# Transition and Flow Map

Diagnose missing reasoning and improve how sections, paragraphs, claims, examples, evidence, exceptions, and actions connect across a draft.

## Usage note

Use this map after the draft has a complete argument or task sequence but before polishing individual sentences. Diagnose the relationship between units before adding transition phrases. Words such as “therefore” cannot repair missing evidence, a reversed sequence, or two paragraphs that address unrelated questions.

## How to use this template

1. State the document’s reader task or central argument and summarize each section and paragraph by function.
2. Draw or list the dependency between claims, evidence, definitions, instructions, examples, and exceptions.
3. Name the relationship at every boundary and flag missing steps, duplication, false transitions, or misplaced material.
4. Reorder, combine, divide, add, or remove content before rewriting transition sentences.
5. Read the structural route aloud, test it with a reviewer, and complete a final reference and terminology check.

## Blank template

### Document route

- **Draft title:** [Working title]
- **Primary reader task:** [What should the reader understand or do?]
- **Starting knowledge:** [What can safely be assumed?]
- **Destination:** [Desired conclusion or completed action]
- **Structural pattern:** [Chronology, problem-solution, hierarchy, comparison, task sequence, or another]
- **Known branch:** [Exception or alternate path]

### Unit map

- **Unit ID:** [Section or paragraph number]
- **Current heading or opening:** [Text]
- **Function:** [Claim / Evidence / Example / Definition / Instruction / Qualification / Handoff]
- **One-sentence content:** [What this unit contributes]
- **Dependency:** [What must be known first?]
- **Next relationship:** [Cause, contrast, sequence, evidence, example, or another]
- **Problem:** [Missing step, duplicate, misplaced, mixed purpose, or None]
- **Revision:** [Move, combine, split, add, remove, or retain]

### Boundary review

- **Boundary:** [Unit A → Unit B]
- **Intended relationship:** [Name it]
- **Reader question at boundary:** [What may they ask?]
- **Current cue:** [Heading, topic sentence, connective phrase, or none]
- **Logic supported:** [Yes / No / Partly, with reason]
- **New cue or structural fix:** [Write action]
- [ ] Demonstrative words such as “this” have a clear referent.
- [ ] Evidence appears beside the claim it supports.
- [ ] Qualifications cannot be mistaken for optional detail.
- [ ] Instructions respect prerequisites and dependencies.

### Final test

- **Topic-sentence read:** [What route appears?]
- **Reviewer summary:** [How another reader described the flow]
- **Unexpected jump:** [Location and fix]
- **Intentional repetition:** [Why it remains]
- **Cross-link needed:** [Destination and purpose]
- **Decision owner:** [Writer or editor]