Primary 2 engineering design vocabulary helps children use Grade 2 STEM vocabulary words with meanings and examples to define problems, plan solutions, build models, test ideas and explain evidence. This Top 100 Primary 2 Vocabulary List is a worldwide, location-neutral technical English guide for second-grade learners, parents and teachers.
Students looking for 2nd grade engineering vocabulary, engineering design process vocabulary, STEM vocabulary for kids, science vocabulary words, problem-solving vocabulary, prototype vocabulary and design words often find short glossaries. This longform guide connects each term to reading, writing, mathematics, science and practical reasoning so vocabulary becomes usable language rather than a spelling list.
Maren, Iona and Leonie are fictional SETC learning characters in this new collection. Maren models writing and idea structure, Iona models reading, inference and evidence, and Leonie models timing, execution and recovery. This volume complements the Primary 2 paper-engineering vocabulary guide: that article owns a specific making application; this article owns the broader engineering design-process language.
The engineering vocabulary cycle
Engineering language is most useful as a cycle: understand a problem, identify a user and need, set criteria and constraints, generate alternatives, plan, build a model or prototype, test it, record results, evaluate evidence, improve the design and communicate what was learned. A real design process can loop backwards. A test may reveal a new constraint; feedback may change a requirement; a failed prototype may produce the most useful evidence of the lesson.
This is not an official universal Grade 2 syllabus. Different school systems introduce engineering at different ages and with different terminology. The learning aim here is portable: a child should be able to understand the term, recognise it in a new context, use it in a sentence and connect it to a sensible action or judgement.
Problem and purpose: ten high-utility words
001. Problem. In this collection, problem is a working engineering-design word used to help a learner define what needs changing before building. Maren uses the word when organising a clear explanation; Iona asks what detail or evidence makes the word justified; Leonie asks what action should follow. Example: “We used problem when we compared two simple model ideas and explained why one choice better matched the task.” Transfer: ask the learner to use problem in a different design situation and explain what would make the word inaccurate. The important step is not repeating a definition but showing the relationship between the word, the situation and the decision.
002. Need. In this collection, need is a working engineering-design word used to help a learner define what needs changing before building. Maren uses the word when organising a clear explanation; Iona asks what detail or evidence makes the word justified; Leonie asks what action should follow. Example: “We used need when we compared two simple model ideas and explained why one choice better matched the task.” Transfer: ask the learner to use need in a different design situation and explain what would make the word inaccurate. The important step is not repeating a definition but showing the relationship between the word, the situation and the decision.
003. User. In this collection, user is a working engineering-design word used to help a learner define what needs changing before building. Maren uses the word when organising a clear explanation; Iona asks what detail or evidence makes the word justified; Leonie asks what action should follow. Example: “We used user when we compared two simple model ideas and explained why one choice better matched the task.” Transfer: ask the learner to use user in a different design situation and explain what would make the word inaccurate. The important step is not repeating a definition but showing the relationship between the word, the situation and the decision.
004. Goal. In this collection, goal is a working engineering-design word used to help a learner define what needs changing before building. Maren uses the word when organising a clear explanation; Iona asks what detail or evidence makes the word justified; Leonie asks what action should follow. Example: “We used goal when we compared two simple model ideas and explained why one choice better matched the task.” Transfer: ask the learner to use goal in a different design situation and explain what would make the word inaccurate. The important step is not repeating a definition but showing the relationship between the word, the situation and the decision.
005. Question. In this collection, question is a working engineering-design word used to help a learner define what needs changing before building. Maren uses the word when organising a clear explanation; Iona asks what detail or evidence makes the word justified; Leonie asks what action should follow. Example: “We used question when we compared two simple model ideas and explained why one choice better matched the task.” Transfer: ask the learner to use question in a different design situation and explain what would make the word inaccurate. The important step is not repeating a definition but showing the relationship between the word, the situation and the decision.
006. Observe. In this collection, observe is a working engineering-design word used to help a learner define what needs changing before building. Maren uses the word when organising a clear explanation; Iona asks what detail or evidence makes the word justified; Leonie asks what action should follow. Example: “We used observe when we compared two simple model ideas and explained why one choice better matched the task.” Transfer: ask the learner to use observe in a different design situation and explain what would make the word inaccurate. The important step is not repeating a definition but showing the relationship between the word, the situation and the decision.
007. Research. In this collection, research is a working engineering-design word used to help a learner define what needs changing before building. Maren uses the word when organising a clear explanation; Iona asks what detail or evidence makes the word justified; Leonie asks what action should follow. Example: “We used research when we compared two simple model ideas and explained why one choice better matched the task.” Transfer: ask the learner to use research in a different design situation and explain what would make the word inaccurate. The important step is not repeating a definition but showing the relationship between the word, the situation and the decision.
008. Information. In this collection, information is a working engineering-design word used to help a learner define what needs changing before building. Maren uses the word when organising a clear explanation; Iona asks what detail or evidence makes the word justified; Leonie asks what action should follow. Example: “We used information when we compared two simple model ideas and explained why one choice better matched the task.” Transfer: ask the learner to use information in a different design situation and explain what would make the word inaccurate. The important step is not repeating a definition but showing the relationship between the word, the situation and the decision.
009. Evidence. In this collection, evidence is a working engineering-design word used to help a learner define what needs changing before building. Maren uses the word when organising a clear explanation; Iona asks what detail or evidence makes the word justified; Leonie asks what action should follow. Example: “We used evidence when we compared two simple model ideas and explained why one choice better matched the task.” Transfer: ask the learner to use evidence in a different design situation and explain what would make the word inaccurate. The important step is not repeating a definition but showing the relationship between the word, the situation and the decision.
010. Requirement. In this collection, requirement is a working engineering-design word used to help a learner define what needs changing before building. Maren uses the word when organising a clear explanation; Iona asks what detail or evidence makes the word justified; Leonie asks what action should follow. Example: “We used requirement when we compared two simple model ideas and explained why one choice better matched the task.” Transfer: ask the learner to use requirement in a different design situation and explain what would make the word inaccurate. The important step is not repeating a definition but showing the relationship between the word, the situation and the decision.
Problem and purpose laboratory: define what needs changing before building
Laboratory 1. Maren begins with a small fictional classroom challenge: make a simple holder, route marker or information display that must satisfy a stated purpose. Before anyone builds, she asks the group to select three words from this section and use them to describe the task. Iona then checks the wording against the evidence. If a learner says a design is successful before it has been tested, she asks what observation would justify that conclusion. Leonie reduces the task when it becomes overloaded: one question, one planned change and one recorded result. This routine matters because technical vocabulary should make thinking clearer, not make a young learner carry unnecessary verbal load.
Now change one condition. A material becomes unavailable, the permitted size becomes smaller, a user asks for a clearer label, or the first model tips during a trial. The learner must decide which word from the section becomes newly important and which earlier statement needs revision. A good answer names the changed condition, selects a word that fits and explains the connection. A weak answer merely inserts the longest available term. The correction is to return to meaning: what happened, what do we know, what remains uncertain, and what should be done next?
For reading practice, give a four-sentence report containing one overstatement. The report might say that a model “always works” after a single successful attempt, or that a change “improved everything” when only one feature was measured. Ask the learner to underline the evidence and fence the conclusion to what the evidence can support. For writing practice, require a short three-part response: observation, reason and next action. This produces a compact technical paragraph without demanding adult-level engineering language.
Laboratory 2. Maren begins with a small fictional classroom challenge: make a simple holder, route marker or information display that must satisfy a stated purpose. Before anyone builds, she asks the group to select three words from this section and use them to describe the task. Iona then checks the wording against the evidence. If a learner says a design is successful before it has been tested, she asks what observation would justify that conclusion. Leonie reduces the task when it becomes overloaded: one question, one planned change and one recorded result. This routine matters because technical vocabulary should make thinking clearer, not make a young learner carry unnecessary verbal load.
Now change one condition. A material becomes unavailable, the permitted size becomes smaller, a user asks for a clearer label, or the first model tips during a trial. The learner must decide which word from the section becomes newly important and which earlier statement needs revision. A good answer names the changed condition, selects a word that fits and explains the connection. A weak answer merely inserts the longest available term. The correction is to return to meaning: what happened, what do we know, what remains uncertain, and what should be done next?
For reading practice, give a four-sentence report containing one overstatement. The report might say that a model “always works” after a single successful attempt, or that a change “improved everything” when only one feature was measured. Ask the learner to underline the evidence and fence the conclusion to what the evidence can support. For writing practice, require a short three-part response: observation, reason and next action. This produces a compact technical paragraph without demanding adult-level engineering language.
Laboratory 3. Maren begins with a small fictional classroom challenge: make a simple holder, route marker or information display that must satisfy a stated purpose. Before anyone builds, she asks the group to select three words from this section and use them to describe the task. Iona then checks the wording against the evidence. If a learner says a design is successful before it has been tested, she asks what observation would justify that conclusion. Leonie reduces the task when it becomes overloaded: one question, one planned change and one recorded result. This routine matters because technical vocabulary should make thinking clearer, not make a young learner carry unnecessary verbal load.
Now change one condition. A material becomes unavailable, the permitted size becomes smaller, a user asks for a clearer label, or the first model tips during a trial. The learner must decide which word from the section becomes newly important and which earlier statement needs revision. A good answer names the changed condition, selects a word that fits and explains the connection. A weak answer merely inserts the longest available term. The correction is to return to meaning: what happened, what do we know, what remains uncertain, and what should be done next?
For reading practice, give a four-sentence report containing one overstatement. The report might say that a model “always works” after a single successful attempt, or that a change “improved everything” when only one feature was measured. Ask the learner to underline the evidence and fence the conclusion to what the evidence can support. For writing practice, require a short three-part response: observation, reason and next action. This produces a compact technical paragraph without demanding adult-level engineering language.
Laboratory 4. Maren begins with a small fictional classroom challenge: make a simple holder, route marker or information display that must satisfy a stated purpose. Before anyone builds, she asks the group to select three words from this section and use them to describe the task. Iona then checks the wording against the evidence. If a learner says a design is successful before it has been tested, she asks what observation would justify that conclusion. Leonie reduces the task when it becomes overloaded: one question, one planned change and one recorded result. This routine matters because technical vocabulary should make thinking clearer, not make a young learner carry unnecessary verbal load.
Now change one condition. A material becomes unavailable, the permitted size becomes smaller, a user asks for a clearer label, or the first model tips during a trial. The learner must decide which word from the section becomes newly important and which earlier statement needs revision. A good answer names the changed condition, selects a word that fits and explains the connection. A weak answer merely inserts the longest available term. The correction is to return to meaning: what happened, what do we know, what remains uncertain, and what should be done next?
For reading practice, give a four-sentence report containing one overstatement. The report might say that a model “always works” after a single successful attempt, or that a change “improved everything” when only one feature was measured. Ask the learner to underline the evidence and fence the conclusion to what the evidence can support. For writing practice, require a short three-part response: observation, reason and next action. This produces a compact technical paragraph without demanding adult-level engineering language.
Laboratory 5. Maren begins with a small fictional classroom challenge: make a simple holder, route marker or information display that must satisfy a stated purpose. Before anyone builds, she asks the group to select three words from this section and use them to describe the task. Iona then checks the wording against the evidence. If a learner says a design is successful before it has been tested, she asks what observation would justify that conclusion. Leonie reduces the task when it becomes overloaded: one question, one planned change and one recorded result. This routine matters because technical vocabulary should make thinking clearer, not make a young learner carry unnecessary verbal load.
Now change one condition. A material becomes unavailable, the permitted size becomes smaller, a user asks for a clearer label, or the first model tips during a trial. The learner must decide which word from the section becomes newly important and which earlier statement needs revision. A good answer names the changed condition, selects a word that fits and explains the connection. A weak answer merely inserts the longest available term. The correction is to return to meaning: what happened, what do we know, what remains uncertain, and what should be done next?
For reading practice, give a four-sentence report containing one overstatement. The report might say that a model “always works” after a single successful attempt, or that a change “improved everything” when only one feature was measured. Ask the learner to underline the evidence and fence the conclusion to what the evidence can support. For writing practice, require a short three-part response: observation, reason and next action. This produces a compact technical paragraph without demanding adult-level engineering language.
Laboratory 6. Maren begins with a small fictional classroom challenge: make a simple holder, route marker or information display that must satisfy a stated purpose. Before anyone builds, she asks the group to select three words from this section and use them to describe the task. Iona then checks the wording against the evidence. If a learner says a design is successful before it has been tested, she asks what observation would justify that conclusion. Leonie reduces the task when it becomes overloaded: one question, one planned change and one recorded result. This routine matters because technical vocabulary should make thinking clearer, not make a young learner carry unnecessary verbal load.
Now change one condition. A material becomes unavailable, the permitted size becomes smaller, a user asks for a clearer label, or the first model tips during a trial. The learner must decide which word from the section becomes newly important and which earlier statement needs revision. A good answer names the changed condition, selects a word that fits and explains the connection. A weak answer merely inserts the longest available term. The correction is to return to meaning: what happened, what do we know, what remains uncertain, and what should be done next?
For reading practice, give a four-sentence report containing one overstatement. The report might say that a model “always works” after a single successful attempt, or that a change “improved everything” when only one feature was measured. Ask the learner to underline the evidence and fence the conclusion to what the evidence can support. For writing practice, require a short three-part response: observation, reason and next action. This produces a compact technical paragraph without demanding adult-level engineering language.
Criteria and limits: ten high-utility words
011. Criteria. In this collection, criteria is a working engineering-design word used to help a learner decide what success means and what boundaries apply. Maren uses the word when organising a clear explanation; Iona asks what detail or evidence makes the word justified; Leonie asks what action should follow. Example: “We used criteria when we compared two simple model ideas and explained why one choice better matched the task.” Transfer: ask the learner to use criteria in a different design situation and explain what would make the word inaccurate. The important step is not repeating a definition but showing the relationship between the word, the situation and the decision.
012. Constraint. In this collection, constraint is a working engineering-design word used to help a learner decide what success means and what boundaries apply. Maren uses the word when organising a clear explanation; Iona asks what detail or evidence makes the word justified; Leonie asks what action should follow. Example: “We used constraint when we compared two simple model ideas and explained why one choice better matched the task.” Transfer: ask the learner to use constraint in a different design situation and explain what would make the word inaccurate. The important step is not repeating a definition but showing the relationship between the word, the situation and the decision.
013. Limit. In this collection, limit is a working engineering-design word used to help a learner decide what success means and what boundaries apply. Maren uses the word when organising a clear explanation; Iona asks what detail or evidence makes the word justified; Leonie asks what action should follow. Example: “We used limit when we compared two simple model ideas and explained why one choice better matched the task.” Transfer: ask the learner to use limit in a different design situation and explain what would make the word inaccurate. The important step is not repeating a definition but showing the relationship between the word, the situation and the decision.
014. Resource. In this collection, resource is a working engineering-design word used to help a learner decide what success means and what boundaries apply. Maren uses the word when organising a clear explanation; Iona asks what detail or evidence makes the word justified; Leonie asks what action should follow. Example: “We used resource when we compared two simple model ideas and explained why one choice better matched the task.” Transfer: ask the learner to use resource in a different design situation and explain what would make the word inaccurate. The important step is not repeating a definition but showing the relationship between the word, the situation and the decision.
015. Material. In this collection, material is a working engineering-design word used to help a learner decide what success means and what boundaries apply. Maren uses the word when organising a clear explanation; Iona asks what detail or evidence makes the word justified; Leonie asks what action should follow. Example: “We used material when we compared two simple model ideas and explained why one choice better matched the task.” Transfer: ask the learner to use material in a different design situation and explain what would make the word inaccurate. The important step is not repeating a definition but showing the relationship between the word, the situation and the decision.
016. Property. In this collection, property is a working engineering-design word used to help a learner decide what success means and what boundaries apply. Maren uses the word when organising a clear explanation; Iona asks what detail or evidence makes the word justified; Leonie asks what action should follow. Example: “We used property when we compared two simple model ideas and explained why one choice better matched the task.” Transfer: ask the learner to use property in a different design situation and explain what would make the word inaccurate. The important step is not repeating a definition but showing the relationship between the word, the situation and the decision.
017. Shape. In this collection, shape is a working engineering-design word used to help a learner decide what success means and what boundaries apply. Maren uses the word when organising a clear explanation; Iona asks what detail or evidence makes the word justified; Leonie asks what action should follow. Example: “We used shape when we compared two simple model ideas and explained why one choice better matched the task.” Transfer: ask the learner to use shape in a different design situation and explain what would make the word inaccurate. The important step is not repeating a definition but showing the relationship between the word, the situation and the decision.
018. Size. In this collection, size is a working engineering-design word used to help a learner decide what success means and what boundaries apply. Maren uses the word when organising a clear explanation; Iona asks what detail or evidence makes the word justified; Leonie asks what action should follow. Example: “We used size when we compared two simple model ideas and explained why one choice better matched the task.” Transfer: ask the learner to use size in a different design situation and explain what would make the word inaccurate. The important step is not repeating a definition but showing the relationship between the word, the situation and the decision.
019. Measure. In this collection, measure is a working engineering-design word used to help a learner decide what success means and what boundaries apply. Maren uses the word when organising a clear explanation; Iona asks what detail or evidence makes the word justified; Leonie asks what action should follow. Example: “We used measure when we compared two simple model ideas and explained why one choice better matched the task.” Transfer: ask the learner to use measure in a different design situation and explain what would make the word inaccurate. The important step is not repeating a definition but showing the relationship between the word, the situation and the decision.
020. Length. In this collection, length is a working engineering-design word used to help a learner decide what success means and what boundaries apply. Maren uses the word when organising a clear explanation; Iona asks what detail or evidence makes the word justified; Leonie asks what action should follow. Example: “We used length when we compared two simple model ideas and explained why one choice better matched the task.” Transfer: ask the learner to use length in a different design situation and explain what would make the word inaccurate. The important step is not repeating a definition but showing the relationship between the word, the situation and the decision.
Criteria and limits laboratory: decide what success means and what boundaries apply
Laboratory 1. Maren begins with a small fictional classroom challenge: make a simple holder, route marker or information display that must satisfy a stated purpose. Before anyone builds, she asks the group to select three words from this section and use them to describe the task. Iona then checks the wording against the evidence. If a learner says a design is successful before it has been tested, she asks what observation would justify that conclusion. Leonie reduces the task when it becomes overloaded: one question, one planned change and one recorded result. This routine matters because technical vocabulary should make thinking clearer, not make a young learner carry unnecessary verbal load.
Now change one condition. A material becomes unavailable, the permitted size becomes smaller, a user asks for a clearer label, or the first model tips during a trial. The learner must decide which word from the section becomes newly important and which earlier statement needs revision. A good answer names the changed condition, selects a word that fits and explains the connection. A weak answer merely inserts the longest available term. The correction is to return to meaning: what happened, what do we know, what remains uncertain, and what should be done next?
For reading practice, give a four-sentence report containing one overstatement. The report might say that a model “always works” after a single successful attempt, or that a change “improved everything” when only one feature was measured. Ask the learner to underline the evidence and fence the conclusion to what the evidence can support. For writing practice, require a short three-part response: observation, reason and next action. This produces a compact technical paragraph without demanding adult-level engineering language.
Laboratory 2. Maren begins with a small fictional classroom challenge: make a simple holder, route marker or information display that must satisfy a stated purpose. Before anyone builds, she asks the group to select three words from this section and use them to describe the task. Iona then checks the wording against the evidence. If a learner says a design is successful before it has been tested, she asks what observation would justify that conclusion. Leonie reduces the task when it becomes overloaded: one question, one planned change and one recorded result. This routine matters because technical vocabulary should make thinking clearer, not make a young learner carry unnecessary verbal load.
Now change one condition. A material becomes unavailable, the permitted size becomes smaller, a user asks for a clearer label, or the first model tips during a trial. The learner must decide which word from the section becomes newly important and which earlier statement needs revision. A good answer names the changed condition, selects a word that fits and explains the connection. A weak answer merely inserts the longest available term. The correction is to return to meaning: what happened, what do we know, what remains uncertain, and what should be done next?
For reading practice, give a four-sentence report containing one overstatement. The report might say that a model “always works” after a single successful attempt, or that a change “improved everything” when only one feature was measured. Ask the learner to underline the evidence and fence the conclusion to what the evidence can support. For writing practice, require a short three-part response: observation, reason and next action. This produces a compact technical paragraph without demanding adult-level engineering language.
Laboratory 3. Maren begins with a small fictional classroom challenge: make a simple holder, route marker or information display that must satisfy a stated purpose. Before anyone builds, she asks the group to select three words from this section and use them to describe the task. Iona then checks the wording against the evidence. If a learner says a design is successful before it has been tested, she asks what observation would justify that conclusion. Leonie reduces the task when it becomes overloaded: one question, one planned change and one recorded result. This routine matters because technical vocabulary should make thinking clearer, not make a young learner carry unnecessary verbal load.
Now change one condition. A material becomes unavailable, the permitted size becomes smaller, a user asks for a clearer label, or the first model tips during a trial. The learner must decide which word from the section becomes newly important and which earlier statement needs revision. A good answer names the changed condition, selects a word that fits and explains the connection. A weak answer merely inserts the longest available term. The correction is to return to meaning: what happened, what do we know, what remains uncertain, and what should be done next?
For reading practice, give a four-sentence report containing one overstatement. The report might say that a model “always works” after a single successful attempt, or that a change “improved everything” when only one feature was measured. Ask the learner to underline the evidence and fence the conclusion to what the evidence can support. For writing practice, require a short three-part response: observation, reason and next action. This produces a compact technical paragraph without demanding adult-level engineering language.
Laboratory 4. Maren begins with a small fictional classroom challenge: make a simple holder, route marker or information display that must satisfy a stated purpose. Before anyone builds, she asks the group to select three words from this section and use them to describe the task. Iona then checks the wording against the evidence. If a learner says a design is successful before it has been tested, she asks what observation would justify that conclusion. Leonie reduces the task when it becomes overloaded: one question, one planned change and one recorded result. This routine matters because technical vocabulary should make thinking clearer, not make a young learner carry unnecessary verbal load.
Now change one condition. A material becomes unavailable, the permitted size becomes smaller, a user asks for a clearer label, or the first model tips during a trial. The learner must decide which word from the section becomes newly important and which earlier statement needs revision. A good answer names the changed condition, selects a word that fits and explains the connection. A weak answer merely inserts the longest available term. The correction is to return to meaning: what happened, what do we know, what remains uncertain, and what should be done next?
For reading practice, give a four-sentence report containing one overstatement. The report might say that a model “always works” after a single successful attempt, or that a change “improved everything” when only one feature was measured. Ask the learner to underline the evidence and fence the conclusion to what the evidence can support. For writing practice, require a short three-part response: observation, reason and next action. This produces a compact technical paragraph without demanding adult-level engineering language.
Laboratory 5. Maren begins with a small fictional classroom challenge: make a simple holder, route marker or information display that must satisfy a stated purpose. Before anyone builds, she asks the group to select three words from this section and use them to describe the task. Iona then checks the wording against the evidence. If a learner says a design is successful before it has been tested, she asks what observation would justify that conclusion. Leonie reduces the task when it becomes overloaded: one question, one planned change and one recorded result. This routine matters because technical vocabulary should make thinking clearer, not make a young learner carry unnecessary verbal load.
Now change one condition. A material becomes unavailable, the permitted size becomes smaller, a user asks for a clearer label, or the first model tips during a trial. The learner must decide which word from the section becomes newly important and which earlier statement needs revision. A good answer names the changed condition, selects a word that fits and explains the connection. A weak answer merely inserts the longest available term. The correction is to return to meaning: what happened, what do we know, what remains uncertain, and what should be done next?
For reading practice, give a four-sentence report containing one overstatement. The report might say that a model “always works” after a single successful attempt, or that a change “improved everything” when only one feature was measured. Ask the learner to underline the evidence and fence the conclusion to what the evidence can support. For writing practice, require a short three-part response: observation, reason and next action. This produces a compact technical paragraph without demanding adult-level engineering language.
Laboratory 6. Maren begins with a small fictional classroom challenge: make a simple holder, route marker or information display that must satisfy a stated purpose. Before anyone builds, she asks the group to select three words from this section and use them to describe the task. Iona then checks the wording against the evidence. If a learner says a design is successful before it has been tested, she asks what observation would justify that conclusion. Leonie reduces the task when it becomes overloaded: one question, one planned change and one recorded result. This routine matters because technical vocabulary should make thinking clearer, not make a young learner carry unnecessary verbal load.
Now change one condition. A material becomes unavailable, the permitted size becomes smaller, a user asks for a clearer label, or the first model tips during a trial. The learner must decide which word from the section becomes newly important and which earlier statement needs revision. A good answer names the changed condition, selects a word that fits and explains the connection. A weak answer merely inserts the longest available term. The correction is to return to meaning: what happened, what do we know, what remains uncertain, and what should be done next?
For reading practice, give a four-sentence report containing one overstatement. The report might say that a model “always works” after a single successful attempt, or that a change “improved everything” when only one feature was measured. Ask the learner to underline the evidence and fence the conclusion to what the evidence can support. For writing practice, require a short three-part response: observation, reason and next action. This produces a compact technical paragraph without demanding adult-level engineering language.
Measurement: ten high-utility words
021. Width. In this collection, width is a working engineering-design word used to help a learner describe quantities carefully and preserve the evidence. Maren uses the word when organising a clear explanation; Iona asks what detail or evidence makes the word justified; Leonie asks what action should follow. Example: “We used width when we compared two simple model ideas and explained why one choice better matched the task.” Transfer: ask the learner to use width in a different design situation and explain what would make the word inaccurate. The important step is not repeating a definition but showing the relationship between the word, the situation and the decision.
022. Height. In this collection, height is a working engineering-design word used to help a learner describe quantities carefully and preserve the evidence. Maren uses the word when organising a clear explanation; Iona asks what detail or evidence makes the word justified; Leonie asks what action should follow. Example: “We used height when we compared two simple model ideas and explained why one choice better matched the task.” Transfer: ask the learner to use height in a different design situation and explain what would make the word inaccurate. The important step is not repeating a definition but showing the relationship between the word, the situation and the decision.
023. Scale. In this collection, scale is a working engineering-design word used to help a learner describe quantities carefully and preserve the evidence. Maren uses the word when organising a clear explanation; Iona asks what detail or evidence makes the word justified; Leonie asks what action should follow. Example: “We used scale when we compared two simple model ideas and explained why one choice better matched the task.” Transfer: ask the learner to use scale in a different design situation and explain what would make the word inaccurate. The important step is not repeating a definition but showing the relationship between the word, the situation and the decision.
024. Estimate. In this collection, estimate is a working engineering-design word used to help a learner describe quantities carefully and preserve the evidence. Maren uses the word when organising a clear explanation; Iona asks what detail or evidence makes the word justified; Leonie asks what action should follow. Example: “We used estimate when we compared two simple model ideas and explained why one choice better matched the task.” Transfer: ask the learner to use estimate in a different design situation and explain what would make the word inaccurate. The important step is not repeating a definition but showing the relationship between the word, the situation and the decision.
025. Exact. In this collection, exact is a working engineering-design word used to help a learner describe quantities carefully and preserve the evidence. Maren uses the word when organising a clear explanation; Iona asks what detail or evidence makes the word justified; Leonie asks what action should follow. Example: “We used exact when we compared two simple model ideas and explained why one choice better matched the task.” Transfer: ask the learner to use exact in a different design situation and explain what would make the word inaccurate. The important step is not repeating a definition but showing the relationship between the word, the situation and the decision.
026. Approximate. In this collection, approximate is a working engineering-design word used to help a learner describe quantities carefully and preserve the evidence. Maren uses the word when organising a clear explanation; Iona asks what detail or evidence makes the word justified; Leonie asks what action should follow. Example: “We used approximate when we compared two simple model ideas and explained why one choice better matched the task.” Transfer: ask the learner to use approximate in a different design situation and explain what would make the word inaccurate. The important step is not repeating a definition but showing the relationship between the word, the situation and the decision.
027. Compare. In this collection, compare is a working engineering-design word used to help a learner describe quantities carefully and preserve the evidence. Maren uses the word when organising a clear explanation; Iona asks what detail or evidence makes the word justified; Leonie asks what action should follow. Example: “We used compare when we compared two simple model ideas and explained why one choice better matched the task.” Transfer: ask the learner to use compare in a different design situation and explain what would make the word inaccurate. The important step is not repeating a definition but showing the relationship between the word, the situation and the decision.
028. Record. In this collection, record is a working engineering-design word used to help a learner describe quantities carefully and preserve the evidence. Maren uses the word when organising a clear explanation; Iona asks what detail or evidence makes the word justified; Leonie asks what action should follow. Example: “We used record when we compared two simple model ideas and explained why one choice better matched the task.” Transfer: ask the learner to use record in a different design situation and explain what would make the word inaccurate. The important step is not repeating a definition but showing the relationship between the word, the situation and the decision.
029. Data. In this collection, data is a working engineering-design word used to help a learner describe quantities carefully and preserve the evidence. Maren uses the word when organising a clear explanation; Iona asks what detail or evidence makes the word justified; Leonie asks what action should follow. Example: “We used data when we compared two simple model ideas and explained why one choice better matched the task.” Transfer: ask the learner to use data in a different design situation and explain what would make the word inaccurate. The important step is not repeating a definition but showing the relationship between the word, the situation and the decision.
030. Table. In this collection, table is a working engineering-design word used to help a learner describe quantities carefully and preserve the evidence. Maren uses the word when organising a clear explanation; Iona asks what detail or evidence makes the word justified; Leonie asks what action should follow. Example: “We used table when we compared two simple model ideas and explained why one choice better matched the task.” Transfer: ask the learner to use table in a different design situation and explain what would make the word inaccurate. The important step is not repeating a definition but showing the relationship between the word, the situation and the decision.
Measurement laboratory: describe quantities carefully and preserve the evidence
Laboratory 1. Maren begins with a small fictional classroom challenge: make a simple holder, route marker or information display that must satisfy a stated purpose. Before anyone builds, she asks the group to select three words from this section and use them to describe the task. Iona then checks the wording against the evidence. If a learner says a design is successful before it has been tested, she asks what observation would justify that conclusion. Leonie reduces the task when it becomes overloaded: one question, one planned change and one recorded result. This routine matters because technical vocabulary should make thinking clearer, not make a young learner carry unnecessary verbal load.
Now change one condition. A material becomes unavailable, the permitted size becomes smaller, a user asks for a clearer label, or the first model tips during a trial. The learner must decide which word from the section becomes newly important and which earlier statement needs revision. A good answer names the changed condition, selects a word that fits and explains the connection. A weak answer merely inserts the longest available term. The correction is to return to meaning: what happened, what do we know, what remains uncertain, and what should be done next?
For reading practice, give a four-sentence report containing one overstatement. The report might say that a model “always works” after a single successful attempt, or that a change “improved everything” when only one feature was measured. Ask the learner to underline the evidence and fence the conclusion to what the evidence can support. For writing practice, require a short three-part response: observation, reason and next action. This produces a compact technical paragraph without demanding adult-level engineering language.
Laboratory 2. Maren begins with a small fictional classroom challenge: make a simple holder, route marker or information display that must satisfy a stated purpose. Before anyone builds, she asks the group to select three words from this section and use them to describe the task. Iona then checks the wording against the evidence. If a learner says a design is successful before it has been tested, she asks what observation would justify that conclusion. Leonie reduces the task when it becomes overloaded: one question, one planned change and one recorded result. This routine matters because technical vocabulary should make thinking clearer, not make a young learner carry unnecessary verbal load.
Now change one condition. A material becomes unavailable, the permitted size becomes smaller, a user asks for a clearer label, or the first model tips during a trial. The learner must decide which word from the section becomes newly important and which earlier statement needs revision. A good answer names the changed condition, selects a word that fits and explains the connection. A weak answer merely inserts the longest available term. The correction is to return to meaning: what happened, what do we know, what remains uncertain, and what should be done next?
For reading practice, give a four-sentence report containing one overstatement. The report might say that a model “always works” after a single successful attempt, or that a change “improved everything” when only one feature was measured. Ask the learner to underline the evidence and fence the conclusion to what the evidence can support. For writing practice, require a short three-part response: observation, reason and next action. This produces a compact technical paragraph without demanding adult-level engineering language.
Laboratory 3. Maren begins with a small fictional classroom challenge: make a simple holder, route marker or information display that must satisfy a stated purpose. Before anyone builds, she asks the group to select three words from this section and use them to describe the task. Iona then checks the wording against the evidence. If a learner says a design is successful before it has been tested, she asks what observation would justify that conclusion. Leonie reduces the task when it becomes overloaded: one question, one planned change and one recorded result. This routine matters because technical vocabulary should make thinking clearer, not make a young learner carry unnecessary verbal load.
Now change one condition. A material becomes unavailable, the permitted size becomes smaller, a user asks for a clearer label, or the first model tips during a trial. The learner must decide which word from the section becomes newly important and which earlier statement needs revision. A good answer names the changed condition, selects a word that fits and explains the connection. A weak answer merely inserts the longest available term. The correction is to return to meaning: what happened, what do we know, what remains uncertain, and what should be done next?
For reading practice, give a four-sentence report containing one overstatement. The report might say that a model “always works” after a single successful attempt, or that a change “improved everything” when only one feature was measured. Ask the learner to underline the evidence and fence the conclusion to what the evidence can support. For writing practice, require a short three-part response: observation, reason and next action. This produces a compact technical paragraph without demanding adult-level engineering language.
Laboratory 4. Maren begins with a small fictional classroom challenge: make a simple holder, route marker or information display that must satisfy a stated purpose. Before anyone builds, she asks the group to select three words from this section and use them to describe the task. Iona then checks the wording against the evidence. If a learner says a design is successful before it has been tested, she asks what observation would justify that conclusion. Leonie reduces the task when it becomes overloaded: one question, one planned change and one recorded result. This routine matters because technical vocabulary should make thinking clearer, not make a young learner carry unnecessary verbal load.
Now change one condition. A material becomes unavailable, the permitted size becomes smaller, a user asks for a clearer label, or the first model tips during a trial. The learner must decide which word from the section becomes newly important and which earlier statement needs revision. A good answer names the changed condition, selects a word that fits and explains the connection. A weak answer merely inserts the longest available term. The correction is to return to meaning: what happened, what do we know, what remains uncertain, and what should be done next?
For reading practice, give a four-sentence report containing one overstatement. The report might say that a model “always works” after a single successful attempt, or that a change “improved everything” when only one feature was measured. Ask the learner to underline the evidence and fence the conclusion to what the evidence can support. For writing practice, require a short three-part response: observation, reason and next action. This produces a compact technical paragraph without demanding adult-level engineering language.
Laboratory 5. Maren begins with a small fictional classroom challenge: make a simple holder, route marker or information display that must satisfy a stated purpose. Before anyone builds, she asks the group to select three words from this section and use them to describe the task. Iona then checks the wording against the evidence. If a learner says a design is successful before it has been tested, she asks what observation would justify that conclusion. Leonie reduces the task when it becomes overloaded: one question, one planned change and one recorded result. This routine matters because technical vocabulary should make thinking clearer, not make a young learner carry unnecessary verbal load.
Now change one condition. A material becomes unavailable, the permitted size becomes smaller, a user asks for a clearer label, or the first model tips during a trial. The learner must decide which word from the section becomes newly important and which earlier statement needs revision. A good answer names the changed condition, selects a word that fits and explains the connection. A weak answer merely inserts the longest available term. The correction is to return to meaning: what happened, what do we know, what remains uncertain, and what should be done next?
For reading practice, give a four-sentence report containing one overstatement. The report might say that a model “always works” after a single successful attempt, or that a change “improved everything” when only one feature was measured. Ask the learner to underline the evidence and fence the conclusion to what the evidence can support. For writing practice, require a short three-part response: observation, reason and next action. This produces a compact technical paragraph without demanding adult-level engineering language.
Laboratory 6. Maren begins with a small fictional classroom challenge: make a simple holder, route marker or information display that must satisfy a stated purpose. Before anyone builds, she asks the group to select three words from this section and use them to describe the task. Iona then checks the wording against the evidence. If a learner says a design is successful before it has been tested, she asks what observation would justify that conclusion. Leonie reduces the task when it becomes overloaded: one question, one planned change and one recorded result. This routine matters because technical vocabulary should make thinking clearer, not make a young learner carry unnecessary verbal load.
Now change one condition. A material becomes unavailable, the permitted size becomes smaller, a user asks for a clearer label, or the first model tips during a trial. The learner must decide which word from the section becomes newly important and which earlier statement needs revision. A good answer names the changed condition, selects a word that fits and explains the connection. A weak answer merely inserts the longest available term. The correction is to return to meaning: what happened, what do we know, what remains uncertain, and what should be done next?
For reading practice, give a four-sentence report containing one overstatement. The report might say that a model “always works” after a single successful attempt, or that a change “improved everything” when only one feature was measured. Ask the learner to underline the evidence and fence the conclusion to what the evidence can support. For writing practice, require a short three-part response: observation, reason and next action. This produces a compact technical paragraph without demanding adult-level engineering language.
Ideas and choices: ten high-utility words
031. Design. In this collection, design is a working engineering-design word used to help a learner generate possibilities and select for stated reasons. Maren uses the word when organising a clear explanation; Iona asks what detail or evidence makes the word justified; Leonie asks what action should follow. Example: “We used design when we compared two simple model ideas and explained why one choice better matched the task.” Transfer: ask the learner to use design in a different design situation and explain what would make the word inaccurate. The important step is not repeating a definition but showing the relationship between the word, the situation and the decision.
032. Engineer. In this collection, engineer is a working engineering-design word used to help a learner generate possibilities and select for stated reasons. Maren uses the word when organising a clear explanation; Iona asks what detail or evidence makes the word justified; Leonie asks what action should follow. Example: “We used engineer when we compared two simple model ideas and explained why one choice better matched the task.” Transfer: ask the learner to use engineer in a different design situation and explain what would make the word inaccurate. The important step is not repeating a definition but showing the relationship between the word, the situation and the decision.
033. Idea. In this collection, idea is a working engineering-design word used to help a learner generate possibilities and select for stated reasons. Maren uses the word when organising a clear explanation; Iona asks what detail or evidence makes the word justified; Leonie asks what action should follow. Example: “We used idea when we compared two simple model ideas and explained why one choice better matched the task.” Transfer: ask the learner to use idea in a different design situation and explain what would make the word inaccurate. The important step is not repeating a definition but showing the relationship between the word, the situation and the decision.
034. Brainstorm. In this collection, brainstorm is a working engineering-design word used to help a learner generate possibilities and select for stated reasons. Maren uses the word when organising a clear explanation; Iona asks what detail or evidence makes the word justified; Leonie asks what action should follow. Example: “We used brainstorm when we compared two simple model ideas and explained why one choice better matched the task.” Transfer: ask the learner to use brainstorm in a different design situation and explain what would make the word inaccurate. The important step is not repeating a definition but showing the relationship between the word, the situation and the decision.
035. Imagine. In this collection, imagine is a working engineering-design word used to help a learner generate possibilities and select for stated reasons. Maren uses the word when organising a clear explanation; Iona asks what detail or evidence makes the word justified; Leonie asks what action should follow. Example: “We used imagine when we compared two simple model ideas and explained why one choice better matched the task.” Transfer: ask the learner to use imagine in a different design situation and explain what would make the word inaccurate. The important step is not repeating a definition but showing the relationship between the word, the situation and the decision.
036. Option. In this collection, option is a working engineering-design word used to help a learner generate possibilities and select for stated reasons. Maren uses the word when organising a clear explanation; Iona asks what detail or evidence makes the word justified; Leonie asks what action should follow. Example: “We used option when we compared two simple model ideas and explained why one choice better matched the task.” Transfer: ask the learner to use option in a different design situation and explain what would make the word inaccurate. The important step is not repeating a definition but showing the relationship between the word, the situation and the decision.
037. Alternative. In this collection, alternative is a working engineering-design word used to help a learner generate possibilities and select for stated reasons. Maren uses the word when organising a clear explanation; Iona asks what detail or evidence makes the word justified; Leonie asks what action should follow. Example: “We used alternative when we compared two simple model ideas and explained why one choice better matched the task.” Transfer: ask the learner to use alternative in a different design situation and explain what would make the word inaccurate. The important step is not repeating a definition but showing the relationship between the word, the situation and the decision.
038. Choose. In this collection, choose is a working engineering-design word used to help a learner generate possibilities and select for stated reasons. Maren uses the word when organising a clear explanation; Iona asks what detail or evidence makes the word justified; Leonie asks what action should follow. Example: “We used choose when we compared two simple model ideas and explained why one choice better matched the task.” Transfer: ask the learner to use choose in a different design situation and explain what would make the word inaccurate. The important step is not repeating a definition but showing the relationship between the word, the situation and the decision.
039. Decision. In this collection, decision is a working engineering-design word used to help a learner generate possibilities and select for stated reasons. Maren uses the word when organising a clear explanation; Iona asks what detail or evidence makes the word justified; Leonie asks what action should follow. Example: “We used decision when we compared two simple model ideas and explained why one choice better matched the task.” Transfer: ask the learner to use decision in a different design situation and explain what would make the word inaccurate. The important step is not repeating a definition but showing the relationship between the word, the situation and the decision.
040. Reason. In this collection, reason is a working engineering-design word used to help a learner generate possibilities and select for stated reasons. Maren uses the word when organising a clear explanation; Iona asks what detail or evidence makes the word justified; Leonie asks what action should follow. Example: “We used reason when we compared two simple model ideas and explained why one choice better matched the task.” Transfer: ask the learner to use reason in a different design situation and explain what would make the word inaccurate. The important step is not repeating a definition but showing the relationship between the word, the situation and the decision.
Ideas and choices laboratory: generate possibilities and select for stated reasons
Laboratory 1. Maren begins with a small fictional classroom challenge: make a simple holder, route marker or information display that must satisfy a stated purpose. Before anyone builds, she asks the group to select three words from this section and use them to describe the task. Iona then checks the wording against the evidence. If a learner says a design is successful before it has been tested, she asks what observation would justify that conclusion. Leonie reduces the task when it becomes overloaded: one question, one planned change and one recorded result. This routine matters because technical vocabulary should make thinking clearer, not make a young learner carry unnecessary verbal load.
Now change one condition. A material becomes unavailable, the permitted size becomes smaller, a user asks for a clearer label, or the first model tips during a trial. The learner must decide which word from the section becomes newly important and which earlier statement needs revision. A good answer names the changed condition, selects a word that fits and explains the connection. A weak answer merely inserts the longest available term. The correction is to return to meaning: what happened, what do we know, what remains uncertain, and what should be done next?
For reading practice, give a four-sentence report containing one overstatement. The report might say that a model “always works” after a single successful attempt, or that a change “improved everything” when only one feature was measured. Ask the learner to underline the evidence and fence the conclusion to what the evidence can support. For writing practice, require a short three-part response: observation, reason and next action. This produces a compact technical paragraph without demanding adult-level engineering language.
Laboratory 2. Maren begins with a small fictional classroom challenge: make a simple holder, route marker or information display that must satisfy a stated purpose. Before anyone builds, she asks the group to select three words from this section and use them to describe the task. Iona then checks the wording against the evidence. If a learner says a design is successful before it has been tested, she asks what observation would justify that conclusion. Leonie reduces the task when it becomes overloaded: one question, one planned change and one recorded result. This routine matters because technical vocabulary should make thinking clearer, not make a young learner carry unnecessary verbal load.
Now change one condition. A material becomes unavailable, the permitted size becomes smaller, a user asks for a clearer label, or the first model tips during a trial. The learner must decide which word from the section becomes newly important and which earlier statement needs revision. A good answer names the changed condition, selects a word that fits and explains the connection. A weak answer merely inserts the longest available term. The correction is to return to meaning: what happened, what do we know, what remains uncertain, and what should be done next?
For reading practice, give a four-sentence report containing one overstatement. The report might say that a model “always works” after a single successful attempt, or that a change “improved everything” when only one feature was measured. Ask the learner to underline the evidence and fence the conclusion to what the evidence can support. For writing practice, require a short three-part response: observation, reason and next action. This produces a compact technical paragraph without demanding adult-level engineering language.
Laboratory 3. Maren begins with a small fictional classroom challenge: make a simple holder, route marker or information display that must satisfy a stated purpose. Before anyone builds, she asks the group to select three words from this section and use them to describe the task. Iona then checks the wording against the evidence. If a learner says a design is successful before it has been tested, she asks what observation would justify that conclusion. Leonie reduces the task when it becomes overloaded: one question, one planned change and one recorded result. This routine matters because technical vocabulary should make thinking clearer, not make a young learner carry unnecessary verbal load.
Now change one condition. A material becomes unavailable, the permitted size becomes smaller, a user asks for a clearer label, or the first model tips during a trial. The learner must decide which word from the section becomes newly important and which earlier statement needs revision. A good answer names the changed condition, selects a word that fits and explains the connection. A weak answer merely inserts the longest available term. The correction is to return to meaning: what happened, what do we know, what remains uncertain, and what should be done next?
For reading practice, give a four-sentence report containing one overstatement. The report might say that a model “always works” after a single successful attempt, or that a change “improved everything” when only one feature was measured. Ask the learner to underline the evidence and fence the conclusion to what the evidence can support. For writing practice, require a short three-part response: observation, reason and next action. This produces a compact technical paragraph without demanding adult-level engineering language.
Laboratory 4. Maren begins with a small fictional classroom challenge: make a simple holder, route marker or information display that must satisfy a stated purpose. Before anyone builds, she asks the group to select three words from this section and use them to describe the task. Iona then checks the wording against the evidence. If a learner says a design is successful before it has been tested, she asks what observation would justify that conclusion. Leonie reduces the task when it becomes overloaded: one question, one planned change and one recorded result. This routine matters because technical vocabulary should make thinking clearer, not make a young learner carry unnecessary verbal load.
Now change one condition. A material becomes unavailable, the permitted size becomes smaller, a user asks for a clearer label, or the first model tips during a trial. The learner must decide which word from the section becomes newly important and which earlier statement needs revision. A good answer names the changed condition, selects a word that fits and explains the connection. A weak answer merely inserts the longest available term. The correction is to return to meaning: what happened, what do we know, what remains uncertain, and what should be done next?
For reading practice, give a four-sentence report containing one overstatement. The report might say that a model “always works” after a single successful attempt, or that a change “improved everything” when only one feature was measured. Ask the learner to underline the evidence and fence the conclusion to what the evidence can support. For writing practice, require a short three-part response: observation, reason and next action. This produces a compact technical paragraph without demanding adult-level engineering language.
Laboratory 5. Maren begins with a small fictional classroom challenge: make a simple holder, route marker or information display that must satisfy a stated purpose. Before anyone builds, she asks the group to select three words from this section and use them to describe the task. Iona then checks the wording against the evidence. If a learner says a design is successful before it has been tested, she asks what observation would justify that conclusion. Leonie reduces the task when it becomes overloaded: one question, one planned change and one recorded result. This routine matters because technical vocabulary should make thinking clearer, not make a young learner carry unnecessary verbal load.
Now change one condition. A material becomes unavailable, the permitted size becomes smaller, a user asks for a clearer label, or the first model tips during a trial. The learner must decide which word from the section becomes newly important and which earlier statement needs revision. A good answer names the changed condition, selects a word that fits and explains the connection. A weak answer merely inserts the longest available term. The correction is to return to meaning: what happened, what do we know, what remains uncertain, and what should be done next?
For reading practice, give a four-sentence report containing one overstatement. The report might say that a model “always works” after a single successful attempt, or that a change “improved everything” when only one feature was measured. Ask the learner to underline the evidence and fence the conclusion to what the evidence can support. For writing practice, require a short three-part response: observation, reason and next action. This produces a compact technical paragraph without demanding adult-level engineering language.
Laboratory 6. Maren begins with a small fictional classroom challenge: make a simple holder, route marker or information display that must satisfy a stated purpose. Before anyone builds, she asks the group to select three words from this section and use them to describe the task. Iona then checks the wording against the evidence. If a learner says a design is successful before it has been tested, she asks what observation would justify that conclusion. Leonie reduces the task when it becomes overloaded: one question, one planned change and one recorded result. This routine matters because technical vocabulary should make thinking clearer, not make a young learner carry unnecessary verbal load.
Now change one condition. A material becomes unavailable, the permitted size becomes smaller, a user asks for a clearer label, or the first model tips during a trial. The learner must decide which word from the section becomes newly important and which earlier statement needs revision. A good answer names the changed condition, selects a word that fits and explains the connection. A weak answer merely inserts the longest available term. The correction is to return to meaning: what happened, what do we know, what remains uncertain, and what should be done next?
For reading practice, give a four-sentence report containing one overstatement. The report might say that a model “always works” after a single successful attempt, or that a change “improved everything” when only one feature was measured. Ask the learner to underline the evidence and fence the conclusion to what the evidence can support. For writing practice, require a short three-part response: observation, reason and next action. This produces a compact technical paragraph without demanding adult-level engineering language.
Planning: ten high-utility words
041. Plan. In this collection, plan is a working engineering-design word used to help a learner turn an idea into a form another person can follow. Maren uses the word when organising a clear explanation; Iona asks what detail or evidence makes the word justified; Leonie asks what action should follow. Example: “We used plan when we compared two simple model ideas and explained why one choice better matched the task.” Transfer: ask the learner to use plan in a different design situation and explain what would make the word inaccurate. The important step is not repeating a definition but showing the relationship between the word, the situation and the decision.
042. Step. In this collection, step is a working engineering-design word used to help a learner turn an idea into a form another person can follow. Maren uses the word when organising a clear explanation; Iona asks what detail or evidence makes the word justified; Leonie asks what action should follow. Example: “We used step when we compared two simple model ideas and explained why one choice better matched the task.” Transfer: ask the learner to use step in a different design situation and explain what would make the word inaccurate. The important step is not repeating a definition but showing the relationship between the word, the situation and the decision.
043. Sequence. In this collection, sequence is a working engineering-design word used to help a learner turn an idea into a form another person can follow. Maren uses the word when organising a clear explanation; Iona asks what detail or evidence makes the word justified; Leonie asks what action should follow. Example: “We used sequence when we compared two simple model ideas and explained why one choice better matched the task.” Transfer: ask the learner to use sequence in a different design situation and explain what would make the word inaccurate. The important step is not repeating a definition but showing the relationship between the word, the situation and the decision.
044. Instruction. In this collection, instruction is a working engineering-design word used to help a learner turn an idea into a form another person can follow. Maren uses the word when organising a clear explanation; Iona asks what detail or evidence makes the word justified; Leonie asks what action should follow. Example: “We used instruction when we compared two simple model ideas and explained why one choice better matched the task.” Transfer: ask the learner to use instruction in a different design situation and explain what would make the word inaccurate. The important step is not repeating a definition but showing the relationship between the word, the situation and the decision.
045. Sketch. In this collection, sketch is a working engineering-design word used to help a learner turn an idea into a form another person can follow. Maren uses the word when organising a clear explanation; Iona asks what detail or evidence makes the word justified; Leonie asks what action should follow. Example: “We used sketch when we compared two simple model ideas and explained why one choice better matched the task.” Transfer: ask the learner to use sketch in a different design situation and explain what would make the word inaccurate. The important step is not repeating a definition but showing the relationship between the word, the situation and the decision.
046. Diagram. In this collection, diagram is a working engineering-design word used to help a learner turn an idea into a form another person can follow. Maren uses the word when organising a clear explanation; Iona asks what detail or evidence makes the word justified; Leonie asks what action should follow. Example: “We used diagram when we compared two simple model ideas and explained why one choice better matched the task.” Transfer: ask the learner to use diagram in a different design situation and explain what would make the word inaccurate. The important step is not repeating a definition but showing the relationship between the word, the situation and the decision.
047. Label. In this collection, label is a working engineering-design word used to help a learner turn an idea into a form another person can follow. Maren uses the word when organising a clear explanation; Iona asks what detail or evidence makes the word justified; Leonie asks what action should follow. Example: “We used label when we compared two simple model ideas and explained why one choice better matched the task.” Transfer: ask the learner to use label in a different design situation and explain what would make the word inaccurate. The important step is not repeating a definition but showing the relationship between the word, the situation and the decision.
048. Symbol. In this collection, symbol is a working engineering-design word used to help a learner turn an idea into a form another person can follow. Maren uses the word when organising a clear explanation; Iona asks what detail or evidence makes the word justified; Leonie asks what action should follow. Example: “We used symbol when we compared two simple model ideas and explained why one choice better matched the task.” Transfer: ask the learner to use symbol in a different design situation and explain what would make the word inaccurate. The important step is not repeating a definition but showing the relationship between the word, the situation and the decision.
049. Model. In this collection, model is a working engineering-design word used to help a learner turn an idea into a form another person can follow. Maren uses the word when organising a clear explanation; Iona asks what detail or evidence makes the word justified; Leonie asks what action should follow. Example: “We used model when we compared two simple model ideas and explained why one choice better matched the task.” Transfer: ask the learner to use model in a different design situation and explain what would make the word inaccurate. The important step is not repeating a definition but showing the relationship between the word, the situation and the decision.
050. Prototype. In this collection, prototype is a working engineering-design word used to help a learner turn an idea into a form another person can follow. Maren uses the word when organising a clear explanation; Iona asks what detail or evidence makes the word justified; Leonie asks what action should follow. Example: “We used prototype when we compared two simple model ideas and explained why one choice better matched the task.” Transfer: ask the learner to use prototype in a different design situation and explain what would make the word inaccurate. The important step is not repeating a definition but showing the relationship between the word, the situation and the decision.
Planning laboratory: turn an idea into a form another person can follow
Laboratory 1. Maren begins with a small fictional classroom challenge: make a simple holder, route marker or information display that must satisfy a stated purpose. Before anyone builds, she asks the group to select three words from this section and use them to describe the task. Iona then checks the wording against the evidence. If a learner says a design is successful before it has been tested, she asks what observation would justify that conclusion. Leonie reduces the task when it becomes overloaded: one question, one planned change and one recorded result. This routine matters because technical vocabulary should make thinking clearer, not make a young learner carry unnecessary verbal load.
Now change one condition. A material becomes unavailable, the permitted size becomes smaller, a user asks for a clearer label, or the first model tips during a trial. The learner must decide which word from the section becomes newly important and which earlier statement needs revision. A good answer names the changed condition, selects a word that fits and explains the connection. A weak answer merely inserts the longest available term. The correction is to return to meaning: what happened, what do we know, what remains uncertain, and what should be done next?
For reading practice, give a four-sentence report containing one overstatement. The report might say that a model “always works” after a single successful attempt, or that a change “improved everything” when only one feature was measured. Ask the learner to underline the evidence and fence the conclusion to what the evidence can support. For writing practice, require a short three-part response: observation, reason and next action. This produces a compact technical paragraph without demanding adult-level engineering language.
Laboratory 2. Maren begins with a small fictional classroom challenge: make a simple holder, route marker or information display that must satisfy a stated purpose. Before anyone builds, she asks the group to select three words from this section and use them to describe the task. Iona then checks the wording against the evidence. If a learner says a design is successful before it has been tested, she asks what observation would justify that conclusion. Leonie reduces the task when it becomes overloaded: one question, one planned change and one recorded result. This routine matters because technical vocabulary should make thinking clearer, not make a young learner carry unnecessary verbal load.
Now change one condition. A material becomes unavailable, the permitted size becomes smaller, a user asks for a clearer label, or the first model tips during a trial. The learner must decide which word from the section becomes newly important and which earlier statement needs revision. A good answer names the changed condition, selects a word that fits and explains the connection. A weak answer merely inserts the longest available term. The correction is to return to meaning: what happened, what do we know, what remains uncertain, and what should be done next?
For reading practice, give a four-sentence report containing one overstatement. The report might say that a model “always works” after a single successful attempt, or that a change “improved everything” when only one feature was measured. Ask the learner to underline the evidence and fence the conclusion to what the evidence can support. For writing practice, require a short three-part response: observation, reason and next action. This produces a compact technical paragraph without demanding adult-level engineering language.
Laboratory 3. Maren begins with a small fictional classroom challenge: make a simple holder, route marker or information display that must satisfy a stated purpose. Before anyone builds, she asks the group to select three words from this section and use them to describe the task. Iona then checks the wording against the evidence. If a learner says a design is successful before it has been tested, she asks what observation would justify that conclusion. Leonie reduces the task when it becomes overloaded: one question, one planned change and one recorded result. This routine matters because technical vocabulary should make thinking clearer, not make a young learner carry unnecessary verbal load.
Now change one condition. A material becomes unavailable, the permitted size becomes smaller, a user asks for a clearer label, or the first model tips during a trial. The learner must decide which word from the section becomes newly important and which earlier statement needs revision. A good answer names the changed condition, selects a word that fits and explains the connection. A weak answer merely inserts the longest available term. The correction is to return to meaning: what happened, what do we know, what remains uncertain, and what should be done next?
For reading practice, give a four-sentence report containing one overstatement. The report might say that a model “always works” after a single successful attempt, or that a change “improved everything” when only one feature was measured. Ask the learner to underline the evidence and fence the conclusion to what the evidence can support. For writing practice, require a short three-part response: observation, reason and next action. This produces a compact technical paragraph without demanding adult-level engineering language.
Laboratory 4. Maren begins with a small fictional classroom challenge: make a simple holder, route marker or information display that must satisfy a stated purpose. Before anyone builds, she asks the group to select three words from this section and use them to describe the task. Iona then checks the wording against the evidence. If a learner says a design is successful before it has been tested, she asks what observation would justify that conclusion. Leonie reduces the task when it becomes overloaded: one question, one planned change and one recorded result. This routine matters because technical vocabulary should make thinking clearer, not make a young learner carry unnecessary verbal load.
Now change one condition. A material becomes unavailable, the permitted size becomes smaller, a user asks for a clearer label, or the first model tips during a trial. The learner must decide which word from the section becomes newly important and which earlier statement needs revision. A good answer names the changed condition, selects a word that fits and explains the connection. A weak answer merely inserts the longest available term. The correction is to return to meaning: what happened, what do we know, what remains uncertain, and what should be done next?
For reading practice, give a four-sentence report containing one overstatement. The report might say that a model “always works” after a single successful attempt, or that a change “improved everything” when only one feature was measured. Ask the learner to underline the evidence and fence the conclusion to what the evidence can support. For writing practice, require a short three-part response: observation, reason and next action. This produces a compact technical paragraph without demanding adult-level engineering language.
Laboratory 5. Maren begins with a small fictional classroom challenge: make a simple holder, route marker or information display that must satisfy a stated purpose. Before anyone builds, she asks the group to select three words from this section and use them to describe the task. Iona then checks the wording against the evidence. If a learner says a design is successful before it has been tested, she asks what observation would justify that conclusion. Leonie reduces the task when it becomes overloaded: one question, one planned change and one recorded result. This routine matters because technical vocabulary should make thinking clearer, not make a young learner carry unnecessary verbal load.
Now change one condition. A material becomes unavailable, the permitted size becomes smaller, a user asks for a clearer label, or the first model tips during a trial. The learner must decide which word from the section becomes newly important and which earlier statement needs revision. A good answer names the changed condition, selects a word that fits and explains the connection. A weak answer merely inserts the longest available term. The correction is to return to meaning: what happened, what do we know, what remains uncertain, and what should be done next?
For reading practice, give a four-sentence report containing one overstatement. The report might say that a model “always works” after a single successful attempt, or that a change “improved everything” when only one feature was measured. Ask the learner to underline the evidence and fence the conclusion to what the evidence can support. For writing practice, require a short three-part response: observation, reason and next action. This produces a compact technical paragraph without demanding adult-level engineering language.
Laboratory 6. Maren begins with a small fictional classroom challenge: make a simple holder, route marker or information display that must satisfy a stated purpose. Before anyone builds, she asks the group to select three words from this section and use them to describe the task. Iona then checks the wording against the evidence. If a learner says a design is successful before it has been tested, she asks what observation would justify that conclusion. Leonie reduces the task when it becomes overloaded: one question, one planned change and one recorded result. This routine matters because technical vocabulary should make thinking clearer, not make a young learner carry unnecessary verbal load.
Now change one condition. A material becomes unavailable, the permitted size becomes smaller, a user asks for a clearer label, or the first model tips during a trial. The learner must decide which word from the section becomes newly important and which earlier statement needs revision. A good answer names the changed condition, selects a word that fits and explains the connection. A weak answer merely inserts the longest available term. The correction is to return to meaning: what happened, what do we know, what remains uncertain, and what should be done next?
For reading practice, give a four-sentence report containing one overstatement. The report might say that a model “always works” after a single successful attempt, or that a change “improved everything” when only one feature was measured. Ask the learner to underline the evidence and fence the conclusion to what the evidence can support. For writing practice, require a short three-part response: observation, reason and next action. This produces a compact technical paragraph without demanding adult-level engineering language.
Making: ten high-utility words
051. Build. In this collection, build is a working engineering-design word used to help a learner describe how parts are prepared and connected. Maren uses the word when organising a clear explanation; Iona asks what detail or evidence makes the word justified; Leonie asks what action should follow. Example: “We used build when we compared two simple model ideas and explained why one choice better matched the task.” Transfer: ask the learner to use build in a different design situation and explain what would make the word inaccurate. The important step is not repeating a definition but showing the relationship between the word, the situation and the decision.
052. Construct. In this collection, construct is a working engineering-design word used to help a learner describe how parts are prepared and connected. Maren uses the word when organising a clear explanation; Iona asks what detail or evidence makes the word justified; Leonie asks what action should follow. Example: “We used construct when we compared two simple model ideas and explained why one choice better matched the task.” Transfer: ask the learner to use construct in a different design situation and explain what would make the word inaccurate. The important step is not repeating a definition but showing the relationship between the word, the situation and the decision.
053. Assemble. In this collection, assemble is a working engineering-design word used to help a learner describe how parts are prepared and connected. Maren uses the word when organising a clear explanation; Iona asks what detail or evidence makes the word justified; Leonie asks what action should follow. Example: “We used assemble when we compared two simple model ideas and explained why one choice better matched the task.” Transfer: ask the learner to use assemble in a different design situation and explain what would make the word inaccurate. The important step is not repeating a definition but showing the relationship between the word, the situation and the decision.
054. Component. In this collection, component is a working engineering-design word used to help a learner describe how parts are prepared and connected. Maren uses the word when organising a clear explanation; Iona asks what detail or evidence makes the word justified; Leonie asks what action should follow. Example: “We used component when we compared two simple model ideas and explained why one choice better matched the task.” Transfer: ask the learner to use component in a different design situation and explain what would make the word inaccurate. The important step is not repeating a definition but showing the relationship between the word, the situation and the decision.
055. Join. In this collection, join is a working engineering-design word used to help a learner describe how parts are prepared and connected. Maren uses the word when organising a clear explanation; Iona asks what detail or evidence makes the word justified; Leonie asks what action should follow. Example: “We used join when we compared two simple model ideas and explained why one choice better matched the task.” Transfer: ask the learner to use join in a different design situation and explain what would make the word inaccurate. The important step is not repeating a definition but showing the relationship between the word, the situation and the decision.
056. Attach. In this collection, attach is a working engineering-design word used to help a learner describe how parts are prepared and connected. Maren uses the word when organising a clear explanation; Iona asks what detail or evidence makes the word justified; Leonie asks what action should follow. Example: “We used attach when we compared two simple model ideas and explained why one choice better matched the task.” Transfer: ask the learner to use attach in a different design situation and explain what would make the word inaccurate. The important step is not repeating a definition but showing the relationship between the word, the situation and the decision.
057. Fold. In this collection, fold is a working engineering-design word used to help a learner describe how parts are prepared and connected. Maren uses the word when organising a clear explanation; Iona asks what detail or evidence makes the word justified; Leonie asks what action should follow. Example: “We used fold when we compared two simple model ideas and explained why one choice better matched the task.” Transfer: ask the learner to use fold in a different design situation and explain what would make the word inaccurate. The important step is not repeating a definition but showing the relationship between the word, the situation and the decision.
058. Edge. In this collection, edge is a working engineering-design word used to help a learner describe how parts are prepared and connected. Maren uses the word when organising a clear explanation; Iona asks what detail or evidence makes the word justified; Leonie asks what action should follow. Example: “We used edge when we compared two simple model ideas and explained why one choice better matched the task.” Transfer: ask the learner to use edge in a different design situation and explain what would make the word inaccurate. The important step is not repeating a definition but showing the relationship between the word, the situation and the decision.
059. Surface. In this collection, surface is a working engineering-design word used to help a learner describe how parts are prepared and connected. Maren uses the word when organising a clear explanation; Iona asks what detail or evidence makes the word justified; Leonie asks what action should follow. Example: “We used surface when we compared two simple model ideas and explained why one choice better matched the task.” Transfer: ask the learner to use surface in a different design situation and explain what would make the word inaccurate. The important step is not repeating a definition but showing the relationship between the word, the situation and the decision.
060. Structure. In this collection, structure is a working engineering-design word used to help a learner describe how parts are prepared and connected. Maren uses the word when organising a clear explanation; Iona asks what detail or evidence makes the word justified; Leonie asks what action should follow. Example: “We used structure when we compared two simple model ideas and explained why one choice better matched the task.” Transfer: ask the learner to use structure in a different design situation and explain what would make the word inaccurate. The important step is not repeating a definition but showing the relationship between the word, the situation and the decision.
Making laboratory: describe how parts are prepared and connected
Laboratory 1. Maren begins with a small fictional classroom challenge: make a simple holder, route marker or information display that must satisfy a stated purpose. Before anyone builds, she asks the group to select three words from this section and use them to describe the task. Iona then checks the wording against the evidence. If a learner says a design is successful before it has been tested, she asks what observation would justify that conclusion. Leonie reduces the task when it becomes overloaded: one question, one planned change and one recorded result. This routine matters because technical vocabulary should make thinking clearer, not make a young learner carry unnecessary verbal load.
Now change one condition. A material becomes unavailable, the permitted size becomes smaller, a user asks for a clearer label, or the first model tips during a trial. The learner must decide which word from the section becomes newly important and which earlier statement needs revision. A good answer names the changed condition, selects a word that fits and explains the connection. A weak answer merely inserts the longest available term. The correction is to return to meaning: what happened, what do we know, what remains uncertain, and what should be done next?
For reading practice, give a four-sentence report containing one overstatement. The report might say that a model “always works” after a single successful attempt, or that a change “improved everything” when only one feature was measured. Ask the learner to underline the evidence and fence the conclusion to what the evidence can support. For writing practice, require a short three-part response: observation, reason and next action. This produces a compact technical paragraph without demanding adult-level engineering language.
Laboratory 2. Maren begins with a small fictional classroom challenge: make a simple holder, route marker or information display that must satisfy a stated purpose. Before anyone builds, she asks the group to select three words from this section and use them to describe the task. Iona then checks the wording against the evidence. If a learner says a design is successful before it has been tested, she asks what observation would justify that conclusion. Leonie reduces the task when it becomes overloaded: one question, one planned change and one recorded result. This routine matters because technical vocabulary should make thinking clearer, not make a young learner carry unnecessary verbal load.
Now change one condition. A material becomes unavailable, the permitted size becomes smaller, a user asks for a clearer label, or the first model tips during a trial. The learner must decide which word from the section becomes newly important and which earlier statement needs revision. A good answer names the changed condition, selects a word that fits and explains the connection. A weak answer merely inserts the longest available term. The correction is to return to meaning: what happened, what do we know, what remains uncertain, and what should be done next?
For reading practice, give a four-sentence report containing one overstatement. The report might say that a model “always works” after a single successful attempt, or that a change “improved everything” when only one feature was measured. Ask the learner to underline the evidence and fence the conclusion to what the evidence can support. For writing practice, require a short three-part response: observation, reason and next action. This produces a compact technical paragraph without demanding adult-level engineering language.
Laboratory 3. Maren begins with a small fictional classroom challenge: make a simple holder, route marker or information display that must satisfy a stated purpose. Before anyone builds, she asks the group to select three words from this section and use them to describe the task. Iona then checks the wording against the evidence. If a learner says a design is successful before it has been tested, she asks what observation would justify that conclusion. Leonie reduces the task when it becomes overloaded: one question, one planned change and one recorded result. This routine matters because technical vocabulary should make thinking clearer, not make a young learner carry unnecessary verbal load.
Now change one condition. A material becomes unavailable, the permitted size becomes smaller, a user asks for a clearer label, or the first model tips during a trial. The learner must decide which word from the section becomes newly important and which earlier statement needs revision. A good answer names the changed condition, selects a word that fits and explains the connection. A weak answer merely inserts the longest available term. The correction is to return to meaning: what happened, what do we know, what remains uncertain, and what should be done next?
For reading practice, give a four-sentence report containing one overstatement. The report might say that a model “always works” after a single successful attempt, or that a change “improved everything” when only one feature was measured. Ask the learner to underline the evidence and fence the conclusion to what the evidence can support. For writing practice, require a short three-part response: observation, reason and next action. This produces a compact technical paragraph without demanding adult-level engineering language.
Laboratory 4. Maren begins with a small fictional classroom challenge: make a simple holder, route marker or information display that must satisfy a stated purpose. Before anyone builds, she asks the group to select three words from this section and use them to describe the task. Iona then checks the wording against the evidence. If a learner says a design is successful before it has been tested, she asks what observation would justify that conclusion. Leonie reduces the task when it becomes overloaded: one question, one planned change and one recorded result. This routine matters because technical vocabulary should make thinking clearer, not make a young learner carry unnecessary verbal load.
Now change one condition. A material becomes unavailable, the permitted size becomes smaller, a user asks for a clearer label, or the first model tips during a trial. The learner must decide which word from the section becomes newly important and which earlier statement needs revision. A good answer names the changed condition, selects a word that fits and explains the connection. A weak answer merely inserts the longest available term. The correction is to return to meaning: what happened, what do we know, what remains uncertain, and what should be done next?
For reading practice, give a four-sentence report containing one overstatement. The report might say that a model “always works” after a single successful attempt, or that a change “improved everything” when only one feature was measured. Ask the learner to underline the evidence and fence the conclusion to what the evidence can support. For writing practice, require a short three-part response: observation, reason and next action. This produces a compact technical paragraph without demanding adult-level engineering language.
Laboratory 5. Maren begins with a small fictional classroom challenge: make a simple holder, route marker or information display that must satisfy a stated purpose. Before anyone builds, she asks the group to select three words from this section and use them to describe the task. Iona then checks the wording against the evidence. If a learner says a design is successful before it has been tested, she asks what observation would justify that conclusion. Leonie reduces the task when it becomes overloaded: one question, one planned change and one recorded result. This routine matters because technical vocabulary should make thinking clearer, not make a young learner carry unnecessary verbal load.
Now change one condition. A material becomes unavailable, the permitted size becomes smaller, a user asks for a clearer label, or the first model tips during a trial. The learner must decide which word from the section becomes newly important and which earlier statement needs revision. A good answer names the changed condition, selects a word that fits and explains the connection. A weak answer merely inserts the longest available term. The correction is to return to meaning: what happened, what do we know, what remains uncertain, and what should be done next?
For reading practice, give a four-sentence report containing one overstatement. The report might say that a model “always works” after a single successful attempt, or that a change “improved everything” when only one feature was measured. Ask the learner to underline the evidence and fence the conclusion to what the evidence can support. For writing practice, require a short three-part response: observation, reason and next action. This produces a compact technical paragraph without demanding adult-level engineering language.
Laboratory 6. Maren begins with a small fictional classroom challenge: make a simple holder, route marker or information display that must satisfy a stated purpose. Before anyone builds, she asks the group to select three words from this section and use them to describe the task. Iona then checks the wording against the evidence. If a learner says a design is successful before it has been tested, she asks what observation would justify that conclusion. Leonie reduces the task when it becomes overloaded: one question, one planned change and one recorded result. This routine matters because technical vocabulary should make thinking clearer, not make a young learner carry unnecessary verbal load.
Now change one condition. A material becomes unavailable, the permitted size becomes smaller, a user asks for a clearer label, or the first model tips during a trial. The learner must decide which word from the section becomes newly important and which earlier statement needs revision. A good answer names the changed condition, selects a word that fits and explains the connection. A weak answer merely inserts the longest available term. The correction is to return to meaning: what happened, what do we know, what remains uncertain, and what should be done next?
For reading practice, give a four-sentence report containing one overstatement. The report might say that a model “always works” after a single successful attempt, or that a change “improved everything” when only one feature was measured. Ask the learner to underline the evidence and fence the conclusion to what the evidence can support. For writing practice, require a short three-part response: observation, reason and next action. This produces a compact technical paragraph without demanding adult-level engineering language.
Structures: ten high-utility words
061. Support. In this collection, support is a working engineering-design word used to help a learner explain how a model behaves when it carries or receives a force. Maren uses the word when organising a clear explanation; Iona asks what detail or evidence makes the word justified; Leonie asks what action should follow. Example: “We used support when we compared two simple model ideas and explained why one choice better matched the task.” Transfer: ask the learner to use support in a different design situation and explain what would make the word inaccurate. The important step is not repeating a definition but showing the relationship between the word, the situation and the decision.
062. Base. In this collection, base is a working engineering-design word used to help a learner explain how a model behaves when it carries or receives a force. Maren uses the word when organising a clear explanation; Iona asks what detail or evidence makes the word justified; Leonie asks what action should follow. Example: “We used base when we compared two simple model ideas and explained why one choice better matched the task.” Transfer: ask the learner to use base in a different design situation and explain what would make the word inaccurate. The important step is not repeating a definition but showing the relationship between the word, the situation and the decision.
063. Balance. In this collection, balance is a working engineering-design word used to help a learner explain how a model behaves when it carries or receives a force. Maren uses the word when organising a clear explanation; Iona asks what detail or evidence makes the word justified; Leonie asks what action should follow. Example: “We used balance when we compared two simple model ideas and explained why one choice better matched the task.” Transfer: ask the learner to use balance in a different design situation and explain what would make the word inaccurate. The important step is not repeating a definition but showing the relationship between the word, the situation and the decision.
064. Stable. In this collection, stable is a working engineering-design word used to help a learner explain how a model behaves when it carries or receives a force. Maren uses the word when organising a clear explanation; Iona asks what detail or evidence makes the word justified; Leonie asks what action should follow. Example: “We used stable when we compared two simple model ideas and explained why one choice better matched the task.” Transfer: ask the learner to use stable in a different design situation and explain what would make the word inaccurate. The important step is not repeating a definition but showing the relationship between the word, the situation and the decision.
065. Stability. In this collection, stability is a working engineering-design word used to help a learner explain how a model behaves when it carries or receives a force. Maren uses the word when organising a clear explanation; Iona asks what detail or evidence makes the word justified; Leonie asks what action should follow. Example: “We used stability when we compared two simple model ideas and explained why one choice better matched the task.” Transfer: ask the learner to use stability in a different design situation and explain what would make the word inaccurate. The important step is not repeating a definition but showing the relationship between the word, the situation and the decision.
066. Strength. In this collection, strength is a working engineering-design word used to help a learner explain how a model behaves when it carries or receives a force. Maren uses the word when organising a clear explanation; Iona asks what detail or evidence makes the word justified; Leonie asks what action should follow. Example: “We used strength when we compared two simple model ideas and explained why one choice better matched the task.” Transfer: ask the learner to use strength in a different design situation and explain what would make the word inaccurate. The important step is not repeating a definition but showing the relationship between the word, the situation and the decision.
067. Flexible. In this collection, flexible is a working engineering-design word used to help a learner explain how a model behaves when it carries or receives a force. Maren uses the word when organising a clear explanation; Iona asks what detail or evidence makes the word justified; Leonie asks what action should follow. Example: “We used flexible when we compared two simple model ideas and explained why one choice better matched the task.” Transfer: ask the learner to use flexible in a different design situation and explain what would make the word inaccurate. The important step is not repeating a definition but showing the relationship between the word, the situation and the decision.
068. Rigid. In this collection, rigid is a working engineering-design word used to help a learner explain how a model behaves when it carries or receives a force. Maren uses the word when organising a clear explanation; Iona asks what detail or evidence makes the word justified; Leonie asks what action should follow. Example: “We used rigid when we compared two simple model ideas and explained why one choice better matched the task.” Transfer: ask the learner to use rigid in a different design situation and explain what would make the word inaccurate. The important step is not repeating a definition but showing the relationship between the word, the situation and the decision.
069. Load. In this collection, load is a working engineering-design word used to help a learner explain how a model behaves when it carries or receives a force. Maren uses the word when organising a clear explanation; Iona asks what detail or evidence makes the word justified; Leonie asks what action should follow. Example: “We used load when we compared two simple model ideas and explained why one choice better matched the task.” Transfer: ask the learner to use load in a different design situation and explain what would make the word inaccurate. The important step is not repeating a definition but showing the relationship between the word, the situation and the decision.
070. Force. In this collection, force is a working engineering-design word used to help a learner explain how a model behaves when it carries or receives a force. Maren uses the word when organising a clear explanation; Iona asks what detail or evidence makes the word justified; Leonie asks what action should follow. Example: “We used force when we compared two simple model ideas and explained why one choice better matched the task.” Transfer: ask the learner to use force in a different design situation and explain what would make the word inaccurate. The important step is not repeating a definition but showing the relationship between the word, the situation and the decision.
Structures laboratory: explain how a model behaves when it carries or receives a force
Laboratory 1. Maren begins with a small fictional classroom challenge: make a simple holder, route marker or information display that must satisfy a stated purpose. Before anyone builds, she asks the group to select three words from this section and use them to describe the task. Iona then checks the wording against the evidence. If a learner says a design is successful before it has been tested, she asks what observation would justify that conclusion. Leonie reduces the task when it becomes overloaded: one question, one planned change and one recorded result. This routine matters because technical vocabulary should make thinking clearer, not make a young learner carry unnecessary verbal load.
Now change one condition. A material becomes unavailable, the permitted size becomes smaller, a user asks for a clearer label, or the first model tips during a trial. The learner must decide which word from the section becomes newly important and which earlier statement needs revision. A good answer names the changed condition, selects a word that fits and explains the connection. A weak answer merely inserts the longest available term. The correction is to return to meaning: what happened, what do we know, what remains uncertain, and what should be done next?
For reading practice, give a four-sentence report containing one overstatement. The report might say that a model “always works” after a single successful attempt, or that a change “improved everything” when only one feature was measured. Ask the learner to underline the evidence and fence the conclusion to what the evidence can support. For writing practice, require a short three-part response: observation, reason and next action. This produces a compact technical paragraph without demanding adult-level engineering language.
Laboratory 2. Maren begins with a small fictional classroom challenge: make a simple holder, route marker or information display that must satisfy a stated purpose. Before anyone builds, she asks the group to select three words from this section and use them to describe the task. Iona then checks the wording against the evidence. If a learner says a design is successful before it has been tested, she asks what observation would justify that conclusion. Leonie reduces the task when it becomes overloaded: one question, one planned change and one recorded result. This routine matters because technical vocabulary should make thinking clearer, not make a young learner carry unnecessary verbal load.
Now change one condition. A material becomes unavailable, the permitted size becomes smaller, a user asks for a clearer label, or the first model tips during a trial. The learner must decide which word from the section becomes newly important and which earlier statement needs revision. A good answer names the changed condition, selects a word that fits and explains the connection. A weak answer merely inserts the longest available term. The correction is to return to meaning: what happened, what do we know, what remains uncertain, and what should be done next?
For reading practice, give a four-sentence report containing one overstatement. The report might say that a model “always works” after a single successful attempt, or that a change “improved everything” when only one feature was measured. Ask the learner to underline the evidence and fence the conclusion to what the evidence can support. For writing practice, require a short three-part response: observation, reason and next action. This produces a compact technical paragraph without demanding adult-level engineering language.
Laboratory 3. Maren begins with a small fictional classroom challenge: make a simple holder, route marker or information display that must satisfy a stated purpose. Before anyone builds, she asks the group to select three words from this section and use them to describe the task. Iona then checks the wording against the evidence. If a learner says a design is successful before it has been tested, she asks what observation would justify that conclusion. Leonie reduces the task when it becomes overloaded: one question, one planned change and one recorded result. This routine matters because technical vocabulary should make thinking clearer, not make a young learner carry unnecessary verbal load.
Now change one condition. A material becomes unavailable, the permitted size becomes smaller, a user asks for a clearer label, or the first model tips during a trial. The learner must decide which word from the section becomes newly important and which earlier statement needs revision. A good answer names the changed condition, selects a word that fits and explains the connection. A weak answer merely inserts the longest available term. The correction is to return to meaning: what happened, what do we know, what remains uncertain, and what should be done next?
For reading practice, give a four-sentence report containing one overstatement. The report might say that a model “always works” after a single successful attempt, or that a change “improved everything” when only one feature was measured. Ask the learner to underline the evidence and fence the conclusion to what the evidence can support. For writing practice, require a short three-part response: observation, reason and next action. This produces a compact technical paragraph without demanding adult-level engineering language.
Laboratory 4. Maren begins with a small fictional classroom challenge: make a simple holder, route marker or information display that must satisfy a stated purpose. Before anyone builds, she asks the group to select three words from this section and use them to describe the task. Iona then checks the wording against the evidence. If a learner says a design is successful before it has been tested, she asks what observation would justify that conclusion. Leonie reduces the task when it becomes overloaded: one question, one planned change and one recorded result. This routine matters because technical vocabulary should make thinking clearer, not make a young learner carry unnecessary verbal load.
Now change one condition. A material becomes unavailable, the permitted size becomes smaller, a user asks for a clearer label, or the first model tips during a trial. The learner must decide which word from the section becomes newly important and which earlier statement needs revision. A good answer names the changed condition, selects a word that fits and explains the connection. A weak answer merely inserts the longest available term. The correction is to return to meaning: what happened, what do we know, what remains uncertain, and what should be done next?
For reading practice, give a four-sentence report containing one overstatement. The report might say that a model “always works” after a single successful attempt, or that a change “improved everything” when only one feature was measured. Ask the learner to underline the evidence and fence the conclusion to what the evidence can support. For writing practice, require a short three-part response: observation, reason and next action. This produces a compact technical paragraph without demanding adult-level engineering language.
Laboratory 5. Maren begins with a small fictional classroom challenge: make a simple holder, route marker or information display that must satisfy a stated purpose. Before anyone builds, she asks the group to select three words from this section and use them to describe the task. Iona then checks the wording against the evidence. If a learner says a design is successful before it has been tested, she asks what observation would justify that conclusion. Leonie reduces the task when it becomes overloaded: one question, one planned change and one recorded result. This routine matters because technical vocabulary should make thinking clearer, not make a young learner carry unnecessary verbal load.
Now change one condition. A material becomes unavailable, the permitted size becomes smaller, a user asks for a clearer label, or the first model tips during a trial. The learner must decide which word from the section becomes newly important and which earlier statement needs revision. A good answer names the changed condition, selects a word that fits and explains the connection. A weak answer merely inserts the longest available term. The correction is to return to meaning: what happened, what do we know, what remains uncertain, and what should be done next?
For reading practice, give a four-sentence report containing one overstatement. The report might say that a model “always works” after a single successful attempt, or that a change “improved everything” when only one feature was measured. Ask the learner to underline the evidence and fence the conclusion to what the evidence can support. For writing practice, require a short three-part response: observation, reason and next action. This produces a compact technical paragraph without demanding adult-level engineering language.
Laboratory 6. Maren begins with a small fictional classroom challenge: make a simple holder, route marker or information display that must satisfy a stated purpose. Before anyone builds, she asks the group to select three words from this section and use them to describe the task. Iona then checks the wording against the evidence. If a learner says a design is successful before it has been tested, she asks what observation would justify that conclusion. Leonie reduces the task when it becomes overloaded: one question, one planned change and one recorded result. This routine matters because technical vocabulary should make thinking clearer, not make a young learner carry unnecessary verbal load.
Now change one condition. A material becomes unavailable, the permitted size becomes smaller, a user asks for a clearer label, or the first model tips during a trial. The learner must decide which word from the section becomes newly important and which earlier statement needs revision. A good answer names the changed condition, selects a word that fits and explains the connection. A weak answer merely inserts the longest available term. The correction is to return to meaning: what happened, what do we know, what remains uncertain, and what should be done next?
For reading practice, give a four-sentence report containing one overstatement. The report might say that a model “always works” after a single successful attempt, or that a change “improved everything” when only one feature was measured. Ask the learner to underline the evidence and fence the conclusion to what the evidence can support. For writing practice, require a short three-part response: observation, reason and next action. This produces a compact technical paragraph without demanding adult-level engineering language.
Forces and testing: ten high-utility words
071. Push. In this collection, push is a working engineering-design word used to help a learner run comparisons that answer a clear question. Maren uses the word when organising a clear explanation; Iona asks what detail or evidence makes the word justified; Leonie asks what action should follow. Example: “We used push when we compared two simple model ideas and explained why one choice better matched the task.” Transfer: ask the learner to use push in a different design situation and explain what would make the word inaccurate. The important step is not repeating a definition but showing the relationship between the word, the situation and the decision.
072. Pull. In this collection, pull is a working engineering-design word used to help a learner run comparisons that answer a clear question. Maren uses the word when organising a clear explanation; Iona asks what detail or evidence makes the word justified; Leonie asks what action should follow. Example: “We used pull when we compared two simple model ideas and explained why one choice better matched the task.” Transfer: ask the learner to use pull in a different design situation and explain what would make the word inaccurate. The important step is not repeating a definition but showing the relationship between the word, the situation and the decision.
073. Pressure. In this collection, pressure is a working engineering-design word used to help a learner run comparisons that answer a clear question. Maren uses the word when organising a clear explanation; Iona asks what detail or evidence makes the word justified; Leonie asks what action should follow. Example: “We used pressure when we compared two simple model ideas and explained why one choice better matched the task.” Transfer: ask the learner to use pressure in a different design situation and explain what would make the word inaccurate. The important step is not repeating a definition but showing the relationship between the word, the situation and the decision.
074. Friction. In this collection, friction is a working engineering-design word used to help a learner run comparisons that answer a clear question. Maren uses the word when organising a clear explanation; Iona asks what detail or evidence makes the word justified; Leonie asks what action should follow. Example: “We used friction when we compared two simple model ideas and explained why one choice better matched the task.” Transfer: ask the learner to use friction in a different design situation and explain what would make the word inaccurate. The important step is not repeating a definition but showing the relationship between the word, the situation and the decision.
075. Test. In this collection, test is a working engineering-design word used to help a learner run comparisons that answer a clear question. Maren uses the word when organising a clear explanation; Iona asks what detail or evidence makes the word justified; Leonie asks what action should follow. Example: “We used test when we compared two simple model ideas and explained why one choice better matched the task.” Transfer: ask the learner to use test in a different design situation and explain what would make the word inaccurate. The important step is not repeating a definition but showing the relationship between the word, the situation and the decision.
076. Trial. In this collection, trial is a working engineering-design word used to help a learner run comparisons that answer a clear question. Maren uses the word when organising a clear explanation; Iona asks what detail or evidence makes the word justified; Leonie asks what action should follow. Example: “We used trial when we compared two simple model ideas and explained why one choice better matched the task.” Transfer: ask the learner to use trial in a different design situation and explain what would make the word inaccurate. The important step is not repeating a definition but showing the relationship between the word, the situation and the decision.
077. Condition. In this collection, condition is a working engineering-design word used to help a learner run comparisons that answer a clear question. Maren uses the word when organising a clear explanation; Iona asks what detail or evidence makes the word justified; Leonie asks what action should follow. Example: “We used condition when we compared two simple model ideas and explained why one choice better matched the task.” Transfer: ask the learner to use condition in a different design situation and explain what would make the word inaccurate. The important step is not repeating a definition but showing the relationship between the word, the situation and the decision.
078. Variable. In this collection, variable is a working engineering-design word used to help a learner run comparisons that answer a clear question. Maren uses the word when organising a clear explanation; Iona asks what detail or evidence makes the word justified; Leonie asks what action should follow. Example: “We used variable when we compared two simple model ideas and explained why one choice better matched the task.” Transfer: ask the learner to use variable in a different design situation and explain what would make the word inaccurate. The important step is not repeating a definition but showing the relationship between the word, the situation and the decision.
079. Fair. In this collection, fair is a working engineering-design word used to help a learner run comparisons that answer a clear question. Maren uses the word when organising a clear explanation; Iona asks what detail or evidence makes the word justified; Leonie asks what action should follow. Example: “We used fair when we compared two simple model ideas and explained why one choice better matched the task.” Transfer: ask the learner to use fair in a different design situation and explain what would make the word inaccurate. The important step is not repeating a definition but showing the relationship between the word, the situation and the decision.
080. Result. In this collection, result is a working engineering-design word used to help a learner run comparisons that answer a clear question. Maren uses the word when organising a clear explanation; Iona asks what detail or evidence makes the word justified; Leonie asks what action should follow. Example: “We used result when we compared two simple model ideas and explained why one choice better matched the task.” Transfer: ask the learner to use result in a different design situation and explain what would make the word inaccurate. The important step is not repeating a definition but showing the relationship between the word, the situation and the decision.
Forces and testing laboratory: run comparisons that answer a clear question
Laboratory 1. Maren begins with a small fictional classroom challenge: make a simple holder, route marker or information display that must satisfy a stated purpose. Before anyone builds, she asks the group to select three words from this section and use them to describe the task. Iona then checks the wording against the evidence. If a learner says a design is successful before it has been tested, she asks what observation would justify that conclusion. Leonie reduces the task when it becomes overloaded: one question, one planned change and one recorded result. This routine matters because technical vocabulary should make thinking clearer, not make a young learner carry unnecessary verbal load.
Now change one condition. A material becomes unavailable, the permitted size becomes smaller, a user asks for a clearer label, or the first model tips during a trial. The learner must decide which word from the section becomes newly important and which earlier statement needs revision. A good answer names the changed condition, selects a word that fits and explains the connection. A weak answer merely inserts the longest available term. The correction is to return to meaning: what happened, what do we know, what remains uncertain, and what should be done next?
For reading practice, give a four-sentence report containing one overstatement. The report might say that a model “always works” after a single successful attempt, or that a change “improved everything” when only one feature was measured. Ask the learner to underline the evidence and fence the conclusion to what the evidence can support. For writing practice, require a short three-part response: observation, reason and next action. This produces a compact technical paragraph without demanding adult-level engineering language.
Laboratory 2. Maren begins with a small fictional classroom challenge: make a simple holder, route marker or information display that must satisfy a stated purpose. Before anyone builds, she asks the group to select three words from this section and use them to describe the task. Iona then checks the wording against the evidence. If a learner says a design is successful before it has been tested, she asks what observation would justify that conclusion. Leonie reduces the task when it becomes overloaded: one question, one planned change and one recorded result. This routine matters because technical vocabulary should make thinking clearer, not make a young learner carry unnecessary verbal load.
Now change one condition. A material becomes unavailable, the permitted size becomes smaller, a user asks for a clearer label, or the first model tips during a trial. The learner must decide which word from the section becomes newly important and which earlier statement needs revision. A good answer names the changed condition, selects a word that fits and explains the connection. A weak answer merely inserts the longest available term. The correction is to return to meaning: what happened, what do we know, what remains uncertain, and what should be done next?
For reading practice, give a four-sentence report containing one overstatement. The report might say that a model “always works” after a single successful attempt, or that a change “improved everything” when only one feature was measured. Ask the learner to underline the evidence and fence the conclusion to what the evidence can support. For writing practice, require a short three-part response: observation, reason and next action. This produces a compact technical paragraph without demanding adult-level engineering language.
Laboratory 3. Maren begins with a small fictional classroom challenge: make a simple holder, route marker or information display that must satisfy a stated purpose. Before anyone builds, she asks the group to select three words from this section and use them to describe the task. Iona then checks the wording against the evidence. If a learner says a design is successful before it has been tested, she asks what observation would justify that conclusion. Leonie reduces the task when it becomes overloaded: one question, one planned change and one recorded result. This routine matters because technical vocabulary should make thinking clearer, not make a young learner carry unnecessary verbal load.
Now change one condition. A material becomes unavailable, the permitted size becomes smaller, a user asks for a clearer label, or the first model tips during a trial. The learner must decide which word from the section becomes newly important and which earlier statement needs revision. A good answer names the changed condition, selects a word that fits and explains the connection. A weak answer merely inserts the longest available term. The correction is to return to meaning: what happened, what do we know, what remains uncertain, and what should be done next?
For reading practice, give a four-sentence report containing one overstatement. The report might say that a model “always works” after a single successful attempt, or that a change “improved everything” when only one feature was measured. Ask the learner to underline the evidence and fence the conclusion to what the evidence can support. For writing practice, require a short three-part response: observation, reason and next action. This produces a compact technical paragraph without demanding adult-level engineering language.
Laboratory 4. Maren begins with a small fictional classroom challenge: make a simple holder, route marker or information display that must satisfy a stated purpose. Before anyone builds, she asks the group to select three words from this section and use them to describe the task. Iona then checks the wording against the evidence. If a learner says a design is successful before it has been tested, she asks what observation would justify that conclusion. Leonie reduces the task when it becomes overloaded: one question, one planned change and one recorded result. This routine matters because technical vocabulary should make thinking clearer, not make a young learner carry unnecessary verbal load.
Now change one condition. A material becomes unavailable, the permitted size becomes smaller, a user asks for a clearer label, or the first model tips during a trial. The learner must decide which word from the section becomes newly important and which earlier statement needs revision. A good answer names the changed condition, selects a word that fits and explains the connection. A weak answer merely inserts the longest available term. The correction is to return to meaning: what happened, what do we know, what remains uncertain, and what should be done next?
For reading practice, give a four-sentence report containing one overstatement. The report might say that a model “always works” after a single successful attempt, or that a change “improved everything” when only one feature was measured. Ask the learner to underline the evidence and fence the conclusion to what the evidence can support. For writing practice, require a short three-part response: observation, reason and next action. This produces a compact technical paragraph without demanding adult-level engineering language.
Laboratory 5. Maren begins with a small fictional classroom challenge: make a simple holder, route marker or information display that must satisfy a stated purpose. Before anyone builds, she asks the group to select three words from this section and use them to describe the task. Iona then checks the wording against the evidence. If a learner says a design is successful before it has been tested, she asks what observation would justify that conclusion. Leonie reduces the task when it becomes overloaded: one question, one planned change and one recorded result. This routine matters because technical vocabulary should make thinking clearer, not make a young learner carry unnecessary verbal load.
Now change one condition. A material becomes unavailable, the permitted size becomes smaller, a user asks for a clearer label, or the first model tips during a trial. The learner must decide which word from the section becomes newly important and which earlier statement needs revision. A good answer names the changed condition, selects a word that fits and explains the connection. A weak answer merely inserts the longest available term. The correction is to return to meaning: what happened, what do we know, what remains uncertain, and what should be done next?
For reading practice, give a four-sentence report containing one overstatement. The report might say that a model “always works” after a single successful attempt, or that a change “improved everything” when only one feature was measured. Ask the learner to underline the evidence and fence the conclusion to what the evidence can support. For writing practice, require a short three-part response: observation, reason and next action. This produces a compact technical paragraph without demanding adult-level engineering language.
Laboratory 6. Maren begins with a small fictional classroom challenge: make a simple holder, route marker or information display that must satisfy a stated purpose. Before anyone builds, she asks the group to select three words from this section and use them to describe the task. Iona then checks the wording against the evidence. If a learner says a design is successful before it has been tested, she asks what observation would justify that conclusion. Leonie reduces the task when it becomes overloaded: one question, one planned change and one recorded result. This routine matters because technical vocabulary should make thinking clearer, not make a young learner carry unnecessary verbal load.
Now change one condition. A material becomes unavailable, the permitted size becomes smaller, a user asks for a clearer label, or the first model tips during a trial. The learner must decide which word from the section becomes newly important and which earlier statement needs revision. A good answer names the changed condition, selects a word that fits and explains the connection. A weak answer merely inserts the longest available term. The correction is to return to meaning: what happened, what do we know, what remains uncertain, and what should be done next?
For reading practice, give a four-sentence report containing one overstatement. The report might say that a model “always works” after a single successful attempt, or that a change “improved everything” when only one feature was measured. Ask the learner to underline the evidence and fence the conclusion to what the evidence can support. For writing practice, require a short three-part response: observation, reason and next action. This produces a compact technical paragraph without demanding adult-level engineering language.
Evaluation: ten high-utility words
081. Pattern. In this collection, pattern is a working engineering-design word used to help a learner judge performance against the original purpose. Maren uses the word when organising a clear explanation; Iona asks what detail or evidence makes the word justified; Leonie asks what action should follow. Example: “We used pattern when we compared two simple model ideas and explained why one choice better matched the task.” Transfer: ask the learner to use pattern in a different design situation and explain what would make the word inaccurate. The important step is not repeating a definition but showing the relationship between the word, the situation and the decision.
082. Failure. In this collection, failure is a working engineering-design word used to help a learner judge performance against the original purpose. Maren uses the word when organising a clear explanation; Iona asks what detail or evidence makes the word justified; Leonie asks what action should follow. Example: “We used failure when we compared two simple model ideas and explained why one choice better matched the task.” Transfer: ask the learner to use failure in a different design situation and explain what would make the word inaccurate. The important step is not repeating a definition but showing the relationship between the word, the situation and the decision.
083. Success. In this collection, success is a working engineering-design word used to help a learner judge performance against the original purpose. Maren uses the word when organising a clear explanation; Iona asks what detail or evidence makes the word justified; Leonie asks what action should follow. Example: “We used success when we compared two simple model ideas and explained why one choice better matched the task.” Transfer: ask the learner to use success in a different design situation and explain what would make the word inaccurate. The important step is not repeating a definition but showing the relationship between the word, the situation and the decision.
084. Evaluate. In this collection, evaluate is a working engineering-design word used to help a learner judge performance against the original purpose. Maren uses the word when organising a clear explanation; Iona asks what detail or evidence makes the word justified; Leonie asks what action should follow. Example: “We used evaluate when we compared two simple model ideas and explained why one choice better matched the task.” Transfer: ask the learner to use evaluate in a different design situation and explain what would make the word inaccurate. The important step is not repeating a definition but showing the relationship between the word, the situation and the decision.
085. Feedback. In this collection, feedback is a working engineering-design word used to help a learner judge performance against the original purpose. Maren uses the word when organising a clear explanation; Iona asks what detail or evidence makes the word justified; Leonie asks what action should follow. Example: “We used feedback when we compared two simple model ideas and explained why one choice better matched the task.” Transfer: ask the learner to use feedback in a different design situation and explain what would make the word inaccurate. The important step is not repeating a definition but showing the relationship between the word, the situation and the decision.
086. Weakness. In this collection, weakness is a working engineering-design word used to help a learner judge performance against the original purpose. Maren uses the word when organising a clear explanation; Iona asks what detail or evidence makes the word justified; Leonie asks what action should follow. Example: “We used weakness when we compared two simple model ideas and explained why one choice better matched the task.” Transfer: ask the learner to use weakness in a different design situation and explain what would make the word inaccurate. The important step is not repeating a definition but showing the relationship between the word, the situation and the decision.
087. Strengths. In this collection, strengths is a working engineering-design word used to help a learner judge performance against the original purpose. Maren uses the word when organising a clear explanation; Iona asks what detail or evidence makes the word justified; Leonie asks what action should follow. Example: “We used strengths when we compared two simple model ideas and explained why one choice better matched the task.” Transfer: ask the learner to use strengths in a different design situation and explain what would make the word inaccurate. The important step is not repeating a definition but showing the relationship between the word, the situation and the decision.
088. Performance. In this collection, performance is a working engineering-design word used to help a learner judge performance against the original purpose. Maren uses the word when organising a clear explanation; Iona asks what detail or evidence makes the word justified; Leonie asks what action should follow. Example: “We used performance when we compared two simple model ideas and explained why one choice better matched the task.” Transfer: ask the learner to use performance in a different design situation and explain what would make the word inaccurate. The important step is not repeating a definition but showing the relationship between the word, the situation and the decision.
089. Function. In this collection, function is a working engineering-design word used to help a learner judge performance against the original purpose. Maren uses the word when organising a clear explanation; Iona asks what detail or evidence makes the word justified; Leonie asks what action should follow. Example: “We used function when we compared two simple model ideas and explained why one choice better matched the task.” Transfer: ask the learner to use function in a different design situation and explain what would make the word inaccurate. The important step is not repeating a definition but showing the relationship between the word, the situation and the decision.
090. Effective. In this collection, effective is a working engineering-design word used to help a learner judge performance against the original purpose. Maren uses the word when organising a clear explanation; Iona asks what detail or evidence makes the word justified; Leonie asks what action should follow. Example: “We used effective when we compared two simple model ideas and explained why one choice better matched the task.” Transfer: ask the learner to use effective in a different design situation and explain what would make the word inaccurate. The important step is not repeating a definition but showing the relationship between the word, the situation and the decision.
Evaluation laboratory: judge performance against the original purpose
Laboratory 1. Maren begins with a small fictional classroom challenge: make a simple holder, route marker or information display that must satisfy a stated purpose. Before anyone builds, she asks the group to select three words from this section and use them to describe the task. Iona then checks the wording against the evidence. If a learner says a design is successful before it has been tested, she asks what observation would justify that conclusion. Leonie reduces the task when it becomes overloaded: one question, one planned change and one recorded result. This routine matters because technical vocabulary should make thinking clearer, not make a young learner carry unnecessary verbal load.
Now change one condition. A material becomes unavailable, the permitted size becomes smaller, a user asks for a clearer label, or the first model tips during a trial. The learner must decide which word from the section becomes newly important and which earlier statement needs revision. A good answer names the changed condition, selects a word that fits and explains the connection. A weak answer merely inserts the longest available term. The correction is to return to meaning: what happened, what do we know, what remains uncertain, and what should be done next?
For reading practice, give a four-sentence report containing one overstatement. The report might say that a model “always works” after a single successful attempt, or that a change “improved everything” when only one feature was measured. Ask the learner to underline the evidence and fence the conclusion to what the evidence can support. For writing practice, require a short three-part response: observation, reason and next action. This produces a compact technical paragraph without demanding adult-level engineering language.
Laboratory 2. Maren begins with a small fictional classroom challenge: make a simple holder, route marker or information display that must satisfy a stated purpose. Before anyone builds, she asks the group to select three words from this section and use them to describe the task. Iona then checks the wording against the evidence. If a learner says a design is successful before it has been tested, she asks what observation would justify that conclusion. Leonie reduces the task when it becomes overloaded: one question, one planned change and one recorded result. This routine matters because technical vocabulary should make thinking clearer, not make a young learner carry unnecessary verbal load.
Now change one condition. A material becomes unavailable, the permitted size becomes smaller, a user asks for a clearer label, or the first model tips during a trial. The learner must decide which word from the section becomes newly important and which earlier statement needs revision. A good answer names the changed condition, selects a word that fits and explains the connection. A weak answer merely inserts the longest available term. The correction is to return to meaning: what happened, what do we know, what remains uncertain, and what should be done next?
For reading practice, give a four-sentence report containing one overstatement. The report might say that a model “always works” after a single successful attempt, or that a change “improved everything” when only one feature was measured. Ask the learner to underline the evidence and fence the conclusion to what the evidence can support. For writing practice, require a short three-part response: observation, reason and next action. This produces a compact technical paragraph without demanding adult-level engineering language.
Laboratory 3. Maren begins with a small fictional classroom challenge: make a simple holder, route marker or information display that must satisfy a stated purpose. Before anyone builds, she asks the group to select three words from this section and use them to describe the task. Iona then checks the wording against the evidence. If a learner says a design is successful before it has been tested, she asks what observation would justify that conclusion. Leonie reduces the task when it becomes overloaded: one question, one planned change and one recorded result. This routine matters because technical vocabulary should make thinking clearer, not make a young learner carry unnecessary verbal load.
Now change one condition. A material becomes unavailable, the permitted size becomes smaller, a user asks for a clearer label, or the first model tips during a trial. The learner must decide which word from the section becomes newly important and which earlier statement needs revision. A good answer names the changed condition, selects a word that fits and explains the connection. A weak answer merely inserts the longest available term. The correction is to return to meaning: what happened, what do we know, what remains uncertain, and what should be done next?
For reading practice, give a four-sentence report containing one overstatement. The report might say that a model “always works” after a single successful attempt, or that a change “improved everything” when only one feature was measured. Ask the learner to underline the evidence and fence the conclusion to what the evidence can support. For writing practice, require a short three-part response: observation, reason and next action. This produces a compact technical paragraph without demanding adult-level engineering language.
Laboratory 4. Maren begins with a small fictional classroom challenge: make a simple holder, route marker or information display that must satisfy a stated purpose. Before anyone builds, she asks the group to select three words from this section and use them to describe the task. Iona then checks the wording against the evidence. If a learner says a design is successful before it has been tested, she asks what observation would justify that conclusion. Leonie reduces the task when it becomes overloaded: one question, one planned change and one recorded result. This routine matters because technical vocabulary should make thinking clearer, not make a young learner carry unnecessary verbal load.
Now change one condition. A material becomes unavailable, the permitted size becomes smaller, a user asks for a clearer label, or the first model tips during a trial. The learner must decide which word from the section becomes newly important and which earlier statement needs revision. A good answer names the changed condition, selects a word that fits and explains the connection. A weak answer merely inserts the longest available term. The correction is to return to meaning: what happened, what do we know, what remains uncertain, and what should be done next?
For reading practice, give a four-sentence report containing one overstatement. The report might say that a model “always works” after a single successful attempt, or that a change “improved everything” when only one feature was measured. Ask the learner to underline the evidence and fence the conclusion to what the evidence can support. For writing practice, require a short three-part response: observation, reason and next action. This produces a compact technical paragraph without demanding adult-level engineering language.
Laboratory 5. Maren begins with a small fictional classroom challenge: make a simple holder, route marker or information display that must satisfy a stated purpose. Before anyone builds, she asks the group to select three words from this section and use them to describe the task. Iona then checks the wording against the evidence. If a learner says a design is successful before it has been tested, she asks what observation would justify that conclusion. Leonie reduces the task when it becomes overloaded: one question, one planned change and one recorded result. This routine matters because technical vocabulary should make thinking clearer, not make a young learner carry unnecessary verbal load.
Now change one condition. A material becomes unavailable, the permitted size becomes smaller, a user asks for a clearer label, or the first model tips during a trial. The learner must decide which word from the section becomes newly important and which earlier statement needs revision. A good answer names the changed condition, selects a word that fits and explains the connection. A weak answer merely inserts the longest available term. The correction is to return to meaning: what happened, what do we know, what remains uncertain, and what should be done next?
For reading practice, give a four-sentence report containing one overstatement. The report might say that a model “always works” after a single successful attempt, or that a change “improved everything” when only one feature was measured. Ask the learner to underline the evidence and fence the conclusion to what the evidence can support. For writing practice, require a short three-part response: observation, reason and next action. This produces a compact technical paragraph without demanding adult-level engineering language.
Laboratory 6. Maren begins with a small fictional classroom challenge: make a simple holder, route marker or information display that must satisfy a stated purpose. Before anyone builds, she asks the group to select three words from this section and use them to describe the task. Iona then checks the wording against the evidence. If a learner says a design is successful before it has been tested, she asks what observation would justify that conclusion. Leonie reduces the task when it becomes overloaded: one question, one planned change and one recorded result. This routine matters because technical vocabulary should make thinking clearer, not make a young learner carry unnecessary verbal load.
Now change one condition. A material becomes unavailable, the permitted size becomes smaller, a user asks for a clearer label, or the first model tips during a trial. The learner must decide which word from the section becomes newly important and which earlier statement needs revision. A good answer names the changed condition, selects a word that fits and explains the connection. A weak answer merely inserts the longest available term. The correction is to return to meaning: what happened, what do we know, what remains uncertain, and what should be done next?
For reading practice, give a four-sentence report containing one overstatement. The report might say that a model “always works” after a single successful attempt, or that a change “improved everything” when only one feature was measured. Ask the learner to underline the evidence and fence the conclusion to what the evidence can support. For writing practice, require a short three-part response: observation, reason and next action. This produces a compact technical paragraph without demanding adult-level engineering language.
Improvement and communication: ten high-utility words
091. Improve. In this collection, improve is a working engineering-design word used to help a learner change a design for a reason and communicate what was learned. Maren uses the word when organising a clear explanation; Iona asks what detail or evidence makes the word justified; Leonie asks what action should follow. Example: “We used improve when we compared two simple model ideas and explained why one choice better matched the task.” Transfer: ask the learner to use improve in a different design situation and explain what would make the word inaccurate. The important step is not repeating a definition but showing the relationship between the word, the situation and the decision.
092. Modify. In this collection, modify is a working engineering-design word used to help a learner change a design for a reason and communicate what was learned. Maren uses the word when organising a clear explanation; Iona asks what detail or evidence makes the word justified; Leonie asks what action should follow. Example: “We used modify when we compared two simple model ideas and explained why one choice better matched the task.” Transfer: ask the learner to use modify in a different design situation and explain what would make the word inaccurate. The important step is not repeating a definition but showing the relationship between the word, the situation and the decision.
093. Adjust. In this collection, adjust is a working engineering-design word used to help a learner change a design for a reason and communicate what was learned. Maren uses the word when organising a clear explanation; Iona asks what detail or evidence makes the word justified; Leonie asks what action should follow. Example: “We used adjust when we compared two simple model ideas and explained why one choice better matched the task.” Transfer: ask the learner to use adjust in a different design situation and explain what would make the word inaccurate. The important step is not repeating a definition but showing the relationship between the word, the situation and the decision.
094. Revise. In this collection, revise is a working engineering-design word used to help a learner change a design for a reason and communicate what was learned. Maren uses the word when organising a clear explanation; Iona asks what detail or evidence makes the word justified; Leonie asks what action should follow. Example: “We used revise when we compared two simple model ideas and explained why one choice better matched the task.” Transfer: ask the learner to use revise in a different design situation and explain what would make the word inaccurate. The important step is not repeating a definition but showing the relationship between the word, the situation and the decision.
095. Redesign. In this collection, redesign is a working engineering-design word used to help a learner change a design for a reason and communicate what was learned. Maren uses the word when organising a clear explanation; Iona asks what detail or evidence makes the word justified; Leonie asks what action should follow. Example: “We used redesign when we compared two simple model ideas and explained why one choice better matched the task.” Transfer: ask the learner to use redesign in a different design situation and explain what would make the word inaccurate. The important step is not repeating a definition but showing the relationship between the word, the situation and the decision.
096. Iteration. In this collection, iteration is a working engineering-design word used to help a learner change a design for a reason and communicate what was learned. Maren uses the word when organising a clear explanation; Iona asks what detail or evidence makes the word justified; Leonie asks what action should follow. Example: “We used iteration when we compared two simple model ideas and explained why one choice better matched the task.” Transfer: ask the learner to use iteration in a different design situation and explain what would make the word inaccurate. The important step is not repeating a definition but showing the relationship between the word, the situation and the decision.
097. Solution. In this collection, solution is a working engineering-design word used to help a learner change a design for a reason and communicate what was learned. Maren uses the word when organising a clear explanation; Iona asks what detail or evidence makes the word justified; Leonie asks what action should follow. Example: “We used solution when we compared two simple model ideas and explained why one choice better matched the task.” Transfer: ask the learner to use solution in a different design situation and explain what would make the word inaccurate. The important step is not repeating a definition but showing the relationship between the word, the situation and the decision.
098. Efficient. In this collection, efficient is a working engineering-design word used to help a learner change a design for a reason and communicate what was learned. Maren uses the word when organising a clear explanation; Iona asks what detail or evidence makes the word justified; Leonie asks what action should follow. Example: “We used efficient when we compared two simple model ideas and explained why one choice better matched the task.” Transfer: ask the learner to use efficient in a different design situation and explain what would make the word inaccurate. The important step is not repeating a definition but showing the relationship between the word, the situation and the decision.
099. Trade-off. In this collection, trade-off is a working engineering-design word used to help a learner change a design for a reason and communicate what was learned. Maren uses the word when organising a clear explanation; Iona asks what detail or evidence makes the word justified; Leonie asks what action should follow. Example: “We used trade-off when we compared two simple model ideas and explained why one choice better matched the task.” Transfer: ask the learner to use trade-off in a different design situation and explain what would make the word inaccurate. The important step is not repeating a definition but showing the relationship between the word, the situation and the decision.
100. Explain. In this collection, explain is a working engineering-design word used to help a learner change a design for a reason and communicate what was learned. Maren uses the word when organising a clear explanation; Iona asks what detail or evidence makes the word justified; Leonie asks what action should follow. Example: “We used explain when we compared two simple model ideas and explained why one choice better matched the task.” Transfer: ask the learner to use explain in a different design situation and explain what would make the word inaccurate. The important step is not repeating a definition but showing the relationship between the word, the situation and the decision.
Improvement and communication laboratory: change a design for a reason and communicate what was learned
Laboratory 1. Maren begins with a small fictional classroom challenge: make a simple holder, route marker or information display that must satisfy a stated purpose. Before anyone builds, she asks the group to select three words from this section and use them to describe the task. Iona then checks the wording against the evidence. If a learner says a design is successful before it has been tested, she asks what observation would justify that conclusion. Leonie reduces the task when it becomes overloaded: one question, one planned change and one recorded result. This routine matters because technical vocabulary should make thinking clearer, not make a young learner carry unnecessary verbal load.
Now change one condition. A material becomes unavailable, the permitted size becomes smaller, a user asks for a clearer label, or the first model tips during a trial. The learner must decide which word from the section becomes newly important and which earlier statement needs revision. A good answer names the changed condition, selects a word that fits and explains the connection. A weak answer merely inserts the longest available term. The correction is to return to meaning: what happened, what do we know, what remains uncertain, and what should be done next?
For reading practice, give a four-sentence report containing one overstatement. The report might say that a model “always works” after a single successful attempt, or that a change “improved everything” when only one feature was measured. Ask the learner to underline the evidence and fence the conclusion to what the evidence can support. For writing practice, require a short three-part response: observation, reason and next action. This produces a compact technical paragraph without demanding adult-level engineering language.
Laboratory 2. Maren begins with a small fictional classroom challenge: make a simple holder, route marker or information display that must satisfy a stated purpose. Before anyone builds, she asks the group to select three words from this section and use them to describe the task. Iona then checks the wording against the evidence. If a learner says a design is successful before it has been tested, she asks what observation would justify that conclusion. Leonie reduces the task when it becomes overloaded: one question, one planned change and one recorded result. This routine matters because technical vocabulary should make thinking clearer, not make a young learner carry unnecessary verbal load.
Now change one condition. A material becomes unavailable, the permitted size becomes smaller, a user asks for a clearer label, or the first model tips during a trial. The learner must decide which word from the section becomes newly important and which earlier statement needs revision. A good answer names the changed condition, selects a word that fits and explains the connection. A weak answer merely inserts the longest available term. The correction is to return to meaning: what happened, what do we know, what remains uncertain, and what should be done next?
For reading practice, give a four-sentence report containing one overstatement. The report might say that a model “always works” after a single successful attempt, or that a change “improved everything” when only one feature was measured. Ask the learner to underline the evidence and fence the conclusion to what the evidence can support. For writing practice, require a short three-part response: observation, reason and next action. This produces a compact technical paragraph without demanding adult-level engineering language.
Laboratory 3. Maren begins with a small fictional classroom challenge: make a simple holder, route marker or information display that must satisfy a stated purpose. Before anyone builds, she asks the group to select three words from this section and use them to describe the task. Iona then checks the wording against the evidence. If a learner says a design is successful before it has been tested, she asks what observation would justify that conclusion. Leonie reduces the task when it becomes overloaded: one question, one planned change and one recorded result. This routine matters because technical vocabulary should make thinking clearer, not make a young learner carry unnecessary verbal load.
Now change one condition. A material becomes unavailable, the permitted size becomes smaller, a user asks for a clearer label, or the first model tips during a trial. The learner must decide which word from the section becomes newly important and which earlier statement needs revision. A good answer names the changed condition, selects a word that fits and explains the connection. A weak answer merely inserts the longest available term. The correction is to return to meaning: what happened, what do we know, what remains uncertain, and what should be done next?
For reading practice, give a four-sentence report containing one overstatement. The report might say that a model “always works” after a single successful attempt, or that a change “improved everything” when only one feature was measured. Ask the learner to underline the evidence and fence the conclusion to what the evidence can support. For writing practice, require a short three-part response: observation, reason and next action. This produces a compact technical paragraph without demanding adult-level engineering language.
Laboratory 4. Maren begins with a small fictional classroom challenge: make a simple holder, route marker or information display that must satisfy a stated purpose. Before anyone builds, she asks the group to select three words from this section and use them to describe the task. Iona then checks the wording against the evidence. If a learner says a design is successful before it has been tested, she asks what observation would justify that conclusion. Leonie reduces the task when it becomes overloaded: one question, one planned change and one recorded result. This routine matters because technical vocabulary should make thinking clearer, not make a young learner carry unnecessary verbal load.
Now change one condition. A material becomes unavailable, the permitted size becomes smaller, a user asks for a clearer label, or the first model tips during a trial. The learner must decide which word from the section becomes newly important and which earlier statement needs revision. A good answer names the changed condition, selects a word that fits and explains the connection. A weak answer merely inserts the longest available term. The correction is to return to meaning: what happened, what do we know, what remains uncertain, and what should be done next?
For reading practice, give a four-sentence report containing one overstatement. The report might say that a model “always works” after a single successful attempt, or that a change “improved everything” when only one feature was measured. Ask the learner to underline the evidence and fence the conclusion to what the evidence can support. For writing practice, require a short three-part response: observation, reason and next action. This produces a compact technical paragraph without demanding adult-level engineering language.
Laboratory 5. Maren begins with a small fictional classroom challenge: make a simple holder, route marker or information display that must satisfy a stated purpose. Before anyone builds, she asks the group to select three words from this section and use them to describe the task. Iona then checks the wording against the evidence. If a learner says a design is successful before it has been tested, she asks what observation would justify that conclusion. Leonie reduces the task when it becomes overloaded: one question, one planned change and one recorded result. This routine matters because technical vocabulary should make thinking clearer, not make a young learner carry unnecessary verbal load.
Now change one condition. A material becomes unavailable, the permitted size becomes smaller, a user asks for a clearer label, or the first model tips during a trial. The learner must decide which word from the section becomes newly important and which earlier statement needs revision. A good answer names the changed condition, selects a word that fits and explains the connection. A weak answer merely inserts the longest available term. The correction is to return to meaning: what happened, what do we know, what remains uncertain, and what should be done next?
For reading practice, give a four-sentence report containing one overstatement. The report might say that a model “always works” after a single successful attempt, or that a change “improved everything” when only one feature was measured. Ask the learner to underline the evidence and fence the conclusion to what the evidence can support. For writing practice, require a short three-part response: observation, reason and next action. This produces a compact technical paragraph without demanding adult-level engineering language.
Laboratory 6. Maren begins with a small fictional classroom challenge: make a simple holder, route marker or information display that must satisfy a stated purpose. Before anyone builds, she asks the group to select three words from this section and use them to describe the task. Iona then checks the wording against the evidence. If a learner says a design is successful before it has been tested, she asks what observation would justify that conclusion. Leonie reduces the task when it becomes overloaded: one question, one planned change and one recorded result. This routine matters because technical vocabulary should make thinking clearer, not make a young learner carry unnecessary verbal load.
Now change one condition. A material becomes unavailable, the permitted size becomes smaller, a user asks for a clearer label, or the first model tips during a trial. The learner must decide which word from the section becomes newly important and which earlier statement needs revision. A good answer names the changed condition, selects a word that fits and explains the connection. A weak answer merely inserts the longest available term. The correction is to return to meaning: what happened, what do we know, what remains uncertain, and what should be done next?
For reading practice, give a four-sentence report containing one overstatement. The report might say that a model “always works” after a single successful attempt, or that a change “improved everything” when only one feature was measured. Ask the learner to underline the evidence and fence the conclusion to what the evidence can support. For writing practice, require a short three-part response: observation, reason and next action. This produces a compact technical paragraph without demanding adult-level engineering language.
Twenty-question retrieval and transfer check
Question 1. Choose two words from different groups and explain how they can work together in one design task. Then give a new example that was not used above. Answer guide: a strong response preserves the distinct job of each word, supplies a plausible situation and avoids claiming more than the evidence allows. For example, a learner can connect a constraint to a design decision, a trial to a recorded result, or feedback to a revision. Other answers are acceptable when the relationship is clearly explained.
Question 2. Choose two words from different groups and explain how they can work together in one design task. Then give a new example that was not used above. Answer guide: a strong response preserves the distinct job of each word, supplies a plausible situation and avoids claiming more than the evidence allows. For example, a learner can connect a constraint to a design decision, a trial to a recorded result, or feedback to a revision. Other answers are acceptable when the relationship is clearly explained.
Question 3. Choose two words from different groups and explain how they can work together in one design task. Then give a new example that was not used above. Answer guide: a strong response preserves the distinct job of each word, supplies a plausible situation and avoids claiming more than the evidence allows. For example, a learner can connect a constraint to a design decision, a trial to a recorded result, or feedback to a revision. Other answers are acceptable when the relationship is clearly explained.
Question 4. Choose two words from different groups and explain how they can work together in one design task. Then give a new example that was not used above. Answer guide: a strong response preserves the distinct job of each word, supplies a plausible situation and avoids claiming more than the evidence allows. For example, a learner can connect a constraint to a design decision, a trial to a recorded result, or feedback to a revision. Other answers are acceptable when the relationship is clearly explained.
Question 5. Choose two words from different groups and explain how they can work together in one design task. Then give a new example that was not used above. Answer guide: a strong response preserves the distinct job of each word, supplies a plausible situation and avoids claiming more than the evidence allows. For example, a learner can connect a constraint to a design decision, a trial to a recorded result, or feedback to a revision. Other answers are acceptable when the relationship is clearly explained.
Question 6. Choose two words from different groups and explain how they can work together in one design task. Then give a new example that was not used above. Answer guide: a strong response preserves the distinct job of each word, supplies a plausible situation and avoids claiming more than the evidence allows. For example, a learner can connect a constraint to a design decision, a trial to a recorded result, or feedback to a revision. Other answers are acceptable when the relationship is clearly explained.
Question 7. Choose two words from different groups and explain how they can work together in one design task. Then give a new example that was not used above. Answer guide: a strong response preserves the distinct job of each word, supplies a plausible situation and avoids claiming more than the evidence allows. For example, a learner can connect a constraint to a design decision, a trial to a recorded result, or feedback to a revision. Other answers are acceptable when the relationship is clearly explained.
Question 8. Choose two words from different groups and explain how they can work together in one design task. Then give a new example that was not used above. Answer guide: a strong response preserves the distinct job of each word, supplies a plausible situation and avoids claiming more than the evidence allows. For example, a learner can connect a constraint to a design decision, a trial to a recorded result, or feedback to a revision. Other answers are acceptable when the relationship is clearly explained.
Question 9. Choose two words from different groups and explain how they can work together in one design task. Then give a new example that was not used above. Answer guide: a strong response preserves the distinct job of each word, supplies a plausible situation and avoids claiming more than the evidence allows. For example, a learner can connect a constraint to a design decision, a trial to a recorded result, or feedback to a revision. Other answers are acceptable when the relationship is clearly explained.
Question 10. Choose two words from different groups and explain how they can work together in one design task. Then give a new example that was not used above. Answer guide: a strong response preserves the distinct job of each word, supplies a plausible situation and avoids claiming more than the evidence allows. For example, a learner can connect a constraint to a design decision, a trial to a recorded result, or feedback to a revision. Other answers are acceptable when the relationship is clearly explained.
Question 11. Choose two words from different groups and explain how they can work together in one design task. Then give a new example that was not used above. Answer guide: a strong response preserves the distinct job of each word, supplies a plausible situation and avoids claiming more than the evidence allows. For example, a learner can connect a constraint to a design decision, a trial to a recorded result, or feedback to a revision. Other answers are acceptable when the relationship is clearly explained.
Question 12. Choose two words from different groups and explain how they can work together in one design task. Then give a new example that was not used above. Answer guide: a strong response preserves the distinct job of each word, supplies a plausible situation and avoids claiming more than the evidence allows. For example, a learner can connect a constraint to a design decision, a trial to a recorded result, or feedback to a revision. Other answers are acceptable when the relationship is clearly explained.
Question 13. Choose two words from different groups and explain how they can work together in one design task. Then give a new example that was not used above. Answer guide: a strong response preserves the distinct job of each word, supplies a plausible situation and avoids claiming more than the evidence allows. For example, a learner can connect a constraint to a design decision, a trial to a recorded result, or feedback to a revision. Other answers are acceptable when the relationship is clearly explained.
Question 14. Choose two words from different groups and explain how they can work together in one design task. Then give a new example that was not used above. Answer guide: a strong response preserves the distinct job of each word, supplies a plausible situation and avoids claiming more than the evidence allows. For example, a learner can connect a constraint to a design decision, a trial to a recorded result, or feedback to a revision. Other answers are acceptable when the relationship is clearly explained.
Question 15. Choose two words from different groups and explain how they can work together in one design task. Then give a new example that was not used above. Answer guide: a strong response preserves the distinct job of each word, supplies a plausible situation and avoids claiming more than the evidence allows. For example, a learner can connect a constraint to a design decision, a trial to a recorded result, or feedback to a revision. Other answers are acceptable when the relationship is clearly explained.
Question 16. Choose two words from different groups and explain how they can work together in one design task. Then give a new example that was not used above. Answer guide: a strong response preserves the distinct job of each word, supplies a plausible situation and avoids claiming more than the evidence allows. For example, a learner can connect a constraint to a design decision, a trial to a recorded result, or feedback to a revision. Other answers are acceptable when the relationship is clearly explained.
Question 17. Choose two words from different groups and explain how they can work together in one design task. Then give a new example that was not used above. Answer guide: a strong response preserves the distinct job of each word, supplies a plausible situation and avoids claiming more than the evidence allows. For example, a learner can connect a constraint to a design decision, a trial to a recorded result, or feedback to a revision. Other answers are acceptable when the relationship is clearly explained.
Question 18. Choose two words from different groups and explain how they can work together in one design task. Then give a new example that was not used above. Answer guide: a strong response preserves the distinct job of each word, supplies a plausible situation and avoids claiming more than the evidence allows. For example, a learner can connect a constraint to a design decision, a trial to a recorded result, or feedback to a revision. Other answers are acceptable when the relationship is clearly explained.
Question 19. Choose two words from different groups and explain how they can work together in one design task. Then give a new example that was not used above. Answer guide: a strong response preserves the distinct job of each word, supplies a plausible situation and avoids claiming more than the evidence allows. For example, a learner can connect a constraint to a design decision, a trial to a recorded result, or feedback to a revision. Other answers are acceptable when the relationship is clearly explained.
Question 20. Choose two words from different groups and explain how they can work together in one design task. Then give a new example that was not used above. Answer guide: a strong response preserves the distinct job of each word, supplies a plausible situation and avoids claiming more than the evidence allows. For example, a learner can connect a constraint to a design decision, a trial to a recorded result, or feedback to a revision. Other answers are acceptable when the relationship is clearly explained.
A four-week Primary 2 teaching route
Week 1. Select five words rather than assigning the full hundred. Day one binds child-friendly meaning to a concrete situation. Day two contrasts each word with a nearby idea. Day three retrieves the words without the original examples. Day four uses them in a short reading or making task. Day five asks the learner to explain one decision in complete sentences. In the following week, return to two earlier words before adding new ones. This spaced return helps distinguish temporary familiarity from vocabulary that can be recovered and used independently.
Week 2. Select five words rather than assigning the full hundred. Day one binds child-friendly meaning to a concrete situation. Day two contrasts each word with a nearby idea. Day three retrieves the words without the original examples. Day four uses them in a short reading or making task. Day five asks the learner to explain one decision in complete sentences. In the following week, return to two earlier words before adding new ones. This spaced return helps distinguish temporary familiarity from vocabulary that can be recovered and used independently.
Week 3. Select five words rather than assigning the full hundred. Day one binds child-friendly meaning to a concrete situation. Day two contrasts each word with a nearby idea. Day three retrieves the words without the original examples. Day four uses them in a short reading or making task. Day five asks the learner to explain one decision in complete sentences. In the following week, return to two earlier words before adding new ones. This spaced return helps distinguish temporary familiarity from vocabulary that can be recovered and used independently.
Week 4. Select five words rather than assigning the full hundred. Day one binds child-friendly meaning to a concrete situation. Day two contrasts each word with a nearby idea. Day three retrieves the words without the original examples. Day four uses them in a short reading or making task. Day five asks the learner to explain one decision in complete sentences. In the following week, return to two earlier words before adding new ones. This spaced return helps distinguish temporary familiarity from vocabulary that can be recovered and used independently.
Why the vocabulary belongs in English as well as STEM
Technical vocabulary supports comprehension because readers must track relationships such as purpose, cause, comparison, evidence and sequence. It supports writing because a learner can replace vague statements such as “we did stuff and it got better” with a bounded explanation of what was changed, what was tested and what result followed. It supports mathematics when measurements, tables and comparisons need precise language, and it supports science when observations must be separated from explanations.
The article therefore treats vocabulary as a bridge between disciplines rather than as a specialist glossary isolated from ordinary language. The same child who learns to fence an engineering conclusion to the evidence is also practising a comprehension habit: answer what the text supports. The same child who sequences a build plan is practising procedural writing. The same child who compares two results is practising mathematical and scientific communication.
Sources and further learning
For broader engineering-design terminology, see the NSW Engineering Design Process teacher guide. For a child-facing design-process example, see the Boston College Coding as Another Language Grade 2 KIBO curriculum. These sources inform the general design-process framing; they do not prescribe this exact hundred-word eduKateSingapore collection.
Continue through the Vocabulary Article Directory or the eduKate Vocabulary Learning System. Use the paper-engineering volume when the learner needs a concrete material application, and use this engineering-design-process volume when the learner needs the wider language of problems, criteria, constraints, models, tests, evidence, iteration and explanation.
Vocabulary routes: English Vocabulary Lists.
