them” tells the reader that content is coming, instead of starting to deliver that content.

Model redraft (part b)

“A lion pacing the same stretch of enclosure for the thousandth time raises an uncomfortable question: does keeping wild animals for public display still have a place in the twenty-first century? While zoos argue that conservation and education justify their existence, mounting evidence about animal welfare in captivity suggests it is time to rethink what a modern zoo should look like.”

Why this works

The opening sentence replaces the generic “some people like zoos” with a specific, unsettling image (a pacing lion) that leads directly into a genuine question, giving the reader an immediate reason to keep reading. The second sentence states a clear, arguable thesis, that zoos need rethinking in light of welfare evidence, while still acknowledging the opposing case (conservation and education), which previews a balanced essay rather than a one-sided rant. Nothing in the redraft merely announces that an essay is about to happen; both sentences are already doing the essay’s work.

Common pitfalls specific to this task

• Opening with a fact rather than a hook, for example “Zoos have existed for hundreds of years,” which is specific but not attention-grabbing or connected to the debate.
• Stating a thesis so one-sided (“Zoos are cruel and should be banned immediately”) that it leaves no room for the balanced discussion a discursive essay needs to develop.
• Writing three sentences that together summarise both sides of the whole debate, effectively drafting a conclusion instead of an opening.