Primary 6 advanced vocabulary should include the academic verbs, command words, question language and task vocabulary that tell Grade 6 learners what an answer must actually do. Words such as identify, describe, explain, compare, contrast, infer, justify, analyse, evaluate, summarise, interpret, determine, calculate, revise and verify are not decorative school vocabulary. They are operating instructions. A learner can know the content and still answer the wrong question if describe is treated like explain, compare like two unrelated descriptions, or justify like a confident opinion with no evidence.

Readers searching for Grade 6 command words, sixth-grade academic verbs, Primary 6 question words, instruction words for reading, writing, Mathematics and Science, or academic vocabulary with meanings, examples and practice need more than short definitions. This advanced collection teaches the response job behind each verb: what information belongs in the answer, what can be omitted, what evidence must be connected, what kind of reasoning is required, and how the answer changes when one command word changes to another.

This eduKateSingapore owner complements the existing Primary 6 argument and evidence collection, the Primary 6 explanatory-writing collection, the semantic-precision collection and the reference-skills collection. Those pages teach argument language, process vocabulary, semantic relationships and reference literacy. This page owns a different search and teaching intent: how to read the task verb itself. It is an advanced collection for Primary 6 and Grade 6 learners, not an official universal exam command-word list.

The one-minute route: find the command before writing the answer

When a question feels familiar, many learners begin answering from topic memory before checking what the command word requires. The correction is simple: identify the content and the task separately. “Photosynthesis” is content. “Explain photosynthesis” is a task. “Compare photosynthesis and respiration” is a different task using some of the same content. “Evaluate a model of photosynthesis” is different again.

Use short-response verbs for command words such as identify, state, name and list. Use description and explanation verbs for describe, explain, illustrate and outline. Use comparison and analysis verbs for compare, contrast, distinguish and analyse. Use evidence and judgement verbs for infer, justify, evaluate, assess and support. Use Mathematics and Science verbs for calculate, determine, estimate, classify, interpret and verify. The later case files mix the families so the learner must select the response shape independently.

Alicia, Tricia and Kai Kai appear in original fictional teaching examples. Their answers, mistakes and corrections are invented. The external search language around Grade 6 academic vocabulary strongly centres on explain, analyse, compare, infer, summarise, justify and describe, and on the idea that directive words tell learners what to do with content. eduKateSG’s own sibling owners already cover PSLE/Grade 6 command-word lists; this eduKateSingapore article is an advanced application collection, not a duplicate list.

Command words are not a perfect difficulty ladder

It is tempting to place every command verb on one hierarchy from easy to hard. That can help loosely, but it can also mislead. Identifying a rare scientific structure may be harder than evaluating two familiar lunch menus. Difficulty comes from both the verb and the content. The command word tells you the kind of thinking or response, not the total difficulty of the task.

Still, some useful progressions exist. Identify → describe → explain can move from naming, to giving features, to making a relationship or cause clear. Compare → analyse → evaluate can move from examining similarities/differences, to breaking relationships into parts, to making a reasoned judgement using criteria. Observe → infer → conclude → justify can move from direct information, to interpretation, to a stated outcome, to defended reasoning. These are teaching progressions, not fixed laws.

The answer length also does not come entirely from the verb. “State two reasons” can require two points. “Explain one reason” may require one reason plus a causal connection. “Evaluate in one sentence” may still require judgement and criterion, but in compressed form. Learners should read marks, word limits, diagrams and surrounding instructions as well as the verb.

Family A: short-response verbs — name the thing before you explain the world

1. Identify

Identify means recognise and name the relevant item, feature, person, pattern or idea. It usually does not require a full explanation unless the question adds one. A learner who identifies correctly and then adds three unsupported reasons can turn a correct short answer into a weaker response.

Example: “Identify the material that absorbed the most water.” If the table shows Paper A retained the greatest amount, a direct answer can be “Paper A.” If the task says “Identify and explain,” then the response must continue.

Boundary: identify is not justify. “Paper A because it is the best material” adds an unsupported evaluation. The correct extra detail, if requested, would come from the supplied measurement.

2. Name

Name usually asks for the correct term, object, person or label. It is often even narrower than identify. “Name the process” expects the process name. A sentence may not be necessary unless the task format requires one.

Example: “Name the process by which liquid water becomes water vapour.” The expected content may be “evaporation.” A long explanation of particles is extra unless the question asks for it.

Teaching point: learners sometimes lose time writing definitions for a naming question. The skill is not only knowing more; it is stopping when the command is satisfied.

3. State

State asks for a clear answer or fact, usually without extended reasoning. “State one difference” requires a difference. “State whether the claim is supported” requires the judgement, although a later “give a reason” may require evidence.

Example: “State the final temperature.” Answer with the final temperature and unit. Do not narrate the whole experiment unless asked.

Boundary: state does not mean guess briefly. The answer still must be accurate and relevant.

4. List

List asks for several items presented clearly. The ordering may matter if the question says “in sequence” or “in order”; otherwise a list can often be simple.

Example: “List three features of the notice that help readers locate the event.” The learner supplies three distinct features. Repeating the same idea in different words does not create three items.

Boundary: list is not explain. “Clear heading — helps readers…” may become explanation if the second part is not required. Read the task carefully.

5. Select

Select asks the learner to choose from available possibilities according to the task. The choice should match the stated criterion even if another option is personally preferred.

Example: “Select the sentence that best supports the inference.” The learner should choose the evidence-bearing sentence, not the most interesting sentence.

Boundary: selection may require no written explanation in one task and a justification in another. The surrounding instruction controls what follows the choice.

6. Locate

Locate asks where something can be found—in a text, diagram, map, table, sequence or physical representation. It may require pointing, quoting a line, naming a section or identifying coordinates depending on context.

Example: “Locate the evidence that the character has changed her mind.” The learner finds the relevant line, not merely states that she changed her mind.

Boundary: locate evidence and interpret evidence are different actions.

7. Label

Label asks the learner to attach correct names to parts of a diagram, map, process or structure. It is usually a precision task: the correct term must align with the correct part.

Example: label the axes of a graph with quantity and unit. Writing a definition beside the graph is not a substitute for putting the label in the correct place.

8. Match

Match requires pairing items according to a relationship: term-definition, cause-effect, object-function, word-sense or other specified relation. The learner must understand what relationship governs the matching.

Example: match each command verb to its response job. A learner who matches explain to “name only” reveals a task-language misunderstanding even if the content topic is familiar.

9. Recognise

Recognise asks the learner to detect or acknowledge a known pattern, feature or category. In some tasks it is implicit rather than printed as the command: multiple-choice questions may require recognition rather than production.

This distinction matters for learning records. Recognising a word among options is easier than producing it independently. Both are useful, but they show different levels of control.

10. Specify

Specify asks for exact or particular information rather than a broad category. It often reduces ambiguity.

Example: “Specify which measurement changed and by how much.” “The result changed” is too general. The learner names the measurement and amount.

Boundary: specify can demand more precision than state, but not necessarily more explanation.

Family B: describe, outline, explain and illustrate

11. Describe

Describe asks what something is like, what happens, or what features are present. Description can include sequence and observable characteristics without necessarily giving causes.

Example: “Describe the pattern in the graph.” A suitable answer might state that the value rises steadily from Monday to Thursday and then remains unchanged. “Because…” is not required unless the question asks why.

Common error: learners often explain when asked to describe, adding causes the data does not establish.

12. Outline

Outline asks for the main points or stages without full detail. A strong outline is selective and organised. It should not be so brief that essential stages disappear.

Example: “Outline the process used to verify the date.” The answer may give: locate original register → compare date → record result. The explanation of why each step matters can come later if requested.

Boundary: outline is not “write anything short”. It still needs the correct main structure.

13. Summarise

Summarise means condense the essential information while preserving the central meaning. A summary removes lower-priority detail without inventing a new conclusion.

Example: a paragraph lists three examples of delays caused by missing information. A summary may say, “Several delays occurred because required information was unavailable.” It should not say “All delays were caused by carelessness” unless the paragraph states that.

Common error: summary becomes opinion. Keep source meaning separate from evaluation.

14. Paraphrase

Paraphrase asks the learner to express the same idea in different words. It is not simply shortening, and it is not changing the claim.

Example: “The route remains provisional until room access is confirmed.” A paraphrase could be, “The route is not final until we know the room can be used.” The status and dependency remain.

Boundary: paraphrase is not explain unless the task asks the learner to make the idea clearer by adding explanation.

15. Explain

Explain asks the learner to make a reason, relationship, process or meaning clear. A good explanation often answers how or why and connects evidence to the result.

Example: “Explain why Paper A is recommended.” A complete answer names the criterion and evidence: “Paper A retained the most water in the supplied trials, so it best meets the stated retention criterion.”

Common error: repeating the conclusion. “Paper A is best because it is the best paper” explains nothing.

16. Clarify

Clarify means make something clearer by removing ambiguity, vagueness or confusion. In a task, the learner may need to rewrite or add the missing distinction.

Example: “Clarify the instruction ‘bring it later’.” A useful clarification names the item and time. The learner should not add unrelated detail.

Boundary: clarify is not necessarily correct a factual error. A sentence can be clear and wrong.

17. Illustrate

Illustrate can mean explain or make something clear using an example, diagram or instance. The task should reveal which mode is expected.

Example: “Illustrate the difference between relevant and irrelevant information with one example.” The learner creates a case where the question changes which detail matters.

Boundary: illustration supports understanding; it is not proof that the example is universally representative.

18. Demonstrate

Demonstrate can mean show clearly, perform a method, or provide evidence of understanding. It can be stronger than illustrate when the task expects a procedure or convincing display.

Example: “Demonstrate how the total is obtained.” The learner shows the necessary calculation or method, not merely states the final number.

Boundary: demonstrate in a Science or Mathematics task may have subject-specific expectations; read the surrounding instruction.

19. Exemplify

Exemplify means provide a representative example of an idea. It is more formal than “give an example” and should be understood receptively even if learners rarely need to produce the verb themselves.

Example: “Give one event that exemplifies the character’s responsibility.” The learner selects an action that genuinely shows the quality.

20. Trace

Trace asks the learner to follow development, sequence, movement or change over time or across a text.

Example: “Trace Alicia’s change in attitude across the passage.” The learner identifies early position, turning point and later position. A single final-state description would be incomplete.

Boundary: trace is not merely list chronological facts; the development linking them matters.

What changes when the verb changes?

Take one fictional record: “The class had twelve labels. Four were corrected on Monday and three more on Tuesday.” Now compare tasks.

Identify how many labels were corrected on Tuesday: three.

Describe the correction pattern: four were corrected on Monday and three on Tuesday.

Calculate the total corrected: seven.

Determine how many remain if all twelve required checking: five.

Explain why five remain: seven of twelve have been corrected, leaving five.

Evaluate whether the work is complete: it is not; five labels remain.

The content barely changes. The intellectual action does. This is the central reason command words deserve explicit vocabulary teaching.

Family C: compare, contrast, distinguish and analyse

Comparison verbs are often grouped together because they involve more than one item, but the response jobs are different. A learner can know two topics very well and still miss the task by discussing them separately. The command word determines whether the answer should focus on similarities, differences, classification boundaries, internal structure or relationships among parts.

21. Compare

Compare asks learners to examine two or more things together. In many school contexts, this includes similarities and differences, although some teachers use compare more narrowly. The safest habit is to read the full instruction and any marking guidance. When the task says “compare and contrast,” compare can be treated as similarities and contrast as differences because the two verbs are deliberately separated.

Example: “Compare the two notices.” A strong answer might say, “Both notices give the same date and starting time, but the second changes the room.” The sentence places the notices in one structure rather than writing two disconnected summaries.

Common error: “Notice A says… Notice B says…” with no explicit relationship. Those sentences may contain accurate content but leave the reader to perform the comparison.

Useful language: both, similarly, whereas, while, unlike, compared with, in contrast, differs in, shares.

22. Contrast

Contrast asks the learner to focus on differences. A response should identify the shared comparison dimension so the difference makes sense.

Example: “Contrast the two characters’ responses to the same warning.” One character checks the source before acting; the other reacts immediately. The answer should compare the response behaviour, not one character’s clothing against the other’s dialogue.

Boundary: a contrast is more useful when the two items are comparable. “One tray is blue, while the other holds twelve books” gives different facts but not a meaningful contrast on one dimension.

23. Distinguish

Distinguish asks the learner to show the boundary between similar or easily confused ideas. It is particularly useful for vocabulary, categories and concepts.

Example: “Distinguish an observation from an inference.” A strong answer states the dividing principle: an observation reports what is directly noticed or recorded, while an inference goes beyond it to an interpretation.

Boundary: distinguish does not merely mean list differences. The learner should identify the difference that keeps the concepts from collapsing into each other.

24. Differentiate

Differentiate can be similar to distinguish: show differences between items or categories. In some subject contexts, it has technical meanings, so the surrounding discipline matters.

Example: “Differentiate between a cause and a condition.” The learner explains that a cause helps bring about an outcome, while a condition is a circumstance under which the outcome occurs or a requirement that applies.

Reference habit: if the verb appears in Mathematics at a later educational level, it can have a specialised technical meaning. The school task controls the sense.

25. Categorise

Categorise asks the learner to place items into groups according to a stated or inferred rule. A good answer identifies the rule and applies it consistently.

Example: “Categorise the words as observation, inference or evaluation language.” The learner should not sort by word length or familiarity when the task’s category system concerns meaning.

Boundary: categorise is not simply label. The groups and the rule connecting items to groups matter.

26. Classify

Classify also means arrange into classes or categories. In Science, classification may follow subject-specific criteria. In English, it can involve word classes, text types or semantic relationships.

Example: “Classify each word relationship as synonym, antonym, type-category or part-whole.” The learner must identify the relationship, not only the fact that the words are connected.

Teaching point: categorise and classify overlap substantially. Use the curriculum’s preferred term but focus on the grouping principle.

27. Group

Group asks the learner to place related items together. It may be less formal than classify and sometimes leaves the learner to explain the relationship afterwards.

Example: “Group the command words by response job.” Identify, name and state may form one group; explain and justify another; compare and contrast another.

Boundary: group by the task’s criterion, not by personal preference.

28. Sequence

Sequence asks for items or stages in the correct order. The order may be chronological, procedural, logical or numerical depending on context.

Example: “Sequence the stages of the verification process.” The learner orders locate source → compare entry → record result, rather than listing them randomly.

Boundary: sequence is not explain why the order works unless the task adds that requirement.

29. Order

Order can function similarly to sequence: arrange items according to a specified criterion such as time, size, importance or numerical value.

Example: “Order the events from earliest to latest.” A learner should not order them by how important they seem.

Reading skill: always identify the dimension of ordering before moving items.

30. Rank

Rank asks for ordering by a criterion such as importance, size, usefulness or performance. A ranking should identify that criterion.

Example: “Rank the three solutions from most to least time-efficient using the supplied durations.” The learner should not rank by personal preference or attractiveness.

Boundary: ranking can require a judgement; justify the order if the question asks for reasons.

31. Analyse

Analyse asks learners to examine parts, relationships, causes, patterns or structure in order to understand how something works or why it matters. It is broader than “break into pieces.” A strong analysis identifies meaningful components and explains their relationships.

Example: “Analyse how the writer creates tension.” The learner might examine repeated short sentences, delayed information and the character’s hesitation, then explain how those choices build tension.

In data work, analyse can involve identifying trends, comparing groups and explaining relevant patterns. In a story, it can involve character, structure and language. The exact operations depend on the material.

Common error: summarising instead of analysing. Retelling what happens does not necessarily explain how the parts create meaning.

32. Examine

Examine asks for close consideration of something. It can overlap with analyse, but the task may expect careful inspection rather than a formal analytical framework.

Example: “Examine the two explanations and identify which assumptions differ.” The learner looks closely at components and evidence.

Boundary: examine does not mean stare at a text; it requires purposeful attention to the task’s feature.

33. Investigate

Investigate asks the learner to find out about a question through systematic evidence gathering or examination. It is commonly used in Science, inquiry, research and problem solving.

Example: “Investigate which paper retains the most water.” The learner needs a method, observations and a conclusion within the task’s conditions.

Boundary: investigate is a process command, not only a final answer command. The response may need method, data and interpretation.

34. Explore

Explore invites consideration of several aspects, possibilities or interpretations. It is often broader and more open-ended than identify or explain.

Example: “Explore how the setting affects the character’s decision.” A strong response can consider several setting features and connections rather than one single cause.

Boundary: open-ended does not mean unsupported. Evidence remains necessary.

35. Deconstruct

Deconstruct can mean break a complex object, text or idea into components for analysis. The word can have specialised theoretical meanings in advanced literary study, but in an upper-primary enrichment task it is best used only when the instruction clearly defines the intended action.

Example: “Deconstruct the argument into claim, evidence and reasoning.” The learner identifies components and their relationships.

Reference rule: when a command word itself is unfamiliar, clarify the task before assuming a specialist meaning.

Family D: infer, justify, support, assess and evaluate

These verbs move beyond direct retrieval. They ask the learner to reason from evidence, defend a position or make a judgement. The response must therefore show the connection between information and conclusion. Confidence alone is never enough.

36. Infer

Infer asks learners to work out something not directly stated by using clues and relevant background knowledge.

Example: a character repeatedly checks the door and packs an umbrella after hearing thunder. The learner may infer that the character expects to leave in bad weather. The answer should cite the clues rather than present the inference as direct quotation.

Boundary: infer is not imagine freely. A plausible story with no textual basis is not a strong inference.

37. Deduce

Deduce asks the learner to reach a conclusion by reasoning from supplied information. It often sounds more formal than infer and can suggest a stronger logical pathway.

Example: “Deduce the missing number from the pattern.” The learner uses the pattern rule to determine the value.

Boundary: in ordinary school tasks, infer and deduce can overlap; follow subject usage and examples.

38. Conclude

Conclude asks for the judgement or outcome that follows from the evidence or reasoning. A conclusion should match the scope of the evidence.

Example: three trials show Paper A retaining more water than B and C. A defensible conclusion is “Paper A retained the most water in these trials.” “Paper A is the best paper for every purpose” exceeds the evidence.

39. Predict

Predict asks what is expected to happen based on information, pattern, model or reasoning. A prediction is about an outcome not yet observed in the task.

Example: “Predict what will happen to the schedule if setup takes five extra minutes.” The learner uses the time constraints to forecast the effect.

Boundary: predict is not guess. A strong prediction has a basis.

40. Suggest

Suggest often asks for a reasonable possible idea, explanation, solution or next step. It typically allows more than one defensible answer.

Example: “Suggest one reason the two records differ.” The learner proposes a plausible explanation such as different counting rules, while acknowledging that it needs checking.

Boundary: suggestion does not equal verified fact. Use may, could or another suitable qualification when necessary.

41. Propose

Propose asks the learner to put forward a plan, explanation, method or solution for consideration.

Example: “Propose a way to test whether headings help readers locate information.” The learner designs a comparison, not merely states that headings are helpful.

Boundary: a proposal is not an observed result.

42. Support

Support asks learners to provide evidence or reasoning in favour of a claim.

Example: “Support your interpretation with two details from the passage.” The learner must select details that bear directly on the interpretation and explain their connection if necessary.

Boundary: repeating the claim is not support.

43. Substantiate

Substantiate is a more advanced verb meaning provide evidence that gives a claim adequate support. It is useful as enrichment and in formal reading.

Example: “Substantiate the claim that the character changes her priorities.” The learner selects evidence across the passage.

Boundary: one irrelevant detail cannot substantiate a broad claim simply because it comes from the same text.

44. Justify

Justify asks the learner to give reasons or evidence showing why a choice, answer or judgement is reasonable.

Example: “Justify your choice of route.” A strong response names the criterion and evidence: “Route B fits the twenty-minute limit and reaches all required stops.”

Common error: personal preference without criterion. “I chose B because I like it” may justify a preference, not an objective route requirement.

45. Defend

Defend asks the learner to maintain a position by responding to possible objections and presenting support. It can require a stronger argumentative structure than justify.

Example: “Defend the claim that the later source should be used.” The learner may discuss source authority, date and explicit update.

Boundary: defend does not mean refuse to revise. New evidence can make a different position more defensible.

46. Argue

Argue in academic tasks means make a reasoned case for a position, using evidence and logic. It does not necessarily mean quarrel.

Example: “Argue whether the rule should be revised.” The learner states a position, provides evidence, addresses relevant alternatives and explains reasoning.

Boundary: argument quality depends on evidence and logic, not emotional intensity.

47. Assess

Assess asks for a judgement using evidence or criteria. It can involve strengths, limitations or degree.

Example: “Assess the usefulness of the glossary for a first-time reader.” The learner needs criteria such as coverage, clarity and accessibility, not merely a description of the glossary.

Boundary: assessment requires a standard of judgement, explicit or implicit.

48. Evaluate

Evaluate asks the learner to make a reasoned judgement about quality, importance, effectiveness, validity or suitability using criteria and evidence.

Example: “Evaluate whether the proposed display meets the brief.” A strong answer checks all required conditions, weighs trade-offs and states a conclusion.

Common error: “The display is good.” Evaluation needs the basis for good.

49. Appraise

Appraise is a more formal judgement verb meaning assess value, quality or performance. Primary 6 learners may encounter it receptively even if evaluate is more common.

Example: “Appraise the two designs against the stated requirements.” The task is criteria-based judgement.

50. Critique

Critique asks for a balanced analytical evaluation of strengths, weaknesses and implications. It does not mean attack or list faults only.

Example: “Critique the proposed survey.” A strong answer might identify useful questions, sampling limitations and a specific improvement.

Boundary: criticism without evidence is not a strong critique.

51. Verify

Verify asks the learner to check a claim, result or detail against an appropriate source, rule or calculation.

Example: “Verify the total using the three entries.” The learner recalculates and compares with the stated total.

Boundary: verifying the arithmetic total does not automatically verify the accuracy of the original entries.

52. Validate

Validate can mean confirm that something meets relevant criteria, rules or evidence. In technical contexts it can have specialised meanings.

Example: “Validate the model using the given constraints.” The learner checks the model against those constraints.

Reference rule: do not treat validate as a fancier synonym for agree.

53. Refute

Refute asks for evidence or reasoning showing that a claim is false or untenable. In everyday usage some speakers use it to mean deny, but in academic reasoning it is useful to preserve the stronger evidence-based sense.

Example: “Refute the statement ‘every folder is blue’.” One verified non-blue folder within the relevant set can be sufficient.

54. Challenge

Challenge asks the learner to question a claim, assumption or interpretation, often by presenting counterevidence or an alternative.

Example: “Challenge the assumption that the later source must be more accurate simply because it is newer.” The learner identifies what else needs checking.

Boundary: challenge does not automatically refute. It can expose uncertainty without settling the opposite conclusion.

55. Qualify

Qualify a claim means add a condition, limit or boundary so the statement matches the evidence more accurately.

Example: change “Labels improve understanding” to “In these trials, labels helped these readers locate the relevant sections.”

Boundary: qualification is not vague hedging. It should name the actual limit.

How to build a criteria-based answer

When the command is assess, evaluate, appraise or critique, teach learners to write a four-part skeleton: criterion → evidence → judgement → boundary. Example: “For the width requirement, Design A fits because it is 45 cm wide within the 50 cm limit. It therefore meets this criterion. The record does not yet show whether its estimated assembly time is accurate.”

This structure prevents evaluation from becoming adjective dumping. “Excellent, effective, useful and impressive” are not criteria. The learner needs to say effective for what, useful to whom, and impressive by what evidence.

Family E: Mathematics and Science command verbs

Cross-subject academic verbs are useful because they allow learners to transfer task-reading habits. Yet the same verb can acquire a more specialised response pattern inside Mathematics or Science. A learner should recognise the general instruction and then apply the subject convention.

56. Calculate

Calculate asks the learner to obtain a numerical answer by computation. The working required depends on the task and curriculum, but the result should normally include an appropriate unit where relevant.

Example: “Calculate the total time used.” Add the stated durations. A paragraph explaining why the schedule matters is not a substitute for the calculation.

Boundary: calculate is not estimate. An exact answer is expected from the supplied values unless the task states approximation.

57. Compute

Compute is closely related to calculate and may be used in Mathematics, computing or technical contexts. It asks for a value produced through specified operations.

For Primary 6 learners, calculate is often the more familiar command. If compute appears, read the subject instructions and examples rather than assuming a different conceptual demand without evidence.

58. Determine

Determine asks the learner to work out or establish an answer from the available information. The method may involve calculation, reasoning, measurement or interpretation.

Example: “Determine which design meets all three constraints.” The learner may need several calculations and comparisons before choosing.

Boundary: determine is broader than calculate. Sometimes the answer is a category or decision rather than a number.

59. Estimate

Estimate asks for an approximate value using appropriate reasoning. The learner should not present the estimate as an exact result.

Example: 198 + 101 can be estimated as about 300 by rounding. The exact sum remains 299.

Boundary: estimate is not careless calculation. The approximation should have a method and be fit for purpose.

60. Approximate

Approximate can act as a verb or adjective. As a command, it asks for a value close to the exact one under stated rules or practical constraints.

Example: “Approximate the area to the nearest whole unit.” The required degree of precision is part of the task.

61. Solve

Solve asks the learner to find the answer to a problem, equation or stated challenge. A complete solution may require working, not merely the final result.

Example: “Solve for the unknown length.” The learner applies relevant relationships and gives the value.

Boundary: solving a problem does not necessarily mean explaining why the method works unless the task adds that requirement.

62. Simplify

Simplify asks the learner to express something in an easier or reduced form without changing its value or essential meaning.

In Mathematics, simplify can have a precise procedural meaning. In language, simplify a sentence means reduce complexity while preserving meaning. The subject context determines the operation.

Boundary: simplifying is not deleting necessary information.

63. Convert

Convert asks the learner to change from one form, unit or representation to another while preserving the underlying quantity or information.

Example: convert metres to centimetres, or convert a paragraph record into a table.

Boundary: the representation changes; the information should not.

64. Express

Express can ask the learner to show a quantity, relationship or idea in a specified form: words, symbols, fractions, percentages or another notation.

Example: “Express 0.75 as a fraction.” The learner changes representation, not numerical value.

In English, express can mean communicate an idea or feeling. Again, subject context selects the sense.

65. Represent

Represent asks the learner to show information using another form such as a diagram, table, model or equation.

Example: “Represent the data on a bar graph.” The graph should preserve categories, quantities and scale.

Boundary: an attractive graph that changes the data is not a successful representation.

66. Model

Model can ask the learner to create or use a simplified representation of a system, quantity or process.

Example: “Model the sharing problem with a bar diagram.” The model should show the relationships needed for the solution.

Boundary: a model selects features; it is not identical to the whole real object or system.

67. Measure

Measure asks for determination of a quantity using an appropriate unit and tool.

Example: “Measure the length of the card.” The learner uses the scale correctly and records the unit.

Boundary: measurement precision depends on the tool and method; extra decimal places do not create accuracy automatically.

68. Observe

Observe asks the learner to notice or record what happens using the available senses, instruments or data. It does not ask for an explanation unless added.

Example: “Observe what happens to the shadow length.” Record the change. Do not immediately invent a cause.

Boundary: observe and infer must remain separate in investigation work.

69. Record

Record asks the learner to write down, store or otherwise capture information systematically.

Example: “Record the temperature every five minutes.” The learner should preserve time and unit, not rely on memory.

Boundary: recorded data can still contain measurement or copying errors; recording is not verification.

70. Tabulate

Tabulate asks the learner to arrange information in a table. The rows, columns, headings and units should make relationships clear.

Example: “Tabulate the results for each material.” The learner creates a structured display, not a paragraph list.

71. Plot

Plot in Mathematics or data work asks the learner to place points accurately on a graph according to coordinates or values.

Example: plot distance against time. Axis labels and scale matter.

Boundary: plot also has literary meanings; subject context selects the correct one.

72. Interpret

Interpret asks learners to make sense of information, data, representation or text and explain what it means.

Example: “Interpret the graph.” A strong answer states relevant trends or relationships rather than simply reading one value.

In literature, interpret can mean explain meaning. The evidence still matters.

73. Extrapolate

Extrapolate is an enrichment verb meaning extend a pattern beyond observed data to estimate what might happen. It should be used cautiously and only when the task defines or supports such reasoning.

Primary 6 learners may encounter the idea before the term. A prediction based on a trend should be marked as extending beyond the observed values.

74. Test

Test asks the learner to check a prediction, claim, model or method through a designed procedure or comparison.

Example: “Test whether the new label helps readers find the correct section.” The learner needs an observable outcome relevant to that claim.

Boundary: a test can provide evidence without proving a universal rule.

75. Control

Control in investigation language can mean keep a variable or condition consistent or manage a process. It can also function as a noun in experimental design.

Example: “Control the amount of water given to each sample.” The learner keeps that input constant so the comparison is more informative.

Reference rule: technical Science uses should follow the curriculum’s terminology.

76. Vary

Vary asks the learner to change a quantity, condition or input systematically.

Example: “Vary the length of the paper strip while keeping the material the same.” The learner identifies what changes and what stays fixed.

77. Compare results

When compare appears in Science, the learner should identify the measured outcome and conditions. “Sample A is red, Sample B retained more water” is not a meaningful result comparison unless colour is part of the measured question.

Use the same comparison discipline learned in English.

78. Identify a variable

A task may ask learners to identify what is changed, measured or controlled. The answer should name the actual variable, not the result value.

Example: “The variable changed is the amount of light,” not “the plant grew 3 cm.”

79. Formulate a hypothesis

Formulate means create or express carefully. A hypothesis is a testable proposed explanation or prediction within the subject’s teaching framework.

Example: “Formulate a hypothesis about how light amount affects growth.” The learner states the expected relationship in a form that can be investigated.

Boundary: the hypothesis is not a result.

80. Draw a conclusion

In Science, drawing a conclusion asks the learner to connect results to the investigation question or hypothesis.

Example: “The samples exposed to more light grew taller in these trials.” Avoid adding a causal mechanism not studied or measured.

Boundary: conclusions should stay within the design and data.

Family F: writing, editing and revision command verbs

81. Draft

Draft asks the learner to create an initial version for later review. A draft is not expected to be perfect, but it should be complete enough to evaluate.

Example: “Draft an opening paragraph that introduces the problem.” The learner produces a working version, not merely an outline unless requested.

82. Revise

Revise means improve content, organisation, clarity or meaning by reconsidering the existing draft. It is broader than correcting spelling.

Example: revise a paragraph so the evidence supports the conclusion more clearly.

Boundary: revision can involve deleting, adding, reordering or rewriting; it is not just “make longer”.

83. Edit

Edit asks for focused improvements to wording, grammar, punctuation, consistency or style, depending on the task.

Example: “Edit the paragraph for precise pronoun reference.” The learner targets reference clarity, not every possible content change.

84. Proofread

Proofread means check a near-final text for surface errors such as spelling, punctuation, grammar or formatting.

Boundary: proofreading is not a substitute for revising a weak argument or missing evidence.

85. Rewrite

Rewrite asks for a new version, often to improve clarity, audience fit, accuracy or structure.

Example: “Rewrite the notice for a younger audience without removing the rule.” The information remains while expression changes.

86. Rephrase

Rephrase asks learners to express the same idea differently, often locally at sentence or phrase level.

It overlaps with paraphrase but can be used more broadly for wording improvement.

87. Expand

Expand asks the learner to add relevant detail, explanation or development.

Example: “Expand the reason with one piece of evidence.” The added material should deepen the point, not repeat it.

88. Condense

Condense asks for a shorter version that preserves essential meaning.

Example: reduce a long notice to its required action, time and place.

Boundary: condensation is not omission of necessary conditions.

89. Combine

Combine asks the learner to bring ideas, sentences or pieces of information together coherently.

Example: combine two short sentences without losing their causal relationship.

90. Integrate

Integrate asks the learner to incorporate information, evidence or ideas into a coherent whole.

Example: integrate a quotation or data point into an explanation so the reader understands its relevance.

Boundary: dropping evidence into a paragraph without connection is insertion, not successful integration.

91. Synthesize

Synthesize asks the learner to combine information from multiple sources or parts into a new integrated understanding.

It is more than summarising each source separately.

Example: synthesize two notices and a correction into one current message.

92. Organise

Organise asks for arrangement of ideas, information or material according to a useful structure.

Example: organise evidence from strongest to weakest or events chronologically, according to the stated task.

93. Structure

Structure asks the learner to arrange parts into a clear framework.

Example: structure an explanation with claim, evidence and reasoning.

94. Develop

Develop asks for fuller elaboration or progression of an idea.

Example: develop the paragraph by explaining how the evidence supports the claim.

95. Refine

Refine asks for careful improvement in precision, efficiency or quality.

Example: refine word choice so the sentence distinguishes possibility from certainty.

96. Correct

Correct asks the learner to fix an identified error.

Example: correct the date using the verified source.

Boundary: correction concerns something wrong; revision can improve something already acceptable.

97. Amend

Amend is a more formal verb meaning change or revise something, often to correct or update it.

Example: amend the notice after the room change is confirmed.

Primary 6 learners may encounter it receptively in formal instructions.

98. Adapt

Adapt asks the learner to adjust content, form or approach for new conditions, audience or purpose.

Example: adapt a technical explanation for younger readers while preserving the facts.

99. Transform

Transform asks for a substantial change of form or representation while preserving specified content.

Example: transform a table into a paragraph or a paragraph into a diagram.

Boundary: transformation should not alter the underlying data or relationships unless the task explicitly asks for creative change.

100. Publish

Publish means make a finished work available to its intended audience. In classroom process language, publishing comes after drafting, revising, editing and proofreading as appropriate.

It is not merely pressing a button. A publication-ready text should meet the task’s accuracy, audience and formatting requirements.

One hundred verbs do not mean one hundred separate lessons

Group the verbs by response job and teach contrasts. Identify versus explain. Describe versus explain. Compare versus contrast. Suggest versus conclude. Justify versus evaluate. Calculate versus estimate. Revise versus proofread. Those contrasts prevent more errors than memorising one hundred isolated mini-definitions.

A useful notebook entry should include the command word, a plain response job, one example prompt and a “do not confuse with” note. For describe: “say what is observed/what it is like; do not automatically explain why.” For justify: “give defensible reasons/evidence; do not merely state preference.”

Six worked case files: the content is known, but the command changes

These original cases test whether a learner can reshape an answer when the command changes while the underlying information stays similar. Each case contains a source packet and several prompts. The model answers are not scripts to memorise; they reveal what each verb requires and what would count as under-answering or over-answering.

Case 1. The room-change notice

Source: The original notice says the Reading Club meets in Room 5 at 3:00 p.m. on Tuesday. A later notice from the organiser says that on Tuesday 18 May only, the club will meet in Room 7 at the same time. The later notice states that all following sessions return to Room 5 unless another update is issued.

Identify the room for 18 May. A complete answer is “Room 7.” No explanation is required unless the task format asks for one.

State what remains unchanged. “The starting time remains 3:00 p.m.” This is a fact statement, not an explanation.

Describe the change. “The club moves from Room 5 to Room 7 for the 18 May session, while the time remains 3:00 p.m.” The answer states what changes and what stays the same.

Explain why the following Tuesday should normally use Room 5. “The later notice says the Room 7 change applies only to 18 May and that subsequent sessions return to Room 5 unless another update is issued.” The explanation connects the future action to the notice’s scope.

Compare the original and later notices. “Both give a 3:00 p.m. meeting time. The later notice changes the room for one specified date and adds an explicit return condition.” The response places the sources together.

Interpret the word only in the later notice. It limits the Room 7 change to the 18 May session; it prevents the change from becoming permanent by implication.

Justify using Room 5 for the next Tuesday. “Room 5 is justified because the update explicitly returns later sessions there, and no further change has been supplied.” The answer states evidence and logic.

Evaluate whether the later notice is clear for a new member. A reasoned judgement might say, “It is mostly clear because it gives the special date, replacement room, unchanged time and return rule. A new member still needs access to the club’s normal day, which this packet already supplies through the original notice.” The evaluation uses criteria rather than “yes, it is clear”.

Diagnostic insight: all eight answers use the same packet. The difference lies in response shape. A learner who writes the full evaluation for an identify question wastes time and creates more opportunities for error. A learner who gives “Room 5” for evaluate has under-answered.

Case 2. The folded-card Mathematics problem

Source: A class has 96 cards. Twelve are reserved for title cards. The remaining cards are divided equally among seven display groups, with no cards left over.

Calculate the number of cards available for display groups after reservation. 96 − 12 = 84 cards.

Determine how many cards each group receives. 84 ÷ 7 = 12 cards per group.

State the answer. “Each display group receives 12 cards.”

Explain why subtraction comes before division. “The 12 title cards are removed from the total before the remaining cards are shared, so the amount being divided is 84 rather than 96.” The response names the relationship, not just the operation.

Represent the problem. A bar model or equation such as 12 + 7x = 96 can represent the structure. The representation should distinguish the reserved cards from the seven equal shares.

Verify the answer. 7 × 12 = 84; 84 + 12 = 96. The check returns to the original total.

Estimate the answer before calculating exactly. A learner might note that 96 − about 10 leaves the mid-80s, and dividing by 7 should give around 12. The estimate is a reasonableness check, not the final exact result.

Analyse a wrong method that divides 96 by 7 first. The method treats reserved title cards as part of the amount being shared equally. It therefore misrepresents the problem structure.

Compare an equation method and bar-model method. Both preserve the reserved part and seven equal shares; one uses symbolic representation and the other spatial representation.

Evaluate a pupil’s answer “12” with no working when the question says “Show how you know.” The numerical result is correct, but the response does not satisfy the full task because it omits the requested method or justification.

Case 3. The wet-paper investigation

Source: Three fictional paper types A, B and C are cut into equal-sized samples. Each receives 20 mL of water and rests for the same time. The retained amounts in three trials are: A = 14, 15, 14 mL; B = 9, 10, 9 mL; C = 12, 12, 11 mL.

Observe one pattern. “A has the highest retained amount in all three trials.” This is direct description.

Record the data. A table should preserve paper type, trial number, amount and unit.

Compare A and C. A’s values are 14, 15 and 14; C’s are 12, 12 and 11. A is higher in every supplied trial.

Calculate the average for A if the curriculum requires mean: (14 + 15 + 14) ÷ 3 = 43 ÷ 3 ≈ 14.33 mL. The learner should follow the expected level of numerical precision.

Infer which paper may be most suitable if the sole criterion is retaining more water under this procedure. A is the strongest candidate from the supplied record.

Conclude from the trials. “Paper A retained the most water under the stated procedure in these trials.” The wording preserves conditions and scope.

Justify the conclusion. “Every A trial produced a higher retained amount than every B or C trial.” The justification names the evidence.

Evaluate the claim “Paper A is the best paper for every purpose.” The claim is unsupported because the investigation measures only water retention under one procedure, not writing quality, cost, strength or every purpose.

Suggest a follow-up question. “How do the papers perform after repeated wetting?” or “How quickly do they dry?” A suggestion creates a new investigation question; it does not answer it.

Propose one follow-up method. The learner outlines a way to test repeated wetting while controlling sample size and water amount. This requires more design than merely suggesting a question.

Critique a trial in which A receives 30 mL while B and C receive 20 mL. The starting water amount becomes a confounding difference, weakening the comparison. A critique identifies the flaw and explains why it matters.

Case 4. The story inference

Passage: Alicia had practised the opening speech all week. On rehearsal day she handed the first page to Tricia. When Tricia hesitated over a name, Alicia quietly supplied it. During the break, Alicia marked the places where Tricia had paused and said, “Let’s try those lines again.”

Identify one action showing support. “Alicia quietly supplies the missing name.”

Describe Alicia’s behaviour. “She gives Tricia the opening, helps when Tricia hesitates and then prepares the difficult lines for another rehearsal.”

Infer Alicia’s attitude towards Tricia’s performance. A reasonable inference is that Alicia wants Tricia to succeed and is actively supporting her.

Support the inference. Use the supplied actions: giving the opening page, supplying the name and preparing difficult lines.

Explain how the final line supports the inference. “By saying ‘Let’s try those lines again,’ Alicia joins Tricia in improving the weak points rather than taking the role back.”

Contrast this behaviour with resentment. Resentment might appear through refusal to help, undermining Tricia or reclaiming the role, none of which appears here.

Qualify the statement “Alicia feels no disappointment at all.” “The passage shows supportive behaviour but does not explicitly state every feeling Alicia has.”

Evaluate the claim “Alicia is generous.” It is defensible if generosity is interpreted as giving opportunity and support, but the learner should tie the trait to these actions rather than treat one episode as proof of lifelong character.

Summarise the scene. “Alicia gives Tricia the opening role and supports her through difficult parts of the rehearsal.” The summary keeps the central interaction and removes lower-detail steps.

Trace Alicia’s role through the passage. She begins as the prepared speaker, shifts to supporter, then becomes a rehearsal partner. Trace captures development rather than one final state.

Case 5. The display-design brief

Brief: A tabletop display must be no more than 50 cm wide, show 16 information cards and be assembled within 20 minutes. Design A: 45 cm, 16 cards, estimated 18 minutes. Design B: 55 cm, 20 cards, estimated 12 minutes. Design C: 40 cm, 12 cards, estimated 10 minutes.

List the three constraints: width ≤ 50 cm; capacity ≥ 16 cards; assembly time ≤ 20 minutes.

Determine which supplied design meets all constraints: Design A.

Compare A and B: B holds more cards and is estimated faster, but exceeds the width limit; A meets all three requirements.

Contrast A and C on capacity and time: C is faster but cannot hold enough cards; A is slower but meets capacity.

Justify choosing A: it is the only supplied design meeting width, capacity and planned-time requirements.

Assess the reliability of the time criterion: the times are estimates, so actual assembly should still be checked.

Evaluate the statement “B is best because it holds the most cards.” It ignores the width constraint and treats one criterion as overriding a requirement.

Propose a modification to C. Increase capacity without exceeding the width/time requirements; the proposal must then be checked rather than assumed successful.

Predict what happens if the width limit increases to 60 cm. B becomes feasible on width and capacity, so A and B both meet stated constraints if their estimated times hold.

Reassess the recommendation under the new condition. A is no longer the only compliant option. The learner must choose criteria for preference rather than repeat the original answer.

Case 6. The conflicting sources

Packet: Source A is an original event notice printed on Monday saying the workshop begins at 10:00. Source B is a correction from the same organiser on Wednesday saying the start moves to 10:30. Source C is a classmate’s copied photo of Monday’s notice. Source D is a social post saying “I think it’s 10ish” with no source.

Identify the current explicit update: Source B.

List sources that repeat the old 10:00 time: A and C.

Distinguish A and C as evidence. C is a copy of A, not an independent update. Their agreement does not double the amount of independent support.

Compare B and D. B is an explicit correction from the organiser with a precise time; D is an unsourced approximate belief.

Assess source relevance and authority. B directly concerns the same event and comes from the organiser; D lacks clear authority.

Justify using 10:30. The authorised later correction explicitly changes the start.

Refute the claim “Two sources say 10:00, so 10:00 must be right.” A and C are not independent, and B explicitly supersedes A.

Challenge the assumption “newer is always more accurate.” In this case B is stronger because it is an authorised correction, not merely because it is newer. A newer unrelated or unofficial post might not be authoritative.

Synthesize the packet into one message: “The workshop now begins at 10:30 according to the organiser’s Wednesday correction; earlier copies showing 10:00 are outdated.”

Evaluate whether “10ish” is an acceptable summary. It is too imprecise for attendance when the exact corrected time is available.

Response reconstruction: fix the verb before fixing the grammar

Sometimes a pupil writes a grammatically polished answer to the wrong task. That is a task-language error, not primarily a grammar error. Before correcting wording, ask: what command was printed, and what response job did the pupil perform?

If the question says describe and the pupil writes a causal explanation, decide whether the description is still present. If yes, trim unsupported causation. If the question says justify and the pupil states only the choice, ask for criterion and evidence. If the question says compare and the pupil writes two separate descriptions, add explicit relationship language.

This diagnostic habit prevents teachers from rewarding length instead of fit. A shorter response can be more complete when it precisely matches the verb.

Fifty independent command-word tasks with explained answers

Attempt each item by identifying the response job before reading the explanation. These are original teaching tasks, not official examination questions. The goal is to connect the printed command to the shape of the answer.

1. Identify vs explain

Task: A table shows Material B has the highest value. The prompt says “Identify the material with the highest value.” What should the answer do?

Answer: Name Material B. An explanation is extra unless another instruction asks for one. The key skill is stopping after the command has been satisfied.

2. State vs justify

Task: The prompt says “State whether Design A meets the width limit.” A pupil writes three reasons. What is the efficient response?

Answer: State yes or no with the relevant value if useful. Justification belongs only if requested. Extra reasoning can waste time or introduce error.

3. List three features

Task: The question says “List three features.” A pupil gives one feature and explains it in three sentences. Is the task complete?

Answer: No. The task asks for three distinct items. Depth on one item does not substitute for the required count.

4. Specify

Task: The answer says “The measurement changed.” The prompt says “Specify which measurement changed.” Repair it.

Answer: Name the exact measurement, such as “the retained water amount changed.” Specify requires narrower information than a broad state.

5. Describe a trend

Task: Values rise 4, 6, 8, 10. What does describe require?

Answer: State the pattern, such as “The value increases by two each step.” Do not invent a cause unless explain or infer is requested.

6. Explain a trend

Task: The same values are given with a rule that two units are added each stage. What does explain require?

Answer: Connect the rule to the pattern: “The value rises by two because the process adds two units at each stage.”

7. Outline a process

Task: How should an outline differ from a full explanation?

Answer: Give the main stages in order without every detail. It is selective structure, not a detailed rationale for each stage.

8. Summarise

Task: A source gives five examples supporting one central point. What should a summary do?

Answer: Condense the central meaning and omit lower-priority examples unless one is needed. Do not add evaluation that the source does not make.

9. Paraphrase

Task: What is the core requirement of paraphrasing?

Answer: Express the same meaning in different wording. Do not strengthen, weaken or change the claim.

10. Illustrate

Task: The prompt says “Illustrate the difference between relevant and irrelevant information.” What kind of answer fits?

Answer: Give an example that makes the distinction visible, and explain enough for the reader to see why the details differ in relevance.

11. Compare

Task: A pupil describes Object A, then Object B, with no connection. What is missing?

Answer: Explicit relationships—similarities, differences or shared dimensions. Compare requires the items to be examined together.

12. Contrast

Task: What should contrast emphasise?

Answer: Differences on a shared dimension. Similarities are not the main job unless the task asks for compare and contrast.

13. Distinguish

Task: How is distinguish different from simply list differences?

Answer: It identifies the boundary that keeps similar concepts separate, such as observation versus inference.

14. Categorise

Task: What must a strong categorisation include?

Answer: A grouping rule and consistent application. Sorting by a different property from the task does not satisfy the command.

15. Sequence

Task: What should be checked before sequencing?

Answer: The ordering dimension: time, process, size, priority or another stated rule.

16. Rank

Task: Why does a ranking need a criterion?

Answer: Because most-to-least must mean most to least of something—importance, efficiency, cost or another property.

17. Analyse

Task: What makes analysis more than summary?

Answer: Analysis examines parts, patterns or relationships and explains how they contribute to meaning or outcome.

18. Examine

Task: What should a learner do when asked to examine two explanations?

Answer: Look closely at assumptions, evidence and relationships rather than merely read them or state a preference.

19. Infer

Task: A passage never states the motive. What makes an inference defensible?

Answer: Relevant clues from the passage plus reasonable reasoning. It should be presented as an interpretation, not direct quotation.

20. Conclude

Task: How should a conclusion be limited?

Answer: To what the evidence and conditions support. Avoid universal claims from small or narrow records.

21. Predict

Task: What separates a prediction from a guess?

Answer: A stated basis: pattern, rule, model or evidence.

22. Suggest

Task: Why can two different answers both be acceptable?

Answer: Suggest often invites plausible possibilities. Each answer must fit the supplied conditions and be explained if required.

23. Propose

Task: What does propose add beyond suggest?

Answer: It commonly asks for a more developed plan, method or solution that can be considered or tested.

24. Support

Task: What is a common support error?

Answer: Repeating the claim instead of supplying relevant evidence or reasoning.

25. Justify

Task: What should a justification include?

Answer: The choice or claim, relevant reason/evidence, and the connection showing why that support makes the choice defensible.

26. Defend

Task: How can defend differ from justify?

Answer: Defend may require responding to objections or competing interpretations while maintaining a supported position.

27. Evaluate

Task: What is the minimum structure of a useful evaluation?

Answer: A judgement tied to explicit or implicit criteria and evidence.

28. Assess

Task: What should be assessed—not merely described?

Answer: Quality, usefulness, extent, reliability or another specified property using evidence.

29. Critique

Task: Why is critique not “find faults”?

Answer: A critique can identify strengths, weaknesses, assumptions and implications. It is balanced analytical evaluation.

30. Verify

Task: What does verify require?

Answer: Check against an appropriate basis such as source, rule, calculation or measurement; state what was actually verified.

31. Refute

Task: Can disagreement alone refute a claim?

Answer: No. Refutation needs evidence or reasoning showing the claim is false or untenable.

32. Challenge

Task: What can challenge do without refuting?

Answer: Expose an assumption, weakness or alternative that reduces certainty while leaving the issue unresolved.

33. Qualify

Task: What does a good qualification add?

Answer: A real boundary: group, time, condition, source, degree or other limit that matches the evidence.

34. Calculate

Task: What is expected beyond a number?

Answer: Appropriate working and unit when the task or curriculum requires them. Calculate seeks an exact result from supplied values.

35. Estimate

Task: What must an estimate preserve?

Answer: A reasoned approximation fit for purpose, clearly distinguished from the exact result.

36. Determine

Task: Why is determine broader than calculate?

Answer: The answer may come from logic, data, comparison or calculation, and it may be a category or decision rather than a number.

37. Solve

Task: What does “solve” require?

Answer: Find the answer to the stated problem using appropriate reasoning or operations. Show working when required.

38. Simplify

Task: What must simplification preserve?

Answer: Underlying value or essential meaning. Removing necessary information is not simplification.

39. Convert

Task: What changes and what stays?

Answer: The form or unit changes; the underlying quantity or information remains equivalent.

40. Represent

Task: What makes a representation successful?

Answer: It preserves the relevant information and relationships in the new form.

41. Interpret a graph

Task: What is more than reading one value?

Answer: Explain the pattern, relationship or significance relevant to the question.

42. Observe

Task: What should not be mixed into observation automatically?

Answer: Unstated cause or interpretation. Observation reports what is directly noticed or recorded.

43. Record

Task: What is the difference between record and verify?

Answer: Recording captures information; verification checks its correctness against an appropriate basis.

44. Test

Task: What should a test be linked to?

Answer: A specific prediction, claim or question and an observable outcome that can inform it.

45. Draft

Task: What is the purpose of a draft?

Answer: Create a workable first version for later review; it is not expected to be final.

46. Revise

Task: What can revision change?

Answer: Meaning, organisation, evidence, clarity and development—not just spelling.

47. Edit

Task: What is a good editing target?

Answer: A specified language or consistency problem such as pronoun reference, word choice or grammar.

48. Proofread

Task: When should proofreading happen?

Answer: Near the end, after major content and organisation problems have been addressed.

49. Condense

Task: What is the danger of condensing?

Answer: Removing a required condition or qualification. Shorter must still preserve essential meaning.

50. Synthesize

Task: How is synthesis different from summary?

Answer: Synthesis integrates multiple sources or ideas into a new coherent whole rather than condensing each separately.

51. Adapt

Task: What should adaptation preserve?

Answer: The essential facts or intended function while changing expression or form for new conditions or audience.

52. Publish

Task: What does publication imply in a writing process?

Answer: The work is ready for its audience after appropriate checking, not merely that a button has been pressed.

Original reading passage: The Question Wasn’t Asking That

The following story is original teaching material. It is designed to show how a learner can know the topic and still answer the wrong intellectual task. Read the story first as a complete narrative. Then use the question set to inspect how command words change the required response.

The first answer

Alicia finished the question in less than a minute.

“That was suspiciously fast,” Tricia said.

“It was easy.”

On the worksheet, the question read: Compare the two notices and explain which one a new visitor should follow.

Notice A had been printed on Monday. It said the exhibition opened at 2:00 p.m. in the school hall. Notice B had been printed on Wednesday. It said the opening had been moved to 2:30 p.m. in the library because the hall was unavailable.

Alicia’s answer was one sentence: “Notice B is newer.”

Kai Kai leaned across the table. “That is true.”

“Exactly.”

Tricia read the command again. “But it is not what the question asks.”

Alicia looked offended. “It asks which notice to follow. B is newer.”

“It asks two things before that.”

She pointed first to compare, then to explain.

Alicia stared at the question for a second time. The information itself had not changed. The job had.

Breaking the task apart

They drew three boxes on scrap paper.

Box one said COMPARE. Box two said EXPLAIN. Box three said WHICH NOTICE TO FOLLOW.

“For compare,” Kai Kai said, “we need both notices.”

“And a relationship,” Tricia added.

Alicia began again. “Both notices concern the same exhibition. Notice A gives 2:00 p.m. in the hall. Notice B gives 2:30 p.m. in the library.”

“That is closer,” Tricia said. “What makes B stronger?”

“It is newer.”

“Still true. Still not enough.”

They read Notice B again. The first line said: Updated Wednesday: The exhibition opening has been moved to 2:30 p.m. in the library because the hall is unavailable.

Alicia wrote, “Notice B explicitly updates the time and place from Notice A. A new visitor should follow B because it is an authorised correction to the earlier arrangement.”

Then she crossed out newer from her first sentence.

“You can keep newer,” Kai Kai said.

“I know. I don’t need it anymore.”

The better reason was not simply recency. It was status: the later notice identified itself as an update and changed the exact details.

The same information, another command

The next question used the same two notices.

Identify two details that changed.

Alicia wrote: “The opening time changed from 2:00 p.m. to 2:30 p.m., and the location changed from the hall to the library.”

“That one actually is easy,” she said.

“Because identify needs less,” Tricia replied.

“It needs the right less.”

Kai Kai laughed. “That sounds like a command word itself.”

The third question read: Evaluate whether Notice B gives enough information for a visitor who has never seen Notice A.

Alicia paused.

She could no longer reuse the comparison answer. Notice B gave the new time and place. It named the event. It said why the hall was unavailable. But did it give the date?

They checked. It said “Wednesday update” at the top, but the event date itself appeared only in Notice A.

“So a person who never saw A might not know which day,” Kai Kai said.

“That is an actual evaluation,” Alicia said slowly. “Not just whether B is correct.”

Her answer became: “Notice B is useful because it gives the updated time, place and event name, but it may not be sufficient for a visitor who has never seen Notice A because it does not repeat the event date. Adding the date would make the update more complete.”

The information had not become harder. The criterion had changed.

The graph question

After break, the class moved to a data task.

A graph showed the number of books borrowed during four weeks: 40, 48, 48 and 55.

The first question said: Describe the trend.

Kai Kai wrote, “Borrowing increased because the new display attracted more pupils.”

Tricia shook her head before he had finished the full stop.

“What?”

“Where does it say there was a new display?”

He looked below the graph. There was a note: New display installed at the start of Week 2.

“There.”

“Fine. But the question still says describe.”

Kai Kai looked back at the graph. “Borrowing rises from 40 to 48, stays at 48, then rises to 55.”

“That answers it.”

“But the display matters.”

“Maybe for another question.”

The next question arrived on the next line: Suggest one possible reason for the change after Week 1.

Kai Kai grinned. “Now I get to use the display.”

He wrote, “The new display may have contributed to the increase because it was installed before Week 2.”

“Why may?” Alicia asked.

“Because there could be other reasons.”

The third question said: Evaluate the claim that the display caused all of the increase.

Kai Kai’s smile disappeared.

“Now I have to argue against my own answer.”

“You have to evaluate the claim,” Tricia said. “Your earlier suggestion can still be plausible.”

They listed the gaps. The graph did not show who borrowed the books. It did not show whether new books arrived, whether class sizes changed, whether there was a reading campaign or whether the same pupils borrowed more.

Kai Kai wrote: “The display may have contributed, but the graph alone does not establish that it caused all of the increase. Other conditions are not reported, and Week 3 shows no increase despite the display remaining in place.”

“That,” Alicia said, “is much longer than describe.”

“The verb is charging by the word.”

“No. Your reasoning is.”

The story question

The reading passage that afternoon described a boy called Haris who always arrived early to feed the class fish. One day he reached the room after everyone else and went straight to the tank without removing his bag. He checked the filter, changed part of the water and only then sat down.

Question one: State what Haris does immediately after arriving.

Tricia wrote, “He goes straight to the fish tank.”

Question two: Infer why Haris may have been concerned.

She used the details about the filter and water. “He may have been worried about the fish or the tank’s condition because he checks the filter and changes water before settling down.”

Question three: Justify the statement that Haris is responsible.

Tricia stopped.

“I already used the evidence.”

“You can use it again,” Alicia said.

“But the answer needs to do something different with it.”

She wrote, “Haris’s actions support the description of him as responsible because he attends to the fish immediately, checks the filter and changes the water before taking care of his own bag or seat. He treats the fish as a duty that needs attention even when he arrives late.”

The inference had asked for a possible motive. The justification asked whether a character trait was defensible. Same actions. Different proposition.

The Mathematics argument

The next worksheet contained two solutions to the same area problem.

Method A split an irregular shape into two rectangles and added their areas. Method B surrounded the shape with a larger rectangle and subtracted the missing corner.

Both obtained 48 square units.

Compare the methods.

Kai Kai wrote, “Both methods break the problem into simpler rectangles and produce the same total. Method A adds two areas; Method B subtracts the missing area from a larger rectangle.”

Evaluate which method is more efficient for this diagram.

He looked at the steps. Method A required three multiplications and one addition. Method B required two multiplications and one subtraction.

“B,” he said.

“Criteria?” Tricia asked automatically.

“Number of operations, if we are judging calculation length.”

His answer became: “Method B is more efficient if efficiency is judged by the number of arithmetic operations, because it uses fewer multiplication steps. Both methods are valid and give the same area.”

“That if is doing a lot of work,” Alicia said.

“It stops efficient from meaning whatever I want.”

The instruction that looked harmless

Near the end of the lesson, the teacher gave them a short revision task.

Rewrite this sentence for a younger reader without changing the rule: “Participants are prohibited from entering the storage area unless accompanied by a supervising adult.”

Alicia wrote, “Children should not go into the storage area.”

Tricia frowned.

“What did you lose?”

Alicia read the original again. “The adult exception.”

She rewrote it: “Do not enter the storage area unless an adult supervisor is with you.”

The sentence was shorter and simpler. The rule remained.

“That is why simplify and rewrite are dangerous words,” she said.

“They are not dangerous,” Kai Kai replied. “We are dangerous.”

“That is exactly the kind of statement an evaluator would challenge.”

The final question

The last page contained no subject content at all. It showed five commands:

Identify. Explain. Compare. Justify. Evaluate.

The instruction said: Order these commands from shortest likely response to most demanding likely response, then explain why your order is only a rough guide.

Alicia put identify first. Explain next. Compare after that. Justify. Evaluate.

Then she stopped.

“Compare could be very short,” she said.

“And identify could be hard if the thing is hard to find,” Tricia said.

“And justify one choice might be shorter than explaining a whole process,” Kai Kai added.

Alicia drew a bracket around all five.

Her final answer said: “A rough progression is identify → explain/compare → justify → evaluate because later commands often require more connections, evidence or criteria. However, command words do not create a fixed difficulty or length hierarchy. The content, number of required points, marks and task conditions also determine how demanding the response is.”

The teacher read it and wrote one word beside the paragraph.

Exactly.

Alicia circled the word.

“What command is that?” Kai Kai asked.

“Approval,” she said.

“Wrong vocabulary article.”

They packed their worksheets away.

Reading the story through command-word lenses

1. Why is Alicia’s first answer insufficient?

It states one relevant fact—Notice B is newer—but does not compare the notices or explain why B should be followed. The command contains multiple response jobs. A correct fact can therefore be insufficient.

2. What improves Alicia’s second answer?

She identifies shared event context, changed time and place, and the later notice’s explicit update status. She moves from recency alone to the reason that the later source supersedes the earlier arrangement.

3. Why does the evaluate question expose a new problem with Notice B?

Evaluation introduces a criterion: usefulness for a visitor who has never seen Notice A. That perspective reveals the missing event date. The earlier comparison question did not require the same audience-completeness judgement.

4. Why is Kai Kai’s first graph answer overextended?

The command describe asks for the observed trend. He adds a causal explanation. The source later supports the display as a possible factor, but description does not require or justify the causal claim.

5. Why is “may have contributed” useful in the suggest answer?

Suggest asks for a plausible reason. The graph and timing make the display a possible contributor, but other causes remain open. The modal may preserves that uncertainty.

6. What makes the evaluation of the causal claim stronger?

Kai Kai identifies missing alternative conditions and a pattern that does not perfectly align with a simple display-causes-growth story. He judges the claim against the evidence rather than merely saying “I disagree.”

7. How do infer and justify use the Haris passage differently?

Infer asks for a possible unstated reason for his concern. Justify asks whether the trait responsible is supported. The same actions can support different propositions.

8. Why does Kai Kai add “if efficiency is judged by number of operations”?

Evaluate requires a criterion. The qualification prevents “efficient” from becoming an undefined overall verdict. Another criterion, such as conceptual clarity, might favour a different method.

9. What is the risk in Alicia’s first rewrite?

She simplifies the prohibition but removes the exception allowing entry with adult supervision. Rewrite requires expression change while preserving the rule.

10. Why is the final hierarchy only approximate?

The cognitive and writing demand depends on content difficulty, marks, number of required points and context. Command verbs shape the response type but do not fully determine task difficulty or length.

Capstone: one source, twelve commands

Source packet: A fictional class surveys 20 pupils about two reading layouts. Layout A uses long paragraphs with no headings. Layout B uses short labelled sections. Twelve pupils say B helped them find information faster; five prefer A for uninterrupted reading; three report no preference. A separate timed task with six pupils records faster average information-finding in B, but the six pupils use B after first seeing the same information in A.

The packet deliberately contains preference data and a small performance task with an order effect. The commands below require different use of those facts.

Identify

Identify the layout preferred for faster information finding by the largest survey group. Answer: Layout B.

State

State how many pupils report no preference. Answer: Three.

Describe

Describe the survey distribution. Answer: Twelve favour B for faster finding, five prefer A for uninterrupted reading, and three report no preference.

Compare

Compare the reasons given for A and B. Answer: B is associated with locating information faster, while A is preferred by some pupils for uninterrupted reading. The preferences concern different reading purposes.

Infer

Infer one possible reason headings help some readers. Answer: Headings may help them identify the relevant section without scanning the entire text. This is plausible, not directly measured by the survey response alone.

Suggest

Suggest one follow-up question. Answer: “Does B still produce faster information finding when pupils encounter B first or when different information is used?”

Analyse

Analyse a limitation of the timed task. Answer: The same six pupils use B after seeing the information in A, so familiarity or memory may contribute to faster performance. The task does not isolate layout.

Justify

Justify the statement that B deserves further testing. Answer: Most surveyed pupils associate B with faster locating, and the small timed task also shows faster performance, although the order effect prevents a clean causal conclusion. These converging signals make follow-up testing reasonable.

Evaluate

Evaluate the claim “Layout B is better for every reader.” Answer: The claim is too broad. Five pupils prefer A for uninterrupted reading, three have no preference, the timed group is small and order is not controlled. B may be useful for information finding, but the evidence does not establish universal superiority.

Synthesize

Synthesize the survey and timed task. Answer: Both sources point towards a possible advantage for B in locating information, while the preference survey also shows that some readers value A for a different purpose. The timed result is promising but causally limited by repeated exposure.

Propose

Propose a better comparison. Answer: Use comparable unfamiliar passages and vary or counterbalance which layout pupils see first; record both speed and accuracy. The exact classroom design should follow teacher guidance.

Conclude

Conclude what the packet supports now. Answer: B appears promising for information-finding tasks in this small fictional record, but the evidence does not establish that it is best for every reader or reading purpose.

The capstone lesson

Twelve commands do not create twelve independent facts. They create twelve ways of operating on one packet. Task-language mastery means choosing the right information and reasoning for each operation. This is why command words deserve explicit vocabulary attention even when the subject content itself is familiar.

Task language beyond the command verb

The command verb is only one part of the instruction. Quantifiers, scope words, negatives, conditions and question stems can change the answer just as much. A learner who reads explain correctly but misses one, except, from the passage or in these trials can still answer the wrong task.

What

What asks for the thing, information, event, idea or answer specified by the rest of the question. It is too broad to define one response shape by itself.

“What happened?” may require an event. “What evidence supports the claim?” requires relevant evidence. “What is meant by…” may require a meaning or paraphrase. Read the noun phrase after what.

Which

Which asks for selection from a known or limited set. The response should identify the relevant option rather than introduce an unrelated possibility.

“Which source is most relevant?” requires a choice among available sources and may need justification if stated.

Who

Who asks for a person or people. In reading, a pronoun-reference question may require identifying the correct person from context.

Do not answer why when asked who, even if the motive is interesting.

When

When asks for time, date, stage or sequence position. “When does the change occur?” may refer to a point in a process rather than a clock time.

Where

Where asks for place, position or location within a text, diagram or process. “Where in the passage is the evidence?” asks for textual location, not a physical place.

Why

Why asks for reason, cause, purpose or justification depending on context. A strong answer normally connects the reason to the event.

“Why did the character return?” may require a stated motive from the passage. “Why is Design A suitable?” may require criteria and evidence. “Why” does not always mean scientific cause.

How

How can ask method, process, degree, effect or manner. “How does the writer create tension?” is analytical; “How do you calculate the area?” is procedural; “How much?” asks quantity.

Learners should not use a single memorised “how = steps” rule.

Quantifiers: the small words that control answer scope

One / one reason / one example

If the task asks for one, give one complete item rather than three partial ones. Extra examples may waste time. The selected one should be the strongest or clearest unless the task gives another criterion.

Two / three / several

Count the required distinct items. Rephrasing one idea several times does not create several points.

All

All creates a universal requirement. “Identify all changes” means missing one change can make the answer incomplete. When evaluating a claim containing all, one counterexample can matter decisively.

Any

Any can mean one or more from an unrestricted or stated set, depending on context. “Give any two examples” allows choice; “Is there any evidence?” asks whether at least one relevant piece exists.

Most / majority

Most refers to more than half in many ordinary quantitative contexts. Do not replace some with most unless the numbers justify it.

At least / no more than / exactly

These phrases define constraints. At least 10 means 10 or more. No more than 10 means 10 or fewer. Exactly 10 permits only 10. In Mathematics and design briefs, these small phrases can reverse whether an option qualifies.

A learner who focuses only on the noun “minutes” and misses at least can choose the wrong plan despite perfect arithmetic.

Scope phrases: where should the evidence come from?

According to the passage

The answer should be grounded in the passage, not outside facts the learner happens to know. Background knowledge can support inference, but it should not override explicit source information.

Using the table

Use the table’s data. Do not add invented measurements or data from another source.

In these trials

This limits a conclusion to the recorded trials. It prevents a classroom result from becoming a universal law.

For this purpose

This makes suitability conditional on a stated goal. A design can be suitable for storing cards but unsuitable for carrying books.

Based on the evidence provided

The learner should judge from the available evidence and may need to state that the evidence is insufficient for a stronger conclusion.

Negative task words: not, except, least, false, cannot

Negative wording deserves deliberate attention because learners often answer the positive version automatically.

Which is NOT supported?

Find the option lacking support. Do not select the strongest supported option merely because it stands out.

All of the following EXCEPT

Three options may fit the group; choose the exception. Underline except before evaluating options.

Least likely

The task asks for the lowest likelihood, not the most likely. This can reverse an otherwise correct reasoning chain.

Cannot be concluded

Identify the statement exceeding the evidence. This is often a scope or causation problem.

False / incorrect

When several statements are given, the task may ask for the one that conflicts with source information. Check each proposition independently.

Conditions inside a question

Words such as if, unless, assuming, provided that, under these conditions create temporary worlds for reasoning. A learner should answer within the stated condition even if real life could differ.

“Assuming each group has four pupils…” authorises that group size for the problem. “If the room remains unavailable…” creates a conditional scenario. The answer should not complain that the premise might be different unless the task asks to evaluate the premise.

Conversely, a learner should not carry the condition into another question where it is absent. Temporary assumptions belong to their task.

Multi-part instructions: count the jobs before answering

“Identify the strongest source, explain why it is relevant, and evaluate one limitation” contains three jobs. A learner can number them in the margin: 1 identify, 2 explain, 3 evaluate.

This technique is especially useful when the same evidence must perform different roles. Source B can be identified, its authority explained and its limitation evaluated. One long paragraph may answer all three if structured clearly, but the learner should check each job before finishing.

Do not confuse multi-part instruction with a demand for a very long answer. Each part can be concise when the reasoning is clear.

A diagnostic map: what kind of command-word error occurred?

Error type 1. The learner misses the verb

The content is correct, but the response job is wrong. Example: the question says compare; the answer gives two separate descriptions. Next step: teach the contrast between response structures.

Error type 2. The learner knows the verb but misses the scope word

Example: the question asks for one reason; the pupil gives four and runs out of time. Or the question says “in these trials,” but the answer says “always”. Next step: mark quantifiers and scope phrases before writing.

Error type 3. The learner knows the task but lacks subject content

Example: the learner correctly understands explain but does not know the scientific mechanism. Command-word instruction alone cannot solve missing subject knowledge. Return to subject teaching.

Error type 4. The learner has the idea but cannot express the reasoning

The learner can explain orally but writes a fragment or vague connector. Next step: sentence frames, collocations or language support, not another definition of justify.

Error type 5. The learner overanswers

The response includes extra claims, invented causes or irrelevant background. Next step: teach stopping rules and relevance.

Error type 6. The learner underanswers

The response gives the conclusion without evidence for justify/evaluate, or gives one side for compare. Next step: use a checklist of required components.

Error type 7. The learner confuses certainty

A suggest/infer answer becomes a definite fact, or a conclusion extends beyond data. Next step: semantic precision—may, suggests, supports, establishes, proves.

Error type 8. The learner changes the task during revision

A rewrite for younger readers removes an exception; a summary adds evaluation; an adaptation changes data. Next step: identify invariants—the information that must survive the transformation.

A seven-step task-reading routine

1. Circle the command verb. What intellectual action is being requested?

2. Underline the content. What topic, data, text or object must the action operate on?

3. Box quantifiers and conditions. One? Two? All? At least? Under these conditions?

4. Mark the evidence source. Passage, table, diagram, prior knowledge, calculation?

5. Predict the response shape. Name, list, comparison, causal explanation, criteria-based judgement?

6. Answer only that job first. Avoid adding unrelated facts.

7. Audit the finished response against the command. Did you actually compare, justify, evaluate or merely discuss?

An eight-session teaching sequence

This sequence is an original planning framework, not a validated programme or universal schedule. Combine or extend sessions according to learner needs.

Session 1. Name versus explain

Teach identify, name, state, list and explain through the same simple source. The learner should feel how answer shape changes before moving to more advanced verbs.

Session 2. Describe versus explain

Use graphs, scenes and processes. Ask for observation-only description first, then causal explanation where the source supports it.

Session 3. Compare, contrast and distinguish

Use two notices or two methods. Require explicit relationship language and a shared comparison dimension.

Session 4. Infer, suggest, conclude

Use a short story and a data pattern. Separate possible interpretation, possible explanation and evidence-bounded conclusion.

Session 5. Justify, support and defend

Teach the movement from claim to evidence to reasoning, then introduce an objection for defend.

Session 6. Assess and evaluate

Use a design brief with explicit criteria. Let the learner see why evaluation needs standards, not adjectives.

Session 7. Cross-subject verbs

Mix calculate, determine, interpret, represent, observe and verify across Mathematics and Science examples.

Session 8. Unlabelled mixed task

Remove the family headings. Give several prompts and require the learner to predict response shape before answering. This checks independent selection.

Three-learner tutorial roles

Alicia identifies the command and predicts response shape. Tricia checks evidence, quantifiers and scope. Kai Kai audits the final answer for fit. Rotate roles after every question so no learner becomes permanently responsible for one skill.

After discussion, each learner completes a fresh prompt independently. Group explanation can make a distinction clear; independent transfer shows whether the learner can recognise it again without the group’s prompt.

Recording progress without converting it into a personality judgement

Use notes such as “Understood evaluate after criteria prompt,” “Compared both notices but omitted similarity,” or “Correctly identified one reason and stopped when one was requested.” These notes describe observable task-language performance.

Avoid “careless reader” when the error is missing except, or “weak reasoning” when the child did not know what justify required. Name the component. Specific diagnosis makes the next lesson shorter and fairer.

Likewise, do not praise length as depth. A concise justified answer can demonstrate stronger task control than a page of irrelevant information.

How multilingual learners can approach command words

When a learner understands the intellectual action in another language, connect that concept to the English command. Ask the learner to explain what compare or justify asks them to do before writing.

Do not assume a direct translation covers every curriculum use. A familiar translated verb may have a wider or narrower range. English examples and task contexts remain important.

Command words are especially suitable for bilingual support because the conceptual operation can often be demonstrated with simple non-linguistic material first: sort objects to show classify, place stages in order to show sequence, or choose and defend a route to show justify.

How parents can help without turning homework into another exam

Ask one question before discussing the answer: “What is this question asking you to do?” Let the child point to the command and explain it in ordinary language.

If the answer goes wrong, compare the response with the verb before reteaching the entire topic. A child may know the content and need only task interpretation.

A short home routine can use one prompt: predict the answer shape, answer, then audit. There is no need to drill one hundred command words every evening.

Family E: Mathematics, Science, data and process verbs

Academic verbs change slightly with subject. Determine in Mathematics may require a calculation or logical deduction. Determine in Science may require interpreting experimental evidence. Interpret in a graph question may require turning a visual pattern into a verbal statement. Estimate explicitly allows approximation. Learners should therefore connect the command word with the subject’s conventions rather than memorise one universal sentence frame.

56. Calculate

Calculate asks the learner to obtain a numerical result using an appropriate operation, method or formula. Working may be required even when the command does not explicitly say “show your working,” especially if the task’s marking expects method.

Example: “Calculate the total time used by the three activities.” The learner adds the supplied durations and gives a unit. A verbal explanation without the numerical result does not complete the task.

Boundary: calculate differs from estimate. A calculated answer should follow from the given values and method; an estimate can be approximate.

57. Compute

Compute is close to calculate and may appear in Mathematics or computing contexts. It generally asks for a result obtained through calculation or processing.

Example: “Compute the mean of the four values.” The learner performs the required arithmetic. If the term mean has a technical definition in the subject, that definition controls the calculation.

58. Determine

Determine asks the learner to work out or establish an answer from the available information. The method may be numerical, logical or evidence-based.

Example: “Determine how many labels remain unchecked.” The learner uses the total and checked count to find the remainder. “Determine which explanation is best supported” instead requires evidence comparison.

Boundary: determine is broader than calculate. Not every determination involves arithmetic.

59. Estimate

Estimate asks for an approximate value based on rounding, known quantities, judgement or a stated method. The learner should not present an estimate as exact.

Example: “Estimate the total distance by rounding each value to the nearest kilometre.” A precise calculator total would not answer the instruction as directly if the task specifically wants estimation.

Boundary: an estimate can be reasonable without matching the exact value. Explain the basis when asked.

60. Approximate

Approximate can act as an adjective, verb or instruction relating to closeness rather than exact equality. In a task, “approximate the value” asks for a near value using an accepted method.

Example: “Approximate 19.8 to the nearest whole number.” The response is 20. The learner should use the required degree of approximation rather than invent another rounding rule.

61. Measure

Measure asks for a quantity to be found using an appropriate instrument, scale or method. The unit matters.

Example: “Measure the length of the model.” The learner uses the stated or suitable measuring tool and records the value with unit.

Boundary: measure is not estimate unless the task allows approximation. A measured value should come from the instrument or scale provided.

62. Quantify

Quantify asks the learner to express something in numerical or measurable terms. It is more advanced vocabulary but useful in data and Science work.

Example: “Quantify the change in temperature.” The learner states the amount of increase or decrease, not merely that it changed.

Boundary: quantify requires a measurable expression. “It changed a lot” is not quantified.

63. Interpret

Interpret asks the learner to explain the meaning of information, a graph, a passage, a result or a representation.

Example: “Interpret the graph between 2 p.m. and 4 p.m.” A strong response states what the values do over that interval and what that pattern means in the graph’s context.

Boundary: copying a number from the graph is retrieval; interpretation explains what the number or pattern signifies.

64. Read

Read in a data task can mean retrieve a value or interpret a representation. The object clarifies the action: “read the value from the graph” versus “read the passage and infer the motive.”

A learner should not assume the ordinary reading-comprehension sense when the subject asks for a measurement or graph value.

65. Plot

Plot asks the learner to place points, values or data on a graph or coordinate system according to the stated axes and scale.

Example: “Plot the four temperature readings.” The learner positions each value accurately. Explaining the trend may be a separate command.

66. Construct

Construct asks the learner to create a representation, diagram, graph, geometric figure, argument or model according to stated conditions.

Example: “Construct a bar graph from the table.” The learner needs suitable axes, scale, labels and bars matching the data.

Boundary: construct is a production command. A learner who only describes what the graph should look like has not completed the task.

67. Represent

Represent asks the learner to express information in another form: diagram, equation, table, model, graph, sentence or symbol system.

Example: “Represent the information in a table.” The learner preserves the data while changing format.

Boundary: representation should not change meaning. A neat table that changes units is not faithful.

68. Model

Model can ask the learner to create or use a simplified representation of a system, process or relationship.

Example: “Model the water cycle using arrows and labels.” The learner creates a representation showing key processes and directions.

Boundary: a model is selective. Evaluating its limitations is a separate task unless requested.

69. Classify

Classify in Science often asks the learner to organise organisms, materials or phenomena by relevant properties.

Example: “Classify the materials as conductors or insulators using the test results.” The learner applies the stated criterion to each material.

Boundary: classification follows the task’s scientific rule, not appearance or preference.

70. Observe

Observe asks the learner to notice and record what is directly available through senses or instruments in the task.

Example: “Observe the colour change.” The learner records the visible change without immediately claiming its cause.

Boundary: observation and inference should be kept separate. “The liquid turned blue” can be observation; “therefore substance X is present” may be an inference or conclusion depending on the rule supplied.

71. Record

Record asks the learner to write down or store observations, measurements or results accurately.

Example: “Record the temperature every two minutes.” The learner should preserve values and units in the required format.

Boundary: recording is not interpreting. The table can be correct even before the learner has explained the pattern.

72. Tabulate

Tabulate means organise information in a table. It is more formal but useful in data work.

Example: “Tabulate the results for the three trials.” The learner creates rows and columns that make the relevant variables and outcomes clear.

Boundary: a table should preserve exact data. Reordering rows can be fine; changing values is not.

73. Derive

Derive asks the learner to obtain a result, rule or relationship from given information or established principles.

Example: “Derive the missing value from the pattern.” The learner shows how the pattern leads to that value.

Boundary: derive is not merely state. The pathway matters.

74. Solve

Solve asks the learner to find an answer to a problem, equation or task using an appropriate method.

Example: “Solve for x.” The learner gives the value and often working.

Boundary: a numerical answer with an invalid method may not satisfy a task that awards method marks.

75. Check

Check asks the learner to inspect an answer, method, source or representation for correctness, consistency or compliance.

Example: “Check your answer by substitution.” The learner uses the specified verification method.

Boundary: checking is not simply rereading. The task should identify what standard or alternative method is used.

76. Verify

Verify is a stronger, more explicit checking verb. It asks whether a result or claim agrees with a relevant source, rule or independent calculation.

Example: “Verify that the total is 48.” Recalculate from the given values and compare.

Boundary: verifying a total does not verify the completeness of the data set unless that is also checked.

77. Test

Test asks the learner to apply a procedure or evidence to see whether a claim, material, model or prediction holds under stated conditions.

Example: “Test whether the paper absorbs more water after treatment.” The learner needs a comparison method and result.

Boundary: one test supports conclusions only within its conditions.

78. Control

Control in an investigation can mean keep a condition constant or manage a variable so that a comparison becomes interpretable.

Example: “Control the amount of water used in each trial.” The learner keeps that quantity the same.

Boundary: control as a scientific instruction differs from everyday “be in charge of”. Subject context selects the sense.

79. Manipulate

Manipulate can mean deliberately change or handle something. In investigation language, the manipulated variable is the factor deliberately changed in some curricula. In everyday language, manipulate can carry a negative social connotation.

Reference rule: use the subject-specific definition supplied by the curriculum in Science. Do not import the negative interpersonal meaning into the technical term.

80. Replicate

Replicate can mean repeat a procedure, study or result closely enough to test whether the finding can be obtained again. It is advanced research vocabulary and should be taught carefully.

Example: “Replicate the measurement using the same method.” The learner repeats the process under comparable conditions.

Boundary: repeating once does not establish universal reliability; it provides another observation.

Cross-subject task-language matrix

The same verb can call for different content structures across subjects. Explain in English may connect textual evidence to character motivation. In Science it may connect cause, mechanism and effect. In Mathematics it may justify why a method or relationship works. The response job—make a relationship clear—remains, while the disciplinary evidence changes.

Compare in English may compare two characters or texts. In Science it may compare materials by measured properties. In Mathematics it may compare methods, quantities or representations. The learner should identify the shared dimension and use subject-appropriate terminology.

Interpret in reading concerns meaning; in data work it concerns what values or patterns show; in Mathematics it can concern what a numerical solution means in context. The verb is stable enough to be teachable across subjects, but the evidence base differs.

Evaluate always needs criteria, but the criteria vary. A writing evaluation can use clarity, evidence and audience; a design evaluation can use constraints and performance; a source evaluation can use authority, relevance and currency. Teaching the abstract response job plus subject-specific criteria creates transfer.

Family F: editing, revision and production verbs

81. Edit

Edit asks the learner to improve or correct a text by changing wording, grammar, organisation, accuracy or style according to the task.

Example: “Edit the sentence to remove ambiguity.” The learner changes the unclear reference, not every word.

Boundary: editing is selective. A completely rewritten sentence can lose the original meaning.

82. Revise

Revise means reconsider and change work to improve fit with purpose, evidence or requirements. It can involve content as well as surface correction.

Example: “Revise the conclusion after receiving new evidence.” The learner changes only the claims affected by the evidence.

Boundary: revision does not mean make longer.

83. Proofread

Proofread asks for checking the final text for surface errors such as spelling, punctuation, grammar and formatting. It usually comes after major content revision.

Example: “Proofread the final paragraph for agreement errors.” The learner looks for that target.

Boundary: proofreading cannot repair a false argument unless the task expands beyond surface correctness.

84. Correct

Correct asks the learner to repair an identified error or make something accurate.

Example: “Correct the inaccurate date.” Use the verified date and preserve unrelated information.

Boundary: correct is narrower than revise when the main issue is reorganisation or audience fit rather than factual error.

85. Rephrase

Rephrase means express the same idea using different wording, usually for clarity, tone or style.

Example: “Rephrase the instruction for a younger reader.” The essential requirement must survive.

Boundary: rephrasing should not change what is required.

86. Rewrite

Rewrite asks for a new version. It can permit broader changes than rephrase, depending on the instruction.

Example: “Rewrite the paragraph in first person.” The learner changes viewpoint and related grammar while preserving core events.

Boundary: rewrite is not automatically creative freedom. The task determines what must remain.

87. Transform

Transform asks for a systematic change of form while preserving specified meaning.

Example: “Transform the active sentence into the passive voice.” The learner preserves participants and event while changing grammatical focus.

Boundary: a grammatical transformation can become semantically unfaithful if an actor, tense or certainty is lost.

88. Combine

Combine asks learners to join information, sentences, ideas or quantities while preserving relationships.

Example: “Combine the two sentences using a relative clause.” The resulting sentence should retain both facts.

Boundary: combination is not compression at any cost. Necessary qualifications must remain.

89. Expand

Expand asks for additional detail, explanation, development or steps.

Example: “Expand your reason with one piece of evidence.” The learner adds support relevant to the claim.

Boundary: expansion should deepen the required idea, not introduce unrelated material.

90. Condense

Condense asks for a shorter version preserving essential meaning.

Example: “Condense the notice to forty words without removing the deadline.” The deadline is a protected requirement.

Boundary: shorter is not automatically better if key conditions disappear.

91. Refine

Refine asks for careful improvement in precision, clarity or effectiveness.

Example: “Refine the claim so that it matches the evidence.” The learner may narrow its scope or choose a more accurate verb.

92. Adapt

Adapt asks the learner to adjust material for a new audience, purpose, medium or condition.

Example: “Adapt the explanation for first-time visitors.” Simplify vocabulary while preserving the core facts.

Boundary: adapting is not deleting every difficult idea.

93. Integrate

Integrate asks learners to combine information or evidence into a coherent whole rather than attach pieces mechanically.

Example: “Integrate evidence from both passages.” The learner connects them to one claim and explains their relationship.

94. Synthesise

Synthesise asks for a new understanding built from multiple sources, ideas or findings. It is more than summarising each source separately.

Example: “Synthesise the two accounts into one explanation of why the schedule changed.” The learner reconciles shared and differing information.

Boundary: synthesis must preserve source differences rather than erase them.

95. Reconcile

Reconcile asks the learner to explain how apparently conflicting information can fit together, or to identify why it cannot yet be resolved.

Example: one record gives the room opening at nine and another gives the activity beginning at ten. Distinguishing room opening from activity start reconciles the times.

Boundary: averaging contradictory values is not reconciliation.

96. Organise

Organise asks for information to be arranged in a clear structure according to purpose.

Example: “Organise the evidence from strongest to weakest for this claim.” The learner applies a relevant ranking criterion.

97. Structure

Structure asks for a planned arrangement of parts in writing, explanation or presentation.

Example: “Structure the response as claim, evidence and reasoning.” The learner creates a response architecture.

98. Frame

Frame can mean present or formulate an idea in a particular way.

Example: “Frame the recommendation in terms of the stated criteria.” The learner avoids unrelated preference language.

99. Formulate

Formulate asks for a clear, deliberate statement, rule, hypothesis, question or plan.

Example: “Formulate a hypothesis explaining the observed pattern.” The learner writes a testable proposed explanation where appropriate.

100. Generate

Generate asks the learner to produce ideas, examples, questions, data or possible solutions.

Example: “Generate two possible explanations for the discrepancy.” The learner offers alternatives without pretending either is established.

One hundred command words do not mean one hundred memorised templates

The purpose of this collection is not to train one fixed opening sentence for every verb. It is to help learners recognise recurring response jobs: retrieve, describe, explain, compare, analyse, infer, support, judge, calculate, represent, verify and revise. Individual verbs then refine those jobs.

A learner who understands the response job can handle an unfamiliar command more intelligently. Appraise may be new, but if the sentence and dictionary show that it means assess value or quality, the learner can connect it to the criteria-based judgement family rather than start from zero.

Twenty command-word contrast laboratories

Most task-language mistakes happen between neighbouring verbs rather than completely unrelated ones. The learner knows roughly what the question wants but chooses the wrong response shape. These contrast laboratories make the boundary explicit.

1. Identify versus describe

Identify asks which item or feature. Describe asks what it is like or what happens. “Identify the highest bar” can be answered with “Week 4.” “Describe the pattern” needs information about rise, fall or stability across several bars. Giving “Week 4” to the second task is under-answering; describing the whole graph for the first may be unnecessary.

2. Describe versus explain

Description states what is observed; explanation makes a relationship or reason clear. “The temperature rises from 20°C to 30°C” describes. “The temperature rises because the sample is heated” explains when the source supports that causal relationship. Learners should not invent because merely because explain sounds more sophisticated.

3. Explain versus justify

Explain can make a process, cause or meaning clear. Justify defends a choice or claim. “Explain how the water moves through the model” is process-centred. “Justify why this model should be used” is judgement-centred and needs criterion/evidence. The same facts can appear, but their argumentative role changes.

4. State versus conclude

State asks for the answer or fact. Conclude asks what follows from evidence. “State the final value: 12.” “Conclude which method performed better from the results: Method B under the stated criterion.” Conclusion requires a relationship between evidence and outcome.

5. Summarise versus analyse

Summary condenses what the source says. Analysis examines how parts, patterns or relationships work. A story summary tells the main events; an analysis might explain how repeated delays build tension. Retelling is not analysis merely because it is long.

6. Compare versus evaluate

Compare identifies similarities and differences; evaluate makes a reasoned judgement. “A is shorter; B holds more” is comparison. “A is more suitable because the task prioritises width and both meet capacity” is evaluation. Criteria convert comparison into judgement.

7. Contrast versus distinguish

Contrast focuses on differences. Distinguish often asks for the conceptual boundary between similar ideas. “A uses addition; B uses subtraction” contrasts methods. “An estimate is approximate, while an exact result is computed from the given values” distinguishes categories.

8. Infer versus suggest

Infer normally asks what can be worked out from evidence. Suggest often asks for a possible idea, explanation or solution. “Infer the character’s feeling” uses passage clues. “Suggest one way to improve the notice” asks for a proposed action that may not already exist in the source.

9. Suggest versus predict

A suggestion puts forward a possible idea or next step. A prediction states an expected future outcome from evidence or pattern. “Suggest adding headings” proposes an intervention. “Predict that search time will fall if headings are added” forecasts an outcome and needs a basis.

10. Predict versus conclude

Prediction concerns an outcome not yet observed in the task. Conclusion interprets existing evidence. “The next value is likely 12” may be a prediction from a pattern. “The values increased by two each step” is a conclusion about supplied data.

11. Support versus justify

Support provides evidence for a claim. Justify uses relevant reasons/evidence to defend a decision or answer. They overlap. A task saying “support with evidence” foregrounds sourcing; “justify your choice” foregrounds defensibility. A strong justification normally includes support.

12. Justify versus evaluate

Justify asks why your selected answer is reasonable. Evaluate asks you to judge quality, suitability or extent, often considering more than one side. A learner may justify choosing Design A without evaluating all strengths and limitations of A.

13. Assess versus evaluate

These verbs overlap substantially. Both can require criteria-based judgement. In some curricula, assess may emphasise measuring extent or quality, while evaluate may emphasise weighing evidence and reaching a judgement. Do not invent a rigid universal difference; read examples and marking guidance.

14. Verify versus justify

Verify checks correctness against a source, rule or calculation. Justify gives reasons why a choice or answer is defensible. “Verify the total” requires recalculation. “Justify using this total in the recommendation” requires reasoning about relevance and criterion.

15. Refute versus challenge

Refute shows a claim to be false or untenable. Challenge raises a problem, counterexample or assumption that reduces certainty. One inconsistent source can challenge a claim without fully refuting it. A verified counterexample can refute a universal “all” claim.

16. Revise versus edit

Revise changes content, organisation or meaning after reconsideration. Edit often focuses more narrowly on wording, grammar, consistency or style. A paragraph missing evidence needs revision; a paragraph with unclear pronoun reference may need editing. Real writing can require both.

17. Edit versus proofread

Editing can change sentences for clarity, grammar and style. Proofreading is a near-final error check. Reorganising an argument during proofreading means the work was not actually at the proofreading stage yet. Process labels help learners know how deep the change should be.

18. Paraphrase versus summarise

Paraphrase restates roughly the same amount of meaning in different words; summary reduces to main points. A one-sentence source may be paraphrased into another sentence. A five-paragraph article may be summarised into one paragraph. Either task must preserve the source’s position.

19. Simplify versus condense

Simplify reduces complexity; condense reduces length. A sentence can become simpler without becoming shorter, and shorter without becoming easier. “Do not enter unless an adult is with you” may simplify a formal rule while keeping all conditions. Condensing should not delete those conditions.

20. Adapt versus transform

Adapt adjusts for new audience, purpose or conditions. Transform changes form more substantially. Adapting a report for younger readers may keep paragraph form but simplify language. Transforming the report into a poster changes representation. Both should preserve required facts unless creative change is explicitly allowed.

Response templates as temporary scaffolds

Sentence frames can help learners express a command they already understand. They should be removed gradually and never treated as universal answers. The content must still fit.

Explain: “___ happens because ___, which means ___.”

Compare: “Both ___ and ___, but ___ whereas ___.”

Infer: “This suggests ___ because the passage states/shows ___.”

Justify: “I choose ___ because ___ meets the criterion of ___.”

Evaluate: “Overall, ___ is suitable/effective to the extent that ___; however, ___ limits the conclusion.”

Qualify: “This is supported for ___ under ___, but the evidence does not establish ___.”

Synthesize: “Source A shows ___, while Source B adds ___; together they suggest ___.”

These frames are useful only when the relationship is correct. Filling a because frame with an irrelevant detail does not create an explanation. The adult should fade the frame once the learner can construct the relationship independently.

A command-word notebook that stays usable

For each high-value verb, record four things: response job, ingredients, common confusion, one original prompt. Example: “Evaluate — judge using criteria/evidence; ingredients: criterion + evidence + judgement + limitation; do not confuse with describe; prompt: Evaluate whether Design A meets the brief.”

Do not copy one hundred full dictionary definitions. Command-word mastery comes from knowing the action. A plain note such as “identify = name the right thing” is enough if the learner consistently responds correctly.

Mark words that vary by subject. Interpret in English, Mathematics and Science can have different material but the shared action is making meaning from information. Model can be a noun or verb with subject-specific expectations. Technical meanings should follow curriculum guidance.

Ten parent and teacher FAQs

1. Does learning command words improve content knowledge?

Not by itself. Command words help learners use the content they know in the required way. A pupil who understands explain but lacks the scientific mechanism still needs subject teaching. Task language and content knowledge interact.

2. Should we teach all 100 at once?

No. Start with high-frequency contrasts that appear in current work: identify/describe/explain, compare/contrast, infer/justify, calculate/estimate, revise/proofread. Add less common terms as they appear.

3. Are these definitions official exam definitions?

No. They are an advanced educational collection of common academic uses. Exact expectations can vary by curriculum, subject and examiner. Always read current instructions and marking guidance.

4. Why do some sources define compare differently?

In some contexts compare means similarities and differences; in “compare and contrast,” compare may be used for similarities while contrast handles differences. Teach learners to read the full wording rather than assume one rigid definition.

5. How long should an “explain” answer be?

Long enough to make the required relationship clear. Marks, number of points and content complexity matter. There is no universal sentence count.

6. How can I tell whether my child overanswers?

Look for irrelevant facts, invented causes, repeated points or material beyond the requested count. Ask whether every sentence performs the command or supplies required content.

7. How can I tell whether my child underanswers?

Check missing ingredients: no relationship in compare, no reason in explain, no evidence in justify, no criteria in evaluate, or too few items in list.

8. Should command words be translated for multilingual learners?

Translation can support understanding, but examples remain essential because translated verbs may not map exactly onto school uses. Demonstrate the intellectual action in English tasks as well.

9. Are command words only for examinations?

No. They appear in classroom discussion, research, project briefs, textbooks, Mathematics, Science and later academic work. They are general academic vocabulary.

10. What is the best sign of mastery?

The learner sees an unfamiliar prompt, identifies the task action, predicts the response shape and produces a relevant answer without being reminded what the verb means.

Continue through the eduKateSingapore vocabulary ecosystem

For broad Primary 6 vocabulary, use the Top 100 Advanced Vocabulary Words for Primary 6. For argument and evidence language, continue to the Primary 6 advanced argument collection.

For explanatory processes and systems, use the explanatory-writing collection. For natural word partnerships, use the collocations and precision-editing collection. For word forms and sentence transformation, use the morphology and word-families collection.

For semantic distinctions among related words, use the semantic-precision collection. For independent dictionary, thesaurus and pronunciation work, use the reference-skills collection.

The eduKate Vocabulary Learning System provides the broader meaning → use → transfer route, while the Vocabulary Article Directory locates other owners. This page remains the task-language and command-word application owner rather than another generic word list.

References and boundaries

Current Grade 6 academic-vocabulary materials commonly foreground verbs such as explain, analyse, compare, infer, summarise, predict, contrast, justify and describe. The external worksheet sources used during topic research reinforce the search-language relevance of these command families. eduKateSG’s sibling owners also already cover Grade 6 academic verbs and PSLE thinking vocabulary, so this eduKateSingapore collection deliberately focuses on deeper response-shape application and cross-subject transfer rather than reproducing those lists.

The definitions here are educational paraphrases of common academic uses. Exact command-word expectations can vary across curricula and subjects. Mathematics and Science teachers may use technical meanings or require specific working. Learners should follow current classroom instructions and marking criteria.

All fictional cases, passages, data and model answers on this page are original teaching material. They do not report measured outcomes from real pupils, guarantee marks or represent official examination questions.

Final principle: the command word is the contract of the question

A question offers content and asks the learner to do something with it. The command word names that action. Identify names. Describe shows features. Explain makes relationships clear. Compare connects items. Infer reasons from evidence. Justify defends. Evaluate judges against criteria. Calculate computes. Revise rethinks. Proofread checks.

Alicia, Tricia and Kai Kai learn that knowing the topic is not enough when the response job is wrong. The strongest answer is not the longest or most sophisticated. It is the answer that fulfils the command, uses the right evidence, respects the scope and stops when the task has been completed.

Final transfer audit: can the learner see the task before seeing the answer?

Use five unseen prompts from current schoolwork and hide the content answers. Ask the learner to predict the response shape only. One prompt might need a name, another a comparison, another a causal explanation, another a criteria-based judgement and another a calculation. If the learner can identify the shape before solving the content, command-word knowledge is becoming operational rather than memorised.

Then reveal the content and complete the tasks. After each answer, return to the verb and ask which sentence or step fulfils it. In a compare answer, underline the explicit relationship between items. In a justify answer, underline the evidence and circle the criterion. In an evaluate answer, box the judgement and the limitation. The visual marks are temporary scaffolds; remove them once the learner can audit mentally.

Next, change only the command word while keeping the source identical. Turn “Describe the graph” into “Explain one possible reason for the graph’s pattern.” Turn “State which source is current” into “Justify which source should be used.” Turn “Calculate the total” into “Estimate the total.” The learner should change the response rather than repeat the original answer with a new opening phrase.

Finally, include one command the learner has not memorised explicitly but can infer from context, such as appraise, substantiate or synthesize. Let the learner use a dictionary or reference-skills page if needed. Advanced task-language control includes knowing how to investigate a new directive rather than pretending every future command is already known.

The audit is successful when the learner can say, in ordinary language, “This question wants me to name it,” “This one wants me to show why,” “This one wants me to judge it against the rules,” or “This one wants me to combine the sources.” Formal terminology is useful, but the underlying task model matters more.

That final transfer is the reason this collection is long: command words appear across English, Mathematics, Science, projects and later secondary work, but their value lies in one compact habit. Read the verb, read the scope, predict the answer shape, and only then begin writing.

Final note: a correct answer begins with correct task interpretation. When learners can distinguish naming from explaining, comparing from evaluating, estimating from calculating, and revising from proofreading, they waste less effort and make their reasoning easier to inspect. That control is transferable: the subject changes, but the habit of reading the command, scope and evidence source before answering remains useful across later academic work.

Eight worked cases: same content, different command

These case files are original. Each shows how changing the command word changes the response even when the underlying content stays similar. Read the source packet first, then compare the answers. The aim is to see the task-language difference, not memorise one model paragraph.

Case 1. The two notices

Source: Notice A says the workshop is on Friday at 3:00 p.m. in Room 4. Notice B says Friday at 3:00 p.m. in Room 6 and adds that the room changed because of maintenance.

Identify: Identify the changed detail. The room changed from Room 4 to Room 6.

Compare: Both notices give the same day and time, but Notice B changes the room and adds a reason.

Explain: The room changed because maintenance made the original room unavailable, according to Notice B.

Evaluate: If Notice B is the later authorised notice, it is more useful for current attendance because it gives the updated room and explains the change. The task must supply that authority before the learner calls it the correct current notice.

The source is the same; the response shape changes. Identify selects one detail. Compare establishes relationships. Explain connects reason and outcome. Evaluate adds a criterion such as usefulness or currency.

Case 2. The graph

Source: A fictional graph shows 12 books borrowed on Monday, 16 on Tuesday, 16 on Wednesday and 20 on Thursday.

State: State the Wednesday value. 16 books.

Describe: Borrowing rises from Monday to Tuesday, remains stable on Wednesday and rises again on Thursday.

Calculate: Calculate the change from Monday to Thursday. 8 books.

Interpret: The graph shows an overall increase across the four days, with no change between Tuesday and Wednesday.

Boundary: The graph does not explain why borrowing changed. A causal explanation needs additional information.

Case 3. The character

Source: Alicia receives a message saying the exhibition date may change. She checks the calendar, asks the organiser for confirmation and tells her group not to reprint the invitations yet.

Describe: Alicia checks the calendar, seeks confirmation and delays reprinting.

Infer: Alicia is likely being cautious because the date is not yet confirmed.

Justify: Calling her cautious is justified by her decision to check the date and wait for confirmation before changing the invitations.

Evaluate: Her response is appropriate to the uncertainty because it avoids printing possibly incorrect information while actively seeking confirmation.

The evaluate answer needs a criterion: suitability to the uncertain status. The infer answer needs textual clues. The describe answer needs only actions.

Case 4. The paper investigation

Source: Paper A absorbs 8 mL, Paper B 5 mL and Paper C 7 mL under the same stated trial conditions.

Identify: Paper A absorbs the most water.

Compare: A absorbs 3 mL more than B and 1 mL more than C.

Calculate: The difference between A and B is 3 mL.

Conclude: Paper A absorbed the most water in these trials.

Qualify: The result applies to these trials and does not by itself establish that Paper A is best for every purpose.

Evaluate: If the only criterion is water absorption under these conditions, A performs best among the three tested papers.

Case 5. The ambiguous instruction

Source: “Bring it later and leave it there.” Two objects and two locations have been mentioned previously.

Identify: Identify the problem. The pronouns it and there have unclear references.

Clarify: Replace the pronouns with the intended object and location once those are known.

Rephrase: Express the corrected instruction in simpler wording while keeping the same action.

Critique: The instruction is too ambiguous for reliable action because readers cannot determine which object and location are intended. It needs explicit references.

Boundary: Do not invent the object or place just to make the sentence grammatical.

Case 6. The two routes

Source: Route A takes 18 minutes and passes all three required stops. Route B takes 14 minutes but misses one required stop. The brief requires all three stops within 20 minutes.

Select: Select the route that meets the full brief. Route A.

Justify: Route A meets both the time limit and all-stop requirement; Route B is faster but incomplete.

Evaluate: Route A is the only supplied route that satisfies every stated constraint, though Route B is faster on time alone.

Propose: Propose an improvement to Route B. Add a path through the missing stop while checking whether the total remains within 20 minutes.

The proposed change is not yet proven feasible. A new route calculation is needed.

Case 7. The source discrepancy

Source: Record A gives 21 June. Record B gives 12 June. Both refer to the same named event, and no higher-authority source has yet been checked.

State: The records give different dates.

Identify: The discrepancy concerns the day and month order.

Challenge: Challenge the assumption that Record B is correct merely because it is newer. Recency alone does not verify accuracy.

Propose: Check the original authorised record or another appropriate source.

Reconcile: The records cannot yet be reconciled from the supplied information. Do not average the dates.

Case 8. The paragraph revision

Source draft: “All visitors understood the exhibition because seven interviewed visitors answered two questions correctly.”

Identify: The claim overgeneralises from seven interviewed visitors and two questions.

Qualify: “All seven interviewed visitors answered the two questions correctly.”

Explain: The revision limits the claim to the people and questions actually recorded.

Evaluate: The revised sentence is more defensible because it reports the observed result without claiming complete understanding by every visitor.

Condense: If brevity is needed, “All seven interviewees answered both questions correctly” preserves the tested scope.

Sixty independent command-word tasks with explained answers

Try each task by identifying the response job before reading the answer. These are original teaching exercises, not an official examination paper. The model answer explains the command, not merely the content.

1. Identify versus explain

Task: A question asks, “Identify the source of the quotation.” What should the answer do?

Answer: Name the source. Do not add a full explanation unless requested.

2. State versus justify

Task: “State whether Route A fits the time limit.” What is the minimum response?

Answer: State yes/no or the direct judgement based on the given limit. If the task also asks why, then add calculation or evidence.

3. List versus describe

Task: “List three features of the poster.” What should be avoided?

Answer: Avoid turning each item into a long explanation unless the question asks for effects or reasons.

4. Describe versus explain

Task: A graph rises after noon. The command is describe. Should you invent a cause?

Answer: No. State the pattern. A cause belongs in an explanation only when evidence supports it.

5. Explain versus repeat

Task: Why is “It happened because it happened” weak?

Answer: It repeats the outcome instead of connecting it to a reason, mechanism or evidence.

6. Outline versus full detail

Task: What should an outline preserve?

Answer: The main stages or points in a clear order, without unnecessary detail.

7. Summarise versus evaluate

Task: A summary should do what with the writer’s claims?

Answer: Condense them faithfully, not add a new judgement unless evaluation is requested.

8. Paraphrase

Task: What must remain stable in a paraphrase?

Answer: The essential meaning, relationships, scope and relevant qualifications.

9. Illustrate

Task: What does “illustrate with an example” require?

Answer: A concrete example that makes the idea clearer, not merely a repeated definition.

10. Trace

Task: What makes a trace answer different from a final-state description?

Answer: It follows development or change across stages or time.

11. Compare

Task: What is missing from two separate descriptions?

Answer: An explicit relationship showing similarities and/or differences on shared dimensions.

12. Contrast

Task: What should a contrast answer focus on?

Answer: Differences on a comparable dimension.

13. Distinguish

Task: What is the core job?

Answer: State the boundary that keeps two similar concepts separate.

14. Categorise

Task: What should be named or inferred?

Answer: The grouping rule or criterion.

15. Sequence

Task: What matters beyond listing stages?

Answer: Correct order according to the task’s dimension, such as time or procedure.

16. Rank

Task: What makes a ranking defensible?

Answer: A stated criterion and evidence supporting the order.

17. Analyse

Task: Why is retelling not enough?

Answer: Analysis examines parts and relationships to explain how or why something works or matters.

18. Examine

Task: What does it add to “look at”?

Answer: Purposeful close inspection of the feature named by the task.

19. Investigate

Task: What kind of answer may it require?

Answer: A question, method, evidence and conclusion rather than only a final statement.

20. Infer

Task: What must an inference have?

Answer: Relevant clues or evidence connecting the passage to the interpretation.

21. Deduce

Task: What does it emphasise?

Answer: A conclusion reached through reasoning from supplied information.

22. Conclude

Task: What should match the evidence?

Answer: The scope and strength of the conclusion.

23. Predict

Task: What distinguishes prediction from guessing?

Answer: A basis in pattern, model, evidence or stated conditions.

24. Suggest

Task: How should a suggestion be presented when unverified?

Answer: As a possible idea or next step, not an established fact.

25. Propose

Task: What should a proposal make visible?

Answer: The planned method, solution or action and any relevant conditions.

26. Support

Task: What does support require?

Answer: Evidence or reasoning bearing directly on the claim.

27. Justify

Task: What two things usually appear?

Answer: The choice/judgement and the reasons or evidence showing why it is reasonable.

28. Defend

Task: What extra challenge can it include?

Answer: Responding to objections or alternatives while supporting the position.

29. Assess

Task: What is essential?

Answer: A criterion or standard for judgement plus evidence.

30. Evaluate

Task: What is the minimum structure?

Answer: Criterion, evidence and reasoned judgement; often a limitation or boundary too.

31. Critique

Task: Does critique mean attack?

Answer: No. It is a balanced analytical evaluation of strengths, weaknesses and implications.

32. Verify

Task: What must be specified?

Answer: What is being checked and against which source, rule or method.

33. Refute

Task: What does it require in academic reasoning?

Answer: Evidence or reasoning showing the claim is false, not merely disagreement.

34. Challenge

Task: Can a challenge leave the issue unresolved?

Answer: Yes. It can expose a weak assumption or alternative without proving the opposite.

35. Qualify

Task: What does a good qualification add?

Answer: A real condition, scope or limit rather than vague uncertainty.

36. Calculate

Task: What must accompany a numerical answer?

Answer: The correct quantity and unit; method when required.

37. Estimate

Task: Should the answer pretend to be exact?

Answer: No. It should reflect the stated approximation method.

38. Determine

Task: Is it always arithmetic?

Answer: No. It can involve calculation, logic or evidence-based judgement.

39. Interpret a graph

Task: How is this different from reading one value?

Answer: Interpretation explains what the pattern or value means in context.

40. Plot

Task: What must remain faithful?

Answer: The data values, axes and scale.

41. Represent

Task: What is the central rule?

Answer: Change form without changing information.

42. Model

Task: What should a learner remember?

Answer: A model is selective and may have limitations.

43. Observe

Task: What should not be mixed in automatically?

Answer: An explanation or inference about why the observation occurred.

44. Record

Task: Does recording equal interpreting?

Answer: No. Recording preserves observations; interpretation comes later.

45. Tabulate

Task: What does tabulate require?

Answer: A clear table structure preserving the data.

46. Solve

Task: What may matter beyond the final answer?

Answer: A valid method and working, depending on the task.

47. Check

Task: What makes checking meaningful?

Answer: A specified standard, alternative method, source or rule.

48. Edit

Task: What is the aim of a good edit?

Answer: Repair the target problem while preserving correct meaning and voice.

49. Revise

Task: How is revision broader than proofreading?

Answer: It can change ideas, evidence, organisation and fit with purpose, not only surface errors.

50. Proofread

Task: What is its typical focus?

Answer: Spelling, punctuation, grammar, formatting and final surface correctness.

51. Rephrase

Task: What should not change?

Answer: The essential proposition unless the task explicitly asks for a change.

52. Transform

Task: What is a common danger?

Answer: Changing tense, actor, certainty or meaning while changing grammar.

53. Condense

Task: What must survive?

Answer: Essential information and required conditions.

54. Expand

Task: What should added detail do?

Answer: Deepen the requested idea, evidence or explanation rather than wander off-topic.

55. Adapt

Task: What should be preserved for a new audience?

Answer: Core facts, required terminology and intended message.

56. Integrate

Task: What makes integration more than joining?

Answer: The information is connected into a coherent whole with relationships made clear.

57. Synthesise

Task: How is synthesis different from two summaries?

Answer: It combines information to produce a new integrated understanding while preserving source differences.

58. Reconcile

Task: What is a false reconciliation?

Answer: Averaging or inventing a middle answer when conflicting evidence has not been resolved.

59. Formulate

Task: What does the verb suggest?

Answer: Create a deliberate, clear statement such as a question, rule, hypothesis or plan.

60. Generate

Task: Does generating ideas make them correct?

Answer: No. Generated possibilities still require evaluation and evidence.

A response-shape notebook

For each difficult command word, record four fields: task job, minimum answer, common over-answer, common under-answer. For identify: job = name the relevant item; minimum = item/term; over-answer = long unsupported explanation; under-answer = vague reference without naming. For evaluate: job = make a reasoned judgement; minimum = criterion + evidence + judgement; over-answer = unrelated essay; under-answer = “it is good.”

This notebook is more useful than a one-word synonym list because it links the verb to performance. A learner can know that evaluate means assess but still not know what an evaluative answer looks like. Recording the response shape closes that gap.

Do not turn the notebook into rigid templates. “Explain = because” is too narrow; many explanations use sequence, mechanism, examples or conditional relationships. The record should guide thinking, not replace it.

A four-step method for reading any unfamiliar command word

Step 1: identify the object. What are you being asked to act on: a passage, graph, method, claim, calculation or design?

Step 2: infer the task family. Is the verb asking for retrieval, description, explanation, comparison, evidence, judgement, calculation, representation or revision?

Step 3: check the exact verb. Use a learner dictionary or subject glossary when the word is unfamiliar. Read examples, not just the first synonym.

Step 4: build the minimum complete answer. Satisfy the command before adding enrichment. Then reread the question to check scope, quantity and conditions.

Teaching command words without teaching answer robots

Begin with pairs that create meaningful contrast: identify/explain, describe/explain, compare/contrast, infer/state, justify/evaluate, estimate/calculate, edit/revise. Give the same content and change only the command. This makes the task-language effect visible.

Next, give two different command words that can share part of an answer. “Compare the routes” and “Evaluate which route meets the brief” may both mention distances, but evaluation adds criteria and judgement. The learner sees that content can be reused while response architecture changes.

Then remove the labels. Give a question and ask the learner to underline the command verb, paraphrase it in plain language and predict the answer shape before solving the content. This short preview can prevent large amounts of irrelevant writing.

Finally, include one unfamiliar command word. Let the learner infer its family from context and verify it with a dictionary. Command-word learning should produce adaptive readers, not dependence on a memorised list of one hundred known verbs.

Questions parents and teachers ask

Do learners need to memorise all 100 verbs?

No. The important structure is the response families and the distinctions among commonly encountered verbs. Many advanced verbs can be learned receptively and connected to a familiar family when they appear.

Is “explain” always harder than “describe”?

Not necessarily. The content can make a description difficult and an explanation easy. The verbs specify different response jobs rather than a universal difficulty ranking.

Does “compare” mean similarities only?

Usage varies. When a task says “compare and contrast,” compare often focuses on similarities and contrast on differences. When compare appears alone, many school contexts expect both. Read local instructions and marking guidance.

Does “evaluate” require both positives and negatives?

Not automatically. It requires a reasoned judgement using relevant criteria and evidence. Strengths and limitations are often useful because they support balanced judgement, but the task itself determines what must be considered.

What should a learner do with an unfamiliar command word in homework?

Infer its likely task family from context, then verify the definition and examples in a reputable learner dictionary or subject glossary before answering.

Why do learners over-answer short commands?

They often equate longer answers with better answers. Teach the minimum response job first, then add detail only when the task requests or rewards it.

Why do learners under-answer evaluation tasks?

They may treat evaluative adjectives such as good or effective as conclusions without stating criteria or evidence. Use the criterion → evidence → judgement framework.

Can these verbs transfer across subjects?

Yes, at the level of response job. Explain still makes a relationship clear; compare still places items in relation; evaluate still uses criteria and evidence. The subject determines the content and conventions.

Continue through the eduKateSingapore Primary 6 advanced vocabulary collection

For the broad word bank, use the Top 100 Advanced Vocabulary Words for Primary 6. For evidence and reasoned claims, use the argument, evidence and critical-reading collection. For process explanation, use the explanatory-writing, processes and systems collection.

For natural word partnerships, use the collocations and precision-editing collection. For word formation, use the morphology and word-family collection. For meaning distinctions, use the synonyms, antonyms, word-clines and connotation collection. For checking unfamiliar language independently, use the dictionary, thesaurus and reference-skills collection.

The Vocabulary Article Directory provides the broader route through the ecosystem. This page remains the academic-verbs and task-language owner rather than another general vocabulary hub.

Final principle: answer the verb, not only the topic

A learner can know everything needed about a topic and still lose precision by answering the wrong task. Identify asks for the item. Describe asks what it is like. Explain asks how or why. Compare asks for relationships. Infer asks for a supported interpretation. Justify asks for reasons. Evaluate asks for judgement against criteria. Calculate asks for a numerical result. Verify asks for a check. Revise asks for purposeful change.

Alicia, Tricia and Kai Kai repeatedly meet the same lesson in different forms: before writing more, decide what the command is asking the answer to do. That one habit makes vocabulary operational. The command word becomes a route from knowledge to performance.