Top 100 Vocabulary Words for Children | Connecting Fence Age 7

CHAPTER 1 OF 19

1. Start with the purpose

Back to contents

Did you know? The same observed result can leave more than one explanation possible. A toy bridge fell. Perhaps a vehicle struck its side, perhaps a support moved, or perhaps something happened outside the observer’s view. The useful first sentence describes what was seen. A reason can follow when it is known; an uncertain explanation should stay visibly uncertain.

Choose two attempts with a familiar construction or another familiar example with the same communication job. Ask: Which detail was observed, and which explanation remains a guess? Let the learner show, say, draw or dictate the relevant relationship.

The word index offers one hundred selected models. Choose the word that serves the current purpose, then use its meaning question to inspect the example. Word meanings and short checking prompts recur across ages; the selected models and worked tasks carry the age-specific focus.

Contents · Next chapter

CHAPTER 2 OF 19

2. How to use the observation and explanation tasks

Back to contents

Make separate records for an observed result and a possible explanation. A child can point, draw or dictate either. If the cause was not seen, keep the explanatory sentence tentative.

Select one example that actually concerns the feature named in the claim. A width comparison is not supported by a colour difference. Keep the statement limited to the arrangement examined instead of turning one attempt into a universal rule.

Contents · Previous chapter · Next chapter

CHAPTER 3 OF 19

3. Observe the contribution and the support

Back to contents

For this guide, use the question: Which detail was observed, and which explanation remains a guess? Record the actual response, whether spoken, drawn, demonstrated or recorded with help. A supported answer and an independent written account are different observations.

Keep the materials from two attempts with a familiar construction available when discussing the response. Note which reference, example or condition needed clarification. Do not turn one successful exchange into a claim of general mastery.

Contents · Previous chapter · Next chapter

CHAPTER 4 OF 19

4. Linking information, reasons, conditions and time

Back to contents

Word	Meaning in these models
and	adds related information; addition alone does not establish a cause
but	marks a contrast between the connected statements
or	offers alternatives; the situation determines whether one or several options are possible
because	introduces a reason or cause that should be known or explicitly qualified
so	links a situation with a result or chosen response
if	introduces a condition or possibility rather than asserting that it has occurred
when	connects an event with its time or occasion, or asks about time
while	links overlapping events or contrasts information, according to the sentence
before	places an event earlier than another reference event
after	places an event later than another reference event

1. and

Selected model. The account names the action and the result, while the picture supplies the setting.

Meaning check. What information is added? Does the sentence claim a cause, or only connect details?

Another context. We compared two designs and recorded what happened.

Set up two cardboard roadways for a toy vehicle, with an adult handling any cutting. Record what the child does and what happens: “We placed the bus on the roadway, and its wheels stayed on the surface.” The two parts identify an action and an observed result. Ask a listener to locate each part in the model or a quick drawing of the attempt.

And joins the information without proving why the result occurred. The bus may have stayed on because of several features of this particular arrangement. Compare a second record that adds a detail about the room’s colour. That detail may be true but have little bearing on the roadway question. Let the child choose which information helps another person understand the attempt. An adult can record the account while preserving the difference between a relevant observation and an explanation that still needs checking.

2. but

Selected model. Our first idea was reasonable, but the toy did not fit when we tried it.

Meaning check. Which two facts or views are being contrasted? Can both remain true?

Another context. I understand the reason, but I prefer the other ending.

The child predicts that a wide toy bus will fit a bridge opening because the roadway looks large. Try it gently with suitable materials. If the sides obstruct it, record both the plausible starting idea and the actual outcome: “The roadway looked wide, but the bus did not fit through the opening.” The contrast gives the learner a reason to inspect which width mattered.

Avoid replacing the account with “The whole bridge was bad.” Its surface may support the bus while its side opening is too narrow. Let the child show the limiting feature and propose a change. If the second attempt succeeds, keep the first result in the notes. A useful explanation can acknowledge an expectation that did not hold without treating the prediction as something shameful to erase. The adult’s expanded wording should preserve the specific observation rather than exaggerate it into total failure.

3. or

Selected model. We can explain the route in words or demonstrate it with the same familiar model.

Meaning check. What alternatives are available? Is a choice between them actually necessary?

Another context. Should this detail introduce the paragraph or follow the example?

A listener cannot follow the route described in the child’s account. Offer two ways to clarify it: explain the landmarks in words or demonstrate the journey with the same model. Try whichever form the child chooses and ask the listener to show where the vehicle travelled. The purpose is recoverable information, not a test of whether speech is the only acceptable response.

The child may combine the methods. A short phrase while moving the vehicle can be clearer than either alone, so ordinary or need not forbid both. Keep the original arrangement available when checking the account. If the model has changed, explain that limitation rather than presenting the demonstration as a faithful replay automatically. For a later written record, an adult can add a diagram or transcribe the chosen description, with the support stated accurately when reporting how the account was produced.

4. because

Selected model. We revised the claim because our example showed only one successful attempt, not every possible case.

Meaning check. Which reason is stated? What would make it known rather than guessed?

Another context. The character turned back because the gate was closed.

Write a first claim saying that every toy bus can cross this kind of bridge after seeing one bus cross once. Compare the claim with the actual record. Revise it to concern the bus and arrangement tried. “We narrowed the sentence because our example showed only one attempt” gives a reason for the edit that a listener can inspect.

The revision does not make the successful attempt unimportant. It makes the account more accurate about what is known. Ask what additional question remains, such as whether another bus would fit. The child can choose to explore it later or stop with the limited description. Because should connect the revision with the genuine mismatch between claim and evidence. Do not invent a mechanical cause for the crossing merely to produce a fluent reason clause. A drawing of the attempt can support the explanation while an adult records the wording.

5. so

Selected model. The result was different on the second attempt, so we described both attempts instead of hiding one.

Meaning check. Which result or response follows? Was that response the only possible choice?

Another context. The listener missed the place, so we named it.

Two arrangements produce different outcomes: the bus fits one opening but not the other. “The results differed, so we described both arrangements” connects an observation with a responsible reporting choice. Keep the unsuccessful result beside the successful one rather than selecting only the version that matches the original prediction.

Ask which conditions changed between attempts. Perhaps the opening and the surface material both changed, making the cause uncertain. So can introduce the decision to record that uncertainty without forcing an immediate explanation. The child can label pictures fit and did not fit, while an adult adds the relevant conditions. Another sensible response might be checking one feature more carefully if the learner wants to continue. The word does not make further investigation compulsory; an honest account of the two attempts is already a useful outcome.

6. if

Selected model. If the evidence comes from one small trial, we can describe that trial without claiming a universal rule.

Meaning check. What condition is proposed? Has it actually occurred in this account?

Another context. We can add an example if the reader needs one.

Before writing a conclusion, place the observation record beside the proposed claim. “If we only tried this one arrangement, we should describe this arrangement” makes the condition for the limited statement visible. Count the recorded attempts with help if useful, but focus on what they actually cover rather than on reaching an arbitrary total.

One example can support an account of what happened in that example without establishing a rule for every design. A second example does not automatically settle every wider question either. Ask which variation would matter to the claim, such as another vehicle width or another support position. Let the child decide whether that question is worth exploring. The adult can keep the conditional as a listening model and help the learner show the relevant boundary through pictures, not demand an independent abstract explanation of why universal claims need broader support.

7. when

Selected model. We check our account when a new observation does not match the first explanation.

Meaning check. Which event supplies the time reference? Would the message change if it happened later?

Another context. Tell me when you want the passage read aloud.

The child’s first explanation is that the bus failed to cross because the bridge was too short. A later attempt with a longer bridge still fails at the narrow entrance. “We check our explanation when a new observation does not match it” identifies a useful occasion for review. Return to the model and inspect where the difficulty actually occurred.

Do not insist that the new result proves a different hidden cause immediately. It may reveal that the original account omitted an important condition. Record the visible obstruction and mark any remaining explanation as possible. When ties the review to an event in the inquiry rather than a fixed number of repetitions. If the child notices the mismatch first, preserve that contribution in the account. An adult can read the notes aloud and help compare them while the learner points to the relevant feature.

8. while

Selected model. One child observes the toy journey while another records the chosen details with adult help.

Meaning check. Are actions overlapping, or is information being contrasted in this particular model?

Another context. The character waited while the guide checked the map.

Give two willing participants manageable roles during a toy journey: one watches the vehicle at the entrance while another records a chosen detail with adult help. Explain what each person is trying to notice. Their observations may differ because attention and position differ, not because one person must have been careless.

Pause afterwards and compare the records. One may have seen a wheel touch the side; another may have noticed the roadway move. Both details can belong to the same event. While describes their overlapping activity without requiring a child to divide attention between watching, writing and explaining simultaneously. If the roles are demanding, take turns and use another attempt rather than forcing concurrency. The final record should state who saw which part and what support was provided, keeping a limited observation separate from a complete account of every movement.

9. before

Selected model. We inspect the example before deciding what it can tell us about this particular design.

Meaning check. Which event comes earlier? Show the event order without relying only on sentence order.

Another context. The character checked the route before leaving.

Before deciding what an example shows, inspect the actual arrangement. Identify the vehicle, the roadway and the opening that mattered to the attempt. A quick sketch can preserve those conditions if the model will be changed. The inspection gives the later explanation a reference beyond a vague memory that one design was better.

Compare two proposed claims against the record: “This bus fitted this opening” and “Wide bridges are always better.” Ask which one the example can directly support. The child can point to the narrower claim without producing a formal argument. Before describes the order of checking and judging in this activity, not a requirement to delay every spontaneous idea. Predictions can be welcomed and recorded as predictions. The useful habit is checking them against observations before presenting them as established accounts for someone else.

10. after

Selected model. We changed the description after noticing that the second bridge was wider, not longer.

Meaning check. Which event has already happened at the reference point? Is the interval specified?

Another context. The character rested after returning the map.

The child calls the second bridge longer, but a side-by-side view shows that its main change is width. After inspecting the pieces, revise the description to name the feature actually different. Keep the first wording briefly so the listener can see why the edit was useful. An adult can record “We changed longer to wider after comparing the pieces.”

If both length and width changed, do not simplify the record into a one-feature comparison falsely. Name both changes and limit any explanation of the result. After locates the revision in the sequence; the reason still comes from what the inspection revealed. Let the child demonstrate the difference through aligning suitable edges or showing a drawing. Independent measurement is not needed for a visible comparison, and unsupported numerical claims should not be added to make the account sound more precise.

Apply this group

Use “The account names the action and the result, while the picture supplies the setting.” as one starting example for two attempts with a familiar construction. Which detail was observed, and which explanation remains a guess?

Compare it with “We changed the description after noticing that the second bridge was wider, not longer.”. Identify the different job of the connecting word, then select the model that serves your current message. The two sentences are examples to discuss, not a script to recite.

Contents · Previous chapter · Next chapter

CHAPTER 5 OF 19

5. Ordering events and locating them in the day

Back to contents

Word	Meaning in these models
first	identifies the beginning item, event or step in a specified order
next	identifies what follows from the current point in an order
then	introduces a following event or stage; sequence alone does not prove cause
finally	marks the ending stage in the current account
now	refers to the current moment or the present state of understanding
later	refers to a time after the current reference point
yesterday	refers to the day immediately before the current day
today	refers to the current day
tomorrow	refers to the day immediately after the current day
soon	refers to a short but unspecified interval, best supported by a clear cue

11. first

Selected model. First we say what happened, then we decide whether the cause is known.

Meaning check. What sequence is being discussed? Identify its actual beginning.

Another context. The first sentence introduces our chosen topic.

Begin the short account with what happened: the bus stopped at the entrance. Then discuss whether anyone knows why it stopped. “First we describe the event” creates a useful distinction between an observation and a proposed cause. The child can choose a picture of the stopped vehicle while an adult records the visible result.

Next, place a possible explanation on a separate card. Perhaps the opening was too narrow, but the account should identify whether that was directly inspected or only suggested. Starting with the observation does not prohibit prediction before an activity; it helps the report make its evidence clear. If the child prefers to tell the prediction first, mark it as a prediction and still preserve what followed. The reader needs to distinguish the stages of thinking without having to guess which statements describe events and which describe ideas.

12. next

Selected model. Next we add a relevant example that helps the reader understand the main idea.

Meaning check. From which current point does the following step count as next?

Another context. Which event belongs next in the factual retelling?

A paragraph begins, “The two openings did not suit the same vehicles.” Ask which example should come next to make that relationship clear. A record comparing one narrow and one wide vehicle at the openings is relevant. A sentence about the bus’s bright colour may share the topic but not explain the fit difference.

Let the child select an example and show the matching feature in both arrangements. Next concerns the useful continuation of this account, not simply another sentence on the same subject. If no suitable comparison was made, narrow the opening claim or choose a different main idea. An adult can read possible examples aloud and record the child’s selection. The resulting paragraph should earn its length through a connection the reader can follow, with any missing comparison left visible rather than supplied as an imagined observation.

13. then

Selected model. We tried the narrow piece, then the wide one, and described each result separately.

Meaning check. What order is stated? Is a causal relationship separately supported?

Another context. The character found the map, then returned home.

Try one suitable roadway piece, then another, recording the outcome of each. Keep the pieces or their pictures in the order used. “We tried the narrow piece, then the wide one” tells a listener about sequence. It does not establish that width alone caused any difference, especially if the supports or vehicle also changed.

Ask what stayed the same and what changed before drafting a reason. The child can place matching vehicle pictures under both records if the same toy was used. If that information was not recorded reliably, acknowledge the gap. Then can organise the events while the explanation remains tentative. For a second version, reverse the sentence order while preserving the event order: “Before trying the wide piece, we used the narrow one.” Act out the sequence so the relationship remains available without relying only on the order words are heard.

14. finally

Selected model. Finally we check whether the paragraph claims only what its example actually shows.

Meaning check. What ends here? Is this the end of the account or of the entire activity?

Another context. Finally the character explains the missing clue.

End the short paragraph by checking whether its conclusion stays within the example. “Finally, we checked the size of our claim” refers to the reporting process, not necessarily the last action in the whole afternoon. The child can compare the conclusion with the two attempt pictures while an adult reads it aloud.

Look for words such as every or always that might extend beyond the record. Keep them only when the claim genuinely concerns a defined set that has been checked. A conclusion about these two attempts can remain useful and clear without sounding universal. If the paragraph introduces a new cause at the end, ask what evidence supports it. An unresolved question is an acceptable ending. Finally should help a reader recognise the endpoint of this account rather than force a confident answer simply because the activity is finishing.

15. now

Selected model. Our explanation is more precise now because it names the condition under which the toy fitted.

Meaning check. Which present moment or current understanding supplies the reference?

Another context. We are checking the reason now.

Keep the first explanation beside a revised one. The new wording names the condition under which the bus fitted: the side opening was wide enough for that vehicle in that arrangement. “Our explanation is more precise now” concerns the information added, not an automatic claim that every uncertainty has disappeared.

Ask what remains unknown, such as whether the same result would occur with another vehicle. A more precise description can coexist with an unanswered causal question. Let the child identify the useful addition through showing the model rather than demanding an abstract definition of precision. Now can also introduce a current observation after the model is moved. Make clear which state is current and which belongs to a saved earlier picture. The word’s reference follows the speaking moment, so an undated old note may need a date or version label when read again later.

16. later

Selected model. We can explore the wider question later; this paragraph describes only the two attempts we made.

Meaning check. What familiar event or record helps identify the later time?

Another context. I will help read the longer account later, after this short task.

The two-attempt account raises a broader question about other bridge designs. Save that question for later if the child wants to return to it, while keeping the present paragraph limited to the attempts made. A small question card can preserve the idea without making the current explanation carry unsupported results.

Connect any promised return to a real opportunity rather than using later to dismiss curiosity indefinitely. If materials will not be available, say that and consider a drawing-based discussion instead. A future possibility is not an event that can be inserted into today’s evidence. In a retelling, later may simply introduce a subsequent attempt whose timing is approximate. State whether that attempt actually occurred or remains planned. The adult can help keep those categories clear while respecting a decision to finish with the modest account already supported by the model and notes.

17. yesterday

Selected model. Yesterday we recorded a different result, so we will check whether the materials were arranged differently.

Meaning check. Does this refer to the preceding day, or is another past reference needed?

Another context. We planned this comparison yesterday.

Use dated records if a previous-day attempt seems to disagree with today’s result. “Yesterday the bus crossed” is meaningful only when that is the correct day reference. Compare the saved arrangement with the current one before proposing an explanation. Supports, vehicle position or the opening may have differed even if the bridge has the same name.

If the earlier event was several days ago, use that description instead. Do not force the history into yesterday merely to practise the word. A child can remember the result while an adult helps establish the date from a reliable record. When reading an old diary entry, explain which day its yesterday meant. Keep memory uncertainty visible. An accurate account can say that the earlier setup was not recorded fully, so the difference between results cannot yet be explained confidently.

18. today

Selected model. Today we are checking one small explanation using the model and the notes we actually have.

Meaning check. Which current day or dated record is meant?

Another context. Which story would you like to discuss today?

State the small question being explored today: whether this toy bus can pass through either of two available openings. The word links the account to the current activity rather than a general expectation about what every learner should investigate at this age. Record the date if the notes may be compared later.

At the end, describe what actually happened today. Perhaps only one arrangement was tried because the child chose another activity. A planned comparison should not appear as a completed one in the record. An adult can transcribe the child’s observation and note the support, preserving the difference between a spoken contribution and independent writing. Compare the current result with any reliable earlier record without assuming the conditions matched. The useful account names what was available to see and leaves missing history or causes unresolved rather than filling gaps for fluency.

19. tomorrow

Selected model. Tomorrow we may repeat the comparison if the materials are available and we want to investigate further.

Meaning check. Is the next-day plan certain, conditional or only hoped for?

Another context. We plan to show this account tomorrow.

The child proposes trying another vehicle tomorrow. Record the idea as a possible continuation, conditional on the materials being available and the learner still wanting to explore it. “Tomorrow we may compare another bus” does not claim that the result is already known or that returning is compulsory.

Ask what information would make the next comparison useful. Keeping the opening and support arrangement visible in a picture may help distinguish changes later. The planning conversation can be brief, with an adult supplying any written record. Add a date when tomorrow might otherwise shift as the note is read again. If the activity does not resume, today’s observation remains valid within its limits. The adult should not insert an imagined second result to complete a neat sequence. A future question can remain unanswered without reducing the value of a truthful account of the attempt already made.

20. soon

Selected model. We will finish this discussion soon, after checking the final sentence together.

Meaning check. What observable endpoint makes the imprecise interval easier to anticipate?

Another context. The story will end soon, after this last event.

The discussion will finish after one final check of the conclusion. “We will finish soon, after reading this sentence together” gives a visible endpoint rather than an indefinite request to continue. Read it, ask whether it matches the record and honour the agreed finish unless the child actively wants another brief step.

If a new question appears, save it as a possible later exploration instead of repeatedly extending soon. The approximate word may need a clearer event reference when the learner is managing another activity. In a story account, a character might predict that a vehicle will arrive soon; distinguish that expectation from an observed arrival. A polished ending should not erase uncertainty about timing or causes. The child can identify one remaining question through a gesture or short phrase while an adult records it beside the completed account.

Apply this group

Use “First we say what happened, then we decide whether the cause is known.” as one starting example for two attempts with a familiar construction. Which detail was observed, and which explanation remains a guess?

Compare it with “We will finish this discussion soon, after checking the final sentence together.”. Identify the different job of the connecting word, then select the model that serves your current message. The two sentences are examples to discuss, not a script to recite.

Contents · Previous chapter · Next chapter

CHAPTER 6 OF 19

6. Questions, ownership questions and checking uncertainty

Back to contents

Word	Meaning in these models
who	asks about a person or introduces identifying information about a person
what	asks for or identifies information about a thing, action, event or idea
where	asks about or identifies a place, position or area of application
which	selects or identifies an option from a recoverable set
why	asks for a reason or cause; an answer may remain uncertain
how	asks about method, manner, degree or the way information connects
whose	asks about or identifies ownership, association or authorship
whether	introduces uncertainty or alternatives about a possibility
question	an inquiry that requests information, clarification or consideration
answer	a response that addresses an inquiry; it can be limited or uncertain

21. who

Selected model. Who made the observation, and which part did they actually see?

Meaning check. Which participant needs identifying before the rest of the message can be followed?

Another context. The character who noticed the mark asks another question.

Two observers stand on different sides of a toy bridge. Ask who saw the wheel touch the side and who saw the support move. Each person should report the part they actually noticed, with the model available to show the viewpoint. Identifying the observer helps a listener understand the source and limits of the account.

Do not assume that everyone present saw every part of the event. A child who watched the entrance may have missed what happened underneath. An adult can record “Ari saw the front wheel stop” without upgrading that contribution into a complete mechanical explanation. If accounts differ, return to what each observer could see before deciding that someone is wrong. Who can also identify the maker or the person moving the vehicle, but those roles supply different information. Keep the current question explicit so naming a participant actually answers it.

22. what

Selected model. What does this example show about the toy bridge we tried, and what remains uncertain?

Meaning check. What kind of information does the question request: an event, object, idea or change?

Another context. What changed between these two story events?

After one attempt, ask what the example shows. A direct response might be that this bus did not pass through this opening. That statement is narrower than saying the bridge cannot carry vehicles, because the attempt may concern clearance rather than support. Point to the place where the movement stopped so the claim remains connected to the observation.

Then ask what remains unknown. Perhaps the bus would fit if its angle changed, or another vehicle would behave differently. These are questions, not results to add to the account. The child can sort a picture of the observed stop and a question picture into separate spaces while an adult records the wording. What requests different kinds of information in the two exchanges. A useful answer identifies either the known result or the open question without pretending that a complete cause must already be available.

23. where

Selected model. Where does the evidence appear in our picture, model or adult-read notes?

Meaning check. Is this a physical place, a textual position or the scope of a statement?

Another context. Where was the character when the sound began?

Ask where a detail supporting the claim appears in the model, picture or adult-read notes. If the claim concerns the opening, the child should be able to indicate the relevant part of the record. A sentence about the paint colour may appear on the same page while providing no support for the clearance question.

The task is locating information, not proving independent reading. An adult can read a note aloud while the child points to its matching feature. If the record never shows the underside of the bridge, it cannot establish the shape of a hidden support there. Say that the detail is unavailable. Later, take a suitable picture or inspect the model if the learner wants to know more. The new observation should be identified as new, not retroactively treated as something everyone saw during the original attempt.

24. which

Selected model. Which example supports this idea, rather than merely mentioning the same topic?

Meaning check. What set of options and selection criterion does the listener need?

Another context. Which ending fits the events we have already told?

Offer two example cards for the idea that the opening affected which bus could pass. One compares two vehicles at the opening; another describes the bridge’s colours. Ask which example concerns the feature named in the idea. Read both aloud so the selection depends on relevance rather than decoding skill.

The relevant card may still have limits. If the vehicles differ in several important ways, it may support a description of the outcomes without isolating a single cause. Keep that distinction visible in the explanation. Let the child choose a narrower main sentence when the evidence is modest. Which should identify a criterion for selection, not conceal an adult preference for longer or more impressive language. On another day, ask which detail belongs in a story about the bridge’s decoration; the previously irrelevant colour information may now have a useful purpose.

25. why

Selected model. Why does this detail matter to the explanation of which bridge the bus could use?

Meaning check. Can the reason be checked, or should the account explicitly remain uncertain?

Another context. Why did the character leave the bag behind?

The account mentions the bus’s width. Ask why that detail matters to the explanation of passing through the opening. A child can show the vehicle touching both sides, while an adult supplies a sentence linking the feature and result. The relationship is more useful than a generic answer that details make writing better.

If the width was not inspected and the bus simply stopped for another reason, keep the explanation tentative. A why question does not supply missing evidence. Compare an observed obstruction with a guessed hidden cause, such as a loose wheel the group did not examine. The child may suggest that possibility, and it can be recorded as a question. The report should distinguish it from what was seen. A clear explanation can also state why a claim was narrowed: the available example concerns these arrangements rather than every possible bridge.

26. how

Selected model. How does the example help the reader understand the difference between width and length?

Meaning check. Would showing the method answer the question more clearly than adding another sentence?

Another context. How did you discover the missing step?

Place two pieces side by side with suitable edges aligned and ask how the comparison helps distinguish width from length. Let the child show which dimension differs. The adult can name the feature in ordinary language without requiring measurements or technical definitions. A drawing with the changed direction marked can preserve the observation.

Now connect that comparison to the paragraph. “The second opening was wider” gives a reader more specific information than “The second one was bigger,” provided the observation supports it. If both dimensions changed, record both rather than simplifying the example to fit the intended lesson. How asks for the contribution of the example to understanding. A successful answer can be a demonstration that reveals the relevant difference. The final wording should preserve that limited relationship instead of making an unsupported claim about which dimension caused every outcome.

27. whose

Selected model. Whose explanation are we discussing, and have we preserved its intended meaning?

Meaning check. Who owns or contributed the material? Is attribution known or merely assumed?

Another context. Whose drawing supplies this detail?

Read a tentative explanation dictated by the child and ask whose idea it represents. An adult may have provided spelling and sentence structure, but the intended cause and uncertainty should remain the child’s. Read back the wording before sharing it so the author can identify any accidental change from might be to definitely is.

For two observers, keep their accounts attributed separately when they saw different parts. Combining notes should not make one person appear to have seen an event they only heard about. Whose concerns the source or contribution relevant to the question, not whoever currently holds the paper. A child can show a role card or name the speaker. If attribution is unknown, leave that gap visible. The record becomes more useful when the listener can distinguish firsthand observation, another person’s report and the writer’s own possible explanation.

28. whether

Selected model. We can check whether the reason matches the example by looking at what actually changed.

Meaning check. Which possibility is unresolved? What information could help settle it?

Another context. I am unsure whether the second event caused the third.

The child proposes that moving the supports changed the outcome. Ask whether the record actually shows support positions before and after the attempts. Look at the saved pictures or model rather than answering from how plausible the explanation sounds. If the information is missing, the current account cannot settle the question.

A new comparison may help if the child wants to continue, but it should be recorded as another activity with its own conditions. Whether introduces an unresolved possibility that checking might clarify; it does not require the answer to be yes. An adult can model “We do not know whether the supports moved” while the child identifies the missing view. This leaves a useful question for a later record. The final paragraph can accurately describe different results while saying their cause remains uncertain.

29. question

Selected model. Our question is narrower now: which of these two pieces lets this toy bus cross?

Meaning check. What information gap gives the inquiry its purpose?

Another context. Your question helped us notice a missing condition.

Begin with a broad inquiry such as “Which bridge is best?” and ask what the group actually wants a toy bus to do. Narrow the question to “Which of these two openings lets this bus pass?” The revised question makes the purpose and available comparison clearer. Other goals, such as appearance or carrying another vehicle, could lead to different judgments.

Write or draw the narrowed question beside the model. Use it to decide which details belong in the account. A colour preference may be relevant to a design discussion but not to this fit check. The child can contribute the practical goal while an adult records it. Keeping the question modest does not diminish curiosity; it gives the current activity something answerable to inspect. Broader questions can be saved separately instead of being claimed as solved by one small example.

30. answer

Selected model. Our answer describes this attempt, while another arrangement may give a different result.

Meaning check. Which part of the inquiry does the response address, and what does it leave open?

Another context. We can answer the reader by showing the model.

After the trial, formulate an answer that names the arrangement and outcome: this bus passed through the wider of the two openings tried. Ask a listener to match the sentence to the correct model or picture. If they cannot identify which opening is meant, add a useful label or landmark.

The answer may settle the immediate practical question while leaving the cause or a wider design rule unresolved. Do not expand it into “All wide bridges work” merely to create a confident ending. A different vehicle or changed support could produce another result. The child can show the relevant attempt and approve the adult’s recorded sentence. If the evidence is incomplete, an accurate answer can state that the record does not tell us. Relevance and honesty matter more than producing a predetermined affirmative conclusion for every question.

Apply this group

Use “Who made the observation, and which part did they actually see?” as one starting example for two attempts with a familiar construction. Which detail was observed, and which explanation remains a guess?

Compare it with “Our answer describes this attempt, while another arrangement may give a different result.”. Identify the different job of the connecting word, then select the model that serves your current message. The two sentences are examples to discuss, not a script to recite.

Contents · Previous chapter · Next chapter

CHAPTER 7 OF 19

7. Keeping objects, ideas and groups identifiable

Back to contents

Word	Meaning in these models
this	identifies one currently focused item or idea
that	identifies an item or idea, or introduces a clause in a larger statement
these	identifies more than one currently focused item or idea
those	identifies a recoverable set through distance, contrast or earlier reference
it	refers to a recoverable singular item or idea, or forms an impersonal expression
they	refers to an identified group or to a person using they
them	refers to an identified group or person using they as an object or recipient
one	a single member, or a substitute for an understood countable noun
another	an additional or different member, example or possibility of a known kind
both	the two members of an identified pair

31. this

Selected model. This example supports a limited claim about the arrangement we actually tried.

Meaning check. Could another nearby item or idea fit this reference? Add a noun if needed.

Another context. This is the story detail I want to retain.

Point to one recorded attempt and say, “This example shows what happened with this bus.” A listener at the table can follow the gesture. An absent reader needs a recoverable reference, such as the picture labelled Attempt A. Add that identifier when the account will travel beyond the shared scene.

The reference also helps limit the claim. This example concerns an actual arrangement, not every superficially similar design. Ask what conditions the picture preserves and what it leaves unseen. The child may notice that the support underneath is hidden. Do not infer its shape simply because the account needs a cause. For another version, replace this with the example’s name while keeping the same observation. The revision should clarify which record is meant without adding a new result or stronger conclusion than the author intended.

32. that

Selected model. That observation needs a clearer description because two different features changed.

Meaning check. Is the word pointing to something or introducing a clause?

Another context. We noticed that the second route had an extra stop.

Read an observation stating that the second bridge was better. Ask what that description actually identifies. If width and support position both changed, the reader needs a more specific account before understanding the comparison. Point to the recorded features rather than choosing a cause from the word better alone.

That can point back to a statement, not only a distant object. A child can indicate the unclear sentence while an adult reads it aloud. In “We noticed that the opening was wider,” that introduces the content of the observation. Check that the widening was actually visible or documented before calling it noticed. The adult’s grammar should not turn a proposed idea into a firsthand perception. Let the child approve the revised wording and show the feature it names, with uncertainty retained wherever the record cannot support a definite description.

33. these

Selected model. These details belong together because both help explain the same practical result.

Meaning check. Which set of items or ideas is being referred to? Name its boundary.

Another context. These are the examples we chose for the paragraph.

Select two details that explain the same practical result: the bus’s width and the opening’s available space. “These details belong together” is useful when the identified set and relationship are clear. Put matching pictures beside the account so a listener can see what the speaker is including.

Add a true but unrelated detail, such as the time a decorative sign was painted. Ask whether it helps answer the current fit question. It may belong in another account about making the model. The child can move that card to a saved-ideas space rather than discard it as worthless. These depends on a recoverable group reference; an audio-only report may need the details named directly. The writing decision concerns relevance to one purpose, not a rule that every paragraph must contain exactly two details or that all decoration is unimportant.

34. those

Selected model. Those details concern another question, so we can keep them for a separate account.

Meaning check. Can a new listener recover the intended set without the original pointing gesture?

Another context. Those are the notes from our earlier attempt.

Several notes concern how the model was decorated, while the current paragraph concerns a vehicle’s fit. Identify the decoration notes and say, “Those details can go in a separate account.” Show the boundary of the set so the child does not accidentally remove the opening description that the current explanation needs.

Later, choose a new purpose such as describing the model for a visitor. The saved details may become relevant. This change helps distinguish an idea’s value from its fit within one paragraph. If the child wants the current account to cover both purposes, discuss whether separate sections would make it easier to follow. The adult can read and record the selection without dictating the author’s viewpoint. In a message to someone who did not see the sorting, name the decoration notes rather than relying only on those.

35. it

Selected model. The first sentence is an observation. It describes what we saw rather than a guessed cause.

Meaning check. Name the referent. Would another singular noun create an ambiguity?

Another context. It is time to check the final example.

Write two sentences: “Our first sentence reports an observation. It names the place where the bus stopped.” Here it has a clear antecedent, the first sentence. Ask the child to show that sentence as an adult reads it aloud. The reference helps discuss writing without repeatedly naming the same item.

Now read “The bus reached the bridge. It was narrow.” Both nouns could plausibly be meant, so the author may need to name the narrow object. Use the model to clarify the intention rather than apply a mechanical rule that it always means the nearest noun. A clear reference matters especially when the feature is central to an explanation. The child can select the intended object, and the adult can make the smallest useful edit. Avoid letting that repair silently add a cause or change the recorded result.

36. they

Selected model. The two toy guides saw different parts of the event. They reached different conclusions.

Meaning check. Identify the group or person referred to before continuing the account.

Another context. They asked for another example.

Two toy guides watch different sections of a journey. Introduce them, then report, “They reached different conclusions.” Ask which parts each guide saw before judging the disagreement. One may have watched the entrance while the other saw the vehicle after it emerged. Neither account should automatically be treated as a full view of the event.

They can also refer to one person, including a person who uses they/them pronouns or someone whose identity is unspecified. “An observer recorded what they saw” is an ordinary model. Use real participants’ known pronouns accurately. If more than one group could be meant, name the intended observers again. The child can show who supplied each note while an adult records the attribution. The practical goal is a reader who knows whose observation or inference is being reported and which limitations belong to it.

37. them

Selected model. The two guides watched the journey. We can ask them what they noticed.

Meaning check. Who receives or is affected by the action? Is the group already identified?

Another context. I read the account back to them.

The two observers supply different notes, and the group wants clarification. “Ask them what they noticed” identifies who can answer about their own viewpoint. Invite each willing participant to describe the visible part rather than press them to agree with a preferred explanation. A short response or demonstration may supply the needed detail.

Keep the observers distinct from their notes. “Put them beside the model” might mean the cards in another sentence, so introduce the intended reference before giving the instruction. Them may also refer to one person with they/them pronouns. Use the relevant person’s actual usage and do not force a group-only rule. In the final account, asking someone about an observation does not make the writer a firsthand observer. Record what was reported and any uncertainty that remains instead of merging sources into an apparently complete single view.

38. one

Selected model. This one names the changed feature, while the other sentence only says the design was better.

Meaning check. Which understood noun does this substitute for, or is an exact single member intended?

Another context. One example may be enough for this short explanation.

Compare two sentences about the second arrangement. One says the design was better; the other names the wider opening and the vehicle that passed. Ask which one gives a reader a more recoverable comparison for this purpose. The intended noun, sentence, should be established before one substitutes for it.

In another use, one identifies the number of attempts recorded. A single attempt can support its own description but not every broader rule. Keep number and reference jobs separate in the conversation. The child can point to the more specific sentence while an adult reads both. If the general sentence concerns personal appearance preference, better may be acceptable with its criterion stated. The selection depends on the communication job, not a permanent ranking in which the longest sentence wins regardless of meaning, accuracy or audience.

39. another

Selected model. We need another example to explore that wider claim, although one example can describe this event.

Meaning check. Is this an additional member or a replacement? Show the difference.

Another context. The character tried another route.

The observation raises a broader claim about different vehicles. Another example might explore that question, but it needs a relevant variation rather than an arbitrary repetition. Ask which feature would matter: another bus width, a changed opening or a different support. Record the purpose before treating the additional attempt as evidence for the same claim.

No small fixed number of attempts automatically proves a universal rule. The current example can remain a useful account even if the learner stops there. If another attempt is made, keep its conditions and result instead of retaining only a favourable outcome. The child can help choose what to observe while an adult records the details. Another can also introduce a different explanation for the same result; label that as a possibility unless the available evidence establishes it. New wording alone is not new observational support.

40. both

Selected model. Both attempts belong in the account because their results differed in a relevant way.

Meaning check. Identify the pair and the property shared by its two members.

Another context. We can both suggest a clearer topic sentence.

One attempt succeeds and another does not. “Both results belong in our account” preserves the relevant difference rather than hiding the inconvenient outcome. Keep the paired pictures and ask what conditions the reader needs to distinguish them. A clear report can say what happened in each without immediately settling the cause.

Both concerns the identified pair, so do not quietly extend it to several unrecorded attempts. If one result is uncertain because nobody watched the whole movement, state that limitation. The child can mark what is known and point to a missing stage. In another comparison, both accounts may report the same stopping place while offering different causes. Agreement about the result does not establish agreement about the explanation. An adult can model the distinction in a short sentence, preserving the author’s chosen meaning and the actual scope of the records.

Apply this group

Use “This example supports a limited claim about the arrangement we actually tried.” as one starting example for two attempts with a familiar construction. Which detail was observed, and which explanation remains a guess?

Compare it with “Both attempts belong in the account because their results differed in a relevant way.”. Identify the different job of the connecting word, then select the model that serves your current message. The two sentences are examples to discuss, not a script to recite.

Contents · Previous chapter · Next chapter

CHAPTER 8 OF 19

8. Ownership, contributions and members of a set

Back to contents

Word	Meaning in these models
my	the speaker's possession, association or contribution before a noun
your	the listener's possession, association or contribution before a noun
our	possession, association or contribution of a group including the speaker
their	possession or association of an identified group or person using they
his	possession or association of an identified male person
her	possession before a noun, or an identified female person as an object
mine	the speaker's possession or contribution without a following noun
yours	the listener's possession or contribution without a following noun
each	every member considered individually within a defined set
every	all members of a stated set; the claim must allow no exception within that set

41. my

Selected model. My explanation is still a possibility because we have not checked the hidden cause.

Meaning check. Who is speaking, and what contribution or association is genuinely theirs?

Another context. My story begins with the missing invitation.

Let the child propose a cause for the vehicle’s unexpected stop and label it honestly: “My explanation is that the wheel touched the side.” Ask which part they saw and which part they inferred. A personal explanation can be worth exploring without already being established. Use a separate card for the observed stop so the result does not become uncertain merely because its cause is.

An adult can help record the idea while retaining words such as perhaps or might. Read it back before sharing. My identifies the speaker’s contribution, not necessarily independent handwriting or sole ownership of the whole investigation. Change speakers and notice the reference move. If the idea was developed jointly, describe that collaboration rather than forcing one person to claim it alone. The account should preserve both the source of the suggestion and its tentative status.

42. your

Selected model. Your example clarified the comparison because it showed the same feature in both models.

Meaning check. Who is being addressed? Would changing the listener change the reference?

Another context. May I check that I understood your reason?

A partner supplies an example showing the same feature in two arrangements. Explain what helped: “Your picture made the opening widths easier to compare.” This feedback names the contribution rather than offering a vague claim that the whole explanation is now proved. Ask the learner to show which feature remains visible in each version.

If the partner’s example changes several features, say what remains uncertain. A relevant example can clarify a comparison without isolating a cause. Your follows the person addressed, so another participant’s picture needs its own attribution. The child can decide which example fits the paragraph and acknowledge help with drawing or recording. Later, ask the partner what they understand from the revised account. Their response can reveal a remaining gap, and it should be recorded as feedback from this listener rather than proof that every future reader will interpret the paragraph identically.

43. our

Selected model. Our account separates events from guesses so the listener knows which details were observed.

Meaning check. Which people are included? Was the activity or judgement actually shared?

Another context. Our paragraph needs a clearer example.

Make a shared account with two spaces: observed events and possible explanations. “Our account keeps them separate” concerns a collaborative reporting choice. Let participants contribute in comfortable forms, including pointing to the model, drawing or dictating to an adult. The finished paragraph should not imply that every person independently wrote or witnessed every detail.

Ask who is included in our when a new listener joins. Two children and an adult may have different roles within the shared work. A group can agree to record uncertainty while still holding different guesses about the cause. Do not turn collective authorship into a false claim of unanimous belief. If one person did not see the attempt, identify the information they received from someone else. The account becomes stronger for a reader when its collaboration and source limits are clear rather than hidden behind a smooth shared voice.

44. their

Selected model. The two guides stood on the other side. Their notes describe another viewpoint.

Meaning check. Which identified group or person supplies the possessive reference?

Another context. The characters changed their plan after the question.

Two observers stand on the far side of the model and record a different view of the vehicle. “Their notes show the exit” identifies the source and perspective. Compare them with the entrance observer’s picture before deciding whether the accounts conflict. They may concern different stages of one journey.

Their can refer to one person as well, such as “A visitor wrote down their observation.” Use known participants’ actual pronouns. Possessing a note is not the same as making the observation it records; someone may be holding a partner’s card. Ask which relationship the sentence intends. The child can match role pictures with notes while an adult supplies readable names or labels. In the final explanation, preserve which details came from which viewpoint rather than presenting the combined record as something every observer saw in full.

45. his

Selected model. The boy kept a record. His example describes the first attempt rather than both trials.

Meaning check. Is the person identified, and is the claimed possession or contribution known?

Another context. The picture beside the notes is his.

Introduce a boy in the invented scene who keeps a drawing of the first attempt. “His picture shows the narrow opening” attributes that record to an identified character using he/him pronouns. Check what the picture actually preserves before using it to describe both attempts. A record of one arrangement cannot silently stand for a second setup that changed later.

If another character carries the picture, his may become ambiguous unless the maker is named again. Clarify contribution rather than guessing from current possession. The child can choose the story roles and point to the relevant record. An adult can record a precise statement such as “Jon drew the first attempt; his picture does not show the new supports.” The sentence’s limit helps a reader know which comparison the record can and cannot support, without turning a missing detail into a criticism of its maker.

46. her

Selected model. Grandma described the route. Her account includes the missing condition about the closed gate.

Meaning check. Is this possession before a noun or a reference to a recipient or object?

Another context. We read the explanation back to her.

In a route account, Grandma describes the gate as closed when the vehicle arrived. “Her account includes the gate condition” identifies a detail that may explain why the route changed. Ask whether Grandma observed that moment in the story or learned about it from another character. Preserve that source distinction if it matters to the explanation.

Her can also identify a recipient: “Show her the second drawing.” Act out that exchange so the meaning is clear without formal grammatical labels. Use actual people’s known pronouns in real examples and keep attribution accurate independently of pronoun choice. If several characters could be meant, name the intended one before continuing. A child can show who supplied the condition while an adult records the words. Do not add a closed gate to an earlier account unless the observation or agreed fictional story actually supplies it.

47. mine

Selected model. This tentative explanation is mine, and I may change it after looking at the model again.

Meaning check. Would the ownership reference change if another person said the sentence?

Another context. The drawing of the first arrangement is mine.

The child offers one possible explanation for a bridge result and says, “That idea is mine.” Record the contribution with its uncertainty intact. A tentative suggestion should not become definite merely because its author wants to keep it in the paragraph. The observed result can be stated separately and confidently if the record supports it.

Invite a revision after looking at the model again. Changing a personal idea in response to information does not erase its original contribution. The author can keep the first version as part of the inquiry history while choosing a more accurate final statement. Mine follows the speaker, so a saved anonymous card may need a name or agreed label for later readers. If an adult supplied the handwriting, distinguish that support from authorship of the idea. Collaborative expression can preserve a child’s meaning without claiming every written feature was independently produced.

48. yours

Selected model. The final wording is yours to choose, with adult help available to preserve the intended meaning.

Meaning check. Does the listener have a genuine choice about this personal contribution?

Another context. I placed my account beside yours.

Give the child genuine control over the final wording of their explanation within the evidence available. “The wording is yours to choose; I can help record it” supports authorship without promising that every factual claim will be accepted unexamined. Compare possible sentences aloud and ask which preserves the intended observation and uncertainty.

If the child prefers a stronger claim than the record supports, discuss the difference openly. Perhaps the sentence can become a prediction or a question rather than an established result. Adult assistance should clarify that choice, not quietly substitute another viewpoint. Yours can also concern which record a listener may keep, so establish ownership or sharing arrangements before offering a card. The practical goal is an accurate account whose author recognises their contribution, with support available for writing and no requirement to adopt an adult’s style simply because it sounds more formal.

49. each

Selected model. Each example needs a clear purpose in this short explanation rather than simply adding length.

Meaning check. What defined set is considered one member at a time?

Another context. We described each attempt separately.

Read a short explanation containing three examples. Ask what each example contributes to the main idea. One may show the opening, another the vehicle that fitted and a third only the room’s decoration. Use pictures and adult reading so the child can inspect relevance without independently decoding every sentence.

An example does not become useful merely by adding length. If the decoration detail serves another purpose, save it for a description of making the model. Repetition can sometimes help a reader, but its role should be clear rather than accidental. Each asks the group to consider members of a defined set individually. The child can point to one example needing clarification or choose a narrower main sentence that fits the available evidence. There is no requirement that every paragraph contain a fixed number of examples; the audience and question determine what information is needed.

50. every

Selected model. Every result we recorded belongs in our notes, including the one that did not match our guess.

Meaning check. Could a member of the stated set be an exception? Check before keeping the claim.

Another context. We checked every label in this small set.

Put all the results from the small agreed activity into the notes, including the attempt that differed from the prediction. “Every recorded result is included” concerns the defined set actually recorded. Check the cards one by one so the claim has a visible boundary. Do not describe imagined or unobserved attempts as missing data that must be invented.

Compare the notes with a paragraph that selects only successful attempts and claims the arrangement always works. Ask what relevant information that selection hides. The child can restore the omitted result and help narrow the conclusion. Every is useful when the set is clear; it does not turn two attempts into every possible condition. If a note itself is uncertain, include its uncertainty rather than presenting it as a dependable observation. An adult can help record these distinctions while the learner contributes through the model or pictures.

Apply this group

Use “My explanation is still a possibility because we have not checked the hidden cause.” as one starting example for two attempts with a familiar construction. Which detail was observed, and which explanation remains a guess?

Compare it with “Every result we recorded belongs in our notes, including the one that did not match our guess.”. Identify the different job of the connecting word, then select the model that serves your current message. The two sentences are examples to discuss, not a script to recite.

Contents · Previous chapter · Next chapter

CHAPTER 9 OF 19

9. Locating a scene and showing a crossing

Back to contents

Word	Meaning in these models
in	location within a place, text, account or other identified frame
on	location on a surface, or dependence and support in an abstract relation
under	a lower position or the conditions within which a statement applies
above	a higher position or an earlier visible position in a layout
below	a lower position or a later visible position in a layout
beside	a position at the side of another identified item
behind	a position at the back, or reasoning and circumstances underlying something
between	a relation or space involving identified reference points or alternatives
across	movement or comparison extending over an identified space or set
through	movement within a passage or progression through a process or explanation

51. in

Selected model. The reason is in the second sentence that the adult reads aloud after the observation.

Meaning check. What place, text or conceptual frame contains the relevant information?

Another context. The spare model pieces are in the tray.

The first sentence records the stop, and the second offers a possible reason. “The possible explanation is in the second sentence” locates information within the account. Read the sentences aloud and let the child match each with an observation or idea card. This use of in concerns textual content, not physical enclosure.

Compare placing the actual cards in a folder. The same word describes another relationship, supported by a different visible action. If the second sentence states a cause too confidently, its location does not make the claim justified. Inspect the wording against the record. The child might choose to add might or replace the cause with an open question. An adult can record that edit without requiring a formal definition of inference. The reader needs to know where the idea appears and what status it has within the account.

52. on

Selected model. The relevant detail is on this card beside the picture showing the changed arrangement.

Meaning check. Does this model describe a surface location or an abstract basis for a statement?

Another context. Your explanation is on the large sheet.

Put a note about the changed opening on a card beside its matching picture. A listener can inspect the record while hearing the explanation. The detail’s physical presence on the card does not guarantee it describes the correct attempt, so check the match before using it as support.

On can also mean about a subject: “This paragraph gives information on the bridge comparison.” Ask whether the actual content concerns the comparison or merely mentions the model in an unrelated story. The child can choose a relevant example while an adult reads the alternatives. Keep a broad definition that fits the sense used rather than teaching on solely as contact with a surface. In a later layout change, move the card and update any location instruction. Its information may remain relevant even when the surface supporting it changes.

53. under

Selected model. The earlier drawing is under the new one so we can compare the arrangements together.

Meaning check. Is the word about position or about the conditions limiting a claim?

Another context. The boat stopped under the bridge.

Place an earlier drawing under the new one, then move them so both can be inspected. Under describes the physical arrangement, but leaving the first picture hidden may prevent a useful comparison. Ask whether displaying them side by side would better serve the listener’s task. Accurate spatial language does not automatically make a layout effective.

Use another context when filing observation cards under an agreed heading such as Bridge Attempts. An adult can read the heading while the child selects the relevant records. The category should not imply that every card supports the same causal claim; some may simply document an outcome. Ask which feature each record shows. The child can reorganise the cards to preserve two different questions, with adult recording support. One physical example should not be treated as a complete explanation of every organising or abstract use of under.

54. above

Selected model. The topic is above the examples on our low display so a visitor can see what they explain.

Meaning check. Which layout or physical reference point makes the higher position meaningful?

Another context. The sign is above the toy entrance.

Display a simple main-idea card above the attempt pictures on a low board. Ask a visitor what relationship the examples are meant to clarify. The heading could say “These two openings fitted different vehicles” if the record supports that account. It should not announce a universal rule that the small comparison cannot establish.

Above concerns the arrangement relative to the board’s agreed orientation. Turn a paper copy and clarify its intended top if the description becomes confusing. A child may have a different reasonable viewpoint rather than a missing word meaning. If the account will be read aloud without the display, the speaker must name the main idea instead of relying on placement. Let the child decide which reference the listener needs. The useful result is a recoverable connection between claim and example, not exact reproduction of an adult’s preferred page layout.

55. below

Selected model. The observation is below the picture, while the possible explanation is on a separate card.

Meaning check. Which reference point makes the lower position meaningful? Does position imply importance here?

Another context. The path is below the hill in this drawing.

Place the observation below the matching picture and the possible explanation on a separate card. Adult reading can make the text accessible while the child shows which statement reports the visible event. The separation helps preserve status: being written below an image does not make a cause directly observable in that image.

Try moving the cards to another clear arrangement and ask whether the listener can still distinguish them. Below is one layout description, not a mandatory convention for all explanations. If two pictures share the space, label the attempts so the observation cannot be assigned to the wrong one. The child can choose a simple marker or dictate an identifying phrase. Keep the final wording limited to what the relevant picture or other reliable record actually supplies, with hidden features and uncertain transitions left as questions rather than filled in by the caption.

56. beside

Selected model. The two versions are beside each other so we can compare the information they preserve.

Meaning check. What two items are placed together, and how does that help the listener?

Another context. The model is beside its explanation.

Put two versions of a claim beside each other. One says all bridges of this kind work; the other reports the bus crossing the particular arrangement tried. Read both aloud and compare them with the recorded attempt. Their proximity helps the child notice a meaning difference without having to remember a long spoken comparison.

Ask which wording matches the evidence available and what wider question remains. The shorter or longer sentence is not automatically better; the accurate boundary matters. Beside can also locate the example card next to its model, allowing a listener to inspect the named feature. If several models are nearby, use a label to clarify the match. A child can reject an adult’s proposed edit if it changes the observed outcome. The adult should then help preserve the result while narrowing only the part of the claim that exceeds it.

57. behind

Selected model. The hidden piece is behind the model from our present viewpoint, so we cannot yet describe its shape.

Meaning check. Is the model about physical position or underlying reasoning? Keep the senses distinct.

Another context. The second toy visitor waits behind the first.

A support is hidden behind the model from the observer’s current position. State the limit plainly: the group cannot yet describe its shape from that view. A guess about the hidden piece may be interesting, but it should not appear in the notes as something seen. Ask what another viewpoint could reveal if inspection is possible and wanted.

Move around the model together or use a suitable photograph rather than reaching into an unstable arrangement. The new view supplies new information, which should be distinguished from the original observation. Behind depends partly on viewpoint when the object has no clear front. Let the child show their perspective before correcting the description. An adult can record “From the entrance side, the support was hidden.” That sentence tells the reader why the earlier record had a gap without inventing what occupied the unseen space.

58. between

Selected model. The difference is between these two arrangements, not between every possible bridge design.

Meaning check. Which reference points or alternatives are necessary for the comparison?

Another context. The spare card is between the two pictures.

Name the comparison carefully: the difference is between these two arrangements. Introduce each attempt and its recorded conditions so the listener knows which pair is being discussed. A statement about their difference does not automatically apply to every possible bridge design. The child can place a marker beside the relevant pair while an adult reads the account.

Compare this relational use with a toy positioned between two supports. In the physical scene, between does not necessarily mean exactly halfway. Name both reference points before asking a listener to locate the object. The two contexts need their own examples, even though the same word appears. If a paragraph says “the difference between them” after several pairs have been introduced, name the arrangements again. A small reference repair can clarify the author’s meaning without enlarging the conclusion or adding an unsupported cause.

59. across

Selected model. The same feature appears across both examples, although other parts of the models differ.

Meaning check. What space or set does the movement or comparison extend over?

Another context. The toy vehicle travels across the bridge.

Look for one stated feature across both attempt pictures, such as the same toy bus. Here across concerns a pattern present in more than one record, not a physical journey. Check that the feature really matches; another bus with a similar colour may differ in width or wheel position. A child can compare the actual toys or pictures while an adult records the relevant identity.

Then use a movement example in which a bus travels across the bridge from one end to the other. Passing the entrance alone does not show a complete crossing, so report the stage actually observed. Keeping the two uses distinct prevents a single gesture from standing for every meaning. In the paragraph, a shared feature can help make the comparison clearer while other changing conditions still limit what can be concluded about the cause of the outcome.

60. through

Selected model. We can work through the steps together, checking which one the listener could not follow.

Meaning check. Does the model trace a passage, a process or a line of explanation?

Another context. The character goes through the narrow doorway.

Work through a short explanation one step at a time with the listener. Ask where their understanding becomes uncertain: identifying the arrangement, following the vehicle’s movement or connecting the example to the claim. Through describes progressing within the account here, not movement through a doorway. Read aloud and pause so the child can show the relevant stage.

For a physical contrast, move the toy through an opening and compare entering with emerging. If the record only shows the start and finish, avoid inventing every hidden movement in between. The child may demonstrate a possible path, but it remains a reconstruction unless witnessed or otherwise established. An adult can label that contribution accurately. The final explanation can be clear about sequence while admitting an unknown intermediate stage; fluency does not require pretending that every transition was directly observed.

Apply this group

Use “The reason is in the second sentence that the adult reads aloud after the observation.” as one starting example for two attempts with a familiar construction. Which detail was observed, and which explanation remains a guess?

Compare it with “We can work through the steps together, checking which one the listener could not follow.”. Identify the different job of the connecting word, then select the model that serves your current message. The two sentences are examples to discuss, not a script to recite.

Contents · Previous chapter · Next chapter

CHAPTER 10 OF 19

10. Routes, origins, accompaniment and absence

Back to contents

Word	Meaning in these models
to	a destination, recipient, relevance relation or other link selected by the sentence
from	a source, starting point or basis for information
into	movement inside, or transformation into another arrangement or form
onto	movement to a supported surface or location
towards	direction or support for a possibility without guaranteeing arrival or proof
around	a surrounding route or an organising focus for a discussion
along	following a course, route or developing line of reasoning
past	movement beyond a reference point or continuation beyond an earlier stage
with	accompaniment, a tool, comparison or another relation supplied by context
without	absence of an item, action or condition, including an avoided change in meaning

61. to

Selected model. The example is relevant to our question because it tests the same practical feature.

Meaning check. Which destination, recipient or relevance relationship does the sentence establish?

Another context. We passed the notes to the other guide.

Place the current question beside two possible examples and ask which one is relevant to it. If the question concerns the bus fitting an opening, an example about the same clearance feature has a useful relationship to the inquiry. A story about painting the bus may be accurate but serve another purpose.

To identifies a relationship in relevant to, not a physical destination. Introduce the phrase through the practical selection rather than expecting an abstract definition. Then compare a route in which the bus travels to the bridge; here the word names an endpoint. The child can show the different jobs in separate scenes. In the explanation, relevance still does not guarantee enough support for a broad claim. A directly related example may justify a limited description while leaving the cause or another arrangement unresolved. Preserve that boundary in the final wording.

62. from

Selected model. The claim comes from this observation, but the observation only covers one attempt.

Meaning check. What is the actual source or starting point, and how reliably is it known?

Another context. This part of the story came from the child's idea.

Ask where a proposed claim comes from. “This statement comes from our observation of one attempt” identifies the source and its scope. Show the matching note or picture. If the claim concerns all designs, compare that breadth with what the single attempt actually covers. The child can choose a narrower sentence while an adult records it.

From also identifies an observer’s viewpoint: a support may be visible from the side but hidden from the entrance. Keep that location attached to the appropriate account. A person who reads another observer’s note has information from that source rather than a firsthand view of the event. Do not merge the relationships into a vague claim that everyone saw the same thing. A useful record states which observation supports the sentence and leaves missing views or untested variations as open questions instead of inventing a complete history.

63. into

Selected model. We can turn the notes into an account while keeping observations and guesses distinguishable.

Meaning check. Is something crossing a boundary or being transformed into another form?

Another context. We put the picture cards into the folder.

Turn the notes into a short account without changing their status. Observed events should remain observations; tentative causes should remain tentative. The child can arrange two kinds of card while an adult helps connect the chosen information in sentences. Into describes a transformation of the record’s form rather than permission to add unsupported content.

Read the account back and compare it with the notes. If “might have moved” became “moved,” the revision strengthened a claim and needs checking. A polished paragraph should not make uncertainty disappear silently. For a physical example, put the notes into a folder after the check, showing movement from outside to inside. The different use can be modelled naturally without a formal classification task. Keep the final folder or version clearly identified so a listener can recover which notes and which account belong together.

64. onto

Selected model. We moved the example onto a separate card so the reader could match it with the main idea.

Meaning check. Which surface or displayed location is reached by the movement?

Another context. The toy driver steps onto the platform.

Move a selected example onto its own card so a reader can place it beside the main idea. The physical separation makes comparison easier without making the example more reliable by itself. Ask which phrase in the claim the example is intended to support and whether the recorded conditions match that purpose.

If the child chooses an attractive but unrelated detail, keep it available for another paragraph rather than treating it as a worthless idea. The adult can read possible cards aloud and record the child’s selection. Onto describes the placement action in this activity; on describes the resulting location. Use suitable low surfaces and stable materials. Later, if another example replaces the first, retain any relevant differences rather than presenting the new card as the only attempt that occurred. Layout should help preserve the evidence, not conceal the inconvenient parts of the record.

65. towards

Selected model. This detail points towards a possible explanation, but it does not establish the cause by itself.

Meaning check. What direction or possibility is indicated without guaranteeing arrival or proof?

Another context. The character walks towards the station.

A wheel appears close to the bridge’s side in a photograph. That detail may point towards an explanation of the stop, but it does not establish contact or prove that contact caused the outcome. Compare what the image actually shows with the stronger sentence the author is considering. The child can indicate the gap between near and touching.

Towards expresses an emerging relationship to a possible explanation here. In a physical scene, the bus can move towards the opening without reaching it. Demonstrate that direction separately, preserving the distinction between approach and arrival. An adult can record a cautious account such as “The picture suggests the wheel may have met the side, but we did not see that stage clearly.” The statement remains useful because it identifies both a plausible idea and the reason it has not been treated as confirmed.

66. around

Selected model. We organised the paragraph around one idea and kept the unrelated detail for another story.

Meaning check. Does the sentence describe a route or an organising focus for ideas?

Another context. The bus goes around the obstacle.

Organise the paragraph around one practical question: which of the two openings fitted this bus. Choose the observations that help answer it and save the decoration story for a different section. Around concerns the organising idea, not a literal circular arrangement of sentences. The child can place relevant cards near the question picture while an adult reads them aloud.

For a movement contrast, a vehicle might travel around a blocked roadway instead of crossing the bridge. Record the actual route if it occurred in the story. That detour may explain arrival at the destination without supporting a claim that the bridge itself worked. Keep the inquiry’s focus explicit before deciding which evidence belongs. A clear paragraph can include a modest result and an open question; it does not need to gather every detail about the model merely because all the details share a broad topic.

67. along

Selected model. The examples go along the display route in the order that visitors encounter the models.

Meaning check. Which course or line of reasoning can the listener follow?

Another context. The character walks along the river path.

Arrange example cards along the route a pretend visitor follows through the display. The order can help the visitor inspect each matching model as the explanation is read. Along describes the distribution relative to the route; it does not necessarily encode the time order in which the attempts occurred. Label that sequence separately if it matters.

Ask the child whether the display is telling a history or comparing features. A comparison might place two arrangements together even if they were made on different days. An account of the activity should retain the actual order where relevant. The adult can help make those different jobs clear rather than assuming physical position always tells the whole story. Later, move a toy along the roadway and describe its route, keeping observed movement distinct from an inferred path supplied to fill a gap between two pictures.

68. past

Selected model. The new account goes past the first event and explains the later result without inventing a cause.

Meaning check. Which reference point is passed, and what information is added beyond it?

Another context. The train goes past the farm.

The first record stops when the bus reaches the entrance. A new account goes past that event and reports what happened afterwards. Ask what reliable information supplies the continuation. If the vehicle emerged on the far side, the result can be stated; if the middle stage was hidden, do not invent its exact movement for narrative smoothness.

Past has a physical use when a toy passes a landmark without stopping there. Show that route separately so the child can compare it with the account’s figurative continuation. A longer report is valuable only if the added events are relevant and accurately represented. The child can choose to end with the observed stop and leave a later result unreported if no record is available. An adult can model an honest gap rather than treating a complete-sounding sequence as more important than what the group actually knows.

69. with

Selected model. We compare the claim with the example to check whether the wording is too broad.

Meaning check. Is this accompaniment, tool use, comparison or another context-dependent relationship?

Another context. The child discussed the account with a familiar adult.

Compare the claim with its chosen example. Read the main sentence aloud, then ask which observed feature the example makes visible. If the claim says the opening was wider, a picture showing only the roadway’s length may not provide the needed comparison. Place the materials side by side and name any missing view.

With expresses the relationship between the two pieces of information in this check. It can also introduce collaboration: the child checks the account with a willing partner. That partner’s question may expose a reference the author took for granted. Keep their role supportive rather than turning the exchange into fault-finding. An adult can supply reading or writing help while the child decides whether the wording matches the model. Describe that contribution accurately instead of reporting the finished paragraph as independent written production solely because the child approved its meaning.

70. without

Selected model. We can disagree about a possible cause without changing the observed result in our notes.

Meaning check. What is absent or avoided? Does removing it affect the intended meaning?

Another context. We can tell the account without writing it down.

Two observers may disagree about why the bus stopped without disagreeing about the fact that it stopped. Put the shared observation in one place and the different possible causes on separate cards. The arrangement lets the listener recover the common result while seeing which parts remain open to discussion.

Without should preserve the actual absence being claimed. An account made with adult transcription was not produced without help, even if the child chose every idea. A comparison made without seeing the hidden support cannot establish its shape. Let the child identify which information or support was available and which was not. This gives limits a practical role in reporting rather than treating independence as the only valuable outcome. The final paragraph can remain clear and useful while stating that the cause is unresolved and that another viewpoint might supply additional information later.

Apply this group

Use “The example is relevant to our question because it tests the same practical feature.” as one starting example for two attempts with a familiar construction. Which detail was observed, and which explanation remains a guess?

Compare it with “We can disagree about a possible cause without changing the observed result in our notes.”. Identify the different job of the connecting word, then select the model that serves your current message. The two sentences are examples to discuss, not a script to recite.

Contents · Previous chapter · Next chapter

CHAPTER 11 OF 19

11. Present, past, possession and possible next actions

Back to contents

Word	Meaning in these models
is	a present form of be used with a singular subject in these models
are	a present form of be used with plural subjects or you in these models
was	a past form of be used with I or a singular third-person subject in these models
were	a past form of be used with plural subjects or you in these models
has	a form of have used with a singular third-person subject; its job depends on the sentence
have	possession, availability or another have construction selected by the sentence
had	a past form of have; the example determines its possession or helping-verb role
can	ability, possibility or permission according to context
could	a possibility, suggestion, polite request or past ability according to context
will	a future action, prediction or commitment, whose certainty depends on context

71. is

Selected model. The first sentence is an observation, while the next sentence offers a possible explanation.

Meaning check. What subject and present state or action are linked in this model?

Another context. The character is searching beside the gate.

Read the sentence “The bus stopped at the entrance.” If that event was observed, it is an observation. Compare it with “The wheel may have caught on the side,” which offers a possible explanation. The child can match each sentence to a seen-event card or an idea card while an adult reads the wording.

Is helps state what kind of contribution the sentence makes, but a label alone is insufficient. A confidently phrased cause does not become an observation because the writer calls it one. Ask what was actually visible and what the record preserves. An adult can expand a child’s short response without changing the event from stopped to crossed. The grammar should support the author’s meaning. If the information is incomplete, a statement such as “The cause is not known from this picture” can be an accurate and useful part of the account.

72. are

Selected model. The two results are different, so our account needs to describe both arrangements clearly.

Meaning check. What subject controls this present form? Remember that you can address one listener.

Another context. You are explaining the feature I missed.

Two recorded results are different: one vehicle crossed, and another remained at the opening. Introduce the arrangements before comparing them so the listener knows which pair is meant. Ask which conditions are documented and whether they actually match apart from the vehicle. A difference in outcome does not by itself reveal a single cause.

Are can also describe ongoing activity, as in “The observers are comparing the notes.” Use the actual participants and support available. In “You are the observer,” are may address one person, so avoid a simplified rule that it always signals a group. The child can show the relevant role or result while an adult supplies natural wording. A clear account preserves the differing outcomes without declaring one participant or whole design inferior. The purpose is identifying a useful relationship, not grading the people involved.

73. was

Selected model. Our first claim was too broad because it described every design from a single example.

Meaning check. Which earlier state or action is described, and what establishes that past reference?

Another context. I was observing while you moved the model.

Keep a first claim that described every bridge of a kind from one example. After revision, say, “The earlier claim was broader than our record.” Show exactly which words extended beyond the observed arrangement. The child can choose a phrase such as this opening or this bus to preserve the useful result while narrowing its reach.

Was refers to the earlier version in this comparison. It does not automatically mean every past statement has become false; the original result may remain accurate. Separate the observed event from the overextended wording about it. If an adult suggested the broad claim, acknowledge that contribution rather than attributing the error to the child. Read the revised account back to ensure it still matches the author’s intended observation. A change in scope can improve accuracy without changing what actually happened during the attempt.

74. were

Selected model. The conditions were different because the second arrangement used a wider piece.

Meaning check. Which subject and earlier reference point make this form appropriate?

Another context. You were describing the first attempt.

Compare two attempts whose conditions were different. Perhaps the second used a wider piece and a new support position. Name both recorded changes before claiming that one caused the new result. A child can identify the visible differences while an adult reads or writes their account. If a condition was not recorded, leave it uncertain.

Were locates the description at the earlier attempts, even if the model has since been dismantled. A saved picture can support that reference; a current reconstruction is not automatically identical to the original. In “You were watching the entrance,” were can concern one listener. Use natural models rather than a rigid group-only rule. The useful account tells a reader which conditions were known, which changed and which outcome followed, with the cause kept tentative wherever the available comparison does not distinguish alternatives.

75. has

Selected model. This account has a clear example that supports its stated limited claim.

Meaning check. Is have expressing possession, inclusion or helping another verb here?

Another context. The character has another possible route.

Ask whether the paragraph has an example that matches its limited claim. The presence of an example is not enough if it concerns another feature. A sentence about a vehicle’s colour may not support a statement about opening width. Read both aloud and let the child show the intended relationship on the model or picture.

Has also helps report a completed action: “The observer has checked the first note.” Verify what was actually checked rather than treating the phrase as proof of a complete review. Perhaps the result matches while the support position remains unknown. Keep the conclusion specific. An adult can help record a child's decision about relevance without claiming independent writing or a confirmed cause. The paragraph can have a useful example and an unresolved question at the same time; these are compatible features of an honest account.

76. have

Selected model. We have an observation and a question, but we do not yet have a confirmed cause.

Meaning check. What is available, possessed or expressed through the larger verb construction?

Another context. I have another idea for the ending.

Lay out what the group has: a recorded stop, a picture of the entrance and a question about the hidden support. None of those alone supplies a confirmed cause. “We have an observation and a question” makes the current information state clear without treating the inquiry as unsuccessful because it lacks a final explanation.

Compare having a proposed reason with having checked that reason. An adult can read the two statements while the child places the matching cards. If another viewpoint is inspected, record what new information it supplies. Do not let a fluent rewrite make a previously unknown feature appear observed from the start. Have can also describe completed work in “We have compared the two notes.” State the actual task completed and the support involved, leaving broader conclusions limited to what that comparison can establish.

77. had

Selected model. The earlier version had a stronger claim than its single example could support.

Meaning check. Which earlier reference is established, and is this possession or a helping-verb use?

Another context. The character had the map before the journey.

The first version had a stronger claim than its example could support. Keep it beside the revised wording so the child can see what changed. The outcome of the attempt may be identical in both versions; the edit concerns how far the sentence reaches. “This bus crossed this arrangement” preserves the observed result while avoiding an unsupported statement about every design.

Had identifies a feature of the earlier account, not proof that the earlier observer saw something different. Ask which information belongs to the event and which belongs to its description. An adult can help record the distinction in a short explanation. In a physical story, the character may have had a map before losing it; that history needs a known event or agreed invention. The final picture alone should not be expanded into a complete past simply because the paragraph would otherwise feel unfinished.

78. can

Selected model. A relevant example can clarify a paragraph when it shows the relationship the main sentence describes.

Meaning check. Does the model express ability, permission or possibility?

Another context. Can you show which feature changed?

A relevant example can make a main sentence easier to understand when it shows the relationship that sentence describes. Try a limited claim about the wider opening and place the matching comparison picture beneath it. Ask a willing reader what feature the paragraph is drawing attention to. Their response provides local feedback on this connection.

Can describes a possibility, not a guarantee that any example on the same topic will help. If the reader remains unsure, inspect whether the comparison feature is visible and the arrangements are identified. The child might choose another label or a narrower sentence. In a physical use, “This bus can pass through the opening” should match the tested arrangement without silently extending to all buses. The adult can supply grammar or transcription support while preserving the learner’s actual observation and its conditions.

79. could

Selected model. We could use a more precise comparison by naming width rather than saying this is better.

Meaning check. Is this a suggestion, tentative possibility, polite request or past ability?

Another context. Could you explain what the second result shows?

The account says the second design was better. Suggest a more precise possibility: “We could name the wider opening.” Read the proposed revision and ask whether width is actually what the record shows. If the main difference was elsewhere, the child can reject the suggestion and identify the relevant feature instead.

Could keeps the proposal open rather than pretending the edit has already been agreed. A possible improvement should preserve the author’s result and uncertainty. In a past account, “Only the narrow vehicle could pass through the first opening” requires observations or story information that support that comparison. Do not infer it merely because the second vehicle was absent from a picture. An adult can read alternatives aloud while the child selects or demonstrates a faithful version. Precision concerns meaning that matches the record, not simply a longer or more formal sentence.

80. will

Selected model. I will record the result you describe, then read it back so you can check its accuracy.

Meaning check. Is this a commitment, plan or prediction? What uncertainty remains?

Another context. The character will return the map at the end.

Offer a dependable recording process: “I will write the result you describe, then read it back.” Carry out the read-back so the child can correct an altered feature, missing condition or overstated cause. The adult’s role includes preserving uncertainty, especially when the child offered only a possible explanation.

Will describes the intended next action here, not a completed observation. Avoid predicting a trial’s result as a certainty unless the statement is clearly part of an invented story. “We will see the bus cross” may overstate what a test is meant to find out; “We will observe what happens” keeps the outcome open. The child can contribute by moving the model, drawing a result or dictating a phrase. Record that contribution and the support accurately instead of making a finished paragraph imply independent writing or complete certainty about every stage.

Apply this group

Use “The first sentence is an observation, while the next sentence offers a possible explanation.” as one starting example for two attempts with a familiar construction. Which detail was observed, and which explanation remains a guess?

Compare it with “I will record the result you describe, then read it back so you can check its accuracy.”. Identify the different job of the connecting word, then select the model that serves your current message. The two sentences are examples to discuss, not a script to recite.

Contents · Previous chapter · Next chapter

CHAPTER 12 OF 19

12. Intentions, joint decisions and making a message clearer

Back to contents

Word	Meaning in these models
want	a desire, preference or intended effect
need	a requirement relative to a purpose or care situation
choose	select among available options
decide	settle on a choice or judgement, including a decision to leave a question open
plan	an intended arrangement or sequence, or the process of preparing one
try	make an attempt or test an option without guaranteeing success
change	alter an identified feature, arrangement, statement or interpretation
agree	share a stated view or acceptance; agreement may be limited to one point
explain	make a method, reason or relationship clearer
describe	state identifying features, events or relationships without necessarily establishing a cause

81. want

Selected model. I want the reader to see the difference between the observed event and my possible explanation.

Meaning check. Whose preference or intended effect is actually known?

Another context. You want the story to keep its surprising ending.

Ask what the author wants the reader to understand. The child may want to report that the bus stopped, suggest a possible cause or compare two arrangements. Those are related but different jobs. Place a simple purpose card beside the draft so the selected details can be checked against it.

Wanting a cause to be true does not make it established. A preferred explanation can remain in the account as a possibility while the observation is recorded separately. An adult can help preserve that distinction without dismissing curiosity. If the child changes the paragraph into an invented story, say so; invention permits details that a factual report cannot claim were witnessed. The author’s purpose should guide the wording, and the reader should be able to recognise whether they are receiving a record of events, an idea to explore or a fictional account.

82. need

Selected model. This claim needs a narrower wording because our example concerns only these two arrangements.

Meaning check. What stated goal makes the item or information necessary?

Another context. We need help reading the longer note.

The draft claims every bridge with a wide opening will work, but the example concerns only two arrangements. The claim needs a narrower boundary if it is to match the current record. Ask which words could identify the actual bus, opening and result. A small phrase such as in our second attempt may resolve the overreach without changing the observation.

Need is relative to the purpose. A practical report may need a clear setup and outcome, while an explanation of cause may require information the group does not have. Do not add invented conditions to satisfy the second purpose. The child can choose the modest report and save the wider question. Adult reading and writing support can remain available throughout. Describe the learner’s actual contribution, such as recognising the missing condition or choosing a more accurate sentence, instead of equating a finished page with independent production.

83. choose

Selected model. I choose the example that fits the idea rather than the one that merely sounds impressive.

Meaning check. Are the options real, and what criterion or preference guides selection?

Another context. You can choose a spoken or drawn account.

Offer two examples for a paragraph about vehicle clearance. One identifies the vehicle and the opening; the other contains impressive wording about engineering but no recorded comparison. Read both aloud and ask the child to choose the example that helps answer the actual question. State that criterion clearly rather than rewarding whichever sounds more advanced.

The impressive sentence may belong in a different discussion if its facts are known, but it should not stand in for evidence of the attempt. Let the child show the relevant feature in the selected record. If no example fits the main idea, choose a narrower main idea instead of forcing a connection. A meaningful choice should affect the final paragraph. The adult can record the selected wording while the author approves its meaning, with any support and remaining uncertainty kept visible.

84. decide

Selected model. We can decide what remains uncertain after separating the observation from our guesses.

Meaning check. What judgement is being settled? Could leaving a question open be a reasonable decision?

Another context. I decided to retain the child's first sentence.

Separate known observations from possible causes before deciding what remains uncertain. The group may know where the vehicle stopped but not whether a hidden wheel problem contributed. Record that distinction in two short statements. A child can place picture cards into known from this record and still a question, with adult help for reading.

Deciding what to write is not the same as deciding reality by agreement. If everyone likes one explanation, it still needs appropriate support before being reported as confirmed. The author can decide to include it as a possibility or leave it for another inquiry. Keep the observed outcome unchanged when it is dependable. Later information may justify a new decision about the wording. An honest revision records what changed in the group’s knowledge rather than rewriting the history as though the final explanation was known from the beginning.

85. plan

Selected model. Our plan includes a comparison of two attempts, with adult help for recording if needed.

Meaning check. Which actions are intended, and which outcomes remain unconfirmed?

Another context. We can plan a short explanation together.

Make a modest plan to compare two attempts. Identify the practical question, the available materials and what the child wants to observe. An adult can handle cutting, record notes or read the chosen question aloud. The plan supports participation; it does not need to imitate a formal laboratory procedure to produce a useful local account.

Name any feature intended to stay the same and record whether it actually did. If several conditions change, the resulting description can still be valuable, but the causal conclusion should remain limited. The child may alter or stop the activity, and the final account should report what happened rather than what the original plan promised. Keep the plan separate from the observation record. That distinction helps a reader understand the difference between an intended comparison, an attempted action and a result that was actually seen.

86. try

Selected model. We can try a more precise sentence and ask whether it still preserves the author's meaning.

Meaning check. What can the attempt show even if the expected result does not occur?

Another context. The character will try another route.

Try replacing a broad sentence with a more specific one: “The opening let this bus pass in the second arrangement.” Ask the author whether the revised sentence preserves their result and whether the record supports its conditions. A wording trial can be evaluated through reading and discussion without repeating the physical activity unnecessarily.

If the sentence adds a detail not recorded, revise again or mark that detail uncertain. More precise language is helpful only when it is accurate. The child can reject a fluent adult edit that changes the outcome or makes a tentative cause definite. Later, a willing reader can say which arrangement they think the sentence describes. Their response may reveal an unclear reference. Try a label or a named feature rather than repeatedly extending the whole paragraph. Keep the check connected to one communication need instead of requiring endless revisions for their own sake.

87. change

Selected model. We can change the scope of the claim while preserving the result we actually observed.

Meaning check. What changes, and which part of the intended meaning should remain?

Another context. The character changed the plan after the gate closed.

Keep the observed result fixed while changing an overbroad conclusion. The bus crossed in the recorded attempt; the revision should not erase that success. Replace a claim about all bridges with a statement about the arrangement actually tried. Ask the child to show which words changed the claim’s reach and which words preserve the event.

Another edit might change certainty rather than scope. Moving from “The support moved” to “The support may have moved” matters when the stage was hidden. An adult can read the two versions and let the author choose the one matching their information. Do not quietly make both changes while claiming only punctuation was adjusted. The record of a revision should describe the real meaning change. A useful paragraph can become more truthful without becoming more elaborate, and a supported short contribution can guide that improvement.

88. agree

Selected model. We agree about what we saw, but we have different possible explanations for it.

Meaning check. What precise point is accepted? Does agreement extend to the entire account?

Another context. I agree that the paragraph needs an identifying detail.

Two observers agree that the bus stopped at the opening, but they suggest different possible causes. Record the shared result separately from the competing ideas. Agreement on the observation does not automatically confirm either explanation, and disagreement about cause does not make the observed stop disappear.

Ask each person what they actually saw before reporting their agreement. A participant who only heard the account later should not be described as another firsthand witness. The child can use role pictures or short phrases while an adult records the distinctions. If the group cannot resolve a cause, the account can say so. There is no requirement to negotiate a single factual answer merely to finish the paragraph. For a creative choice such as the heading, participants may reasonably compromise; that process is different from establishing what happened in the attempt.

89. explain

Selected model. I can explain why this example is relevant: it shows the same feature named in the main idea.

Meaning check. What relationship becomes clearer: a method, reason or connection between information?

Another context. Can you show or explain what happened next?

Ask why the selected example belongs in the paragraph. If the main idea concerns the difference in opening width, the example should make that feature visible in the two arrangements. A child can point between the relevant parts while an adult records a sentence connecting them. Naming the relationship is more useful than a generic claim that examples make writing interesting.

Keep explaining relevance separate from proving cause. The comparison may clarify what differed without showing which difference produced the result. If the record changed several conditions, state that limit. An adult can model “This example shows the width difference, but it does not settle every reason the bus stopped.” The child does not need to repeat that complete sentence for their pointing or short explanation to count as a contribution. The final account should preserve what the example genuinely helps the reader understand.

90. describe

Selected model. We can describe the result before guessing its cause, using the model and our reliable notes.

Meaning check. What is reported directly, and where would a causal explanation require more support?

Another context. Please describe which arrangement you mean.

Before asking for a cause, describe the visible result. The bus stopped with its front wheels at the entrance, if that is what the record shows. Include a position or stage that a reader can recover from the model or picture. Avoid adding a guessed intention, such as the character refusing to cross, unless the activity is an explicitly invented story.

Compare the description with a sentence offering a possible mechanical explanation. Both can appear in the account when their status is clear. The child can show the difference through separate cards and adult read-back. If the picture only shows the vehicle after the event, do not claim every part of the movement was seen. A precise description can honestly state the final position and an unknown transition. The purpose is a reliable account, not a requirement to make the scene sound complete at the cost of inventing evidence.

Apply this group

Use “I want the reader to see the difference between the observed event and my possible explanation.” as one starting example for two attempts with a familiar construction. Which detail was observed, and which explanation remains a guess?

Compare it with “We can describe the result before guessing its cause, using the model and our reliable notes.”. Identify the different job of the connecting word, then select the model that serves your current message. The two sentences are examples to discuss, not a script to recite.

Contents · Previous chapter · Next chapter

CHAPTER 13 OF 19

13. Amounts, sufficiency and precise comparisons

Back to contents

Word	Meaning in these models
more	an additional amount, degree or continuation of an identified thing
less	a smaller amount or degree relative to a stated comparison
fewer	a smaller number of countable items
many	a context-dependent large number of countable items
much	amount or degree, usually with uncountable information or material in these models
enough	sufficient for an explicitly identified purpose
same	matching in a specified respect, not necessarily identical in every respect
different	not matching in an identified respect; difference alone is not opposition
similar	alike in relevant respects while allowing differences
opposite	an opposing direction or meaning within a specified relation, not merely any difference

91. more

Selected model. The wider claim needs more support than this one example provides.

Meaning check. What specific addition would serve this purpose rather than merely increase length?

Another context. The listener needs more information about the starting place.

A claim about many kinds of bridge requires more support than one local example provides. Ask what variation the wider claim concerns before adding material. Another unrelated description of the same bus does not necessarily broaden the evidence. A useful next example would need to address a relevant condition, and even then the conclusion should match the range actually explored.

The learner can choose to narrow the claim instead of extending the activity. More is not automatically better if the present purpose is a clear report of two attempts. Adult help can identify what information is missing while respecting a decision to stop. In the paragraph, more words may be unnecessary when one condition phrase resolves the overreach. Record the particular contribution an addition makes rather than treating length, repeated attempts or a larger pile of notes as evidence of understanding by themselves.

92. less

Selected model. The revised claim is less broad because it concerns this arrangement rather than every design.

Meaning check. Which amount or degree is reduced, and what is the comparison reference?

Another context. This version uses less space.

Compare “All bridges of this kind work” with “This bus crossed our second arrangement.” The revision is less broad because it names a smaller, defined situation. It does not report a less successful crossing or reduce the value of the observation. Ask the child to identify the unchanged result and the changed scope.

Less can also concern an amount of text. A shorter paragraph may preserve every relevant condition, while a longer one may repeat the same unsupported claim. Read both versions aloud and compare their meanings rather than ranking them by size. If removing a phrase drops an important limitation, restore it even if the paragraph becomes longer. An adult can transcribe the child’s choice while keeping its actual basis visible. The useful comparison concerns how accurately each version serves this reader and question, not a universal preference for shorter writing.

93. fewer

Selected model. The short account includes fewer events while preserving the actual order of those retained.

Meaning check. What countable members are compared? Is the numerical difference actually checked?

Another context. We used fewer picture cards.

A concise account can include fewer events than the full activity record. Choose the relevant attempts and keep their actual order, using picture cards to preserve the relationship. If an omitted step explains why the arrangement changed, add a brief link or narrow the account so the reader is not left with an invented transition.

Fewer concerns the number of countable items, such as events or example cards. It does not automatically mean less evidence, because one carefully documented comparison may contain different information from several repeated descriptions. Name what is being counted before drawing a conclusion. Adult counting or reading support can keep the task about selecting relevant information. The child can show which event belongs and approve the sequence. Do not hide an unfavourable result simply to make a short account look consistent with the original prediction.

94. many

Selected model. Many explanations are possible, but the account should identify which are guesses.

Meaning check. Is the model an approximate quantity statement or a question asking for an exact number?

Another context. How many attempts do these notes describe?

Invite several possible explanations for an unexpected result, then label them as possibilities. The child may suggest the opening, a wheel position or a moving support. Many ideas can show curiosity, but their number does not establish which one is true. Keep the observed stop on its own card so it is not confused with the suggestions.

Ask which possibility the existing record could help check and which needs another view. The learner can choose one question or leave them unresolved. Many is approximate in this discussion; an exact count is unnecessary unless the group wants one for organising the cards. Avoid treating a long list of guesses as better than one relevant, clearly marked idea. An adult can help record the possibilities without strengthening their certainty. The final paragraph may include only the most useful question, while the other ideas remain available for another conversation.

95. much

Selected model. There is not much evidence for that wider claim because we observed only one arrangement.

Meaning check. Which uncountable amount or degree is relevant to the task?

Another context. How much background does this reader need?

The record contains one arrangement and an outcome, but not much information about hidden supports or other vehicles. State that limitation in relation to the wider claim being considered. A small record may still contain enough information for a direct description of the observed attempt; the amount is judged against the question.

Much does not mean simply counting cards. Several cards can repeat one fact, while one clear picture may preserve several visible conditions. Ask what information each source actually supplies. The child can point to a feature and name a missing view, with adult reading support. If the wider cause remains uncertain, say so rather than using confident language to compensate for a thin record. The useful account makes the reader’s access to information clearer, including what is available, what is repeated and what cannot be recovered from the materials kept.

96. enough

Selected model. The example is enough for this limited description, but it does not establish a rule about every bridge.

Meaning check. What goal defines sufficiency, and would a different goal change the answer?

Another context. Do we have enough room for both models?

Define the claim before asking whether the example is enough. A reliable picture and observation may be enough to describe where this bus stopped. They are not automatically enough to establish a rule about every bridge or identify a hidden cause. Put the narrow and broad statements beside the same record and compare what each asks it to support.

The child can choose the limited description and save the larger question without continuing the activity. Enough is a relationship to a purpose, not an absolute quality of a page. Another reader may need a clearer label to identify the attempt even when the underlying observation is dependable. An adult can help add that reference while preserving uncertainty. Record what the exchange established locally rather than treating a finished explanation as proof of independent writing, complete causal understanding or mastery of every use of the word.

97. same

Selected model. Both accounts describe the same result, although one gives a more precise condition.

Meaning check. Which feature or meaning matches? What other differences may remain?

Another context. The pieces have the same width.

Two accounts may describe the same observed result while giving different amounts of detail. One says the bus crossed; another says it crossed with the side gates open. Check whether the added condition matches the actual arrangement. If it does, the second account can be more informative without reporting a different outcome.

Same needs a specified respect. Matching results do not guarantee identical setups or causes. Ask the child what matches and what the records leave different or unknown. Use the models or pictures rather than relying on a repeated phrase such as the same bridge when important features changed. An adult can record a short comparison and read it back for approval. For another task, keep the same vehicle across two attempts while changing an opening. That shared feature helps describe the comparison but does not remove the need to record other conditions accurately.

98. different

Selected model. The accounts offer different explanations for the same observed result.

Meaning check. Which relevant feature differs? Does that establish a contradiction or only another option?

Another context. The two models have different widths.

Put two explanations for the same observed stop beside the result card. One suggests the opening was too narrow; another suggests a wheel problem. These are different proposed causes, not necessarily different observations. Ask which parts were seen and what information would distinguish the explanations if further checking is wanted.

Do not assume that every difference is a contradiction. The accounts may concern different stages, viewpoints or conditions. Conversely, two claims about the same visible position at the same moment may genuinely conflict and require checking. The child can identify the relevant event pictures while an adult supplies a clear record of the distinction. Personal preferences about a title can remain different without needing resolution. A factual report should still preserve the best available information about the event rather than treating accuracy as merely a preference between equally pleasant phrasings.

99. similar

Selected model. The examples are similar in one useful respect, but their other differences still matter.

Meaning check. Which resemblance matters, and what differences limit the comparison?

Another context. Our drawings have similar arrangements.

Compare two attempt pictures that share a recognisable opening shape but differ in support position. They are similar in one useful respect, not identical in every condition. Ask the child to show a resemblance and a difference before using the pair to support a claim. Adult reading or drawing help can keep the comparison accessible.

The important feature depends on the question. A shared shape may matter to identifying the models but not settle what caused a vehicle to stop. Keep the conclusion aligned with the actual comparison rather than extending from broad resemblance to presumed identical behaviour. In two written accounts, similar wording can also conceal a changed condition or degree of certainty. Read both aloud and inspect meaning. The child can approve a paraphrase that preserves the limited result or reject one that silently makes a tentative explanation sound established.

100. opposite

Selected model. The arrows show opposite directions along the same route, so the starting point matters.

Meaning check. What specific opposing relationship is meant? Is this merely a difference instead?

Another context. In this comparison, increase and decrease have opposite meanings.

Draw two arrows along the same straight roadway, pointing in opposite directions. Mark a starting point and let a toy follow each arrow. The opposing relation is clear because the shared route and directions are specified. Two unrelated journeys or different preferences do not automatically form an opposite pair.

Use the scene to check a report: if the second attempt approached from the opposite end, that condition may matter and should not be omitted from the comparison. Ask what the record shows rather than assuming the setup was otherwise unchanged. The child can indicate the start and movement while an adult records the account. Introduce a separate meaning contrast, such as open and closed, only with its own context. The final paragraph should name the relation actually relevant to its question instead of using opposite as an emphatic replacement for merely different.

Apply this group

Use “The wider claim needs more support than this one example provides.” as one starting example for two attempts with a familiar construction. Which detail was observed, and which explanation remains a guess?

Compare it with “The arrows show opposite directions along the same route, so the starting point matters.”. Identify the different job of the connecting word, then select the model that serves your current message. The two sentences are examples to discuss, not a script to recite.

Contents · Previous chapter · Next chapter

CHAPTER 14 OF 19

14. Worked tasks for observation and explanation

Back to contents

What was seen and what was inferred

Observe a manageable toy event. Record one sentence about what happened and another about a possible cause. Keep the second tentative if the cause was not visible.

Ask what information could distinguish the possibilities. It is acceptable to leave the question open; the activity need not become a formal experiment or a compulsory explanation.

Worked observation. Use this invented record, or act it out with suitable toys: an adult gives a toy car one gentle push across a mat. The car moves forward and stops beside a book. The record does not show the underside of the car, describe the wheel condition or explain why it stopped. Keep those gaps visible rather than adding a plausible cause to complete the story.

A first draft says, “The car stopped because the book blocked it.” The observation places the car beside the book but does not say that they touched. Because therefore introduces a reason that the supplied record has not established. A location beside another object is not, by itself, evidence that the object caused the stop.

Worked revision: “The car moved across the mat and stopped beside the book. The record does not show why it stopped.” If the learner proposes a possibility, label it separately: “A wheel problem could have contributed, but the wheels have not been checked.” The first sentence reports the event; the possible explanation belongs to the learner’s reasoning and remains unconfirmed.

Choose a follow-up that answers a specific uncertainty. For a repeat attempt, an adult could watch for contact with the book or inspect the wheels first. Keep those new observations separate from the original attempt. These are proposed checks, not results already contained in the supplied record. If a further fictional account of the original attempt says the car did not touch the book, the direct-blocking explanation loses support, but that account still does not establish the actual cause. A useful final account can retain the observed movement and stop while leaving the reason open.

One example and its limit

Compare two available pieces for a small construction. Describe the actual fit and the feature being compared. Do not assume colour, size and material were held constant if they were not.

Form a short statement about the arrangement tried. Compare that wording with a claim about every possible construction, and identify what additional information the wider claim would need.

Worked comparison. In this invented arrangement, two supports are 8 centimetres apart. An adult lays one straight strip across the gap at a time. A 6-centimetre red paper strip does not reach both supports; a 10-centimetre blue cardboard strip does. These are the supplied observations. The pieces differ in length, colour and material, and no weights are placed on them.

A first conclusion says, “Blue bridges are stronger.” That statement goes beyond the comparison. The record concerns whether these pieces reach across a particular gap. It contains no strength test, and several features differ between the pieces. The colour of the successful piece does not establish that colour caused the result or that other blue pieces would behave similarly.

Worked response: “In this arrangement, the 10-centimetre strip reached both supports, but the 6-centimetre strip did not. The record does not show how much weight either strip could hold.” In this arrangement limits the claim, but identifies the observed difference, and the final sentence preserves what was not tested. The learner can demonstrate the two placements while an adult records that account.

For a changed case, draw an 11-centimetre gap and keep the same straight placements. Neither supplied strip is long enough to reach both sides of that wider gap. This is a prediction from the stated lengths, not an observation of an experiment already completed. If the question changes to load-bearing, it needs a different, appropriately supervised comparison. Finish by naming the particular conclusion supported here: the longer supplied strip spans the original gap. Do not turn that local result into a claim about every construction, colour or material.

Contents · Previous chapter · Next chapter

CHAPTER 15 OF 19

15. Repair two common problems

Back to contents

An observed event becomes a guessed cause

Keep the event sentence and mark the explanation as tentative. Check whether anyone saw the proposed cause.

One example becomes a universal claim

Name the arrangement that was actually examined. Narrow the wording instead of pretending that another case was tested.

Contents · Previous chapter · Next chapter

CHAPTER 16 OF 19

16. Parent and tutor handover

Back to contents

Name the purpose of the observation and explanation task and the format the learner used. Record one actual example, the help supplied and what became clearer to the listener. Avoid a broad label such as knows all the words.

Choose one useful next step within two attempts with a familiar construction. A reading aid, a drawn representation or adult recording can stay available. Agree on the relationship to practise rather than a compulsory number of repetitions.

Contents · Previous chapter · Next chapter

CHAPTER 17 OF 19

17. Progression and useful return routes

Back to contents

Age 7 extends clear messages into short connected accounts with a main idea and relevant support. It adds attention to the distinction between what was observed and what is only a possible explanation. These are flexible teaching purposes, not uniform expectations imposed by a birthday.

One pathway begins with describing a visible result, then adding a known condition and an appropriate example. Another begins with a short story account and clarifies the order without inventing a cause. Another compares two versions to see whether they preserve the same meaning. Select the pathway that answers a real communication need.

Keep the scope modest. A successful fit in one arrangement can describe that fit. It does not establish that every bridge of the same colour or material will work. A short paragraph can end with a question when the available information does not settle the explanation. Honest limits are part of clarity rather than a failure to finish.

Observe the support and the actual contribution. A demonstrated comparison, repeated adult sentence, dictated paragraph and independently written account are different observations. None should be dismissed, but they should not be merged into an inflated mastery claim. Reading, handwriting and physical construction can each receive separate support.

The Base, Connecting and Maximum Fence strands retain their related educational jobs: establish familiar meaning, clarify relationships and explore richer distinctions. These labels are not clinical stages or compulsory levels. Return to earlier models whenever they help communicate a current idea.

Continue with the published Connecting Fence Age 8. Continue developing useful language across different listeners, familiar topics and supported formats. The aim is an account whose connections can be followed, not a required paragraph length or completion of every example in the bank.

Contents · Previous chapter · Next chapter

CHAPTER 18 OF 19

18. Questions about this guide

Back to contents

Must every seven-year-old produce every model?

No. The bank is a flexible adult reference, not a developmental checklist or official syllabus. Select a meaningful purpose and keep support available. A demonstration, drawing, home-language contribution or shorter spoken account can supply useful meaning while an adult models a fuller connection.

What changes from Connecting Fence Age 6?

Age 7 introduces new sentence models and paragraph challenges about relevant examples, precise comparisons, observations, possible explanations and appropriately limited claims. The headwords and age-specific worked tasks continue earlier guides. Adult reading and recording support remain available.

Must the response be independently written?

No. Spoken, drawn and adult-supported work can serve the task. Record the support honestly and do not infer an independent reading or handwriting skill from assisted production.

How should earlier guides be used?

Use the hub to choose an earlier experience when a word relationship is unclear. A familiar object, action or listener can reduce competing demands while a new connection is explored. Returning to an earlier example is a teaching choice, not a judgement about the learner.

Contents · Previous chapter · Next chapter

CHAPTER 19 OF 19

19. Scope and continuation

Back to contents

The selected Age 7 models are educational examples. Age labels organise the series; they are not an official syllabus or a developmental test. The examples do not establish the truth of an imagined event or certify independent literacy skills.

Contents · Previous chapter

Continue exploring the series

Open the complete Children’s Vocabulary Ages 1–12 series hub · Vocabulary Learning System.

Age 1: Everyday Age 1 · Base Age 1 · Connecting Age 1 · Maximum Age 1

Age 2: Everyday Age 2 · Base Age 2 · Connecting Age 2 · Maximum Age 2

Age 3: Everyday Age 3 · Base Age 3 · Connecting Age 3 · Maximum Age 3

Age 4: Everyday Age 4 · Base Age 4 · Connecting Age 4 · Maximum Age 4

Age 5: Everyday Age 5 · Base Age 5 · Connecting Age 5 · Maximum Age 5

Age 6: Everyday Age 6 · Base Age 6 · Connecting Age 6 · Maximum Age 6

Age 7: Everyday Age 7 · Base Age 7 · Connecting Age 7 (this guide) · Maximum Age 7

Age 8: Base Age 8 · Connecting Age 8 · Maximum Age 8 · Everyday Age 8

Age 9: Base Age 9 · Connecting Age 9 · Maximum Age 9 · Everyday Age 9

Age 10: Base Age 10 · Connecting Age 10 · Maximum Age 10 · Everyday Age 10

Age 11: Base Age 11 · Connecting Age 11 · Everyday Age 11 · Maximum Age 11

Age 12: Everyday Age 12 · Base Age 12 · Connecting Age 12 · Maximum Age 12