Non-parallel: \u00a0I like drawing, reading, and to play<\/em> the piano.<\/p>\n Parallel: \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 I like drawing, reading, and playing<\/em> the piano.<\/p>\n Let’s compare the two examples above. \u00a0In the Parallel one, all the speaker’s activities are listed in the same form; therefore, parallelism is achieved. In the Non-parallel one, drawing<\/span> \u00a0and reading<\/span>\u00a0are in -ing (gerund) form, while to play<\/span> is in infinitive form.<\/p>\n Parallel structures are parts of a sentence that have similar construction. \u00a0What creates parallelism is the way those parts are written rather than their meaning.<\/p>\n In the academic world, parallelism is viewed fondly – \u00a0failure to execute it, disapprovingly. Last I heard, English 12 government exams are marked with consideration for parallel structures. \u00a0A sentence like the “Non-parallel” example above would likely receive a deduction for “faulty parallelism.”<\/p>\n While English is mainly about content, markers like style as well. \u00a0A few nice touches – like parallelism – can elevate a teacher’s perception of a paper from “good” to “very good”, or from “very good” to “great.” \u00a0Hopefully, that paper will be yours:)<\/p>\n