Most students either overthink their introduction or write it as an afterthought. Both approaches produce the same result: an opening that does not do its job. The introduction and conclusion are the two moments in the essay when the examiner most clearly sees whether you are arguing or just writing. They matter disproportionately.
What an introduction needs to do
An introduction has two jobs: state your argument, and signal how you will make it. That is it. It does not need to provide historical background, define terms at length, narrate the period, or quote the question back at the examiner. Every sentence that does those things is a sentence that is not doing either of the two actual jobs.
A strong introduction does this in three to five sentences:
- Acknowledge the question’s terms — briefly, without restating them verbatim.
- State your overall argument — your answer to the question, clearly and directly.
- Signal the main lines of reasoning that support that argument.
A worked example
Question: “To what extent was Hitler’s appointment as Chancellor in January 1933 the result of the failures of the Weimar Republic’s political elite?”
Weak introduction: In January 1933, Hitler was appointed Chancellor of Germany. The Weimar Republic had existed since 1919 following Germany’s defeat in the First World War. There were many reasons why Hitler came to power, including the Great Depression, the weaknesses of Weimar, and the role of von Papen and Hindenburg. This essay will examine the extent to which the failures of the political elite were responsible.
That introduction contains three sentences of scene-setting that add nothing, and a final sentence that announces a plan rather than making an argument. The examiner knows you are going to “examine the extent” — that is what the question asked. This opening earns no analytical credit.
Strong introduction: Hitler’s appointment was the product of a specific conjuncture: structural vulnerabilities in the Weimar system that the Depression exposed, and a catastrophic failure of political judgement by the conservative elite who believed they could use Nazi mass support while retaining power themselves. Elite miscalculation was decisive in the immediate term, but it operated within constraints — economic collapse, institutional weakness, the erosion of democratic legitimacy — that made some form of authoritarian breakthrough likely regardless of the specific actors involved. The question is therefore not whether elite failure mattered but how much autonomous force it had relative to the structural conditions that made it possible.
That introduction states a position, acknowledges complexity, and signals the analytical framework (structural conditions vs. contingent decisions) that will organise the essay. The examiner knows from the first paragraph what kind of answer this will be.
What a conclusion needs to do
The conclusion is where your argument is delivered, not where it is summarised. There is a crucial difference. A summary conclusion recaps the paragraph topics: In conclusion, there were three main reasons: the Depression, elite miscalculation, and Weimar’s structural weaknesses. That earns nothing. The examiner has just read the essay; they do not need a recap.
A strong conclusion synthesises: it draws together the threads of the argument to reach a definite, qualified judgement on the question. It should do three things:
- Weigh the factors or arguments you have developed — not just list them, but assess their relative importance.
- Deliver a clear, direct answer to the question.
- Acknowledge the limits of that answer — what would complicate or qualify it.
The most common conclusion mistakes
- The list conclusion. In conclusion, factors A, B and C were all important. This is description. A conclusion requires a judgement about which factor was most significant, and why.
- The contradiction conclusion. An essay that argues one position and then concludes with a different one suggests the student has not thought through their argument before writing. The conclusion should be consistent with — and follow logically from — the body of the essay.
- The hedge conclusion. In conclusion, it is difficult to say definitively… Historians reach qualified conclusions; they do not refuse to reach conclusions. You must commit to an answer, even if you acknowledge it is not the whole story.
- The new evidence conclusion. Do not introduce facts or arguments in the conclusion that did not appear in the body. The conclusion synthesises what came before; it does not start new arguments.
