What is PSLE thinking vocabulary? Thinking vocabulary is the academic and reasoning language that helps Primary 6 learners understand what a question asks, organise evidence, explain relationships and communicate a justified answer. In PSLE vocabulary, words such as identify, infer, explain, compare, justify, evidence, consequence, perspective and relevant are not decorative language. They act as operating instructions for thought. Students searching for academic vocabulary, question command words, Primary 6 vocabulary and Grade 6 academic words need to understand the mental job behind each term.
A learner can know the subject content and still answer the wrong question if describe is treated like explain, identify like justify, or compare like two separate descriptions. Thinking vocabulary therefore connects language to reasoning. It tells the learner whether to name, connect causes, infer from evidence, judge against criteria, distinguish alternatives, summarise, paraphrase or support a claim. That connection is useful in English and across school learning.
This What is PSLE Vocabulary child article owns the conceptual system behind academic verbs, question language, evidence and reasoning. It extends the complete PSLE vocabulary apex, the word-knowledge model and the learning cycle while leaving the existing Top-100 academic-verbs/command-words page as the narrow list-and-practice owner. The central proposition is that a learner understands thinking vocabulary when the word reliably triggers the correct mental action.
50-Second Router
- Child knows content but gives incomplete answers: check the command word and response job.
- Comprehension answers repeat the passage: train explain, infer, paraphrase and justify.
- Writing lacks logic: strengthen cause, consequence, evidence and perspective vocabulary.
- Questions are misread: translate command words into actions before answering.
- Revision feels unfocused: use prioritise, diagnose, verify and evaluate as study vocabulary.
Command Words Are Cognitive Instructions
A command word does not merely label a question. It specifies the type of transformation the learner must perform on information. Identify asks for selection; explain asks for a relationship; infer asks for a conclusion from clues; justify asks for support; evaluate asks for judgement against criteria. When learners translate each word into a mental action, questions become more navigable.
Teach the response job before sentence frames. A frame can help, but memorised frames become brittle if the learner does not understand the reasoning underneath. The command word should tell the student what evidence to gather and how to shape the answer.
Evidence Vocabulary
Words such as evidence, support, relevant, fact, assumption and conclusion help learners distinguish information from reasoning. They make invisible thinking visible. A student who can say “this detail is relevant because it supports the inference” is easier to teach than one who says only “I think this is the answer”.
Relationship Vocabulary
Cause, effect, consequence, influence, contrast and comparison help learners organise relationships. These words matter in comprehension because passages encode relationships, and they matter in writing because clear ideas need structure. Vocabulary is therefore part of reasoning architecture, not just lexical decoration.
Thinking About Thinking
Academic vocabulary also supports self-correction. A learner can ask: What is my assumption? Is this evidence relevant? Have I explained or merely described? What alternative interpretation exists? Can I verify the meaning? These questions create a language for monitoring reasoning.
50 Thinking-Vocabulary Case Studies
1. identify: Turn the Word Into an Action
Thinking job. identify means to find or name the specific item required. Convert that meaning into a short mental instruction the learner can execute. The goal is to make the command operational: when the word appears, the learner should know what kind of work begins before any answer is written.
Boundary. Do not automatically add reasons unless the task asks for them. A useful phrase is identify the key detail. Ask the learner to compare identify with a nearby academic verb and state what would make the responses different. This prevents command words from collapsing into a general instruction to “write something about the topic”.
Action model. Name the exact person, feature or idea that satisfies the question. Give a tiny example and require the learner to demonstrate the operation in one or two sentences. Then remove the label and ask which academic verb best describes the thinking just performed. This two-way practice links word to action and action back to word.
Transfer. Move the same thinking job into another subject or context. An English inference, a Science conclusion and a Mathematics explanation differ in content but still rely on disciplined relationships between evidence and response. Transfer shows that academic vocabulary can organise learning across domains without making every subject identical.
2. state: Turn the Word Into an Action
Thinking job. state means to give information clearly and directly. Convert that meaning into a short mental instruction the learner can execute. The goal is to make the command operational: when the word appears, the learner should know what kind of work begins before any answer is written.
Boundary. A state task may need a concise answer rather than an extended explanation. A useful phrase is state the reason. Ask the learner to compare state with a nearby academic verb and state what would make the responses different. This prevents command words from collapsing into a general instruction to “write something about the topic”.
Action model. Give the requested fact or point without burying it. Give a tiny example and require the learner to demonstrate the operation in one or two sentences. Then remove the label and ask which academic verb best describes the thinking just performed. This two-way practice links word to action and action back to word.
Transfer. Move the same thinking job into another subject or context. An English inference, a Science conclusion and a Mathematics explanation differ in content but still rely on disciplined relationships between evidence and response. Transfer shows that academic vocabulary can organise learning across domains without making every subject identical.
3. describe: Turn the Word Into an Action
Thinking job. describe means to give relevant characteristics or details. Convert that meaning into a short mental instruction the learner can execute. The goal is to make the command operational: when the word appears, the learner should know what kind of work begins before any answer is written.
Boundary. Description tells what something is like; it does not automatically explain why. A useful phrase is describe the scene. Ask the learner to compare describe with a nearby academic verb and state what would make the responses different. This prevents command words from collapsing into a general instruction to “write something about the topic”.
Action model. Select details that make the object, event or process observable. Give a tiny example and require the learner to demonstrate the operation in one or two sentences. Then remove the label and ask which academic verb best describes the thinking just performed. This two-way practice links word to action and action back to word.
Transfer. Move the same thinking job into another subject or context. An English inference, a Science conclusion and a Mathematics explanation differ in content but still rely on disciplined relationships between evidence and response. Transfer shows that academic vocabulary can organise learning across domains without making every subject identical.
4. explain: Turn the Word Into an Action
Thinking job. explain means to make clear how or why something happens. Convert that meaning into a short mental instruction the learner can execute. The goal is to make the command operational: when the word appears, the learner should know what kind of work begins before any answer is written.
Boundary. An explanation needs relationships, not only a repeated fact. A useful phrase is explain why. Ask the learner to compare explain with a nearby academic verb and state what would make the responses different. This prevents command words from collapsing into a general instruction to “write something about the topic”.
Action model. Connect cause, process, evidence or reasoning to the answer. Give a tiny example and require the learner to demonstrate the operation in one or two sentences. Then remove the label and ask which academic verb best describes the thinking just performed. This two-way practice links word to action and action back to word.
Transfer. Move the same thinking job into another subject or context. An English inference, a Science conclusion and a Mathematics explanation differ in content but still rely on disciplined relationships between evidence and response. Transfer shows that academic vocabulary can organise learning across domains without making every subject identical.
5. infer: Turn the Word Into an Action
Thinking job. infer means to reach a conclusion from evidence not stated directly. Convert that meaning into a short mental instruction the learner can execute. The goal is to make the command operational: when the word appears, the learner should know what kind of work begins before any answer is written.
Boundary. Inference is not free guessing; the conclusion must be constrained by the text. A useful phrase is infer from the passage. Ask the learner to compare infer with a nearby academic verb and state what would make the responses different. This prevents command words from collapsing into a general instruction to “write something about the topic”.
Action model. Combine clues with reasonable background knowledge. Give a tiny example and require the learner to demonstrate the operation in one or two sentences. Then remove the label and ask which academic verb best describes the thinking just performed. This two-way practice links word to action and action back to word.
Transfer. Move the same thinking job into another subject or context. An English inference, a Science conclusion and a Mathematics explanation differ in content but still rely on disciplined relationships between evidence and response. Transfer shows that academic vocabulary can organise learning across domains without making every subject identical.
6. conclude: Turn the Word Into an Action
Thinking job. conclude means to reach an ending judgement from information. Convert that meaning into a short mental instruction the learner can execute. The goal is to make the command operational: when the word appears, the learner should know what kind of work begins before any answer is written.
Boundary. A conclusion should follow from evidence already considered. A useful phrase is conclude that. Ask the learner to compare conclude with a nearby academic verb and state what would make the responses different. This prevents command words from collapsing into a general instruction to “write something about the topic”.
Action model. State the judgement the evidence supports. Give a tiny example and require the learner to demonstrate the operation in one or two sentences. Then remove the label and ask which academic verb best describes the thinking just performed. This two-way practice links word to action and action back to word.
Transfer. Move the same thinking job into another subject or context. An English inference, a Science conclusion and a Mathematics explanation differ in content but still rely on disciplined relationships between evidence and response. Transfer shows that academic vocabulary can organise learning across domains without making every subject identical.
7. justify: Turn the Word Into an Action
Thinking job. justify means to support a choice or conclusion with reasons or evidence. Convert that meaning into a short mental instruction the learner can execute. The goal is to make the command operational: when the word appears, the learner should know what kind of work begins before any answer is written.
Boundary. Repeating the choice is not justification. A useful phrase is justify the answer. Ask the learner to compare justify with a nearby academic verb and state what would make the responses different. This prevents command words from collapsing into a general instruction to “write something about the topic”.
Action model. Show why the answer is reasonable using specific support. Give a tiny example and require the learner to demonstrate the operation in one or two sentences. Then remove the label and ask which academic verb best describes the thinking just performed. This two-way practice links word to action and action back to word.
Transfer. Move the same thinking job into another subject or context. An English inference, a Science conclusion and a Mathematics explanation differ in content but still rely on disciplined relationships between evidence and response. Transfer shows that academic vocabulary can organise learning across domains without making every subject identical.
8. support: Turn the Word Into an Action
Thinking job. support means to provide evidence or reasoning that strengthens a point. Convert that meaning into a short mental instruction the learner can execute. The goal is to make the command operational: when the word appears, the learner should know what kind of work begins before any answer is written.
Boundary. Support can be textual, logical or example-based. A useful phrase is support an inference. Ask the learner to compare support with a nearby academic verb and state what would make the responses different. This prevents command words from collapsing into a general instruction to “write something about the topic”.
Action model. Connect evidence explicitly to the claim. Give a tiny example and require the learner to demonstrate the operation in one or two sentences. Then remove the label and ask which academic verb best describes the thinking just performed. This two-way practice links word to action and action back to word.
Transfer. Move the same thinking job into another subject or context. An English inference, a Science conclusion and a Mathematics explanation differ in content but still rely on disciplined relationships between evidence and response. Transfer shows that academic vocabulary can organise learning across domains without making every subject identical.
9. evidence: Turn the Word Into an Action
Thinking job. evidence means to information that supports or challenges a conclusion. Convert that meaning into a short mental instruction the learner can execute. The goal is to make the command operational: when the word appears, the learner should know what kind of work begins before any answer is written.
Boundary. Evidence is not the same as an unsupported opinion. A useful phrase is supporting evidence. Ask the learner to compare evidence with a nearby academic verb and state what would make the responses different. This prevents command words from collapsing into a general instruction to “write something about the topic”.
Action model. Quote or paraphrase only what is relevant to the point. Give a tiny example and require the learner to demonstrate the operation in one or two sentences. Then remove the label and ask which academic verb best describes the thinking just performed. This two-way practice links word to action and action back to word.
Transfer. Move the same thinking job into another subject or context. An English inference, a Science conclusion and a Mathematics explanation differ in content but still rely on disciplined relationships between evidence and response. Transfer shows that academic vocabulary can organise learning across domains without making every subject identical.
10. reason: Turn the Word Into an Action
Thinking job. reason means to a cause, explanation or justification. Convert that meaning into a short mental instruction the learner can execute. The goal is to make the command operational: when the word appears, the learner should know what kind of work begins before any answer is written.
Boundary. A reason should answer why, not merely restate what happened. A useful phrase is give a reason. Ask the learner to compare reason with a nearby academic verb and state what would make the responses different. This prevents command words from collapsing into a general instruction to “write something about the topic”.
Action model. Connect the answer to a cause or rationale. Give a tiny example and require the learner to demonstrate the operation in one or two sentences. Then remove the label and ask which academic verb best describes the thinking just performed. This two-way practice links word to action and action back to word.
Transfer. Move the same thinking job into another subject or context. An English inference, a Science conclusion and a Mathematics explanation differ in content but still rely on disciplined relationships between evidence and response. Transfer shows that academic vocabulary can organise learning across domains without making every subject identical.
11. compare: Turn the Word Into an Action
Thinking job. compare means to examine items for meaningful similarities and, where required, differences. Convert that meaning into a short mental instruction the learner can execute. The goal is to make the command operational: when the word appears, the learner should know what kind of work begins before any answer is written.
Boundary. Comparison needs a common basis. A useful phrase is compare the two responses. Ask the learner to compare compare with a nearby academic verb and state what would make the responses different. This prevents command words from collapsing into a general instruction to “write something about the topic”.
Action model. Use the same criterion for both items. Give a tiny example and require the learner to demonstrate the operation in one or two sentences. Then remove the label and ask which academic verb best describes the thinking just performed. This two-way practice links word to action and action back to word.
Transfer. Move the same thinking job into another subject or context. An English inference, a Science conclusion and a Mathematics explanation differ in content but still rely on disciplined relationships between evidence and response. Transfer shows that academic vocabulary can organise learning across domains without making every subject identical.
12. contrast: Turn the Word Into an Action
Thinking job. contrast means to show meaningful differences. Convert that meaning into a short mental instruction the learner can execute. The goal is to make the command operational: when the word appears, the learner should know what kind of work begins before any answer is written.
Boundary. Contrast is not simply listing separate facts. A useful phrase is contrast the characters. Ask the learner to compare contrast with a nearby academic verb and state what would make the responses different. This prevents command words from collapsing into a general instruction to “write something about the topic”.
Action model. Make the difference explicit with a shared dimension. Give a tiny example and require the learner to demonstrate the operation in one or two sentences. Then remove the label and ask which academic verb best describes the thinking just performed. This two-way practice links word to action and action back to word.
Transfer. Move the same thinking job into another subject or context. An English inference, a Science conclusion and a Mathematics explanation differ in content but still rely on disciplined relationships between evidence and response. Transfer shows that academic vocabulary can organise learning across domains without making every subject identical.
13. distinguish: Turn the Word Into an Action
Thinking job. distinguish means to recognise or explain the difference between similar things. Convert that meaning into a short mental instruction the learner can execute. The goal is to make the command operational: when the word appears, the learner should know what kind of work begins before any answer is written.
Boundary. The task often requires a boundary, not two isolated definitions. A useful phrase is distinguish between. Ask the learner to compare distinguish with a nearby academic verb and state what would make the responses different. This prevents command words from collapsing into a general instruction to “write something about the topic”.
Action model. State the feature that separates the items. Give a tiny example and require the learner to demonstrate the operation in one or two sentences. Then remove the label and ask which academic verb best describes the thinking just performed. This two-way practice links word to action and action back to word.
Transfer. Move the same thinking job into another subject or context. An English inference, a Science conclusion and a Mathematics explanation differ in content but still rely on disciplined relationships between evidence and response. Transfer shows that academic vocabulary can organise learning across domains without making every subject identical.
14. classify: Turn the Word Into an Action
Thinking job. classify means to place items into groups using shared features. Convert that meaning into a short mental instruction the learner can execute. The goal is to make the command operational: when the word appears, the learner should know what kind of work begins before any answer is written.
Boundary. The grouping rule must be clear and consistent. A useful phrase is classify the examples. Ask the learner to compare classify with a nearby academic verb and state what would make the responses different. This prevents command words from collapsing into a general instruction to “write something about the topic”.
Action model. Name the criterion before assigning items. Give a tiny example and require the learner to demonstrate the operation in one or two sentences. Then remove the label and ask which academic verb best describes the thinking just performed. This two-way practice links word to action and action back to word.
Transfer. Move the same thinking job into another subject or context. An English inference, a Science conclusion and a Mathematics explanation differ in content but still rely on disciplined relationships between evidence and response. Transfer shows that academic vocabulary can organise learning across domains without making every subject identical.
15. categorise: Turn the Word Into an Action
Thinking job. categorise means to organise into meaningful categories. Convert that meaning into a short mental instruction the learner can execute. The goal is to make the command operational: when the word appears, the learner should know what kind of work begins before any answer is written.
Boundary. Categories should not overlap accidentally unless the task permits it. A useful phrase is categorise the vocabulary. Ask the learner to compare categorise with a nearby academic verb and state what would make the responses different. This prevents command words from collapsing into a general instruction to “write something about the topic”.
Action model. Use a defensible rule such as function, meaning or form. Give a tiny example and require the learner to demonstrate the operation in one or two sentences. Then remove the label and ask which academic verb best describes the thinking just performed. This two-way practice links word to action and action back to word.
Transfer. Move the same thinking job into another subject or context. An English inference, a Science conclusion and a Mathematics explanation differ in content but still rely on disciplined relationships between evidence and response. Transfer shows that academic vocabulary can organise learning across domains without making every subject identical.
16. sequence: Turn the Word Into an Action
Thinking job. sequence means to arrange events or steps in order. Convert that meaning into a short mental instruction the learner can execute. The goal is to make the command operational: when the word appears, the learner should know what kind of work begins before any answer is written.
Boundary. Sequence may be chronological, procedural or logical. A useful phrase is sequence the events. Ask the learner to compare sequence with a nearby academic verb and state what would make the responses different. This prevents command words from collapsing into a general instruction to “write something about the topic”.
Action model. Use time and cause clues to establish order. Give a tiny example and require the learner to demonstrate the operation in one or two sentences. Then remove the label and ask which academic verb best describes the thinking just performed. This two-way practice links word to action and action back to word.
Transfer. Move the same thinking job into another subject or context. An English inference, a Science conclusion and a Mathematics explanation differ in content but still rely on disciplined relationships between evidence and response. Transfer shows that academic vocabulary can organise learning across domains without making every subject identical.
17. summarise: Turn the Word Into an Action
Thinking job. summarise means to compress the main ideas without unnecessary detail. Convert that meaning into a short mental instruction the learner can execute. The goal is to make the command operational: when the word appears, the learner should know what kind of work begins before any answer is written.
Boundary. A summary preserves central meaning while reducing length. A useful phrase is summarise the passage. Ask the learner to compare summarise with a nearby academic verb and state what would make the responses different. This prevents command words from collapsing into a general instruction to “write something about the topic”.
Action model. Select essential ideas and omit examples unless they are central. Give a tiny example and require the learner to demonstrate the operation in one or two sentences. Then remove the label and ask which academic verb best describes the thinking just performed. This two-way practice links word to action and action back to word.
Transfer. Move the same thinking job into another subject or context. An English inference, a Science conclusion and a Mathematics explanation differ in content but still rely on disciplined relationships between evidence and response. Transfer shows that academic vocabulary can organise learning across domains without making every subject identical.
18. paraphrase: Turn the Word Into an Action
Thinking job. paraphrase means to express the same meaning in different words. Convert that meaning into a short mental instruction the learner can execute. The goal is to make the command operational: when the word appears, the learner should know what kind of work begins before any answer is written.
Boundary. A paraphrase changes wording without changing the idea. A useful phrase is paraphrase the sentence. Ask the learner to compare paraphrase with a nearby academic verb and state what would make the responses different. This prevents command words from collapsing into a general instruction to “write something about the topic”.
Action model. Preserve scope, tone and relationships. Give a tiny example and require the learner to demonstrate the operation in one or two sentences. Then remove the label and ask which academic verb best describes the thinking just performed. This two-way practice links word to action and action back to word.
Transfer. Move the same thinking job into another subject or context. An English inference, a Science conclusion and a Mathematics explanation differ in content but still rely on disciplined relationships between evidence and response. Transfer shows that academic vocabulary can organise learning across domains without making every subject identical.
19. interpret: Turn the Word Into an Action
Thinking job. interpret means to explain the meaning or significance of something. Convert that meaning into a short mental instruction the learner can execute. The goal is to make the command operational: when the word appears, the learner should know what kind of work begins before any answer is written.
Boundary. Interpretation must remain anchored to evidence. A useful phrase is interpret the phrase. Ask the learner to compare interpret with a nearby academic verb and state what would make the responses different. This prevents command words from collapsing into a general instruction to “write something about the topic”.
Action model. State what it means here, not every possible dictionary sense. Give a tiny example and require the learner to demonstrate the operation in one or two sentences. Then remove the label and ask which academic verb best describes the thinking just performed. This two-way practice links word to action and action back to word.
Transfer. Move the same thinking job into another subject or context. An English inference, a Science conclusion and a Mathematics explanation differ in content but still rely on disciplined relationships between evidence and response. Transfer shows that academic vocabulary can organise learning across domains without making every subject identical.
20. analyse: Turn the Word Into an Action
Thinking job. analyse means to examine parts and relationships closely. Convert that meaning into a short mental instruction the learner can execute. The goal is to make the command operational: when the word appears, the learner should know what kind of work begins before any answer is written.
Boundary. Analysis goes beyond description by showing how elements work together. A useful phrase is analyse the response. Ask the learner to compare analyse with a nearby academic verb and state what would make the responses different. This prevents command words from collapsing into a general instruction to “write something about the topic”.
Action model. Break the whole into relevant components and connect them. Give a tiny example and require the learner to demonstrate the operation in one or two sentences. Then remove the label and ask which academic verb best describes the thinking just performed. This two-way practice links word to action and action back to word.
Transfer. Move the same thinking job into another subject or context. An English inference, a Science conclusion and a Mathematics explanation differ in content but still rely on disciplined relationships between evidence and response. Transfer shows that academic vocabulary can organise learning across domains without making every subject identical.
21. evaluate: Turn the Word Into an Action
Thinking job. evaluate means to judge quality or effectiveness using criteria. Convert that meaning into a short mental instruction the learner can execute. The goal is to make the command operational: when the word appears, the learner should know what kind of work begins before any answer is written.
Boundary. Evaluation needs a standard and evidence. A useful phrase is evaluate the choice. Ask the learner to compare evaluate with a nearby academic verb and state what would make the responses different. This prevents command words from collapsing into a general instruction to “write something about the topic”.
Action model. State the criterion before judging how well it is met. Give a tiny example and require the learner to demonstrate the operation in one or two sentences. Then remove the label and ask which academic verb best describes the thinking just performed. This two-way practice links word to action and action back to word.
Transfer. Move the same thinking job into another subject or context. An English inference, a Science conclusion and a Mathematics explanation differ in content but still rely on disciplined relationships between evidence and response. Transfer shows that academic vocabulary can organise learning across domains without making every subject identical.
22. assess: Turn the Word Into an Action
Thinking job. assess means to make a reasoned judgement about value, quality or condition. Convert that meaning into a short mental instruction the learner can execute. The goal is to make the command operational: when the word appears, the learner should know what kind of work begins before any answer is written.
Boundary. Assessment should be evidence-based rather than impressionistic. A useful phrase is assess the evidence. Ask the learner to compare assess with a nearby academic verb and state what would make the responses different. This prevents command words from collapsing into a general instruction to “write something about the topic”.
Action model. Weigh strengths, weaknesses and relevance. Give a tiny example and require the learner to demonstrate the operation in one or two sentences. Then remove the label and ask which academic verb best describes the thinking just performed. This two-way practice links word to action and action back to word.
Transfer. Move the same thinking job into another subject or context. An English inference, a Science conclusion and a Mathematics explanation differ in content but still rely on disciplined relationships between evidence and response. Transfer shows that academic vocabulary can organise learning across domains without making every subject identical.
23. verify: Turn the Word Into an Action
Thinking job. verify means to check that information or an answer is accurate. Convert that meaning into a short mental instruction the learner can execute. The goal is to make the command operational: when the word appears, the learner should know what kind of work begins before any answer is written.
Boundary. Verification requires another source, method or consistency check. A useful phrase is verify the meaning. Ask the learner to compare verify with a nearby academic verb and state what would make the responses different. This prevents command words from collapsing into a general instruction to “write something about the topic”.
Action model. Return to context or a reliable reference. Give a tiny example and require the learner to demonstrate the operation in one or two sentences. Then remove the label and ask which academic verb best describes the thinking just performed. This two-way practice links word to action and action back to word.
Transfer. Move the same thinking job into another subject or context. An English inference, a Science conclusion and a Mathematics explanation differ in content but still rely on disciplined relationships between evidence and response. Transfer shows that academic vocabulary can organise learning across domains without making every subject identical.
24. predict: Turn the Word Into an Action
Thinking job. predict means to state what is likely to happen using evidence or patterns. Convert that meaning into a short mental instruction the learner can execute. The goal is to make the command operational: when the word appears, the learner should know what kind of work begins before any answer is written.
Boundary. Prediction is not certainty; it is a reasoned expectation. A useful phrase is predict what happens next. Ask the learner to compare predict with a nearby academic verb and state what would make the responses different. This prevents command words from collapsing into a general instruction to “write something about the topic”.
Action model. Use established clues rather than invention. Give a tiny example and require the learner to demonstrate the operation in one or two sentences. Then remove the label and ask which academic verb best describes the thinking just performed. This two-way practice links word to action and action back to word.
Transfer. Move the same thinking job into another subject or context. An English inference, a Science conclusion and a Mathematics explanation differ in content but still rely on disciplined relationships between evidence and response. Transfer shows that academic vocabulary can organise learning across domains without making every subject identical.
25. anticipate: Turn the Word Into an Action
Thinking job. anticipate means to expect and prepare for something before it happens. Convert that meaning into a short mental instruction the learner can execute. The goal is to make the command operational: when the word appears, the learner should know what kind of work begins before any answer is written.
Boundary. Anticipate includes forward-looking expectation and sometimes preparation. A useful phrase is anticipate a problem. Ask the learner to compare anticipate with a nearby academic verb and state what would make the responses different. This prevents command words from collapsing into a general instruction to “write something about the topic”.
Action model. Identify a likely future demand early enough to respond. Give a tiny example and require the learner to demonstrate the operation in one or two sentences. Then remove the label and ask which academic verb best describes the thinking just performed. This two-way practice links word to action and action back to word.
Transfer. Move the same thinking job into another subject or context. An English inference, a Science conclusion and a Mathematics explanation differ in content but still rely on disciplined relationships between evidence and response. Transfer shows that academic vocabulary can organise learning across domains without making every subject identical.
26. estimate: Turn the Word Into an Action
Thinking job. estimate means to make a reasonable approximate judgement. Convert that meaning into a short mental instruction the learner can execute. The goal is to make the command operational: when the word appears, the learner should know what kind of work begins before any answer is written.
Boundary. An estimate should use available information rather than random guessing. A useful phrase is estimate the amount. Ask the learner to compare estimate with a nearby academic verb and state what would make the responses different. This prevents command words from collapsing into a general instruction to “write something about the topic”.
Action model. Use known values, scale or context. Give a tiny example and require the learner to demonstrate the operation in one or two sentences. Then remove the label and ask which academic verb best describes the thinking just performed. This two-way practice links word to action and action back to word.
Transfer. Move the same thinking job into another subject or context. An English inference, a Science conclusion and a Mathematics explanation differ in content but still rely on disciplined relationships between evidence and response. Transfer shows that academic vocabulary can organise learning across domains without making every subject identical.
27. observe: Turn the Word Into an Action
Thinking job. observe means to notice carefully and record relevant features. Convert that meaning into a short mental instruction the learner can execute. The goal is to make the command operational: when the word appears, the learner should know what kind of work begins before any answer is written.
Boundary. Observation should separate what is seen from what is inferred. A useful phrase is observe a pattern. Ask the learner to compare observe with a nearby academic verb and state what would make the responses different. This prevents command words from collapsing into a general instruction to “write something about the topic”.
Action model. State the visible or audible evidence first. Give a tiny example and require the learner to demonstrate the operation in one or two sentences. Then remove the label and ask which academic verb best describes the thinking just performed. This two-way practice links word to action and action back to word.
Transfer. Move the same thinking job into another subject or context. An English inference, a Science conclusion and a Mathematics explanation differ in content but still rely on disciplined relationships between evidence and response. Transfer shows that academic vocabulary can organise learning across domains without making every subject identical.
28. examine: Turn the Word Into an Action
Thinking job. examine means to inspect closely for relevant information. Convert that meaning into a short mental instruction the learner can execute. The goal is to make the command operational: when the word appears, the learner should know what kind of work begins before any answer is written.
Boundary. Examination is more deliberate than a glance. A useful phrase is examine the sentence. Ask the learner to compare examine with a nearby academic verb and state what would make the responses different. This prevents command words from collapsing into a general instruction to “write something about the topic”.
Action model. Look for grammar, collocation and context constraints. Give a tiny example and require the learner to demonstrate the operation in one or two sentences. Then remove the label and ask which academic verb best describes the thinking just performed. This two-way practice links word to action and action back to word.
Transfer. Move the same thinking job into another subject or context. An English inference, a Science conclusion and a Mathematics explanation differ in content but still rely on disciplined relationships between evidence and response. Transfer shows that academic vocabulary can organise learning across domains without making every subject identical.
29. investigate: Turn the Word Into an Action
Thinking job. investigate means to inquire systematically to find evidence or explanation. Convert that meaning into a short mental instruction the learner can execute. The goal is to make the command operational: when the word appears, the learner should know what kind of work begins before any answer is written.
Boundary. Investigation requires a question, method and evidence. A useful phrase is investigate the cause. Ask the learner to compare investigate with a nearby academic verb and state what would make the responses different. This prevents command words from collapsing into a general instruction to “write something about the topic”.
Action model. Gather information before deciding. Give a tiny example and require the learner to demonstrate the operation in one or two sentences. Then remove the label and ask which academic verb best describes the thinking just performed. This two-way practice links word to action and action back to word.
Transfer. Move the same thinking job into another subject or context. An English inference, a Science conclusion and a Mathematics explanation differ in content but still rely on disciplined relationships between evidence and response. Transfer shows that academic vocabulary can organise learning across domains without making every subject identical.
30. demonstrate: Turn the Word Into an Action
Thinking job. demonstrate means to show clearly through evidence, example or performance. Convert that meaning into a short mental instruction the learner can execute. The goal is to make the command operational: when the word appears, the learner should know what kind of work begins before any answer is written.
Boundary. Demonstrate is stronger than merely mention. A useful phrase is demonstrate understanding. Ask the learner to compare demonstrate with a nearby academic verb and state what would make the responses different. This prevents command words from collapsing into a general instruction to “write something about the topic”.
Action model. Make the knowledge observable through use. Give a tiny example and require the learner to demonstrate the operation in one or two sentences. Then remove the label and ask which academic verb best describes the thinking just performed. This two-way practice links word to action and action back to word.
Transfer. Move the same thinking job into another subject or context. An English inference, a Science conclusion and a Mathematics explanation differ in content but still rely on disciplined relationships between evidence and response. Transfer shows that academic vocabulary can organise learning across domains without making every subject identical.
31. illustrate: Turn the Word Into an Action
Thinking job. illustrate means to make an idea clearer with an example or representation. Convert that meaning into a short mental instruction the learner can execute. The goal is to make the command operational: when the word appears, the learner should know what kind of work begins before any answer is written.
Boundary. Illustration supports explanation but does not replace it. A useful phrase is illustrate the point. Ask the learner to compare illustrate with a nearby academic verb and state what would make the responses different. This prevents command words from collapsing into a general instruction to “write something about the topic”.
Action model. Choose an example that directly shows the principle. Give a tiny example and require the learner to demonstrate the operation in one or two sentences. Then remove the label and ask which academic verb best describes the thinking just performed. This two-way practice links word to action and action back to word.
Transfer. Move the same thinking job into another subject or context. An English inference, a Science conclusion and a Mathematics explanation differ in content but still rely on disciplined relationships between evidence and response. Transfer shows that academic vocabulary can organise learning across domains without making every subject identical.
32. exemplify: Turn the Word Into an Action
Thinking job. exemplify means to serve as or provide a clear example of something. Convert that meaning into a short mental instruction the learner can execute. The goal is to make the command operational: when the word appears, the learner should know what kind of work begins before any answer is written.
Boundary. The example must display the defining feature. A useful phrase is exemplify responsibility. Ask the learner to compare exemplify with a nearby academic verb and state what would make the responses different. This prevents command words from collapsing into a general instruction to “write something about the topic”.
Action model. Show behaviour that makes the concept visible. Give a tiny example and require the learner to demonstrate the operation in one or two sentences. Then remove the label and ask which academic verb best describes the thinking just performed. This two-way practice links word to action and action back to word.
Transfer. Move the same thinking job into another subject or context. An English inference, a Science conclusion and a Mathematics explanation differ in content but still rely on disciplined relationships between evidence and response. Transfer shows that academic vocabulary can organise learning across domains without making every subject identical.
33. define: Turn the Word Into an Action
Thinking job. define means to state the essential meaning of a term. Convert that meaning into a short mental instruction the learner can execute. The goal is to make the command operational: when the word appears, the learner should know what kind of work begins before any answer is written.
Boundary. A useful definition sets boundaries without becoming circular. A useful phrase is define the word. Ask the learner to compare define with a nearby academic verb and state what would make the responses different. This prevents command words from collapsing into a general instruction to “write something about the topic”.
Action model. Use clear language and distinguish nearby concepts. Give a tiny example and require the learner to demonstrate the operation in one or two sentences. Then remove the label and ask which academic verb best describes the thinking just performed. This two-way practice links word to action and action back to word.
Transfer. Move the same thinking job into another subject or context. An English inference, a Science conclusion and a Mathematics explanation differ in content but still rely on disciplined relationships between evidence and response. Transfer shows that academic vocabulary can organise learning across domains without making every subject identical.
34. clarify: Turn the Word Into an Action
Thinking job. clarify means to make something less ambiguous or confusing. Convert that meaning into a short mental instruction the learner can execute. The goal is to make the command operational: when the word appears, the learner should know what kind of work begins before any answer is written.
Boundary. Clarification targets the source of misunderstanding. A useful phrase is clarify the meaning. Ask the learner to compare clarify with a nearby academic verb and state what would make the responses different. This prevents command words from collapsing into a general instruction to “write something about the topic”.
Action model. Restate more precisely or add the missing distinction. Give a tiny example and require the learner to demonstrate the operation in one or two sentences. Then remove the label and ask which academic verb best describes the thinking just performed. This two-way practice links word to action and action back to word.
Transfer. Move the same thinking job into another subject or context. An English inference, a Science conclusion and a Mathematics explanation differ in content but still rely on disciplined relationships between evidence and response. Transfer shows that academic vocabulary can organise learning across domains without making every subject identical.
35. elaborate: Turn the Word Into an Action
Thinking job. elaborate means to add relevant detail to develop an idea. Convert that meaning into a short mental instruction the learner can execute. The goal is to make the command operational: when the word appears, the learner should know what kind of work begins before any answer is written.
Boundary. Elaboration should deepen rather than repeat. A useful phrase is elaborate on the reason. Ask the learner to compare elaborate with a nearby academic verb and state what would make the responses different. This prevents command words from collapsing into a general instruction to “write something about the topic”.
Action model. Add explanation, evidence or an example. Give a tiny example and require the learner to demonstrate the operation in one or two sentences. Then remove the label and ask which academic verb best describes the thinking just performed. This two-way practice links word to action and action back to word.
Transfer. Move the same thinking job into another subject or context. An English inference, a Science conclusion and a Mathematics explanation differ in content but still rely on disciplined relationships between evidence and response. Transfer shows that academic vocabulary can organise learning across domains without making every subject identical.
36. revise: Turn the Word Into an Action
Thinking job. revise means to improve content, ideas, organisation or language. Convert that meaning into a short mental instruction the learner can execute. The goal is to make the command operational: when the word appears, the learner should know what kind of work begins before any answer is written.
Boundary. Revision is more than correcting spelling. A useful phrase is revise the paragraph. Ask the learner to compare revise with a nearby academic verb and state what would make the responses different. This prevents command words from collapsing into a general instruction to “write something about the topic”.
Action model. Change what the writing communicates or how effectively it does so. Give a tiny example and require the learner to demonstrate the operation in one or two sentences. Then remove the label and ask which academic verb best describes the thinking just performed. This two-way practice links word to action and action back to word.
Transfer. Move the same thinking job into another subject or context. An English inference, a Science conclusion and a Mathematics explanation differ in content but still rely on disciplined relationships between evidence and response. Transfer shows that academic vocabulary can organise learning across domains without making every subject identical.
37. edit: Turn the Word Into an Action
Thinking job. edit means to correct or refine language and presentation. Convert that meaning into a short mental instruction the learner can execute. The goal is to make the command operational: when the word appears, the learner should know what kind of work begins before any answer is written.
Boundary. Editing often focuses on accuracy, clarity and conventions after larger ideas are settled. A useful phrase is edit the sentence. Ask the learner to compare edit with a nearby academic verb and state what would make the responses different. This prevents command words from collapsing into a general instruction to “write something about the topic”.
Action model. Check grammar, vocabulary, punctuation and unnecessary wording. Give a tiny example and require the learner to demonstrate the operation in one or two sentences. Then remove the label and ask which academic verb best describes the thinking just performed. This two-way practice links word to action and action back to word.
Transfer. Move the same thinking job into another subject or context. An English inference, a Science conclusion and a Mathematics explanation differ in content but still rely on disciplined relationships between evidence and response. Transfer shows that academic vocabulary can organise learning across domains without making every subject identical.
38. organise: Turn the Word Into an Action
Thinking job. organise means to arrange information into a useful structure. Convert that meaning into a short mental instruction the learner can execute. The goal is to make the command operational: when the word appears, the learner should know what kind of work begins before any answer is written.
Boundary. Organisation should reveal relationships rather than create a decorative layout. A useful phrase is organise the ideas. Ask the learner to compare organise with a nearby academic verb and state what would make the responses different. This prevents command words from collapsing into a general instruction to “write something about the topic”.
Action model. Group and order points according to purpose. Give a tiny example and require the learner to demonstrate the operation in one or two sentences. Then remove the label and ask which academic verb best describes the thinking just performed. This two-way practice links word to action and action back to word.
Transfer. Move the same thinking job into another subject or context. An English inference, a Science conclusion and a Mathematics explanation differ in content but still rely on disciplined relationships between evidence and response. Transfer shows that academic vocabulary can organise learning across domains without making every subject identical.
39. prioritise: Turn the Word Into an Action
Thinking job. prioritise means to decide what is most important or urgent. Convert that meaning into a short mental instruction the learner can execute. The goal is to make the command operational: when the word appears, the learner should know what kind of work begins before any answer is written.
Boundary. Priority is a ranking based on criteria, not personal preference alone. A useful phrase is prioritise revision. Ask the learner to compare prioritise with a nearby academic verb and state what would make the responses different. This prevents command words from collapsing into a general instruction to “write something about the topic”.
Action model. Spend limited time on the highest-value gaps. Give a tiny example and require the learner to demonstrate the operation in one or two sentences. Then remove the label and ask which academic verb best describes the thinking just performed. This two-way practice links word to action and action back to word.
Transfer. Move the same thinking job into another subject or context. An English inference, a Science conclusion and a Mathematics explanation differ in content but still rely on disciplined relationships between evidence and response. Transfer shows that academic vocabulary can organise learning across domains without making every subject identical.
40. relevant: Turn the Word Into an Action
Thinking job. relevant means to closely connected to the current question or purpose. Convert that meaning into a short mental instruction the learner can execute. The goal is to make the command operational: when the word appears, the learner should know what kind of work begins before any answer is written.
Boundary. Interesting information can still be irrelevant. A useful phrase is relevant evidence. Ask the learner to compare relevant with a nearby academic verb and state what would make the responses different. This prevents command words from collapsing into a general instruction to “write something about the topic”.
Action model. Keep only details that help answer the task. Give a tiny example and require the learner to demonstrate the operation in one or two sentences. Then remove the label and ask which academic verb best describes the thinking just performed. This two-way practice links word to action and action back to word.
Transfer. Move the same thinking job into another subject or context. An English inference, a Science conclusion and a Mathematics explanation differ in content but still rely on disciplined relationships between evidence and response. Transfer shows that academic vocabulary can organise learning across domains without making every subject identical.
41. significant: Turn the Word Into an Action
Thinking job. significant means to important or large enough to matter. Convert that meaning into a short mental instruction the learner can execute. The goal is to make the command operational: when the word appears, the learner should know what kind of work begins before any answer is written.
Boundary. Significant does not automatically mean enormous. A useful phrase is significant difference. Ask the learner to compare significant with a nearby academic verb and state what would make the responses different. This prevents command words from collapsing into a general instruction to “write something about the topic”.
Action model. Explain why the difference changes interpretation or outcome. Give a tiny example and require the learner to demonstrate the operation in one or two sentences. Then remove the label and ask which academic verb best describes the thinking just performed. This two-way practice links word to action and action back to word.
Transfer. Move the same thinking job into another subject or context. An English inference, a Science conclusion and a Mathematics explanation differ in content but still rely on disciplined relationships between evidence and response. Transfer shows that academic vocabulary can organise learning across domains without making every subject identical.
42. cause: Turn the Word Into an Action
Thinking job. cause means to something that produces or contributes to an event. Convert that meaning into a short mental instruction the learner can execute. The goal is to make the command operational: when the word appears, the learner should know what kind of work begins before any answer is written.
Boundary. Cause should be distinguished from mere sequence or correlation. A useful phrase is cause of the problem. Ask the learner to compare cause with a nearby academic verb and state what would make the responses different. This prevents command words from collapsing into a general instruction to “write something about the topic”.
Action model. Show the mechanism or relationship where possible. Give a tiny example and require the learner to demonstrate the operation in one or two sentences. Then remove the label and ask which academic verb best describes the thinking just performed. This two-way practice links word to action and action back to word.
Transfer. Move the same thinking job into another subject or context. An English inference, a Science conclusion and a Mathematics explanation differ in content but still rely on disciplined relationships between evidence and response. Transfer shows that academic vocabulary can organise learning across domains without making every subject identical.
43. effect: Turn the Word Into an Action
Thinking job. effect means to a result produced by a cause or condition. Convert that meaning into a short mental instruction the learner can execute. The goal is to make the command operational: when the word appears, the learner should know what kind of work begins before any answer is written.
Boundary. Effect answers what changed as a result. A useful phrase is effect on the reader. Ask the learner to compare effect with a nearby academic verb and state what would make the responses different. This prevents command words from collapsing into a general instruction to “write something about the topic”.
Action model. Connect the feature to its consequence. Give a tiny example and require the learner to demonstrate the operation in one or two sentences. Then remove the label and ask which academic verb best describes the thinking just performed. This two-way practice links word to action and action back to word.
Transfer. Move the same thinking job into another subject or context. An English inference, a Science conclusion and a Mathematics explanation differ in content but still rely on disciplined relationships between evidence and response. Transfer shows that academic vocabulary can organise learning across domains without making every subject identical.
44. consequence: Turn the Word Into an Action
Thinking job. consequence means to a result that follows from an action or condition. Convert that meaning into a short mental instruction the learner can execute. The goal is to make the command operational: when the word appears, the learner should know what kind of work begins before any answer is written.
Boundary. A consequence can be intended or unintended, positive or negative. A useful phrase is serious consequence. Ask the learner to compare consequence with a nearby academic verb and state what would make the responses different. This prevents command words from collapsing into a general instruction to “write something about the topic”.
Action model. Trace what follows from the decision. Give a tiny example and require the learner to demonstrate the operation in one or two sentences. Then remove the label and ask which academic verb best describes the thinking just performed. This two-way practice links word to action and action back to word.
Transfer. Move the same thinking job into another subject or context. An English inference, a Science conclusion and a Mathematics explanation differ in content but still rely on disciplined relationships between evidence and response. Transfer shows that academic vocabulary can organise learning across domains without making every subject identical.
45. influence: Turn the Word Into an Action
Thinking job. influence means to affect development, behaviour or judgement. Convert that meaning into a short mental instruction the learner can execute. The goal is to make the command operational: when the word appears, the learner should know what kind of work begins before any answer is written.
Boundary. Influence does not necessarily mean complete control. A useful phrase is influence the outcome. Ask the learner to compare influence with a nearby academic verb and state what would make the responses different. This prevents command words from collapsing into a general instruction to “write something about the topic”.
Action model. State how one factor shifts another. Give a tiny example and require the learner to demonstrate the operation in one or two sentences. Then remove the label and ask which academic verb best describes the thinking just performed. This two-way practice links word to action and action back to word.
Transfer. Move the same thinking job into another subject or context. An English inference, a Science conclusion and a Mathematics explanation differ in content but still rely on disciplined relationships between evidence and response. Transfer shows that academic vocabulary can organise learning across domains without making every subject identical.
46. perspective: Turn the Word Into an Action
Thinking job. perspective means to a way of viewing an issue shaped by position or experience. Convert that meaning into a short mental instruction the learner can execute. The goal is to make the command operational: when the word appears, the learner should know what kind of work begins before any answer is written.
Boundary. Perspective is broader than a single opinion. A useful phrase is different perspective. Ask the learner to compare perspective with a nearby academic verb and state what would make the responses different. This prevents command words from collapsing into a general instruction to “write something about the topic”.
Action model. Explain how viewpoint changes interpretation. Give a tiny example and require the learner to demonstrate the operation in one or two sentences. Then remove the label and ask which academic verb best describes the thinking just performed. This two-way practice links word to action and action back to word.
Transfer. Move the same thinking job into another subject or context. An English inference, a Science conclusion and a Mathematics explanation differ in content but still rely on disciplined relationships between evidence and response. Transfer shows that academic vocabulary can organise learning across domains without making every subject identical.
47. alternative: Turn the Word Into an Action
Thinking job. alternative means to another possible option, explanation or course of action. Convert that meaning into a short mental instruction the learner can execute. The goal is to make the command operational: when the word appears, the learner should know what kind of work begins before any answer is written.
Boundary. An alternative must genuinely differ from the current option. A useful phrase is alternative explanation. Ask the learner to compare alternative with a nearby academic verb and state what would make the responses different. This prevents command words from collapsing into a general instruction to “write something about the topic”.
Action model. Generate another plausible route and compare it. Give a tiny example and require the learner to demonstrate the operation in one or two sentences. Then remove the label and ask which academic verb best describes the thinking just performed. This two-way practice links word to action and action back to word.
Transfer. Move the same thinking job into another subject or context. An English inference, a Science conclusion and a Mathematics explanation differ in content but still rely on disciplined relationships between evidence and response. Transfer shows that academic vocabulary can organise learning across domains without making every subject identical.
48. assumption: Turn the Word Into an Action
Thinking job. assumption means to something accepted as true without being fully established. Convert that meaning into a short mental instruction the learner can execute. The goal is to make the command operational: when the word appears, the learner should know what kind of work begins before any answer is written.
Boundary. Assumptions should be identified before they silently drive reasoning. A useful phrase is hidden assumption. Ask the learner to compare assumption with a nearby academic verb and state what would make the responses different. This prevents command words from collapsing into a general instruction to “write something about the topic”.
Action model. Ask what the argument is taking for granted. Give a tiny example and require the learner to demonstrate the operation in one or two sentences. Then remove the label and ask which academic verb best describes the thinking just performed. This two-way practice links word to action and action back to word.
Transfer. Move the same thinking job into another subject or context. An English inference, a Science conclusion and a Mathematics explanation differ in content but still rely on disciplined relationships between evidence and response. Transfer shows that academic vocabulary can organise learning across domains without making every subject identical.
49. fact: Turn the Word Into an Action
Thinking job. fact means to a claim that can be checked against evidence. Convert that meaning into a short mental instruction the learner can execute. The goal is to make the command operational: when the word appears, the learner should know what kind of work begins before any answer is written.
Boundary. Facts differ from evaluations and preferences. A useful phrase is relevant fact. Ask the learner to compare fact with a nearby academic verb and state what would make the responses different. This prevents command words from collapsing into a general instruction to “write something about the topic”.
Action model. Verify before using it as support. Give a tiny example and require the learner to demonstrate the operation in one or two sentences. Then remove the label and ask which academic verb best describes the thinking just performed. This two-way practice links word to action and action back to word.
Transfer. Move the same thinking job into another subject or context. An English inference, a Science conclusion and a Mathematics explanation differ in content but still rely on disciplined relationships between evidence and response. Transfer shows that academic vocabulary can organise learning across domains without making every subject identical.
50. opinion: Turn the Word Into an Action
Thinking job. opinion means to a judgement, view or belief. Convert that meaning into a short mental instruction the learner can execute. The goal is to make the command operational: when the word appears, the learner should know what kind of work begins before any answer is written.
Boundary. Opinions can be reasoned or unreasoned; they are not automatically false. A useful phrase is personal opinion. Ask the learner to compare opinion with a nearby academic verb and state what would make the responses different. This prevents command words from collapsing into a general instruction to “write something about the topic”.
Action model. Separate preference from verifiable evidence. Give a tiny example and require the learner to demonstrate the operation in one or two sentences. Then remove the label and ask which academic verb best describes the thinking just performed. This two-way practice links word to action and action back to word.
Transfer. Move the same thinking job into another subject or context. An English inference, a Science conclusion and a Mathematics explanation differ in content but still rely on disciplined relationships between evidence and response. Transfer shows that academic vocabulary can organise learning across domains without making every subject identical.
40 Thinking-Vocabulary Clinics
Clinic 1: identify versus explain
Use identify versus explain as the single reasoning contrast for the lesson. Begin with a short question and ask the learner to translate the command into an action before answering. If the learner cannot state the action, teaching the content answer first will hide the language problem rather than solve it.
Model two responses: one that performs the command and one that answers a nearby but different command. Ask the learner to identify which response fits and why. This comparison makes answer scope visible. The difference may lie in adding evidence, showing a relationship, making a judgement or reducing unnecessary detail.
Then remove the model. Give a new topic and require the learner to plan the response using three labels: task, evidence, action. The learner should know what is being asked, what information is available and what transformation must be performed. This routine reduces the chance that a familiar topic triggers an automatic but unsuitable answer.
Finish with delayed transfer. Use the same thinking vocabulary in another context or subject and ask whether the response job changes. Record errors as command misunderstanding, evidence selection, reasoning relationship or expression. The label matters because each failure requires a different repair rather than more generic practice.
Clinic 2: describe versus explain
Use describe versus explain as the single reasoning contrast for the lesson. Begin with a short question and ask the learner to translate the command into an action before answering. If the learner cannot state the action, teaching the content answer first will hide the language problem rather than solve it.
Model two responses: one that performs the command and one that answers a nearby but different command. Ask the learner to identify which response fits and why. This comparison makes answer scope visible. The difference may lie in adding evidence, showing a relationship, making a judgement or reducing unnecessary detail.
Then remove the model. Give a new topic and require the learner to plan the response using three labels: task, evidence, action. The learner should know what is being asked, what information is available and what transformation must be performed. This routine reduces the chance that a familiar topic triggers an automatic but unsuitable answer.
Finish with delayed transfer. Use the same thinking vocabulary in another context or subject and ask whether the response job changes. Record errors as command misunderstanding, evidence selection, reasoning relationship or expression. The label matters because each failure requires a different repair rather than more generic practice.
Clinic 3: infer versus guess
Use infer versus guess as the single reasoning contrast for the lesson. Begin with a short question and ask the learner to translate the command into an action before answering. If the learner cannot state the action, teaching the content answer first will hide the language problem rather than solve it.
Model two responses: one that performs the command and one that answers a nearby but different command. Ask the learner to identify which response fits and why. This comparison makes answer scope visible. The difference may lie in adding evidence, showing a relationship, making a judgement or reducing unnecessary detail.
Then remove the model. Give a new topic and require the learner to plan the response using three labels: task, evidence, action. The learner should know what is being asked, what information is available and what transformation must be performed. This routine reduces the chance that a familiar topic triggers an automatic but unsuitable answer.
Finish with delayed transfer. Use the same thinking vocabulary in another context or subject and ask whether the response job changes. Record errors as command misunderstanding, evidence selection, reasoning relationship or expression. The label matters because each failure requires a different repair rather than more generic practice.
Clinic 4: justify versus repeat
Use justify versus repeat as the single reasoning contrast for the lesson. Begin with a short question and ask the learner to translate the command into an action before answering. If the learner cannot state the action, teaching the content answer first will hide the language problem rather than solve it.
Model two responses: one that performs the command and one that answers a nearby but different command. Ask the learner to identify which response fits and why. This comparison makes answer scope visible. The difference may lie in adding evidence, showing a relationship, making a judgement or reducing unnecessary detail.
Then remove the model. Give a new topic and require the learner to plan the response using three labels: task, evidence, action. The learner should know what is being asked, what information is available and what transformation must be performed. This routine reduces the chance that a familiar topic triggers an automatic but unsuitable answer.
Finish with delayed transfer. Use the same thinking vocabulary in another context or subject and ask whether the response job changes. Record errors as command misunderstanding, evidence selection, reasoning relationship or expression. The label matters because each failure requires a different repair rather than more generic practice.
Clinic 5: compare versus contrast
Use compare versus contrast as the single reasoning contrast for the lesson. Begin with a short question and ask the learner to translate the command into an action before answering. If the learner cannot state the action, teaching the content answer first will hide the language problem rather than solve it.
Model two responses: one that performs the command and one that answers a nearby but different command. Ask the learner to identify which response fits and why. This comparison makes answer scope visible. The difference may lie in adding evidence, showing a relationship, making a judgement or reducing unnecessary detail.
Then remove the model. Give a new topic and require the learner to plan the response using three labels: task, evidence, action. The learner should know what is being asked, what information is available and what transformation must be performed. This routine reduces the chance that a familiar topic triggers an automatic but unsuitable answer.
Finish with delayed transfer. Use the same thinking vocabulary in another context or subject and ask whether the response job changes. Record errors as command misunderstanding, evidence selection, reasoning relationship or expression. The label matters because each failure requires a different repair rather than more generic practice.
Clinic 6: summarise versus paraphrase
Use summarise versus paraphrase as the single reasoning contrast for the lesson. Begin with a short question and ask the learner to translate the command into an action before answering. If the learner cannot state the action, teaching the content answer first will hide the language problem rather than solve it.
Model two responses: one that performs the command and one that answers a nearby but different command. Ask the learner to identify which response fits and why. This comparison makes answer scope visible. The difference may lie in adding evidence, showing a relationship, making a judgement or reducing unnecessary detail.
Then remove the model. Give a new topic and require the learner to plan the response using three labels: task, evidence, action. The learner should know what is being asked, what information is available and what transformation must be performed. This routine reduces the chance that a familiar topic triggers an automatic but unsuitable answer.
Finish with delayed transfer. Use the same thinking vocabulary in another context or subject and ask whether the response job changes. Record errors as command misunderstanding, evidence selection, reasoning relationship or expression. The label matters because each failure requires a different repair rather than more generic practice.
Clinic 7: analyse versus describe
Use analyse versus describe as the single reasoning contrast for the lesson. Begin with a short question and ask the learner to translate the command into an action before answering. If the learner cannot state the action, teaching the content answer first will hide the language problem rather than solve it.
Model two responses: one that performs the command and one that answers a nearby but different command. Ask the learner to identify which response fits and why. This comparison makes answer scope visible. The difference may lie in adding evidence, showing a relationship, making a judgement or reducing unnecessary detail.
Then remove the model. Give a new topic and require the learner to plan the response using three labels: task, evidence, action. The learner should know what is being asked, what information is available and what transformation must be performed. This routine reduces the chance that a familiar topic triggers an automatic but unsuitable answer.
Finish with delayed transfer. Use the same thinking vocabulary in another context or subject and ask whether the response job changes. Record errors as command misunderstanding, evidence selection, reasoning relationship or expression. The label matters because each failure requires a different repair rather than more generic practice.
Clinic 8: evaluate versus state
Use evaluate versus state as the single reasoning contrast for the lesson. Begin with a short question and ask the learner to translate the command into an action before answering. If the learner cannot state the action, teaching the content answer first will hide the language problem rather than solve it.
Model two responses: one that performs the command and one that answers a nearby but different command. Ask the learner to identify which response fits and why. This comparison makes answer scope visible. The difference may lie in adding evidence, showing a relationship, making a judgement or reducing unnecessary detail.
Then remove the model. Give a new topic and require the learner to plan the response using three labels: task, evidence, action. The learner should know what is being asked, what information is available and what transformation must be performed. This routine reduces the chance that a familiar topic triggers an automatic but unsuitable answer.
Finish with delayed transfer. Use the same thinking vocabulary in another context or subject and ask whether the response job changes. Record errors as command misunderstanding, evidence selection, reasoning relationship or expression. The label matters because each failure requires a different repair rather than more generic practice.
Clinic 9: fact versus opinion
Use fact versus opinion as the single reasoning contrast for the lesson. Begin with a short question and ask the learner to translate the command into an action before answering. If the learner cannot state the action, teaching the content answer first will hide the language problem rather than solve it.
Model two responses: one that performs the command and one that answers a nearby but different command. Ask the learner to identify which response fits and why. This comparison makes answer scope visible. The difference may lie in adding evidence, showing a relationship, making a judgement or reducing unnecessary detail.
Then remove the model. Give a new topic and require the learner to plan the response using three labels: task, evidence, action. The learner should know what is being asked, what information is available and what transformation must be performed. This routine reduces the chance that a familiar topic triggers an automatic but unsuitable answer.
Finish with delayed transfer. Use the same thinking vocabulary in another context or subject and ask whether the response job changes. Record errors as command misunderstanding, evidence selection, reasoning relationship or expression. The label matters because each failure requires a different repair rather than more generic practice.
Clinic 10: evidence versus claim
Use evidence versus claim as the single reasoning contrast for the lesson. Begin with a short question and ask the learner to translate the command into an action before answering. If the learner cannot state the action, teaching the content answer first will hide the language problem rather than solve it.
Model two responses: one that performs the command and one that answers a nearby but different command. Ask the learner to identify which response fits and why. This comparison makes answer scope visible. The difference may lie in adding evidence, showing a relationship, making a judgement or reducing unnecessary detail.
Then remove the model. Give a new topic and require the learner to plan the response using three labels: task, evidence, action. The learner should know what is being asked, what information is available and what transformation must be performed. This routine reduces the chance that a familiar topic triggers an automatic but unsuitable answer.
Finish with delayed transfer. Use the same thinking vocabulary in another context or subject and ask whether the response job changes. Record errors as command misunderstanding, evidence selection, reasoning relationship or expression. The label matters because each failure requires a different repair rather than more generic practice.
Clinic 11: cause versus sequence
Use cause versus sequence as the single reasoning contrast for the lesson. Begin with a short question and ask the learner to translate the command into an action before answering. If the learner cannot state the action, teaching the content answer first will hide the language problem rather than solve it.
Model two responses: one that performs the command and one that answers a nearby but different command. Ask the learner to identify which response fits and why. This comparison makes answer scope visible. The difference may lie in adding evidence, showing a relationship, making a judgement or reducing unnecessary detail.
Then remove the model. Give a new topic and require the learner to plan the response using three labels: task, evidence, action. The learner should know what is being asked, what information is available and what transformation must be performed. This routine reduces the chance that a familiar topic triggers an automatic but unsuitable answer.
Finish with delayed transfer. Use the same thinking vocabulary in another context or subject and ask whether the response job changes. Record errors as command misunderstanding, evidence selection, reasoning relationship or expression. The label matters because each failure requires a different repair rather than more generic practice.
Clinic 12: effect versus consequence
Use effect versus consequence as the single reasoning contrast for the lesson. Begin with a short question and ask the learner to translate the command into an action before answering. If the learner cannot state the action, teaching the content answer first will hide the language problem rather than solve it.
Model two responses: one that performs the command and one that answers a nearby but different command. Ask the learner to identify which response fits and why. This comparison makes answer scope visible. The difference may lie in adding evidence, showing a relationship, making a judgement or reducing unnecessary detail.
Then remove the model. Give a new topic and require the learner to plan the response using three labels: task, evidence, action. The learner should know what is being asked, what information is available and what transformation must be performed. This routine reduces the chance that a familiar topic triggers an automatic but unsuitable answer.
Finish with delayed transfer. Use the same thinking vocabulary in another context or subject and ask whether the response job changes. Record errors as command misunderstanding, evidence selection, reasoning relationship or expression. The label matters because each failure requires a different repair rather than more generic practice.
Clinic 13: assumption versus fact
Use assumption versus fact as the single reasoning contrast for the lesson. Begin with a short question and ask the learner to translate the command into an action before answering. If the learner cannot state the action, teaching the content answer first will hide the language problem rather than solve it.
Model two responses: one that performs the command and one that answers a nearby but different command. Ask the learner to identify which response fits and why. This comparison makes answer scope visible. The difference may lie in adding evidence, showing a relationship, making a judgement or reducing unnecessary detail.
Then remove the model. Give a new topic and require the learner to plan the response using three labels: task, evidence, action. The learner should know what is being asked, what information is available and what transformation must be performed. This routine reduces the chance that a familiar topic triggers an automatic but unsuitable answer.
Finish with delayed transfer. Use the same thinking vocabulary in another context or subject and ask whether the response job changes. Record errors as command misunderstanding, evidence selection, reasoning relationship or expression. The label matters because each failure requires a different repair rather than more generic practice.
Clinic 14: relevant versus interesting
Use relevant versus interesting as the single reasoning contrast for the lesson. Begin with a short question and ask the learner to translate the command into an action before answering. If the learner cannot state the action, teaching the content answer first will hide the language problem rather than solve it.
Model two responses: one that performs the command and one that answers a nearby but different command. Ask the learner to identify which response fits and why. This comparison makes answer scope visible. The difference may lie in adding evidence, showing a relationship, making a judgement or reducing unnecessary detail.
Then remove the model. Give a new topic and require the learner to plan the response using three labels: task, evidence, action. The learner should know what is being asked, what information is available and what transformation must be performed. This routine reduces the chance that a familiar topic triggers an automatic but unsuitable answer.
Finish with delayed transfer. Use the same thinking vocabulary in another context or subject and ask whether the response job changes. Record errors as command misunderstanding, evidence selection, reasoning relationship or expression. The label matters because each failure requires a different repair rather than more generic practice.
Clinic 15: significant versus large
Use significant versus large as the single reasoning contrast for the lesson. Begin with a short question and ask the learner to translate the command into an action before answering. If the learner cannot state the action, teaching the content answer first will hide the language problem rather than solve it.
Model two responses: one that performs the command and one that answers a nearby but different command. Ask the learner to identify which response fits and why. This comparison makes answer scope visible. The difference may lie in adding evidence, showing a relationship, making a judgement or reducing unnecessary detail.
Then remove the model. Give a new topic and require the learner to plan the response using three labels: task, evidence, action. The learner should know what is being asked, what information is available and what transformation must be performed. This routine reduces the chance that a familiar topic triggers an automatic but unsuitable answer.
Finish with delayed transfer. Use the same thinking vocabulary in another context or subject and ask whether the response job changes. Record errors as command misunderstanding, evidence selection, reasoning relationship or expression. The label matters because each failure requires a different repair rather than more generic practice.
Clinic 16: perspective versus opinion
Use perspective versus opinion as the single reasoning contrast for the lesson. Begin with a short question and ask the learner to translate the command into an action before answering. If the learner cannot state the action, teaching the content answer first will hide the language problem rather than solve it.
Model two responses: one that performs the command and one that answers a nearby but different command. Ask the learner to identify which response fits and why. This comparison makes answer scope visible. The difference may lie in adding evidence, showing a relationship, making a judgement or reducing unnecessary detail.
Then remove the model. Give a new topic and require the learner to plan the response using three labels: task, evidence, action. The learner should know what is being asked, what information is available and what transformation must be performed. This routine reduces the chance that a familiar topic triggers an automatic but unsuitable answer.
Finish with delayed transfer. Use the same thinking vocabulary in another context or subject and ask whether the response job changes. Record errors as command misunderstanding, evidence selection, reasoning relationship or expression. The label matters because each failure requires a different repair rather than more generic practice.
Clinic 17: alternative explanations
Use alternative explanations as the single reasoning contrast for the lesson. Begin with a short question and ask the learner to translate the command into an action before answering. If the learner cannot state the action, teaching the content answer first will hide the language problem rather than solve it.
Model two responses: one that performs the command and one that answers a nearby but different command. Ask the learner to identify which response fits and why. This comparison makes answer scope visible. The difference may lie in adding evidence, showing a relationship, making a judgement or reducing unnecessary detail.
Then remove the model. Give a new topic and require the learner to plan the response using three labels: task, evidence, action. The learner should know what is being asked, what information is available and what transformation must be performed. This routine reduces the chance that a familiar topic triggers an automatic but unsuitable answer.
Finish with delayed transfer. Use the same thinking vocabulary in another context or subject and ask whether the response job changes. Record errors as command misunderstanding, evidence selection, reasoning relationship or expression. The label matters because each failure requires a different repair rather than more generic practice.
Clinic 18: prediction from evidence
Use prediction from evidence as the single reasoning contrast for the lesson. Begin with a short question and ask the learner to translate the command into an action before answering. If the learner cannot state the action, teaching the content answer first will hide the language problem rather than solve it.
Model two responses: one that performs the command and one that answers a nearby but different command. Ask the learner to identify which response fits and why. This comparison makes answer scope visible. The difference may lie in adding evidence, showing a relationship, making a judgement or reducing unnecessary detail.
Then remove the model. Give a new topic and require the learner to plan the response using three labels: task, evidence, action. The learner should know what is being asked, what information is available and what transformation must be performed. This routine reduces the chance that a familiar topic triggers an automatic but unsuitable answer.
Finish with delayed transfer. Use the same thinking vocabulary in another context or subject and ask whether the response job changes. Record errors as command misunderstanding, evidence selection, reasoning relationship or expression. The label matters because each failure requires a different repair rather than more generic practice.
Clinic 19: verification
Use verification as the single reasoning contrast for the lesson. Begin with a short question and ask the learner to translate the command into an action before answering. If the learner cannot state the action, teaching the content answer first will hide the language problem rather than solve it.
Model two responses: one that performs the command and one that answers a nearby but different command. Ask the learner to identify which response fits and why. This comparison makes answer scope visible. The difference may lie in adding evidence, showing a relationship, making a judgement or reducing unnecessary detail.
Then remove the model. Give a new topic and require the learner to plan the response using three labels: task, evidence, action. The learner should know what is being asked, what information is available and what transformation must be performed. This routine reduces the chance that a familiar topic triggers an automatic but unsuitable answer.
Finish with delayed transfer. Use the same thinking vocabulary in another context or subject and ask whether the response job changes. Record errors as command misunderstanding, evidence selection, reasoning relationship or expression. The label matters because each failure requires a different repair rather than more generic practice.
Clinic 20: clarification
Use clarification as the single reasoning contrast for the lesson. Begin with a short question and ask the learner to translate the command into an action before answering. If the learner cannot state the action, teaching the content answer first will hide the language problem rather than solve it.
Model two responses: one that performs the command and one that answers a nearby but different command. Ask the learner to identify which response fits and why. This comparison makes answer scope visible. The difference may lie in adding evidence, showing a relationship, making a judgement or reducing unnecessary detail.
Then remove the model. Give a new topic and require the learner to plan the response using three labels: task, evidence, action. The learner should know what is being asked, what information is available and what transformation must be performed. This routine reduces the chance that a familiar topic triggers an automatic but unsuitable answer.
Finish with delayed transfer. Use the same thinking vocabulary in another context or subject and ask whether the response job changes. Record errors as command misunderstanding, evidence selection, reasoning relationship or expression. The label matters because each failure requires a different repair rather than more generic practice.
Clinic 21: elaboration
Use elaboration as the single reasoning contrast for the lesson. Begin with a short question and ask the learner to translate the command into an action before answering. If the learner cannot state the action, teaching the content answer first will hide the language problem rather than solve it.
Model two responses: one that performs the command and one that answers a nearby but different command. Ask the learner to identify which response fits and why. This comparison makes answer scope visible. The difference may lie in adding evidence, showing a relationship, making a judgement or reducing unnecessary detail.
Then remove the model. Give a new topic and require the learner to plan the response using three labels: task, evidence, action. The learner should know what is being asked, what information is available and what transformation must be performed. This routine reduces the chance that a familiar topic triggers an automatic but unsuitable answer.
Finish with delayed transfer. Use the same thinking vocabulary in another context or subject and ask whether the response job changes. Record errors as command misunderstanding, evidence selection, reasoning relationship or expression. The label matters because each failure requires a different repair rather than more generic practice.
Clinic 22: classification
Use classification as the single reasoning contrast for the lesson. Begin with a short question and ask the learner to translate the command into an action before answering. If the learner cannot state the action, teaching the content answer first will hide the language problem rather than solve it.
Model two responses: one that performs the command and one that answers a nearby but different command. Ask the learner to identify which response fits and why. This comparison makes answer scope visible. The difference may lie in adding evidence, showing a relationship, making a judgement or reducing unnecessary detail.
Then remove the model. Give a new topic and require the learner to plan the response using three labels: task, evidence, action. The learner should know what is being asked, what information is available and what transformation must be performed. This routine reduces the chance that a familiar topic triggers an automatic but unsuitable answer.
Finish with delayed transfer. Use the same thinking vocabulary in another context or subject and ask whether the response job changes. Record errors as command misunderstanding, evidence selection, reasoning relationship or expression. The label matters because each failure requires a different repair rather than more generic practice.
Clinic 23: sequencing
Use sequencing as the single reasoning contrast for the lesson. Begin with a short question and ask the learner to translate the command into an action before answering. If the learner cannot state the action, teaching the content answer first will hide the language problem rather than solve it.
Model two responses: one that performs the command and one that answers a nearby but different command. Ask the learner to identify which response fits and why. This comparison makes answer scope visible. The difference may lie in adding evidence, showing a relationship, making a judgement or reducing unnecessary detail.
Then remove the model. Give a new topic and require the learner to plan the response using three labels: task, evidence, action. The learner should know what is being asked, what information is available and what transformation must be performed. This routine reduces the chance that a familiar topic triggers an automatic but unsuitable answer.
Finish with delayed transfer. Use the same thinking vocabulary in another context or subject and ask whether the response job changes. Record errors as command misunderstanding, evidence selection, reasoning relationship or expression. The label matters because each failure requires a different repair rather than more generic practice.
Clinic 24: prioritisation
Use prioritisation as the single reasoning contrast for the lesson. Begin with a short question and ask the learner to translate the command into an action before answering. If the learner cannot state the action, teaching the content answer first will hide the language problem rather than solve it.
Model two responses: one that performs the command and one that answers a nearby but different command. Ask the learner to identify which response fits and why. This comparison makes answer scope visible. The difference may lie in adding evidence, showing a relationship, making a judgement or reducing unnecessary detail.
Then remove the model. Give a new topic and require the learner to plan the response using three labels: task, evidence, action. The learner should know what is being asked, what information is available and what transformation must be performed. This routine reduces the chance that a familiar topic triggers an automatic but unsuitable answer.
Finish with delayed transfer. Use the same thinking vocabulary in another context or subject and ask whether the response job changes. Record errors as command misunderstanding, evidence selection, reasoning relationship or expression. The label matters because each failure requires a different repair rather than more generic practice.
Clinic 25: observation versus inference
Use observation versus inference as the single reasoning contrast for the lesson. Begin with a short question and ask the learner to translate the command into an action before answering. If the learner cannot state the action, teaching the content answer first will hide the language problem rather than solve it.
Model two responses: one that performs the command and one that answers a nearby but different command. Ask the learner to identify which response fits and why. This comparison makes answer scope visible. The difference may lie in adding evidence, showing a relationship, making a judgement or reducing unnecessary detail.
Then remove the model. Give a new topic and require the learner to plan the response using three labels: task, evidence, action. The learner should know what is being asked, what information is available and what transformation must be performed. This routine reduces the chance that a familiar topic triggers an automatic but unsuitable answer.
Finish with delayed transfer. Use the same thinking vocabulary in another context or subject and ask whether the response job changes. Record errors as command misunderstanding, evidence selection, reasoning relationship or expression. The label matters because each failure requires a different repair rather than more generic practice.
Clinic 26: interpretation
Use interpretation as the single reasoning contrast for the lesson. Begin with a short question and ask the learner to translate the command into an action before answering. If the learner cannot state the action, teaching the content answer first will hide the language problem rather than solve it.
Model two responses: one that performs the command and one that answers a nearby but different command. Ask the learner to identify which response fits and why. This comparison makes answer scope visible. The difference may lie in adding evidence, showing a relationship, making a judgement or reducing unnecessary detail.
Then remove the model. Give a new topic and require the learner to plan the response using three labels: task, evidence, action. The learner should know what is being asked, what information is available and what transformation must be performed. This routine reduces the chance that a familiar topic triggers an automatic but unsuitable answer.
Finish with delayed transfer. Use the same thinking vocabulary in another context or subject and ask whether the response job changes. Record errors as command misunderstanding, evidence selection, reasoning relationship or expression. The label matters because each failure requires a different repair rather than more generic practice.
Clinic 27: textual support
Use textual support as the single reasoning contrast for the lesson. Begin with a short question and ask the learner to translate the command into an action before answering. If the learner cannot state the action, teaching the content answer first will hide the language problem rather than solve it.
Model two responses: one that performs the command and one that answers a nearby but different command. Ask the learner to identify which response fits and why. This comparison makes answer scope visible. The difference may lie in adding evidence, showing a relationship, making a judgement or reducing unnecessary detail.
Then remove the model. Give a new topic and require the learner to plan the response using three labels: task, evidence, action. The learner should know what is being asked, what information is available and what transformation must be performed. This routine reduces the chance that a familiar topic triggers an automatic but unsuitable answer.
Finish with delayed transfer. Use the same thinking vocabulary in another context or subject and ask whether the response job changes. Record errors as command misunderstanding, evidence selection, reasoning relationship or expression. The label matters because each failure requires a different repair rather than more generic practice.
Clinic 28: question deconstruction
Use question deconstruction as the single reasoning contrast for the lesson. Begin with a short question and ask the learner to translate the command into an action before answering. If the learner cannot state the action, teaching the content answer first will hide the language problem rather than solve it.
Model two responses: one that performs the command and one that answers a nearby but different command. Ask the learner to identify which response fits and why. This comparison makes answer scope visible. The difference may lie in adding evidence, showing a relationship, making a judgement or reducing unnecessary detail.
Then remove the model. Give a new topic and require the learner to plan the response using three labels: task, evidence, action. The learner should know what is being asked, what information is available and what transformation must be performed. This routine reduces the chance that a familiar topic triggers an automatic but unsuitable answer.
Finish with delayed transfer. Use the same thinking vocabulary in another context or subject and ask whether the response job changes. Record errors as command misunderstanding, evidence selection, reasoning relationship or expression. The label matters because each failure requires a different repair rather than more generic practice.
Clinic 29: answer scope
Use answer scope as the single reasoning contrast for the lesson. Begin with a short question and ask the learner to translate the command into an action before answering. If the learner cannot state the action, teaching the content answer first will hide the language problem rather than solve it.
Model two responses: one that performs the command and one that answers a nearby but different command. Ask the learner to identify which response fits and why. This comparison makes answer scope visible. The difference may lie in adding evidence, showing a relationship, making a judgement or reducing unnecessary detail.
Then remove the model. Give a new topic and require the learner to plan the response using three labels: task, evidence, action. The learner should know what is being asked, what information is available and what transformation must be performed. This routine reduces the chance that a familiar topic triggers an automatic but unsuitable answer.
Finish with delayed transfer. Use the same thinking vocabulary in another context or subject and ask whether the response job changes. Record errors as command misunderstanding, evidence selection, reasoning relationship or expression. The label matters because each failure requires a different repair rather than more generic practice.
Clinic 30: complete sentences
Use complete sentences as the single reasoning contrast for the lesson. Begin with a short question and ask the learner to translate the command into an action before answering. If the learner cannot state the action, teaching the content answer first will hide the language problem rather than solve it.
Model two responses: one that performs the command and one that answers a nearby but different command. Ask the learner to identify which response fits and why. This comparison makes answer scope visible. The difference may lie in adding evidence, showing a relationship, making a judgement or reducing unnecessary detail.
Then remove the model. Give a new topic and require the learner to plan the response using three labels: task, evidence, action. The learner should know what is being asked, what information is available and what transformation must be performed. This routine reduces the chance that a familiar topic triggers an automatic but unsuitable answer.
Finish with delayed transfer. Use the same thinking vocabulary in another context or subject and ask whether the response job changes. Record errors as command misunderstanding, evidence selection, reasoning relationship or expression. The label matters because each failure requires a different repair rather than more generic practice.
Clinic 31: oral explanation
Use oral explanation as the single reasoning contrast for the lesson. Begin with a short question and ask the learner to translate the command into an action before answering. If the learner cannot state the action, teaching the content answer first will hide the language problem rather than solve it.
Model two responses: one that performs the command and one that answers a nearby but different command. Ask the learner to identify which response fits and why. This comparison makes answer scope visible. The difference may lie in adding evidence, showing a relationship, making a judgement or reducing unnecessary detail.
Then remove the model. Give a new topic and require the learner to plan the response using three labels: task, evidence, action. The learner should know what is being asked, what information is available and what transformation must be performed. This routine reduces the chance that a familiar topic triggers an automatic but unsuitable answer.
Finish with delayed transfer. Use the same thinking vocabulary in another context or subject and ask whether the response job changes. Record errors as command misunderstanding, evidence selection, reasoning relationship or expression. The label matters because each failure requires a different repair rather than more generic practice.
Clinic 32: writing coherence
Use writing coherence as the single reasoning contrast for the lesson. Begin with a short question and ask the learner to translate the command into an action before answering. If the learner cannot state the action, teaching the content answer first will hide the language problem rather than solve it.
Model two responses: one that performs the command and one that answers a nearby but different command. Ask the learner to identify which response fits and why. This comparison makes answer scope visible. The difference may lie in adding evidence, showing a relationship, making a judgement or reducing unnecessary detail.
Then remove the model. Give a new topic and require the learner to plan the response using three labels: task, evidence, action. The learner should know what is being asked, what information is available and what transformation must be performed. This routine reduces the chance that a familiar topic triggers an automatic but unsuitable answer.
Finish with delayed transfer. Use the same thinking vocabulary in another context or subject and ask whether the response job changes. Record errors as command misunderstanding, evidence selection, reasoning relationship or expression. The label matters because each failure requires a different repair rather than more generic practice.
Clinic 33: situational-writing purpose
Use situational-writing purpose as the single reasoning contrast for the lesson. Begin with a short question and ask the learner to translate the command into an action before answering. If the learner cannot state the action, teaching the content answer first will hide the language problem rather than solve it.
Model two responses: one that performs the command and one that answers a nearby but different command. Ask the learner to identify which response fits and why. This comparison makes answer scope visible. The difference may lie in adding evidence, showing a relationship, making a judgement or reducing unnecessary detail.
Then remove the model. Give a new topic and require the learner to plan the response using three labels: task, evidence, action. The learner should know what is being asked, what information is available and what transformation must be performed. This routine reduces the chance that a familiar topic triggers an automatic but unsuitable answer.
Finish with delayed transfer. Use the same thinking vocabulary in another context or subject and ask whether the response job changes. Record errors as command misunderstanding, evidence selection, reasoning relationship or expression. The label matters because each failure requires a different repair rather than more generic practice.
Clinic 34: comprehension inference
Use comprehension inference as the single reasoning contrast for the lesson. Begin with a short question and ask the learner to translate the command into an action before answering. If the learner cannot state the action, teaching the content answer first will hide the language problem rather than solve it.
Model two responses: one that performs the command and one that answers a nearby but different command. Ask the learner to identify which response fits and why. This comparison makes answer scope visible. The difference may lie in adding evidence, showing a relationship, making a judgement or reducing unnecessary detail.
Then remove the model. Give a new topic and require the learner to plan the response using three labels: task, evidence, action. The learner should know what is being asked, what information is available and what transformation must be performed. This routine reduces the chance that a familiar topic triggers an automatic but unsuitable answer.
Finish with delayed transfer. Use the same thinking vocabulary in another context or subject and ask whether the response job changes. Record errors as command misunderstanding, evidence selection, reasoning relationship or expression. The label matters because each failure requires a different repair rather than more generic practice.
Clinic 35: editing command language
Use editing command language as the single reasoning contrast for the lesson. Begin with a short question and ask the learner to translate the command into an action before answering. If the learner cannot state the action, teaching the content answer first will hide the language problem rather than solve it.
Model two responses: one that performs the command and one that answers a nearby but different command. Ask the learner to identify which response fits and why. This comparison makes answer scope visible. The difference may lie in adding evidence, showing a relationship, making a judgement or reducing unnecessary detail.
Then remove the model. Give a new topic and require the learner to plan the response using three labels: task, evidence, action. The learner should know what is being asked, what information is available and what transformation must be performed. This routine reduces the chance that a familiar topic triggers an automatic but unsuitable answer.
Finish with delayed transfer. Use the same thinking vocabulary in another context or subject and ask whether the response job changes. Record errors as command misunderstanding, evidence selection, reasoning relationship or expression. The label matters because each failure requires a different repair rather than more generic practice.
Clinic 36: revision language
Use revision language as the single reasoning contrast for the lesson. Begin with a short question and ask the learner to translate the command into an action before answering. If the learner cannot state the action, teaching the content answer first will hide the language problem rather than solve it.
Model two responses: one that performs the command and one that answers a nearby but different command. Ask the learner to identify which response fits and why. This comparison makes answer scope visible. The difference may lie in adding evidence, showing a relationship, making a judgement or reducing unnecessary detail.
Then remove the model. Give a new topic and require the learner to plan the response using three labels: task, evidence, action. The learner should know what is being asked, what information is available and what transformation must be performed. This routine reduces the chance that a familiar topic triggers an automatic but unsuitable answer.
Finish with delayed transfer. Use the same thinking vocabulary in another context or subject and ask whether the response job changes. Record errors as command misunderstanding, evidence selection, reasoning relationship or expression. The label matters because each failure requires a different repair rather than more generic practice.
Clinic 37: error analysis
Use error analysis as the single reasoning contrast for the lesson. Begin with a short question and ask the learner to translate the command into an action before answering. If the learner cannot state the action, teaching the content answer first will hide the language problem rather than solve it.
Model two responses: one that performs the command and one that answers a nearby but different command. Ask the learner to identify which response fits and why. This comparison makes answer scope visible. The difference may lie in adding evidence, showing a relationship, making a judgement or reducing unnecessary detail.
Then remove the model. Give a new topic and require the learner to plan the response using three labels: task, evidence, action. The learner should know what is being asked, what information is available and what transformation must be performed. This routine reduces the chance that a familiar topic triggers an automatic but unsuitable answer.
Finish with delayed transfer. Use the same thinking vocabulary in another context or subject and ask whether the response job changes. Record errors as command misunderstanding, evidence selection, reasoning relationship or expression. The label matters because each failure requires a different repair rather than more generic practice.
Clinic 38: self-questioning
Use self-questioning as the single reasoning contrast for the lesson. Begin with a short question and ask the learner to translate the command into an action before answering. If the learner cannot state the action, teaching the content answer first will hide the language problem rather than solve it.
Model two responses: one that performs the command and one that answers a nearby but different command. Ask the learner to identify which response fits and why. This comparison makes answer scope visible. The difference may lie in adding evidence, showing a relationship, making a judgement or reducing unnecessary detail.
Then remove the model. Give a new topic and require the learner to plan the response using three labels: task, evidence, action. The learner should know what is being asked, what information is available and what transformation must be performed. This routine reduces the chance that a familiar topic triggers an automatic but unsuitable answer.
Finish with delayed transfer. Use the same thinking vocabulary in another context or subject and ask whether the response job changes. Record errors as command misunderstanding, evidence selection, reasoning relationship or expression. The label matters because each failure requires a different repair rather than more generic practice.
Clinic 39: timed response
Use timed response as the single reasoning contrast for the lesson. Begin with a short question and ask the learner to translate the command into an action before answering. If the learner cannot state the action, teaching the content answer first will hide the language problem rather than solve it.
Model two responses: one that performs the command and one that answers a nearby but different command. Ask the learner to identify which response fits and why. This comparison makes answer scope visible. The difference may lie in adding evidence, showing a relationship, making a judgement or reducing unnecessary detail.
Then remove the model. Give a new topic and require the learner to plan the response using three labels: task, evidence, action. The learner should know what is being asked, what information is available and what transformation must be performed. This routine reduces the chance that a familiar topic triggers an automatic but unsuitable answer.
Finish with delayed transfer. Use the same thinking vocabulary in another context or subject and ask whether the response job changes. Record errors as command misunderstanding, evidence selection, reasoning relationship or expression. The label matters because each failure requires a different repair rather than more generic practice.
Clinic 40: mixed transfer
Use mixed transfer as the single reasoning contrast for the lesson. Begin with a short question and ask the learner to translate the command into an action before answering. If the learner cannot state the action, teaching the content answer first will hide the language problem rather than solve it.
Model two responses: one that performs the command and one that answers a nearby but different command. Ask the learner to identify which response fits and why. This comparison makes answer scope visible. The difference may lie in adding evidence, showing a relationship, making a judgement or reducing unnecessary detail.
Then remove the model. Give a new topic and require the learner to plan the response using three labels: task, evidence, action. The learner should know what is being asked, what information is available and what transformation must be performed. This routine reduces the chance that a familiar topic triggers an automatic but unsuitable answer.
Finish with delayed transfer. Use the same thinking vocabulary in another context or subject and ask whether the response job changes. Record errors as command misunderstanding, evidence selection, reasoning relationship or expression. The label matters because each failure requires a different repair rather than more generic practice.
A Five-Step Question-Language Routine
- Circle or identify the command word.
- Translate it into a plain-language action.
- Identify the scope: what exactly must be addressed?
- Select evidence or information relevant to that action.
- Check that the final response performs the command rather than a nearby task.
Evidence-to-Answer Audit
Before accepting an answer, run a short audit. First, name the command word and the exact response job. Second, point to the evidence or information the answer depends on. Third, identify the reasoning bridge between evidence and conclusion. Fourth, remove any sentence that does not help perform the command. This prevents length from being mistaken for completeness and helps learners see why some short answers are strong while longer answers may still miss the task.
The audit is also a revision tool. When an answer loses marks, do not record only “wrong comprehension”. Ask whether the breakdown came from misunderstood command language, irrelevant evidence, a missing reasoning link, inaccurate vocabulary or incomplete expression. The diagnosis determines the repair. Over time, thinking vocabulary becomes a set of controls the learner can use independently before, during and after answering.
Cross-Subject Transfer: Same Thinking Word, Different Evidence
Thinking vocabulary becomes especially powerful when learners see that the mental action can travel while the evidence changes. To compare two characters, the evidence may be actions and dialogue; to compare two scientific observations, the evidence may be measured features; to compare two mathematical methods, the evidence may be steps, efficiency or correctness. The command survives, but each subject supplies different material and standards.
Teach transfer explicitly. Give the same academic verb in English, Science and Mathematics examples and ask what stays constant. The stable element is the reasoning job: identify, explain, justify, compare, infer or evaluate. The changing element is what counts as appropriate evidence. This helps students avoid two opposite errors—treating every subject as identical, or failing to recognise that familiar reasoning language already gives them a useful starting structure.
A Thinking-Vocabulary Diagnostic
- Match academic verbs to response jobs.
- Distinguish five pairs such as describe/explain and infer/guess.
- Read short questions and state the required action without answering them.
- Choose relevant evidence for a claim.
- Identify assumptions and facts in a short argument.
- Write one comparison and one contrast using the same material.
- Justify an inference with evidence.
- Repeat selected tasks after delay in a new topic.
PSLE Alignment
The current PSLE English format includes language-use and comprehension demands in Paper 2, writing in Paper 1, oral communication and listening. Thinking vocabulary supports how learners read instructions, interpret passages, build answers and communicate reasoning across these tasks. See SEAB’s PSLE formats examined in 2026. This article does not claim that every academic verb listed here appears as an official command word; it teaches a broader reasoning vocabulary useful for Primary 6 English and school learning.
eduKate Routes
- What is PSLE Vocabulary | Complete Primary 6 Vocabulary System
- What is PSLE Vocabulary | Word Knowledge
- PSLE Vocabulary Learning Cycle
- Vocabulary Learning Hub
Thinking Vocabulary Makes Reasoning Executable
Academic words are powerful because they compress reasoning instructions. Infer means use clues to reach an unstated conclusion. Justify means support a choice. Evaluate means judge using criteria. Relevant means connected to the task. When these words trigger the correct actions, students become more precise readers, writers and thinkers.
The goal is not to decorate answers with academic vocabulary. It is to let vocabulary organise thought. A Primary 6 learner who can translate question language into evidence-based action has a stronger PSLE vocabulary system because words are doing cognitive work, not merely sitting in memory.
