The Framing Problem: How to Make Your Ideas Matter
A student recently sat in my office, frustrated with her draft on Jonathan Haidt's The Anxious Generation "The problem is, I agree with most of it," she said. "Kids are on their phones too much and parents don’t allow enough free play. But I think his argument is too broad. I just don't know how to write that."
Her draft defaulted to the safest academic move: summaries of parts of Haidt's book and a few tentative, unfocused criticisms. She'd retreated into summary because she hadn’t decided what conversation she wanted to enter.
“Let's try something,” I said. “In one of your paragraphs, you mentioned that he doesn’t spend enough time considering economic factors. Describe that?”
“Well, his solutions assume parents live near parks, and have safe neighborhoods,” she said.
“Ok, great. And you also mention disabilities. Describe that?”
“His whole argument assumes neurotypical kids, not students who use phones for accessibility,” she said. “He’s missing that this technology has a lot of positives and he’s making this big argument that we should get rid of it instead of figuring out how to make it work better.”
“What if you framed the entire essay through one of those ideas instead?” I asked. “Build your discussion of his book out of it?”
We talked through her options and she decided she was interested in focusing on where neurodiverse kids fit within Haidt’s argument, and how it shows some of the limitations of his book’s approach.
For our assignment, it didn't matter which option she chose. But for her, as a writer, the choice was everything. Recognizing that we decide what conversation to enter is the most crucial step in making our ideas matter.
We face this choice every time we write. It's not about finding a "correct" frame. There is never just one. In fact, “framing” can be a difficult concept to pin down because it is invisible work. Sociologist Erving Goffman argued that frames are how we organize experience—the invisible structures that determine what we notice and what fades into the background. To choose a frame is to enter a conversation.
Climbing a Tree
Let me show you how this works with a travel article I wrote in graduate school.
I was in the pacific island nation of Kiribati and climbed a forty-five-foot palm tree with a fifteen-year-old boy named Batiota. Batiota showed me how to collect tree sap—dangerous work, but essential—and I wrote about the experience.
For a travel magazine, it became a story about an exciting experience and a boy’s interesting work. The framing paragraphs focused on culture and location: why he does this work, how you get there, what the place is known for, etc. The article sold wanderlust.
But watch what happens when we change the frame.
Focus on climate science instead, and the story transforms. Harvesting those trees has become increasingly essential work because rising seas have contaminated their island’s fresh water. Kiribati is primarily a subsistence economy, so without as much fresh water, it is difficult to grow food. Coconut sap is one of the few foods that doesn’t need to be purchased and shipped in. If I’d used this context, then the boy's dangerous work is about a people’s dwindling ability to sustain themselves, not my adventure or his morning chores.
Frame it through colonial history, and we see something else. He's not in school because high school here requires English, not I-Kiribati. He wasn't proficient enough in his secondary language to continue. In that context, the scar from his fall isn't just an occupational hazard; it's evidence of a school system rooted in colonial history rather than local need. Even the name Kiribati is the local pronunciation of "Gilberts," the colonial-era British name.
Notice what's happening here. Same tree. Same climb. Same fifteen-year-old. But each time I shift the frame, you understand the story completely differently. That's the power you have as a writer.
Neither of those frames made it into that essay. I wrote them into other essays but omitted them from this travel article. I tried, but every time I did, the context it demanded hijacked the piece, pulling it out of the travel genre entirely, or it felt like a distracting footnote. So those frames appeared in their own essays, where they had room to breathe.
Those omissions weren't neutral; they were a choice. I could have refused the assignment. Instead, I chose small subversions of the genre, focusing on the boy’s work over the adventure. These choices are compromises that every writer faces. The key is recognizing them as ideological choices.
This might feel uncomfortable. You might have been taught that good writing is neutral, objective, clear. But neutrality is itself a choice, usualy the choice to accept the dominant frame without questioning it.
Understanding this helps us see how texts are built upon a meaningful choice.
Frame as Argument
Your frame is often your implicit argument. It focuses readers on what conversation you're entering and what matters. Choosing to frame something like immigration through economics instead of human rights isn't a neutral choice, it's taking a stance on what conversation you think needs highlighting.
Genre plays a part too. It shapes which frames seem natural or off-limits: travel articles sell trips, op-eds argue for change.
This is why writing scholar Carolyn Miller calls genres "social actions." Genres don't just format information, they shape what we say and how we say it. Charles Bazerman takes this further, arguing that genres don't just shape communication, they shape what we're able to think within them. When you write a lab report, you're embracing empirical observation. When you write for a travel magazine, you're embracing a tourist's perspective.
When my student chose to frame her analytical essay on Haidt through the lens of disability and accessibility, she was arguing that this perspective is undervalued in dialogues about technology and teens. That choice shifted the discourse she would enter. It doesn't mean that it’s the only discourse she’ll enter. That's what other essays are for, and where expertise grows. Writers develop expertise not by saying everything at once but by writing a series of pieces, each one an entry into a specific conversation. The travel piece, the climate piece, the colonial history piece—they aren't failed versions of one another. They're a body of work. But making that choice each time is meaningful.
My student’s summary-focused draft wasn't without ideology, either. While skilled summary involves framing—choosing what to compress and what to foreground—defaulting to summary often means accepting someone else's choices. It treats the author's framing as natural rather than constructed, repeating a conversation rather than entering one.
Finding Your Frame
We all navigate frames in daily life. We adjust how we describe a success or failure depending on whether we're talking to a parent, a potential employer, or a friend. The difference is that in casual discourse, these shifts happen instinctively.
Academic writing feels different because it's often presented as discovering truth rather than exploring one narrow view. But even empirical discoveries require frames to become meaningful. Data means nothing without an interpretive frame. Writing requires a choice to focus on one aspect of a very complex reality.
This choice can happen throughout your writing process. You can deeply alter a draft by strengthening the moments where you step back from a quote or datapoint to explain why it matters. That move—pausing to explain significance—is where you build a coherent frame.
When my student reconsidered her Haidt essay, she wasn't just finding her voice, she was finding her analytical frame—her way into a conversation she felt was important or overlooked.
To find your frame, you might ask what happens to a text when:
- Consider Disciplinary Lenses: How would a psychologist analyze this versus a historian? What readings from other classes complicate this text?
- Adjust the Spatial Scale: How does this idea look globally, or through a specific demographic? Or, how do individual stories challenge the broad argument?
- Change the Time Scale: Is this a recent development or part of a longer evolution? Or, how have events since publication altered the debate?
- Consider the Stakeholders: Who is represented in this text, and who is silenced? What does the issue look like from someone being overlooked?
These aren't formulas, nor is this an exhaustive list. Instead, they're sample prompts to help you see what's already there. You might use one frame for an entire essay, or a combination. The point is choosing deliberately.
By choosing her own frame, my student could agree with Haidt’s premise while expanding into a related conversation. Her essay wasn't a rebuttal. She took Haidt's argument seriously enough to ask where it hadn't gone yet. That's not disagreement, it's extension. Sometimes the most interesting frame doesn’t lead us toward "here's what's wrong" but "here's what's missing."
Defaulting to summary lets someone else make these choices for you. Your power lies in choosing which conversations matter. While anyone can tell the story of someone climbing a tree, only you can decide if that climb is a story about adventure, climate change, or colonial history. These choices are never neutral. They're indications of what matters.
But here's what I want you to sit with: every frame you choose also means frames you're leaving out. My travel article sold wanderlust while a boy climbed a tree so his family could eat. My student's essay will illuminate disability but overlook economics. That's the condition of writing. The question isn't whether your frame is complete. It's whether you chose it deliberately, knowing what it costs.
The next time you write, don't just ask what conversation you want to enter. Ask what you're leaving out.
—-
Brice Particelli is a faculty member at UC Berkeley’s College Writing Programs. His scholarship on writing Pedagogy has been published in Pedagogy and the Journal of Response to Writing, and his essays appear in magazines including Harper’s and Guernica.