Analytical Paper Outline — Kate Chopin’s
Story of an Hour & Desiree’s Baby
This assignment requires you to build an outline for a comparative analytical paper on two Kate Chopin short stories. You need a specific, arguable thesis statement, four distinct body paragraph topics with textual evidence, inferential-level interpretations for each passage, and a conclusion that addresses the broader significance of your argument. Each of those is a separate analytical task with different requirements. This guide breaks down exactly what belongs in each section — and where students lose points.
📖 Need expert help with your Kate Chopin analytical paper or literary analysis outline?
Get Expert Help →What This Assignment Is Testing — and Why Generic Literary Summaries Fail
This assignment is testing whether you can move beyond plot summary and surface-level observation to construct an arguable interpretation of literary texts. The outline is not a summary of what happens in the stories — it is a structured plan for a comparative analytical argument. The rubric evaluates the thesis statement for analytical clarity and arguability, the body paragraph topics for distinctness and equal significance, the passage selections for quality and relevance, and the interpretations for inferential depth. A student who submits an outline that describes the stories rather than arguing a specific interpretation will not satisfy any rubric criterion above the lowest level.
The assignment distinguishes three levels of reading. The literal level is what the text explicitly says. The inferential/interpretive level is what the text implies — the subtext, the significance of word choices, the symbolic weight of images, the logic of narrative structure. The evaluative level is what the text means in relation to the broader world — its social commentary, its relevance to human experience, its contribution to literary history. The body paragraphs must operate at the inferential level. The conclusion operates at the evaluative level. The outline demonstrates whether you understand that distinction — and whether you can execute it.
The Outline Is a Structural Commitment — Not a Brainstorm
An outline is not a list of ideas you might possibly use. It is a formal document that maps the argument your paper will make. The rubric evaluates organization — specifically whether the order of subtopics and the sequence of passages within each paragraph demonstrate “forethought regarding how best to develop the analysis.” Randomly ordered points, equally weighted topics that overlap with each other, and passages that don’t connect to the topic sentence will all cost points under the organization criterion. Before filling in the template, decide what each body paragraph will argue and in what order the paragraphs should appear so the argument builds logically.
The minimum paper length is six paragraphs (introduction, four body paragraphs, conclusion), and the outline maps all of those. Three academic sources are required for the final paper, but the outline does not need research — every passage must come from the primary texts only. The outline requires full sentences for the thesis, topic sentences, passages (with APA citations), and the restatement of thesis. Bullet points and fragments are acceptable for the interpretation notes and background information slots, but the sentences that will anchor each section of the paper must be written out in full.
Reading Both Texts for Analytical Data — What to Extract Before Writing a Single Outline Sentence
Both stories are short enough to read in under thirty minutes combined. Before selecting a prompt or drafting a thesis, read both texts once for comprehension and once specifically to extract analytical data — the specific textual moments that could function as evidence for an interpretive argument. An outline built on textual evidence you actually identified from the texts will be sharper and more specific than one built on remembered impressions. Extract this data first; the prompt and thesis will become clearer once you see what the texts actually offer.
Story of an Hour — Key Textual Moments for Analysis
The window: Mrs. Mallard sits facing an open window; she sees trees, spring life, the blue sky — the natural world as emblem of possibility and freedom. The window is a threshold between domestic enclosure and open life.
The thing approaching: “There was something coming to her and she was waiting for it, fearfully” — the anticipation and fear of the emotion Chopin refuses to name immediately. The unnamed quality builds suspense and suggests the emotion is socially unspeakable.
“Free, free, free!”: The whispered repetition marks the pivot of the story. Note the vacant stare that precedes it and the terror in her eyes — Chopin presents the recognition of freedom as psychologically disturbing, not simply joyful.
The will passage: “There would be no powerful will bending hers in that blind persistence with which men and women believe they have a right to impose a private will upon a fellow-creature.” The phrase “men and women” is deliberate — Chopin broadens the critique beyond gender-specific oppression.
“Sometimes. Often she had not.”: The acknowledgment that she loved him sometimes but often did not — Chopin’s frank treatment of the complexity of marriage that destabilizes any reading of the story as simply anti-male.
The ending: The doctors’ diagnosis — “joy that kills” — is ironic. Louise dies of loss, not joy. The medical establishment’s misreading of her death mirrors the social misreading of her marriage.
Desiree’s Baby — Key Textual Moments for Analysis
Desiree’s origin: She was found as an infant at the gateway of Valmondé — she has no documented racial identity. This unknown origin becomes the story’s fatal ambiguity.
Armand’s love: “He fell in love with her as if struck by a pistol shot” — the simile of violence foreshadows the destructive force of his attachment. Love in this story is presented as dangerous from the start.
The changed atmosphere: After the baby’s racial identity is questioned, Armand’s treatment of enslaved people worsens. Chopin links racial prejudice and domestic cruelty structurally, not incidentally.
The letter to Madame Valmondé: Desiree’s passive, devastated response — “tell me it is not true” — positions her as a victim of a system she cannot see clearly enough to navigate.
The walk into the bayou: Desiree does not flee or fight. She walks into the swamp with her child. This ending has been read as suicide, as passivity, as the only available form of resistance for a woman with nowhere to go.
Armand’s letter: The final revelation — the letter from his mother confirming that Armand himself carries Black ancestry. The irony is precise: the man who destroyed his wife and child over racial purity carries the very ancestry he feared.
Mark the Passages You Might Use Before Choosing Your Topics
Go through both stories and mark every passage that strikes you as significant — images that recur, moments of psychological intensity, statements that seem to carry more weight than their plot function requires, structural choices (what Chopin chooses not to say, what she leaves ambiguous). This is the raw material of literary analysis. Your four body paragraph topics should emerge from patterns you notice in this material — not from deciding in advance what you want to argue and then looking for evidence that fits. The strongest outlines are built from the text outward, not from a predetermined argument inward.
Choosing Between the Two Prompts — What Each One Requires and Where Students Underestimate the Difficulty
Both prompts ask for a comparative analysis of the two stories, but they organize the comparison differently. Prompt Option 1 asks you to identify four shared elements and analyze how each functions similarly in both stories. Prompt Option 2 asks you to compare and contrast the two protagonists — Louise Mallard and Désirée — across four dimensions. The choice is not about which prompt is easier. It is about which organizational structure produces a more specific, arguable thesis from your reading of the texts.
Prompt Option 1 — Four Shared Elements
- Structure: Each body paragraph focuses on one literary element — a theme, a literary device, a tonal quality — and demonstrates how it operates in both texts
- Strength: Clean organizational logic; the comparative move is built into each paragraph because you must show the element in both stories
- Risk: Students choose elements that are too broad (e.g., “both stories are about women”) — the elements must be specific enough to support an argument, not just an observation
- Strong element options: irony as a narrative device; symbolism of physical spaces (window, bayou, gateway); the role of male will in determining female fate; Chopin’s use of ambiguity at narrative endpoints
- Weak element choices: “theme of oppression” (too broad); “both have female protagonists” (not a literary element); “both are short” (irrelevant)
- Best for: Students comfortable with literary device analysis who want a predictable, manageable comparative structure
Prompt Option 2 — Character Comparison
- Structure: Two similarities and two differences between Louise and Désirée, or four points of comparison/contrast in any combination; each body paragraph handles one point
- Strength: Character analysis generates rich inferential work because it requires reading psychological motivation from textual evidence, not just identifying surface features
- Risk: Students compare biographical facts (“both are married women”) rather than analyzing what the characters reveal about Chopin’s thematic concerns — the comparison must be interpretive, not merely descriptive
- Strong comparison points: both women are defined by their relationship to a male will they cannot control; both experience a moment of psychological crisis presented ambiguously; Louise’s death is ironic reversal, Désirée’s is erasure — different narrative logics for female tragedy
- Weak comparison choices: “both are sad” (not arguable); “both live in the 19th century” (not interpretive); “both have husbands” (not analytical)
- Best for: Students who respond more naturally to character-driven analysis and want to engage with the psychological complexity of both protagonists
The Rubric Criterion for “Equal Significance” Is a Real Constraint
The rubric specifically evaluates whether subtopics are “distinct and of equal significance.” This means your four body paragraph topics cannot have a hierarchy where three are minor points and one carries the argument. Each topic must hold equal analytical weight. Test yours: if you removed one body paragraph, would the paper lose a genuinely important dimension of the argument? If the answer is no — if one topic feels like padding — it does not have equal significance. Replace it with a topic that carries its own analytical weight.
Building the Thesis Statement — The Single Most Important Sentence in the Outline
The rubric’s content criterion evaluates the thesis statement first, and it distinguishes between a thesis that “provides a clear, compelling analysis” (exceeds expectations) and one that is “overly broad or unclearly expressed” (approaches expectations). A thesis statement for a literary analysis paper must do three things: identify the texts and author (context), make a specific, arguable interpretive claim (argument), and indicate the analytical framework or key points that will support it (scope). A thesis that does any fewer than those three things is incomplete.
What Makes a Literary Analysis Thesis Arguable vs. Merely Observational
The distinction between an observation and an argument is the central problem students face when writing a thesis for literary analysis. An observation describes what is true. An argument makes a claim that a reasonable reader could dispute — and that requires evidence to support.
Why These Fail as Thesis Statements
- “Both stories feature female protagonists who face hardship.” — True, but not arguable. No evidence is required to support this.
- “Kate Chopin wrote about women’s lives in the 19th century.” — Biographical observation, not an interpretation of the texts.
- “Story of an Hour and Desiree’s Baby both have ironic endings.” — Partially analytical, but says nothing about what the irony means or accomplishes.
- “Chopin uses symbolism in both stories.” — True of almost all literary fiction; too broad to constitute an argument.
- Any thesis that could be “proven” with a single sentence from a plot summary has no analytical depth.
Elements of a Strong Analytical Thesis
- Makes a claim about what the texts mean, not just what they contain
- Uses interpretive language: “suggests,” “reveals,” “critiques,” “demonstrates,” “challenges”
- Is specific enough that the four body paragraph topics emerge naturally from it
- Could be disagreed with — a reasonable reader could say “I don’t think that’s what these texts are doing” and require evidence to be convinced
- Example direction: Chopin uses irony, confined physical spaces, and the motif of suppressed identity to argue that [specific claim about women, marriage, or social systems in both stories]
Shared Elements — Analytical Angles
- Both stories use irony to expose the gap between social appearance (happy marriage, racial purity) and psychological or genetic reality
- Chopin uses spatial symbolism — the window, the bayou, the gateway — to externalize the interior states of women who cannot speak their experience directly
- Both stories present male authority as simultaneously sincere and destructive — a critique that goes beyond villainy to structural analysis
- The endings of both stories punish women for existing outside the categories their social world assigns them, suggesting Chopin sees female autonomy as socially unsustainable in that historical moment
Character Comparison — Analytical Angles
- Both Louise and Désirée are destroyed not by overt cruelty but by their dependence on male identity for their own social existence — Chopin’s structural critique is more damning than a story of villains would be
- Louise and Désirée experience similar moments of psychological awakening, but where Louise’s leads to a brief, fatal glimpse of selfhood, Désirée’s leads only to erasure — the difference reveals Chopin’s nuanced analysis of how race and class shape the space available for female interiority
- Both characters love men who love them in ways that are ultimately lethal — Chopin’s treatment of benevolent male affection as equally dangerous as overt cruelty is the shared thread
The Thesis Must Be Written in Third Person — Check Your Draft
The rubric’s format criterion specifies that full sentences should be “written clearly, concisely, and in the third person.” First-person constructions (“I will argue,” “I believe,” “In my opinion”) are not APA-style academic writing and will cost points under the format criterion. Write the thesis as a declarative statement of what the texts do, reveal, suggest, or demonstrate — not as a statement of your personal belief about them. The difference: “Chopin uses irony to reveal the violence of benevolent male authority” (third person, analytical) vs. “I think Chopin is showing that men hurt women even when they mean well” (first person, colloquial).
Structuring the Four Body Paragraphs — How to Organize Each One for Maximum Analytical Clarity
Each body paragraph in the outline follows the same structural logic: a topic sentence that makes a specific claim about the literary element or character point being analyzed, followed by passages from the texts that support that claim, each followed by an interpretation that explains what the passage means at the inferential level. The topic sentence is not a transition that says “another element the two stories share is…” — that is a transition phrase, not a topic sentence. The topic sentence makes the analytical claim the paragraph will support.
| Body Paragraph Component | What It Must Do | Common Failure Mode | Fix |
|---|---|---|---|
| Topic/Transition Sentence | State the specific analytical claim of this paragraph — what you will argue about the literary element or character point in relation to both stories. This sentence should connect back to the thesis explicitly or implicitly: the reader should be able to see how this paragraph advances the overall argument. | Writing a topic sentence that only names the topic rather than making a claim: “The next element the two stories share is irony.” This sentence identifies what the paragraph is about but does not argue anything. The grader cannot evaluate whether the paragraph succeeds until they read the evidence because there is no claim to test. | Make the topic sentence argumentative: “In both stories, Chopin deploys irony at the narrative’s endpoint to expose the institutions — marriage and racial classification — that the stories have been critiquing throughout.” Now the paragraph has a specific claim to support: that the irony is endpoint-located and institution-directed. |
| Passage Selection | Choose passages that directly illustrate the claim made in the topic sentence. For a comparative paper, each body paragraph needs at least one passage from each story — ideally two from each — to demonstrate that the pattern holds across both texts, not just in one. Passages should be the most concentrated, specific moments in the text where the element is most visible. | Selecting passages that are narratively important but not analytically relevant to the specific claim of the paragraph. A passage can be a pivotal moment in the story and still not be the right passage for a specific analytical argument. Students often pick the passages they remember most vividly rather than the passages that best illustrate their topic sentence’s claim. | After selecting a passage, ask: does this passage specifically show the claim my topic sentence makes? If it shows something related but not precisely that claim, either revise the claim or find a more precise passage. The passage-to-claim relationship should be direct enough that you can state the connection in one sentence of interpretation. |
| Interpretation | Explain what the passage means at the inferential level — what it implies, what it reveals about character or theme, what its word choices or images suggest beyond their literal content. The interpretation is the analytical work of the paper. It should go further than the passage itself; if your interpretation merely restates what the passage says in different words, it is not inferential — it is paraphrase. | Writing interpretations that summarize: “This shows that Louise is happy to be free.” This statement adds no analytical value — the reader can already see that from the passage. An inferential interpretation explains why the text presents freedom this way, what the word choices reveal about the social context, or what the passage implies about the cost of that freedom. | After writing an interpretation, ask: am I reading between the lines, or am I restating what the lines say? If you are restating, push one level deeper. Ask what the passage implies about the character’s psychology, about Chopin’s critique of social institutions, about the narrative’s structure, or about the relationship between what the character feels and what the text tells us she is allowed to say. |
| Sequence Within the Paragraph | The passages within a body paragraph should be ordered so they build — either from general to specific, from surface observation to deeper implication, or from one story to the other in a consistent pattern. The rubric evaluates whether “order of supporting points and passages / interpretations” demonstrates “forethought.” Random ordering signals that the outline was assembled rather than designed. | Alternating randomly between stories (one passage from Story of an Hour, then one from Desiree’s Baby, then back to Story of an Hour) without a structural logic for the alternation. Readers lose track of the comparative argument when the pattern is inconsistent. | Choose a consistent pattern for each body paragraph and maintain it. Either group all Story of an Hour passages first and all Desiree’s Baby passages second (then connect them in the final interpretation), or alternate them in a deliberate point-counterpoint structure. State the logic in the topic sentence so the pattern reads as intentional. |
The four body paragraphs are not four separate observations about the stories. They are four coordinated moves in a single argument. Each paragraph should advance the thesis — not just add more evidence, but push the interpretation further.
— The logic of analytical paragraph sequencing in literary analysisSelecting and Interpreting Passages — The Difference Between Evidence That Works and Evidence That Decorates
Passage selection is the single most important micro-decision in the outline. The rubric criterion for “Exceeds Expectations” on content states that “passages for each subtopic are well-chosen, and interpretations demonstrate thorough thought on the topic.” Well-chosen means specific, brief, and directly relevant to the topic sentence’s claim. A long passage often contains both relevant and irrelevant material — isolating the most analytically dense sentence or phrase is a skill, and doing it well signals to the grader that you understand which details carry the argument.
Passage from Story of an Hour: “There stood, facing the open window, a comfortable, roomy armchair. Into this she sank, pressed down by a physical exhaustion that haunted her body and seemed to reach into her soul” (Chopin, 1894).
Interpretation in outline: The armchair and the open window establish a spatial tension that externalizes Louise’s psychological state — she is contained (the chair presses her down) while facing openness (the window toward spring life). The physical exhaustion that reaches her soul suggests her body is the site where social constraint is registered; freedom, when it comes, must move from the visible exterior world (the window) inward against the weight pressing down. The space is arranged so that liberation must be imaginatively seized rather than physically available — precisely the condition of Chopin’s critique of marriage.
Passage: “She did not hear the story as many women have heard the same, with a paralyzed inability to accept its significance. She wept at once, with sudden, wild abandonment, in her sister’s arms” (Chopin, 1894).
Interpretation in outline: This shows that Louise is grieving her husband’s death. She cries when she hears the news, which is how many women would react.
Problem: The passage is from the story’s opening and describes Louise’s initial grief response — it does not illustrate the topic about physical spaces. The interpretation restates the literal content of the passage without adding inferential analysis. Nothing is read “between the lines.” The passage was chosen because it is memorable, not because it serves this paragraph’s specific claim.
For the APA citation format required in the outline, direct quotes from the primary texts follow this pattern: (Author Last Name, Year, p. X) for paginated sources, or (Author Last Name, Year) if the text does not have page numbers. Since “The Story of an Hour” was originally published in 1894 and you may be using a course-provided version without page numbers, (Chopin, 1894) is acceptable. For Desiree’s Baby, which was published in 1893, use (Chopin, 1893). Do not cite them both as the same year — the original publication years differ and the in-text citations must differentiate them. Check whether your course provides page numbers in the text — if so, include them.
How Long Should Each Quoted Passage Be?
Keep passages brief and specific — one to three sentences maximum. A passage that runs for an entire paragraph contains far more material than any single interpretation can address, and the grader cannot tell which part of the passage you are analyzing. Isolate the specific words and phrases that carry the analytical weight. If you need to establish context before the key phrase, use a brief lead-in sentence in your interpretation rather than quoting the context.
How Many Passages Per Story Per Paragraph?
For a comparative paper, each body paragraph must draw from both stories. The minimum is one passage from each story per paragraph. Two from each story is stronger — it demonstrates the pattern holds across multiple moments in both texts, not just a single parallel. The outline template offers six passage slots; you do not need to use all six, but three to four is the target range. Using only one passage per story signals the parallel may be coincidental rather than systematic.
What “Reading Between the Lines” Actually Means
The assignment specifies inferential analysis explicitly. Inferential means you are drawing a conclusion the text implies but does not state. A literal reading of the “free, free, free” passage says Louise feels free. An inferential reading asks: why does Chopin present this as a whispered, initially fearful experience? What does the terror before the recognition suggest about the social context in which female freedom is experienced? Those are the questions that produce inferential interpretations.
Writing the Conclusion Section of the Outline — What “Evaluative Level” Means and How to Execute It
The conclusion section of the outline requires two things: a restatement of the thesis (in different words — not a copy-paste of the original) and three points that address “the wider implications of your interpretation.” The wider implications are the evaluative level of reading — zooming out from the specific textual argument and addressing what the analysis reveals about the real world: history, gender, race, power, literary tradition, or ongoing social relevance.
The restatement of the thesis is not a summary of the body paragraphs. It is a return to the argument in language that reflects the analytical journey the paper has taken. The original thesis introduces the claim before the evidence has been developed; the restatement can be more confident, more precise, or expressed at a higher level of abstraction because the evidence has now been laid out. The difference between a strong and a weak restatement is the difference between “As shown above, Chopin uses irony and symbolism to critique marriage” (summary) and “Chopin’s deployment of irony at both stories’ narrative endpoints suggests that for the women she imagines, insight arrives only at the moment of destruction — a structural argument about the cost of female consciousness in the social world she depicts” (evaluative).
Historical and Social Context
What does the analysis reveal about the historical conditions in which Chopin was writing? The late 19th century context of Coverture law (by which married women had no independent legal existence), the Southern racial classification system, and the social constraints on women’s expression are all relevant. The evaluative conclusion does not need to be historically extensive — one or two sentences that locate the analysis in its historical moment and draw a conclusion about what Chopin’s critique means within that context.
Relevance Beyond the Historical Moment
What does the analysis reveal about structures or dynamics that persist beyond 19th century Louisiana? The critique of how identity categories (gender, race) are imposed on individuals by social systems; the question of what kinds of freedom are imaginable within constraint; the structural analysis of how benevolent authority can be as limiting as cruel authority. These themes have ongoing resonance — the evaluative conclusion can draw that connection without overstating it.
Literary and Authorial Significance
What does the analysis suggest about Chopin’s place in literary history? She was writing during the American Realist period and is often considered a proto-feminist or a precursor to modernist women’s writing. The evaluative conclusion can address what the specific analytical argument of this paper contributes to an understanding of why Chopin’s work matters — what makes it more than period piece and why it is still assigned in literary courses more than 130 years after it was written.
The Conclusion Does Not Introduce New Textual Evidence
The evaluative level operates above the text — it draws out the implications of what has already been argued, not additional evidence from the stories. If you find yourself wanting to quote a passage in the conclusion that you did not use in the body paragraphs, that is a signal that the passage belongs in a body paragraph, not the conclusion. The conclusion is the moment to address what the argument means — not to add more evidence for it. Keep the three wider implication points at the level of claim and significance rather than textual analysis.
APA Formatting for the Outline — What the Rubric’s Format Criterion Actually Checks
The rubric’s format criterion evaluates three things: whether you use the provided outline template, whether passages are cited correctly in APA, and whether the full sentences (thesis, topic sentences, passages, restatement of thesis) are grammatically clean and written in the third person. The format criterion is worth 15 points out of 75 — a significant portion that students often underweight relative to content. A paper with strong analysis but careless formatting will not score at the highest level.
| APA Requirement | What It Means for the Outline | Common Error |
|---|---|---|
| In-Text Citations for Passages | Every direct quote from the stories needs a parenthetical citation immediately after the closing quotation mark and before any punctuation that belongs to your sentence. For Story of an Hour: (Chopin, 1894). For Desiree’s Baby: (Chopin, 1893). If page numbers are available in your text version, include them: (Chopin, 1894, p. 1). Do not write “according to the story” as a substitute for a citation. | Using the same year for both stories. They were published in different years — 1894 and 1893 — and the citations must reflect this. Also: placing the citation after the period rather than before it is an APA error. The period comes after the closing parenthesis of the citation. |
| Third Person Throughout | All full sentences in the outline — thesis, topic sentences, interpretations that are written as full sentences, restatement of thesis — must be in the third person. No “I,” “we,” “you,” or “my.” Replace “I will argue that Chopin uses irony” with “Chopin uses irony to…” or “Both stories deploy irony to…” | Starting the thesis with “In this paper, I will examine…” — this construction is first person, announces rather than argues, and tells the reader what you will do rather than making the analytical claim itself. Eliminate announcements and start directly with the argument. |
| Template Structure | Use the provided outline template exactly. Roman numerals for the main sections (I. Introduction, II. Body Paragraph 1, etc.), capital letters for the primary slot within each section (A. Topic sentence), Arabic numerals for passages (1. passage), lowercase letters for interpretations (a. interpretation). Do not reformat, reorder, or rename the sections. | Converting the outline into a running prose draft. The template requires formal outline notation — students who are more comfortable writing prose sometimes skip the template structure and write paragraphs instead. This fails the “uses the outline template required” criterion at any level above Does Not Meet Expectations. |
| Full Sentences for Required Elements | The instructions specify full sentences for: the thesis statement, all topic/transition sentences, all passages (which are quotes, so they are already full sentences), and the restatement of thesis. The background info slots (I.A, I.B, I.C) and interpretation slots can be notes or fragments if needed — but the rubric rewards interpretations written as full sentences. | Writing topic sentences as fragments or incomplete claims: “Irony in both stories” as a topic sentence. This identifies the topic but provides no claim to analyze. Write a full sentence that makes an argumentative statement: “Both stories deploy structural irony to expose the gap between social narrative and psychological reality.” |
| Titles in APA Style | Short story titles are placed in quotation marks in APA in-text references: “The Story of an Hour” and “Désirée’s Baby.” The author’s full name (Kate Chopin) is used on first reference and the last name only (Chopin) thereafter. Do not italicize short story titles — italics are reserved for novel-length works and journals in APA style. | Italicizing short story titles (as you would in MLA) or capitalizing every word in the title in-text outside of a reference list context. APA headline style capitalizes only the first word, proper nouns, and the first word after a colon in reference list titles — but in-text references to titles use standard capitalization of the full title. |
Verified External Resource: Kate Chopin International Society
The Kate Chopin International Society — available at katechopin.org — maintains a scholarly resource on Chopin’s life, historical context, and critical reception. While it is not a peer-reviewed journal and therefore would not count toward the three academic source requirement for the final paper, it provides reliable contextual information on the social conditions in which Chopin wrote, the critical history of both stories, and bibliographic references to peer-reviewed scholarship on her work. Students building toward the final paper can use the site’s bibliography to identify JSTOR-accessible peer-reviewed articles on “The Story of an Hour” and “Désirée’s Baby” from journals such as American Literature, The Southern Literary Journal, and Legacy: A Journal of American Women Writers — all of which publish peer-reviewed Chopin scholarship that would count toward the academic source requirement.
Common Errors That Cost Points — and Exactly How to Avoid Each One
| # | The Error | Why It Costs Points | The Fix |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Writing a thesis statement that is an observation rather than an argument | The rubric’s content criterion at the highest level requires a thesis that provides “a clear, compelling analysis.” An observation describes what is in the text; an analysis argues what it means and why it matters. “Both stories are about women facing oppression in the 19th century” is an observation — it describes a feature of the texts rather than making a specific interpretive claim about what Chopin is doing with that feature and to what argumentative end. A grader who reads this thesis cannot assess whether the body paragraphs succeed because there is no specific argument to test. | After writing your thesis, ask: could a reasonable reader read both stories and disagree with this claim? If the answer is no — if the claim is obviously true and requires no argument — it is not an analytical thesis. Push the claim to the level of interpretation: not just that both stories feature oppressed women, but what Chopin’s specific formal choices reveal about how that oppression operates, what it costs, or what it means for women’s interiority. |
| 2 | Choosing body paragraph topics that overlap or have unequal weight | The rubric specifically evaluates whether subtopics are “distinct and of equal significance.” If two of your four body paragraph topics are essentially the same point expressed differently, they are not distinct. If one topic is a major thematic argument and another is a minor textual observation, they do not have equal significance. Both errors cost points under the content criterion, and overlapping topics also cost points under the organization criterion because the logical sequence of the argument breaks down when topics aren’t clearly differentiated. | Write out the four topic sentences before filling in passages. Then test: does each topic sentence make a genuinely different claim from the others? Could removing one paragraph leave the argument significantly weaker? If two topics feel like variations on the same point, merge them and develop a genuinely different fourth topic. The four topics should map the full territory of the thesis without repetition. |
| 3 | Writing interpretations at the literal level — restating what the passage says | The assignment explicitly instructs students to analyze passages at the “inferential/interpretive level” and to read “between the lines.” An interpretation that says “this shows that Louise is unhappy in her marriage” after a passage that explicitly describes her unhappiness is not inferential — it is literal. The rubric at the highest level requires interpretations that “demonstrate thorough thought on the topic.” Literal restatements demonstrate no thought beyond reading comprehension, which is a prerequisite for the assignment, not a criterion for earning points. | After writing an interpretation, ask: is this reading something the text implies, or is it only restating what the text explicitly says? If the text says it directly, you need to push one level deeper: why does Chopin present it this way? What does the specific word choice suggest? What is the implication for the argument about marriage, race, gender, or social structure that your thesis is making? The inferential interpretation connects the specific passage to the broader argument of the paper. |
| 4 | Selecting passages from only one story per body paragraph | This is a comparative analysis assignment. Each body paragraph must compare — which requires textual evidence from both stories. A body paragraph that draws all its evidence from “The Story of an Hour” and mentions “Désirée’s Baby” only in the topic sentence or interpretation is not performing comparative analysis at the textual level. The rubric’s content criterion rewards analysis that systematically demonstrates the claim across both texts. | Before finalizing passage selections for each body paragraph, verify that you have at least one passage — preferably two — from each story. The passages should be parallel in the sense that they both illustrate the same analytical claim, even if they do so in different ways. The interpretation should explicitly connect the two stories: not just “this passage from Story of an Hour shows X” and then “this passage from Desiree’s Baby shows Y,” but a comparative interpretation that explains how both passages illuminate the same literary pattern, theme, or character dynamic. |
| 5 | Writing the conclusion’s wider implications as plot summary | The conclusion operates at the evaluative level — zooming out from the text to address significance, relevance, and broader implications. Students who are not clear on the distinction between evaluative and inferential levels often write conclusions that continue the textual analysis of the body paragraphs or that summarize what happened in the stories one final time. Neither of those is evaluative. The rubric’s content criterion rewards an introduction and conclusion that demonstrate “thoughtful consideration of how to develop the paper” — the conclusion is the moment to show that you understand what the analysis is for. | The three wider implication points should each move further from the text: the first might still be close to it (the historical context that makes Chopin’s critique significant), the second should move to broader thematic or structural implications, and the third should address the most abstract level of significance — what this analysis contributes to an understanding of literature, gender, race, or social power. Each point should be a sentence or brief note that you could expand into a paragraph — it is a direction for thought, not a completed argument. |
| 6 | Using research in the outline | The assignment instructions state explicitly: “Do not include any information from research yet. You first want to make sure that you have enough evidence from the text itself to defend your thesis.” An outline that quotes literary critics or secondary sources instead of primary textual passages has not followed this instruction. The rubric’s format criterion evaluates whether the outline follows the directions — including this one. Secondary sources are for the final paper, not the outline. | Every passage in the outline should be a direct quote from “The Story of an Hour” or “Désirée’s Baby.” If you find yourself wanting to use a critic’s observation about Chopin’s symbolism, convert it into a question you will answer through your own textual analysis: find the specific passage in the text that the critic is discussing and use that instead. The outline is the stage at which you demonstrate that your argument can stand on textual evidence alone. |
Pre-Submission Checklist for the Analytical Paper Outline
- Prompt choice made — either four shared elements (Option 1) or character comparison (Option 2)
- Both stories read with analytical notes taken — passages marked for potential use before writing begins
- Thesis statement written as a full, third-person sentence that makes an arguable analytical claim (not just an observation)
- Four body paragraph topics identified — distinct from each other and of equal analytical weight
- Topic sentences written as full, third-person sentences that make specific claims (not just label the topic)
- Each body paragraph contains at least two passages from each story (four passages minimum per paragraph)
- Each passage is a direct quote from the primary text with an APA in-text citation — (Chopin, 1894) or (Chopin, 1893)
- Each interpretation operates at the inferential level — reads between the lines rather than restating what the passage says
- Body paragraphs are sequenced so the argument builds — each paragraph advances the thesis rather than repeating earlier points
- Conclusion includes a restatement of the thesis in different words — not a copy-paste and not a summary of the body paragraphs
- Three wider implication points identified at the evaluative level — significance beyond the text itself
- No research sources used — all passages are from the primary texts only
- Outline uses the provided template format with correct Roman numeral / letter / number notation
- All full sentences written in third person with no first-person constructions
- Story titles formatted in quotation marks (not italicized) in APA style
FAQs: Analytical Paper Outline — Kate Chopin Comparative Analysis
What Separates a High-Scoring Analytical Outline From a Passing One
The highest-scoring outlines on this assignment share three characteristics. First, the thesis is specific enough that the four body paragraph topics follow from it directly — a reader who saw only the thesis could predict what the four topics would need to be. This signals that the argument is architecturally coherent rather than assembled from loosely related observations. Second, the passage selections are precise — they isolate the specific sentences and phrases in each story where the analytical claim is most densely concentrated, rather than quoting large blocks that contain both relevant and irrelevant material. Third, the interpretations move genuinely beyond the literal level — they identify what the passage implies about character psychology, social critique, or narrative structure, and they connect that implication back to the thesis in a way that advances the argument rather than merely confirming it.
Kate Chopin’s two stories are short, canonical, and frequently analyzed — which means the interpretive ground is well-mapped. The essays that stand out are not the ones that identify the same themes every reader notices (irony, confined women, cruel or careless husbands) but the ones that make a specific, precise argument about how Chopin deploys those elements and what they accomplish analytically. The outline is the moment to commit to a specific interpretation rather than covering every possible reading. Specificity of argument, precision of evidence, and depth of interpretation are what the rubric is measuring at every criterion level.
If you need professional help structuring your outline, developing a specific and arguable thesis for either prompt, selecting and analyzing passages at the inferential level, formatting APA citations correctly, or editing a draft for analytical clarity and precision, the team at Smart Academic Writing covers literary analysis, comparative essays, and analytical outlines at all academic levels. Visit our essay writing service, our editing and proofreading service, our APA citation help service, or our general academic writing service. You can also see how the service works or contact us directly with your assignment details and deadline.