In the beginning was the topic.

The topic is the broad heading for any article we would choose to do. But with only the topic, we are definitely not reay to write. The topic offers us only an idea of where to begin the hunt for the article. For example, I may know that many children's magazines are interested in bringing articles on the topic of technology to young readers.

Technology, though, is far too sweeping to make an article. But within the sweeping topic lie many ideas -- I might, for example, want to do an article on the new stackable "farms" that Organitech is developing using huge shipping containers and hydroponics. A stackable farm would definitely be weird enough to capture the attention of a kid. Or I might decide to do an article on the car developed in India that runs on compressed air instead of gasoline -- wouldn't kids love a car that runs on air? Or how about the NASA Institute for Advanced Concepts idea of a solar powered unmanned aircraft that uses a flapping motion to fly -- the pictures alone are coolness personified. Clearly these are precisely focused pieces of the big topic of technology.

Once I know my focus, I'm probably well on my way with research. A little research is almost always necessary to ferret out a really good focus for an article. For the ideas above, I simply poked around Ecogreek -- that site would not end up appearing in my bibliography. It is simply a launching spot for ideas and always an entertaining read. I like the Ecogeek site because all the technology in the articles is related to being environmentally friendly and that's something that interests children's magazine editors as well. So, it's a great spot for gleaning potential focused technology pieces that are very timely.

Idea generating sites often also point me in the direction of more sources since they'll share what their sources are -- beyond that, I also use Google to find even more sites where I can look for more sources. Sooner or later, I run across sources the will please an editor: government agencies, magazines, newspapers, books, and experts in the field. It's a multi-step process but worthwhile because I am learning every step of the way. If I stopped at the first site and tried to write an article, I wouldn't have enough information to do a good job and I wouldn't have sources that would please an editor. You get the best articles when you commit to digging for quite a while before you begin writing.

As the idea takes shape, I can work on how the article will be organized. Think of your article as being made up of mini-articles in the form of paragraphs. Each paragraph will focus on a single splinter of the total focus. Everything in the paragraph must be related. That's the key to organization -- recognizing what material is related and grouping it accordingly. Editors often get articles made up of odd random facts clumped together with little discernable pattern or grouping -- they don't buy those articles. Editors are looking for a focused article with a clear, flowing organization.

Let's consider an article on cars that run on air. What splinters of this focus would make up my paragraphs? I could have a paragraph about the designer and what made him focus on a compressed air-driven car. I could have another paragraph on how a compressed-air driven car works -- keeping it simple since this is for kids. Then I could have yet another paragraph on how soon the reader might see one of these on the road. Now, while researching this article, I might learn something really interesting about traffic flow in India, but if it doesn't relate cleanly and directly to my focus or to the splinter focuses of my paragraphs -- I'll have to leave that interesting bit out. That's one of the toughest things about organization -- not what you put in but what you have to leave out. We all hate to leave out anything.

Many new writers cram an article with every single interesting thing they learned while researching. Because of the constraints of article length, these writers have to leave out explainations and analogies and depth and instead cram in all the random facts that seem cool, even if they don't directly relate to the overall focus of the article. I've seen articles on Australian camels that include cool facts about llamas, articles on Indy car safety that include cool hobbies of car drivers, and articles focusing on someone's discovery of some cool new thing that includes facts about the person's grade school friends. None of those pieces would squeak by an editor because the writers slid away from the focus and lost sight of their organization.

The basic organization of an article looks like this:

• Opening Paragraph -- intro of the coolest thing about the subject, often with an anecdote. The intro gives a clear sense of the focus of the piece while grabbing reader attention.
• Body paragraphs -- each a splinter of the focus.
• Closing paragraph -- gives the "punch line" of the article. The ending needs to feel satisfying, as if the article were leading up to this. It can be a "twist" on the subject, a funny turn of phrase about the subject, or a subtle connecting of the subject to the reader's life.

You will use as many splinter paragraphs you need to cover the focus. If you find you have way too many splinters, your focus might be too wide. If you find you have too few splinters, your focus may be too narrow. Changing the scope of the focus means rewriting the entire article, not just tacking on or cutting out splinters, because your opening and closing paragraphs must correctly express what the article is really about -- if that focus changes, then so must the opening and closing.

A properly organized article will be easy to explain in a cover letter. You will know instantly what the most interesting thing about the focus is (since that will be in your opening paragraph). You will know instantly what the scope of the focus is (since that is the sum of the splinters). And you will know instantly what the value of the focus is for the reader (since the closing paragraph is likely to hint at it). If you find your cover letter doesn't sound interesting or clear -- chances are that's a reflection of your focus and organization. Another way to check if your organization is clear is to have someone read the article, then take it from them and have them tell you what it's about. A smoothly organized article is easy to summarize, so a reader should have no problem telling you about it.

Go through the article an ask yourself:

• What is this paragraph about?
• How does it relate to the paragraph about it?
• How does it relate to the paragraph below it?
• If I move this paragraph to a new spot -- how does that change the article?

A perfect organization will give you easy answers to each of those questions -- so keep tinkering until you find you really can answer them. An editor will appreciate your attention to organization and you'll appreciate the acceptance letters that come from a focused, well organized article. So -- let's get organized. You'll be glad you did.