Structure of written analysis of one's own work

I am to write an analysis of a piece of mine for a university that I am applying and I don't know how I should compose the whole thing. I've thought of two sections: first where I explain the idea behind the piece and second, an analysis of how the piece is built. Is this correct? Should I include anything else?

Thanks in advance! :)

Alexandros

Alex -

I'd start with the obvious - rhythm, harmony, thematic material, orchestration and what models you chose and why. The university wants to get an idea of your knowledge of these things and how much you are conscious of the parameters you control at various levels (eg maybe you set strict guidelines about timbre and motivic development but weren't too fussy over harmonic development etc)