Use these 200 vocabulary words to compare texts, qualify claims and revise academic writing in IB Diploma Programme Year 2. Every entry includes a meaning and an original example. The main assessment examples concern English A: Language and Literature; research and TOK terms have separate purposes.
School Year 13 is an approximate British-style label, usually around ages 17–18, rather than an official IB-wide year number. Follow your school’s actual programme and examination session. This is an independent eduKate learning bank, not a prescribed IB list or a promise of marks.
The 200-word list: meanings and writing examples
Choose a small useful set for today. Each numbered entry gives one target word, a meaning for this context and an original example. These are eduKate teaching selections; recurring words across stages are revisited for a new writing purpose.
1–20: Making precise comparisons · 21–40: Connecting claims with evidence · 41–60: Controlling certainty and scope · 61–80: Explaining language and rhetoric · 81–100: Tracking form, narrative and structure · 101–120: Considering context, power and perspective · 121–140: Evaluating an argument fairly · 141–160: Describing inquiry and research accurately · 161–180: Building relationships between sentences · 181–200: Revising for clear, controlled expression
Assessment requirements · Fencing Method · Practice and answers
1–20. Making precise comparisons
- converge — move towards a shared position or pattern. Example: The two narratives converge in their criticism of inherited privilege.
- diverge — develop in different directions. Example: The speakers diverge when they explain who deserves forgiveness.
- parallel — a meaningful similarity between separate things. Example: A parallel emerges between the public ceremony and the private argument.
- contrast — a significant difference made clear by comparison. Example: The contrast between the settings reveals unequal access to safety.
- juxtapose — place things together so their relationship becomes noticeable. Example: The writer juxtaposes a cheerful announcement with an empty playground.
- reconcile — make apparently conflicting ideas compatible. Example: The ending does not fully reconcile personal loyalty with public responsibility.
- differentiate — identify the features that make things distinct. Example: Differentiate the narrator's judgement from the author's arrangement of the scene.
- align — bring into agreement or a shared position. Example: The advertisement tries to align buying the product with protecting nature.
- echo — repeat or recall an earlier detail in a meaningful way. Example: The final image seems to echo the unfinished promise in the opening.
- invert — reverse an established order or relationship. Example: The last scene appears to invert the usual relationship between teacher and pupil.
- complement — add something that helps another feature work more fully. Example: The quiet illustrations complement the restrained language of the memoir.
- counterpoint — a contrasting element that makes another element more noticeable. Example: The comic conversation provides a counterpoint to the narrator's anxiety.
- symmetrical — arranged with corresponding parts on either side of a structure. Example: The symmetrical opening and ending make the intervening disruption more striking.
- asymmetrical — having parts that do not correspond evenly. Example: The asymmetrical exchange gives one speaker far more room to define events.
- analogous — similar in a relevant relationship, though not identical. Example: The two restrictions are analogous because both control access to information.
- disparate — different enough that an easy grouping may mislead. Example: The essay connects disparate settings through a shared concern with belonging.
- affinity — a meaningful likeness or connection. Example: An affinity between the protagonists emerges through their repeated acts of care.
- continuity — a connection that persists across change. Example: The recurring doorway creates continuity between the childhood and adult sections.
- disparity — a noticeable inequality or difference. Example: The disparity in speaking time suggests an unequal relationship within the family.
- reciprocal — working in both directions between people or things. Example: The story presents a reciprocal relationship between trust and honest disclosure.
21–40. Connecting claims with evidence
- substantiate — support a claim with relevant evidence. Example: The repeated interruptions substantiate the argument that the exchange is unequal.
- corroborate — provide further evidence supporting an existing account. Example: A later letter may corroborate the witness's description of the departure.
- infer — reach a reasoned conclusion from available evidence. Example: We can infer reluctance from the pauses, but we cannot know its cause.
- imply — communicate a meaning without stating it directly. Example: The untouched meal may imply that the planned reunion has failed.
- suggest — point towards an interpretation without establishing it conclusively. Example: The narrow framing may suggest that the visitor feels trapped.
- demonstrate — show something clearly through evidence or explanation. Example: The paragraph must demonstrate how the change of tense affects the account.
- establish — provide a firm basis for a claim or relationship. Example: The opening establishes a routine that the next scene deliberately disrupts.
- indicate — serve as a sign of something. Example: The revised caption may indicate an attempt to soften the original accusation.
- qualify — limit or refine a statement so that it is more accurate. Example: The second example helps qualify the claim that every official is indifferent.
- nuance — a small but meaningful distinction. Example: The final apology adds nuance to an otherwise hostile portrayal.
- warrant — a reason that connects evidence to a conclusion. Example: The missing warrant leaves the paragraph's interpretation difficult to follow.
- premise — a starting proposition on which an argument depends. Example: The appeal depends on the premise that convenience should outweigh privacy.
- inference — a conclusion drawn from evidence and reasoning. Example: This inference remains tentative because the narrator never describes the whole conversation.
- implication — a consequence or unstated meaning arising from a detail. Example: The implication of the repeated gate imagery is a restricted sense of belonging.
- contention — a claim advanced for discussion or argument. Example: The essay's central contention must respond to the question about responsibility.
- interpretation — a reasoned account of what something means. Example: A persuasive interpretation explains both the comforting details and the threatening ones.
- evidence — material used to support or challenge a claim. Example: Evidence from the final scene complicates the student's initial description of the protagonist.
- plausibility — the quality of being reasonable in light of what is known. Example: The plausibility of this reading depends on the wider pattern of concealment.
- counterexample — a case that challenges a general claim. Example: The neighbour's generosity is a counterexample to the claim that nobody offers help.
- refutation — a reasoned demonstration that a claim fails. Example: A refutation must address the argument, rather than attack the person making it.
41–60. Controlling certainty and scope
- arguably — in a way that can be supported but remains open to challenge. Example: The quiet refusal is arguably the protagonist's clearest act of resistance.
- potentially — possibly, depending on relevant conditions. Example: The repeated slogan is potentially reassuring, although its effect depends on the reader.
- partly — to some extent without explaining everything. Example: The narrator's uncertainty is partly created by the gaps in the chronology.
- predominantly — mainly, though not exclusively. Example: The passage uses predominantly domestic images to frame a public dispute.
- comparatively — in relation to a stated comparison. Example: The second speaker adopts a comparatively restrained tone during the disagreement.
- ostensibly — according to the apparent or stated purpose. Example: The notice is ostensibly informative, yet its wording also discourages questions.
- seemingly — as it appears from the available evidence. Example: A seemingly minor correction changes who receives credit for the discovery.
- provisionally — subject to revision when more evidence becomes available. Example: We can provisionally accept this reading while examining the contradictory ending.
- contingent — dependent on a particular circumstance or condition. Example: The force of the allusion is contingent on the reader recognising its source.
- conditional — true or applicable only when a stated condition holds. Example: The narrator offers conditional approval, praising the plan only if access remains equal.
- tentative — held with caution because support is incomplete. Example: The unfinished diary permits only a tentative account of the writer's intentions.
- qualified — limited or modified by a relevant reservation. Example: The conclusion offers qualified support for the claim that the ending restores order.
- limited — restricted in extent, strength or applicability. Example: The available evidence gives a limited view of the family's earlier history.
- contextual — dependent on the circumstances surrounding something. Example: The phrase has a contextual meaning that a dictionary definition alone cannot settle.
- defensible — capable of being supported by sound reasons. Example: A defensible reading must account for the details that appear to contradict it.
- inconclusive — insufficient to settle the question being examined. Example: The single survey response is inconclusive evidence of the whole community's opinion.
- unequivocal — clear and leaving no relevant ambiguity. Example: The explicit refusal provides unequivocal evidence that permission was withheld.
- indeterminate — not settled or precisely identifiable from available information. Example: The speaker's final destination remains indeterminate when the narrative ends.
- ambivalent — having mixed or conflicting feelings towards something. Example: The protagonist remains ambivalent about returning to the place that shaped her.
- absolute — allowing no exception or limitation. Example: The phrase introduces an absolute claim that the later examples cannot sustain.
61–80. Explaining language and rhetoric
- rhetorical — concerned with how language shapes communication or persuasion. Example: The rhetorical question invites agreement before any evidence has been presented.
- diction — the particular words chosen in a text. Example: The mechanical diction reduces the workers to replaceable parts of a process.
- register — a style of language suited to a situation or relationship. Example: The abrupt shift in register turns a friendly invitation into an official warning.
- syntax — the arrangement of words and clauses in a sentence. Example: The interrupted syntax mirrors the speaker's difficulty completing the confession.
- cadence — the rhythmic movement or ending pattern of spoken or written language. Example: The steady cadence makes the repeated promise sound rehearsed.
- refrain — a phrase or line repeated at intervals. Example: The refrain returns after each failure, gradually losing its comforting effect.
- anaphora — repetition at the beginnings of successive clauses or lines. Example: The anaphora gives the speaker's demands a cumulative force.
- antithesis — a sharply balanced contrast between ideas. Example: The antithesis places private comfort beside public neglect.
- asyndeton — the deliberate omission of conjunctions from a sequence. Example: The asyndeton compresses the list into a hurried catalogue of losses.
- polysyndeton — the deliberate repetition of conjunctions beyond ordinary expectation. Example: The polysyndeton makes each additional obligation feel difficult to escape.
- metonymy — using an associated thing to stand for something else. Example: The reference to the crown uses metonymy to represent royal authority.
- synecdoche — using a part to represent a whole, or a whole for a part. Example: Calling the crew extra hands uses synecdoche to foreground their labour.
- irony — a meaningful discrepancy between expression, expectation or reality. Example: The praise becomes irony when the reader learns that the rescue never occurred.
- paradox — an apparent contradiction that invites closer thought. Example: The claim that silence speaks creates a paradox about withheld testimony.
- euphemism — a softened expression for something difficult or unpleasant. Example: The euphemism conceals the severity of the proposed dismissals.
- dysphemism — a deliberately harsh expression for something. Example: The dysphemism encourages the audience to dismiss the opposing group before hearing it.
- allusion — an indirect reference to another text, event or cultural detail. Example: The allusion connects the journey to an older story of exile.
- connotation — an association carried by a word beyond its basic reference. Example: The word home carries a connotation of safety that the scene unsettles.
- denotation — the direct reference or basic meaning of a word. Example: The denotation of gate is ordinary, but its repeated placement creates symbolic possibilities.
- modality — the degree of certainty, possibility or obligation expressed in language. Example: The shift from may to must strengthens the notice's modality of obligation.
81–100. Tracking form, narrative and structure
- focalisation — the perspective through which narrative information is perceived or filtered. Example: The restricted focalisation prevents readers from hearing the absent brother's explanation.
- retrospective — looking back on events from a later position. Example: The retrospective account places childhood confidence beside adult doubt.
- unreliable — not fully dependable as a source of an accurate account. Example: The narrator becomes unreliable when her later admission contradicts her earlier certainty.
- fragmentation — the breaking of a whole into disconnected or partial pieces. Example: The fragmentation of the diary disrupts any easy account of cause and effect.
- chronology — the order in which events happen. Example: The essay distinguishes the story's chronology from the order in which scenes are told.
- analepsis — a narrative movement back to an earlier event. Example: The analepsis reveals the conversation that changed the visitor's expectations.
- prolepsis — a narrative movement ahead to a later event. Example: The brief prolepsis makes the peaceful opening feel temporary.
- ellipsis — an omission that leaves something unstated or unrepresented. Example: The narrative ellipsis prevents readers from witnessing the decision itself.
- motif — a recurring element that contributes to a text's developing meaning. Example: The key becomes a motif through its repeated association with permission.
- symbolism — the use of details to carry meaning beyond their literal role. Example: The symbolism of the sealed window develops through its changing context.
- framing — the way information is bounded or presented for interpretation. Example: The framing of the interview gives the official's explanation priority.
- closure — the sense that a narrative or argument has reached an ending. Example: The final reunion provides emotional closure while leaving the legal dispute unresolved.
- resolution — the settling of a conflict or problem. Example: The resolution changes the immediate situation without removing its underlying inequality.
- cyclical — returning to an earlier pattern or position. Example: The cyclical structure suggests that the community has repeated its earlier mistake.
- linear — proceeding along a straightforward sequence. Example: The linear account makes the sequence of decisions easy to follow.
- digression — a movement away from the main subject. Example: The apparent digression introduces a memory that later changes the central argument.
- intertextual — involving relationships between texts. Example: The intertextual connection adds a second perspective to the narrator's claim of originality.
- metafictional — drawing attention to a story's status as a constructed narrative. Example: The metafictional interruption asks readers to notice who controls the account.
- paratext — material surrounding a main text that influences its presentation. Example: The publisher's note is paratext that frames the memoir as a recovered document.
- genre — a category shaped by shared conventions of form and purpose. Example: The writer adapts the conventions of the detective genre to explore uncertain memory.
101–120. Considering context, power and perspective
- ideology — a connected set of ideas about society and how it should operate. Example: The advertisement's ideology treats constant consumption as evidence of personal success.
- hegemony — dominance sustained partly through accepted ideas and cultural authority. Example: The novel questions hegemony by revealing how the dominant account becomes ordinary knowledge.
- agency — the capacity to act and make choices within particular conditions. Example: The character gains limited agency by deciding which part of the story to tell.
- autonomy — the ability to make decisions with meaningful independence. Example: The apparent gift reduces the recipient's autonomy because it carries hidden conditions.
- marginalisation — the process of pushing people or perspectives towards the edges of participation. Example: The repeated absence of workers' voices contributes to their marginalisation in the report.
- representation — the way people, places or ideas are presented. Example: The representation of the village changes when residents become speakers rather than scenery.
- positionality — the relationship between one's social position and one's perspective. Example: The research reflection considers how the interviewer's positionality may shape the exchange.
- hierarchy — an arrangement in which some positions carry greater rank or authority. Example: The seating plan makes the household's hierarchy visible before anyone speaks.
- legitimacy — the perceived or established rightfulness of authority or an action. Example: The official invokes tradition to defend the legitimacy of the restriction.
- authority — the power or recognised standing to direct or make claims. Example: The narrator's confident tone creates authority that the later evidence undermines.
- dominance — a position of greater control or influence. Example: The visual dominance of the logo leaves little space for the warning.
- resistance — opposition to a force, expectation or form of control. Example: The refusal to repeat the slogan becomes a small act of resistance.
- compliance — acting in accordance with a demand or expectation. Example: The scene distinguishes outward compliance from genuine agreement.
- complicity — involvement in helping or allowing wrongdoing. Example: The silent bystander forces the essay to consider complicity as well as direct action.
- solidarity — support based on shared interests or responsibility. Example: The shared meal represents solidarity without erasing the participants' different experiences.
- alienation — a sense or condition of separation from others or one's surroundings. Example: The distant narration intensifies the protagonist's alienation from the familiar street.
- belonging — a sense of connection and recognised membership. Example: The repeated use of we offers belonging while leaving its boundaries unclear.
- displacement — removal from a familiar place, position or sense of security. Example: The altered place names make displacement visible in the character's everyday language.
- identity — the qualities and relationships through which a person or group is understood. Example: The two names expose a conflict within the narrator's public identity.
- collective — shared by or involving a group. Example: The collective voice presents a common demand while concealing individual disagreement.
121–140. Evaluating an argument fairly
- coherence — the quality of ideas fitting together intelligibly. Example: The paragraph loses coherence when its final sentence changes the issue without explanation.
- consistency — agreement between different parts of an account or approach. Example: The conclusion needs consistency with the qualified claim established in the introduction.
- validity — the quality of an inference following logically, or a measure fitting its purpose. Example: The argument's validity depends on whether its conclusion follows from the stated premises.
- credibility — the degree to which a source or account deserves belief. Example: The anonymous claim requires a careful assessment of its credibility.
- reliability — dependability or consistency under the conditions being considered. Example: The source's reliability cannot be assumed merely because its language sounds confident.
- relevance — a direct connection to the question or purpose. Example: The example has relevance only if the essay explains its connection to the claim.
- sufficiency — the quality of being enough for the stated purpose. Example: The sufficiency of the evidence depends on the breadth of the conclusion.
- salience — the quality of standing out as especially noticeable or significant. Example: The headline gives salience to the cost while placing the benefit in small print.
- ambiguity — the possibility of more than one meaning. Example: The final pronoun preserves ambiguity about who accepted responsibility.
- contradiction — a conflict in which two claims cannot both hold in the stated sense. Example: The later confession creates a contradiction within the narrator's account.
- tension — a relationship between forces or ideas that pull against each other. Example: The dialogue maintains tension between family duty and individual freedom.
- assumption — an idea accepted as a starting point without being established here. Example: The proposal rests on the assumption that all families have internet access.
- bias — a tendency that can skew selection, interpretation or judgement. Example: The report's selection bias excludes people who could not attend the meeting.
- fallacy — a recognizable error in reasoning. Example: The claim risks a fallacy when it treats popularity as proof of truth.
- oversimplification — a reduction that removes distinctions necessary for accuracy. Example: Calling every disagreement selfish is an oversimplification of the conflict.
- generalisability — the extent to which a finding can apply beyond its original setting. Example: The small local sample limits the generalisability of the research claim.
- limitation — a boundary on what an argument or investigation can establish. Example: The missing interviews are a limitation that the researcher explains directly.
- counterargument — a reasoned objection to a position. Example: The counterargument challenges the proposed solution rather than denying the problem.
- rebuttal — a reasoned response to an opposing argument. Example: The rebuttal concedes the cost but questions the estimate used to calculate it.
- concession — an acknowledgement that another position has a valid point. Example: The concession strengthens the discussion by recognising a genuine drawback.
141–160. Describing inquiry and research accurately
- methodology — the reasoned approach guiding the selection and use of research methods. Example: The methodology explains why these documents can address the research question.
- scope — the boundaries of what an investigation covers. Example: The scope is limited to the campaign's public posters during one month.
- criterion — a standard used to make a judgement. Example: The researcher states a criterion for including an item in the comparison.
- variable — a feature that can take different values. Example: The analysis identifies price as a variable rather than assuming it stayed constant.
- operationalise — define a concept through the specific way it will be observed or measured. Example: The study must operationalise participation before it can compare attendance records.
- triangulate — compare different sources or approaches to examine a finding. Example: The researcher will triangulate the interview account with dated letters and minutes.
- provenance — the origin and history of an item or source. Example: The photograph's provenance matters because its original caption is missing.
- attribution — the assignment of a statement or work to its source. Example: Accurate attribution prevents the editor's introduction from becoming the author's own claim.
- paraphrase — restate another source's meaning in new wording. Example: A responsible paraphrase preserves the source's uncertainty and acknowledges the source.
- citation — a reference identifying a source used in an argument. Example: The citation must point to the source that actually supports the statement.
- synthesis — the combination of sources or ideas into a reasoned account. Example: The synthesis explains where the studies agree and why their conclusions differ.
- primary — directly originating from the event or material being studied in this context. Example: The signed letter serves as a primary source for the writer's stated intention.
- secondary — interpreting or discussing primary material in this research context. Example: The secondary account helps situate the letter within a wider debate.
- qualitative — concerned with qualities, meanings or experiences rather than chiefly numerical measures. Example: The qualitative analysis examines how participants describe their sense of safety.
- quantitative — concerned with numerical measurements or counts. Example: The quantitative summary records the number of responses in each stated category.
- correlation — a relationship in which variables vary together. Example: The observed correlation does not establish that one variable caused the other.
- causation — a relationship in which one factor produces or contributes to an effect. Example: The essay avoids claiming causation from a single coinciding change.
- confounding — distortion of an apparent relationship by another factor associated with both variables. Example: Prior experience may affect both course selection and final performance, confounding the apparent relationship between the course and the result.
- replicability — the possibility of obtaining comparable findings through a repeated study. Example: Detailed procedures allow readers to consider the study's replicability.
- reflexivity — critical attention to how one's own role influences the inquiry. Example: The reflection shows reflexivity by examining how the researcher's questions shaped the answers.
161–180. Building relationships between sentences
- nevertheless — despite the point just made. Example: The warning is brief; nevertheless, its placement makes it difficult to overlook.
- nonetheless — even though a preceding fact might suggest otherwise. Example: The account is incomplete; nonetheless, it supplies a useful counterexample.
- however — introducing a contrast or relevant reservation. Example: The opening promises inclusion; however, the later instructions restrict participation.
- conversely — introducing the reverse or an opposing relationship. Example: The first narrator conceals knowledge; conversely, the second reveals more than the characters know.
- similarly — in a relevant comparable way. Example: Similarly, the repeated closing image links belonging with a controlled entrance.
- likewise — in a corresponding way. Example: The speech praises individual choice; likewise, the poster addresses each reader personally.
- whereas — introducing a direct contrast between clauses. Example: The first text makes the restriction explicit, whereas the second presents it as common sense.
- although — introducing a concession within a sentence. Example: Although the ending restores contact, it does not restore the earlier trust.
- despite — in spite of a stated noun or noun phrase. Example: Despite the narrator's confidence, the available evidence remains incomplete.
- therefore — introducing a conclusion that follows from the stated reasoning. Example: The second account contradicts the first; therefore, both cannot be accepted without qualification.
- consequently — introducing a result of the preceding situation. Example: The speaker withholds the reason; consequently, the reader must evaluate competing explanations.
- hence — indicating a result or inference. Example: The final sentence changes the address, hence the need to reconsider the intended audience.
- accordingly — in a way that follows from the preceding circumstances. Example: The question concerns comparison; accordingly, the plan develops relationships between the two works.
- moreover — adding a further point that strengthens the same direction of argument. Example: The image conceals the barrier; moreover, the caption describes entry as effortless.
- furthermore — adding another relevant supporting consideration. Example: The claim ignores cost; furthermore, it assumes that every resident can travel independently.
- specifically — identifying an exact aspect of a broader point. Example: The poster appeals to responsibility, specifically the duty to protect shared spaces.
- notably — drawing attention to a particularly relevant detail. Example: Notably, the character speaks only after the official has left the room.
- indeed — emphasising or strengthening a preceding claim. Example: The invitation is conditional; indeed, its final line lists three exclusions.
- ultimately — referring to the final outcome or overall judgement. Example: Ultimately, the comparison reveals different limits on the possibility of reconciliation.
- otherwise — indicating an alternative condition or result. Example: Name the intended comparison; otherwise, the word similarly leaves the relationship vague.
181–200. Revising for clear, controlled expression
- precision — the accurate selection and expression of what is meant. Example: Precision improves when the student replaces a vague effect with a specific interpretation.
- concision — the expression of necessary meaning without avoidable excess. Example: The revised sentence gains concision by removing the repeated explanation.
- redundancy — repetition that adds no useful meaning. Example: The final clause creates redundancy because it merely repeats the opening claim.
- verbosity — the use of more words than the purpose requires. Example: Verbosity hides the otherwise clear relationship between the evidence and the interpretation.
- specificity — the quality of identifying exact details rather than generalities. Example: The paragraph needs specificity about which image creates the claimed contrast.
- emphasis — the attention or importance given to a particular element. Example: Moving the qualification changes the emphasis of the sentence.
- proportion — the relative amount of space or attention given to something. Example: The minor symbol occupies too much of the essay in proportion to its relevance.
- progression — a purposeful development from one stage or idea to another. Example: The argument's progression becomes clearer when each paragraph answers the previous one's question.
- transition — a movement or link between stages or ideas. Example: The transition explains why the discussion moves from private speech to public silence.
- cohesion — the linguistic connections that help parts of a text hold together. Example: Clear pronoun reference improves cohesion between the two sentences.
- antecedent — the word or phrase to which a later expression refers. Example: The pronoun has an unclear antecedent because two possible speakers were just mentioned.
- modifier — a word or phrase that adds information to another expression. Example: Moving the modifier prevents the sentence from describing the wrong character.
- nominalisation — the conversion of an action or quality into a noun expression. Example: The nominalisation obscures who made the decision until the sentence is rewritten.
- active — describing a clause in which the subject performs the stated action. Example: The active construction identifies the committee as the body that rejected the request.
- passive — describing a clause in which the subject receives the action. Example: The passive construction makes the decision visible while leaving the decision-maker unstated.
- parallelism — the use of corresponding grammatical structures. Example: The parallelism makes the two conditions easier to compare.
- revision — a deliberate change made to improve meaning or organisation. Example: The revision changes the claim because the original evidence supports a narrower conclusion.
- verification — the act of checking something against a dependable source or record. Example: Verification shows that the quotation was taken from a later scene.
- calibration — the adjustment of a claim or judgement to fit the evidence. Example: Careful calibration replaces an absolute accusation with a supported criticism.
- discrimination — the ability to distinguish relevant differences in this context. Example: Lexical discrimination helps the writer choose implies rather than proves.
List check: 200 entries in 10 groups of 20, with no repeated headword within this article. The list is a reference bank, not a target to insert into one essay.
Choose your next useful step
Use the word bank immediately, then choose the help you need.
Guide contents
Sections 1–5: Understand the stage and build clear sentences
Sections 6–9: Worked examples and practice
Sections 10–15: Review, revise and continue
Begin with the course name on your timetable. English A: Language and Literature, English A: Literature and English B have different tasks. This guide concentrates on the first of these while offering transferable language for other academic writing. Your teacher’s current assessment instructions and your examination session determine the task you actually complete.
In the Language A: Language and Literature guide for first assessment 2026, SL Paper 1 allows 1 hour 15 minutes for an analysis of one unseen non-literary passage; HL allows 2 hours 15 minutes for two analyses. Paper 2 gives both levels 1 hour 45 minutes for a comparative essay on two studied literary works. HL also includes a 1,200–1,500-word essay. The individual oral is a separate assessed component. These are different writing and speaking situations, so one memorised paragraph cannot serve every purpose.
The current Paper 2 assessment includes explicit comparative analysis within a 25-mark framework. Use the current guide when checking criteria; older online summaries can describe an earlier arrangement. Do not turn a vocabulary checklist into a substitute for understanding the task.
Check your Paper 2 work choices: The 2026 examiner instructions require two studied literary works by different authors, excluding works already used for other assessment components. Confirm your component allocations with your teacher before preparing a comparison.
Keep other DP writing tasks distinct
Language B is language acquisition. Adapt register, vocabulary and organisation to the specified text type, audience and purpose; do not automatically write an English A literary analysis. Similarly, a history explanation and an economics evaluation need subject knowledge that this general bank does not supply.
The extended essay brief for first assessment 2027 retains a maximum of 4,000 words. The 2027 update changes the research pathways and assessment framework, so check which version applies to your session. TOK includes an exhibition and an essay of up to 1,600 words. In research and TOK, vocabulary should express an actual method, distinction or knowledge question.
For a practical start, write the task, course, level, session and relevant criterion on one page. Beside each, record one question for your teacher if anything is uncertain. Then select words that address a visible weakness in your last piece of work.
Before writing, turn the question into a short working instruction. Identify the action, the subject of that action, the evidence available and any boundary. For example, an original practice question might ask, “Compare how two studied works present the consequences of a character’s decision.” Your response needs a relationship between the works, an account of consequences, and analysis of how those consequences are presented. A paragraph describing a character’s personality may be accurate but still miss the task.
Match the words to the component
| Component | Useful evidence to prepare | Question to ask while writing |
|---|---|---|
| Paper 1 | Specific language, structure and relevant visual details in the supplied text. | How does this choice contribute to the interpretation I am developing? |
| Paper 2 | Accurate moments and wider patterns from two studied literary works. | What does comparing these choices reveal about the question? |
| HL essay | A sustained selection of details serving the chosen line of inquiry. | Does this paragraph advance the inquiry, or repeat the topic? |
| Individual oral | Relevant extract details connected to the wider work and body of work. | Can I explain the connection to the global issue clearly when speaking? |
The component distinctions follow the current Language A: Language and Literature guide; the questions in the table are our study prompts. Check your teacher’s guidance about selecting works across components. Keep a small record of where each work has been used before settling an assessment choice.
Make a plan that can change
- Write a provisional answer. State the relationship you currently see in one ordinary sentence. You can refine it after examining the evidence.
- Choose supporting moments. Beside each moment, identify the relevant authorial choice. An event alone does not explain its presentation.
- Test the weakest link. Ask which part of your answer depends on a detail you cannot remember or an effect you have simply assumed.
- Revise the answer before polishing. Narrow the claim, change the evidence or choose a more suitable question if the actual task permits that choice.
Useful words enter after these decisions. Consequence might organise the argument; juxtaposition might name a relevant arrangement; contingent might explain a condition on your conclusion. Do not begin by deciding that you must use all three. If a word does not help answer the question, it has no necessary place in the paragraph.
For practice, try a brief planning session separately from timed writing. Compare two possible outlines and explain which gives you stronger evidence. Planning quality is visible in the decisions you can defend, not in how elaborate the outline looks. This is an eduKate exercise, not an additional IB assessment.
Start here: a short evidence check
This original eduKate check helps you choose a practice route. Consider five bank words: infer, qualify, whereas, corroborate and credibility. Explain two in plain language before using them.
Mini-task: A 9 a.m. announcement says the bridge is open. A maintenance log for the same bridge and date records a closure from 8 a.m. until noon. Write two sentences identifying the disagreement and explaining what further evidence you need.
A sound response might say: “The announcement reports an open bridge, whereas the log records a closure. An independent, dated inspection record could corroborate one account; the disagreement alone does not establish which source has greater credibility.” Other accurate wording is welcome.
Choose the next step: If meaning is uncertain, revisit the relevant entries. If the sentence breaks down, use the Fencing Method with one clause first. If you declare one account true without support, practise the evidence boundary. If you need to copy the model, close it and try a different pair of conflicting accounts. This is a practice guide, not an IB score.
A useful word resolves a specific problem. If two works share a pattern but differ in outcome, you might need converge, diverge or counterpoint. If the evidence supports a possibility rather than a certainty, you might need suggests, potentially or a conditional clause. If your paragraph drifts, you may need a clearer claim rather than a new adjective.
Ask four questions before choosing
- What exactly am I claiming?
- What detail supports that claim?
- What relationship connects the detail and the claim?
- What limit must remain visible?
Consider the sentence, “The image shows power.” It identifies a topic but gives the reader little to examine. If the image places a large official portrait above a small queue, the sentence could become, “The portrait’s visual dominance places institutional authority above individual need.” That revision is useful only if the actual image supports the spatial comparison. Vocabulary cannot supply a missing detail.
Now consider “The image proves that everyone obeys.” The problem is the scope of everyone and the certainty of proves. A narrower claim might read, “The orderly queue suggests outward compliance, although the image does not reveal individual agreement.” The second version makes an observable detail and an interpretive boundary visible. It does not merely exchange ordinary words for difficult ones.
Build a notebook of distinctions
Give each useful word a small entry: meaning here, common sentence pattern, your own evidence, and a nearby word that does a different job. For example, imply describes what a text communicates indirectly; infer describes what a reader concludes. A writer may imply uncertainty through gaps, while a reader infers uncertainty from those gaps.
Keep a separate line for use conditions. Corroborate requires additional supporting evidence; it should not mean that you have repeated your own opinion. Conversely introduces a reverse or opposing relationship; it is not a more formal version of additionally. Such boundaries make the vocabulary usable under pressure.
Begin with five words from a relevant group. Close the list and explain a real passage using two of them. Reopen the page to check meaning, grammar and fit. If the wording becomes less clear, keep the simpler accurate version and return to the new word in another context.
Knowing a definition is only the first step. A word must also fit the surrounding grammar and the relationship you mean. Keep the following short examples as models of use, then replace their content with evidence from your own reading. They illustrate choices within this guide rather than adding a second vocabulary list.
| Choice | Working example | Boundary to check |
|---|---|---|
| Although / despite | Although the invitation sounds generous, entry is restricted. Despite the generous invitation, entry is restricted. | Although introduces a clause; despite can introduce a noun phrase. Do not write “despite the invitation sounds generous”. |
| Qualify / contradict | The final scene qualifies the earlier optimism. | A qualification limits a claim. A contradiction conflicts with it. A mixed ending need not completely reverse an earlier impression. |
| Ambiguous / ambivalent | The message is ambiguous; the character appears ambivalent about leaving. | Ambiguity concerns interpretation or uncertainty of meaning. Ambivalence involves mixed or conflicting attitudes. |
| Contingent on | The welcome is contingent on the visitor’s compliance. | Name the condition. Contingent does not simply mean important or uncertain. |
| Corroborate | The second account corroborates the reported date. | Identify what is supported. Agreement about a date does not verify every claim in the first account. |
| Therefore / nevertheless | The invitation excludes late arrivals; therefore, access is conditional. Nevertheless, the notice presents itself as inclusive. | Therefore signals a conclusion; nevertheless introduces a point that persists despite what precedes it. |
Repair three sentences
Try first: “Despite the narrator admits uncertainty, the description is unequivocal.” “The report corroborates everything because another report repeats it.” “The character is ambiguous because she both wants and fears the journey.” For each, decide whether the problem concerns grammar, evidence or meaning before rewriting.
Checking notes: The first can begin “Although the narrator admits uncertainty”. Then decide whether unequivocal actually fits the description; a grammatical repair alone does not settle the interpretation. The second needs a narrower statement of what matches, and a check on whether the reports are independent. Repetition from the same original source is not additional independent confirmation. In the third, ambivalent describes the character’s conflicting feelings more accurately.
Sentence length is a separate choice. “The voice is tentative. The command is absolute.” may express a sharp contrast effectively. “Although the voice is tentative, the command is absolute” makes the concession explicit. Choose the version that fits the paragraph’s movement. Complex grammar is useful when it makes a complex relationship readable.
Finally, check pronoun reference. In “The narrator challenges the official, which makes her unreliable”, both which and her can obscure the claim. State who appears unreliable and what textual feature supports that judgement. An exact antecedent can improve analysis more than another technical term.
eduKate’s Fencing Method begins with a correct core and adds controlled layers. Here it is a revision routine, not an official IB paragraph formula. Each addition must preserve the evidence and make the intended reasoning easier to follow.
An original practice source
Imagine an invented public notice headed “A place for everyone”. Its large photograph shows an open gate. A small line underneath states that entry requires a paid booking made online. This is a made-up practice notice, not a real advertisement or examination text.
- Core: The notice promises access.
- Exact detail: The heading promises access through the phrase “for everyone”.
- Relevant contrast: The inclusive heading contrasts with the small-print booking requirement.
- Interpretation: This contrast creates tension between the promise of universal access and the conditions attached to entry.
- Qualification: The arrangement may make the conditions less salient, although a careful reader can still identify them.
At the fourth layer, the argument has become more precise without requiring a name for every technique. At the fifth, may acknowledges that reader response cannot simply be declared. Notice that the claim concerns the arrangement of the notice; it does not invent the advertiser’s private motives or measure how many readers were persuaded.
Repair a broken layer
An unsafe expansion would be, “The manipulative organisation deliberately deceives every vulnerable resident.” The practice source does not establish those intentions or that universal effect. Return to the supported core. You can analyse the unequal prominence of promise and condition without inventing evidence about the organisation.
Try a second version with a different purpose: explain how the notice could be revised for clarity. “The notice should make the booking condition as prominent as the invitation.” The vocabulary now serves a recommendation rather than literary analysis. This change of task tests whether you understand the words independently of a memorised sentence.
For your own writing, draw a line beneath the first unsupported expansion. Repair that layer before adding another. A short accurate paragraph is a better foundation for development than an elaborate paragraph whose central inference fails.
The following two miniature passages are original teaching material. They are not extracts from real literary works, and this short exercise is not a replacement for studying complete works for Paper 2.
Passage A: Mara put the spare house key on the kitchen table. “You can come whenever you wish,” her brother said. Then he slid the key into his own pocket.
Passage B: Every evening, Arun left the porch light burning. When his sister returned, he asked no questions. She paused at the doorway before stepping inside.
Practice question: Compare how the passages present the possibility of belonging. There is no official word limit for this invented exercise; a short developed paragraph is enough to test the comparison.
Move beyond two separate descriptions
A limited response might state that Passage A contains a key and Passage B contains a light. It has identified details, but it has not yet explained their relationship. Another limited response might say both families are kind. That reading overlooks the brother’s removal of the key and the sister’s hesitation.
A more defensible claim is that both passages use a household threshold to explore belonging, while presenting different limits on welcome. In A, the welcome is contradicted by an action that controls access. In B, access appears available, but the returning person’s hesitation keeps emotional certainty unresolved.
One model paragraph
Both passages connect belonging with access to a home, but they diverge in the source of uncertainty. In Passage A, the brother’s invitation is contradicted by his removal of the key, turning an apparent offer of autonomy into a demonstration of control. Passage B offers a quieter welcome through the persistent porch light and the absence of questions. Nevertheless, the sister’s pause qualifies any claim that the reunion is effortless. Whereas A locates the obstacle in another person’s action, B leaves open the possibility that hesitation continues even when entry is available. The comparison therefore reveals different limits on welcome: permission can be withheld externally, while a sense of belonging may remain emotionally unsettled.
Why these words earn their space
Diverge identifies a specific difference. Contradicted connects speech with action. Autonomy names the choice apparently offered and then restricted. Qualifies prevents the porch light from becoming proof of complete reconciliation. Whereas carries an explicit comparison rather than announcing that the essay has moved to the second text.
The paragraph also has limits. It cannot establish the whole history of either family. It should not call the sister frightened merely because she pauses. In an actual comparative literary essay, you would develop the interpretation with accurate references to the studied works and their wider patterns.
To extend the exercise, write a second paragraph that challenges one part of the model. Perhaps the silence in B could be read as emotional distance as well as kindness. Explain what additional textual evidence would strengthen either reading. A productive alternative interpretation tests the first argument; it does not simply replace one certainty with another.
SECTION 7 OF 15
7. Paper 1 practice: develop an interpretation from a complete short text
This invented advertisement and its described layout are original eduKate teaching material. They offer a manageable analysis exercise, not a reproduced IB paper. In an examination, use the actual supplied text and question.
Practice text: “Make room for a slower Saturday”
Your calendar is full. Your afternoon need not be.
At the Town Hall’s Quiet Hour, borrow a chair, choose a page and let one story set the pace. No prizes. No progress chart. No need to finish.
Come alone or bring someone who knows how to share a silence. Drop in between two and four. Stay for ten minutes or stay for the afternoon.
Quiet Hour: time you do not have to account for.
Layout: The title sits above a large photograph of an empty chair beside a window. Most of the page is pale and uncluttered. The practical details appear below the main copy in readable type. The text gives no attendance figures or reader testimonials.
Practice question: How do the language and layout present the event as a response to pressure? Begin with an interpretation, choose two connected details, and develop a paragraph. A suggested 150–220 words gives room for this small exercise; it is not an IB word requirement.
Read the choices before naming devices
- The opening moves from a full calendar to the possibility of a different afternoon. It acknowledges pressure before offering an alternative.
- The repeated “No” removes familiar expectations of achievement. Explain what is excluded and why that exclusion matters here.
- The instructions offer choices about company, duration and completion. Their form is directive, but their content repeatedly permits flexibility.
- The empty chair and open space can support the invitation to pause. They cannot prove that every visitor will feel relaxed.
One developed response
The advertisement presents the event as permission to step outside the demand to make every hour productive. Its opening recognises a crowded routine through the full “calendar”, then separates that routine from what the afternoon could become. The repeated “No” gives prizes, progress and completion the same emphatic rejection, making the absence of measurable achievement part of the offer. This idea continues in the flexible alternatives: visitors may come alone or together and stay briefly or longer. Although the copy uses imperatives such as “borrow” and “choose”, these instructions largely return decisions to the visitor. The uncluttered layout and unoccupied chair reinforce that room for choice by leaving space within the advertisement itself. The invitation therefore frames rest as legitimate without requiring the reader to justify it. Its effect remains a textual invitation, however; the page supplies no evidence that all readers experience the same pressure or respond in the same way.
Why the response holds together
Each detail contributes to the central idea of permission. The paragraph moves from recognition of pressure to the removal of demands and then to personal choice. It does not place one unrelated technique after another. The term imperatives is useful because the response notices a tension between the command form and the freedom offered. Frames describes how the advertisement presents rest; it does not claim that the event actually changes social attitudes.
Revise a weak sentence: “The beautiful photograph manipulates everyone into relaxing.” A more defensible version is, “The unoccupied chair makes the invitation to pause visible, although the image cannot establish how every reader feels.” The revision specifies the detail, explains its relationship to the invitation and removes an unsupported universal effect.
Independent transfer: Change only the imagined photograph to a crowded hall with a prominent clock. Would the same interpretation still work? Explain one tension that the new image could create. Do not merely substitute a different adjective. This second task checks whether your argument responds to evidence rather than following a sentence you have memorised.
A comparison becomes useful when it helps answer the question. “Both works contain conflict” provides a broad connection; “Both works make silence consequential, but one treats it as protection while the other exposes its cost” proposes a relationship that evidence can test. The second sentence is a model of reasoning, not a claim to reuse about works that do not support it.
The IB’s 2026 examiner guidance stresses explicit comparative analysis and detailed reference. It does not require a prescribed essay structure or memorised quotations. Comparison may develop similarities, differences or both as the chosen question warrants. Use this flexibility to organise a clear argument; do not turn it into a rule that every paragraph must follow the same pattern.
A planning sheet for your actual studied works
- Question focus: Rewrite the issue in plain language without dropping any part of the task. If the question concerns the consequences of a decision, keep both the decision and its consequences visible.
- Shared point of comparison: Choose something meaningful enough to investigate in both works, such as whose choices are permitted or how responsibility is assigned.
- Work A: Record a precise moment, its place in the work and the choice of narration, structure, dialogue or imagery that matters.
- Work B: Record equivalent evidence. Equivalent means useful for the comparison; the scenes need not be superficially identical.
- Relationship: Explain what converges or diverges and why the difference changes the answer.
- Complication: Identify a later moment, competing perspective or unresolved detail that prevents the claim from becoming too simple.
Repeat the sheet only for points that advance the argument. Three well-chosen relationships can form a practice outline, but three is our planning suggestion, not an IB paragraph requirement. If the second point simply repeats the first with a new quotation, combine them or choose a distinct development.
Use the earlier miniature comparison as a rehearsal
Return to the key and porch-light passages. One comparison concerns who controls entry; another concerns the gap between outward welcome and emotional belonging. Those points are related, so a plan should show how the second develops the first. A third paragraph merely stating that both passages involve houses would add little.
The miniatures cannot support a full Paper 2 essay about studied works. Their purpose is to expose the planning decisions in a small space. When transferring the routine, check each point against the complete works. A remembered ending may complicate your interpretation of an early scene; a recurring narrative pattern may matter more than one striking line.
Make the introduction and conclusion do different work
In a practice introduction, identify the works accurately, establish the question’s focus and propose the relationship your essay will develop. In the conclusion, explain what the completed comparison has clarified. “They are similar and different” reports that comparison occurred; it does not express what the comparison revealed. Return to the question with the more exact judgement your evidence now supports.
These activities are original eduKate practice. Suggested response sizes organise the work; they are not IB assessment limits. Attempt each task before reading the explanation.
Activity 1: choose the more defensible verb
A fictional memoir describes a character repeatedly checking an unopened letter. Complete the sentence: “The repeated checking ___ anxiety about the message.” Choose suggests or proves, then explain what the source cannot establish.
Check: Suggests is the more defensible choice on this limited evidence. The action can support an interpretation of anxiety, but it may have other explanations. A stronger answer identifies the relevant uncertainty rather than treating suggests as a universal safe word.
Activity 2: repair the connector
“The poster uses a bright colour. Conversely, its heading uses a large font.” Rewrite the relationship without inventing an opposition.
Check: “The poster uses a bright colour, and its heading uses a large font.” The supplied sentences identify two visual features without establishing an opposing relationship, so conversely is unsuitable. To use a contrast, identify an actual difference and explain its relevance. The evidence decides the connector.
Activity 3: narrow an excessive claim
Two interviewees say they support a proposal. A student writes, “The two interviews demonstrate that the whole city supports the proposal.” State a more accurate conclusion and one research limitation.
Check: “Both interviewees support the proposal, but the two interviews cannot establish the distribution of opinion across the city.” The limitation concerns the sample and the scope of the conclusion. Adding apparently before the original claim would not repair the missing evidence.
Activity 4: turn a device label into analysis
An invented speech by a neighbourhood representative repeats “We waited” at the start of three sentences describing missed promises to the neighbourhood. Write two sentences explaining a possible effect of the anaphora.
One possible answer: “The anaphora gives the separate disappointments a shared grammatical shape, presenting them as a repeated pattern rather than isolated incidents. The emphasis on waiting also foregrounds the community’s endurance, although the extract alone does not establish that every resident shares the speaker’s view.” This connects the device with a reasoned interpretation and a boundary.
Activity 5: make a research term do real work
Replace “My methodology was good” with a sentence that names a decision and its reason. Use a research project you actually understand rather than inventing data.
Check: A suitable answer might explain why documents from the same period were selected to make a comparison fairer. The word methodology is useful only when it points to an approach that the reader can examine. Do not claim triangulation if you consulted only one source.
For a transfer check, repeat one activity with a different real passage a few days later. Record whether you selected the word independently, not whether you remembered the model answer exactly.
The paragraph names techniques but explains little
Return to the actual detail. State what it says or presents, identify the relevant choice, and explain how that choice contributes to your interpretation. If you cannot make the connection, remove the device label until you can. A precise description of a pattern can be more useful than an incorrectly named technique.
The argument sounds certain beyond its evidence
Circle universal or absolute claims: every, always, proves, entirely, unquestionably. Some may be justified, but each needs support. Change the scope where necessary. A narrow claim about one passage can be stronger than a broad claim about all people, all readers or the author’s private beliefs.
The comparison disappears after the introduction
Write one relationship sentence for each paragraph before revising the whole essay. Identify the common issue and the relevant difference. For example: “Both narrators conceal information, but one does so knowingly while the other lacks access to it.” Then supply evidence that actually establishes the difference.
The wording is difficult to read aloud
Check the main subject and verb. Excessive nominalisation can hide action: “The implementation of the exclusion of participants was undertaken” obscures who did what. If the evidence names the committee, “The committee excluded participants” is clearer. A passive construction can be appropriate when the actor is unknown or less relevant; the choice should serve meaning.
The new word is correct but unnecessary
Read the sentence with the new word and with a familiar alternative. Keep the version that expresses the intended distinction most accurately. Lexical discrimination includes choosing simple language. You do not need hegemony when you mean that one character speaks more often, unless the wider argument genuinely concerns cultural authority and accepted social ideas.
Choose one diagnosis per practice session. Repairing every feature at once makes it difficult to see which change helped. Keep the original and revised sentence, then write a short reason for the revision.
This is a suggested routine that you can adapt to school deadlines. It is not an IB timetable or a fixed requirement. Begin with a recent teacher-marked paragraph so your vocabulary work addresses a real need.
- Select: Identify one repeated problem, such as vague analytical verbs or disconnected comparison. Choose five relevant words.
- Explain: Say each meaning in ordinary language and identify a situation where it would be inappropriate.
- Apply: Revise two sentences using actual textual evidence. Leave a sentence unchanged if the new word adds nothing.
- Retrieve: Close the list and write a fresh short paragraph on another passage.
- Review: Check accuracy, relevance and the strength of the inference. Record one successful use and one repair.
Before timed practice, decide which habits you want to preserve: answer the question, use precise references, explain the inference and compare where required. Do not carry a mental quota of advanced words into the task. If searching for a term interrupts the argument, use an accurate familiar expression and continue.
After practice, examine a small sample carefully rather than highlighting every difficult word. Find one sentence where a verb overstated the evidence, one where a comparison became clearer, and one where a shorter construction improved meaning. Those changes show usable progress.
For parents or study partners, a useful question is “What does that word let you say more accurately?” Listen for an explanation, not a recited definition. If the learner cannot explain it, ask them to restate the sentence simply. The purpose is to reveal the thinking so the next revision has a clear target.
SECTION 12 OF 15
12. Transfer vocabulary into research and TOK with a clear purpose
The same word can require different evidence in different subjects. A claim about a narrator’s credibility needs textual support. A claim about a source’s credibility in a research essay needs attention to its origin, purpose and suitability for the particular question. Neither judgement can be settled by inserting the adjective reliable.
Keep a decision record for research
For a source you actually use, record who produced it, when, why it is relevant, the specific claim it supports and one limitation. Then write a sentence that makes a research decision visible. For example: “I used the dated programme to establish when the event was scheduled, but checked a later account before concluding that it took place.” The distinction between intention and occurrence gives the source a limited, defensible role.
Try the same routine with a method. Replace “My sample was good” with an explanation of who was included and what the selection permits you to infer. If your participants were volunteers from one club, do not describe their views as representative of every student. Name the limitation and explain its effect on your conclusion. This example teaches claim control; it is not permission to undertake a particular research method without your supervisor’s guidance.
For first assessment in 2027, the extended essay brief specifies three formal supervisor reflections and a final 500-word reflective statement. Confirm the applicable arrangements for your examination session. A useful practice note connects a difficulty, a decision, its outcome and what you would carry into future work. “I worked hard” does not explain what changed in your approach.
Use confounding precisely: A possible confounder is associated with both variables in the relationship being studied; it is not simply anything that makes research difficult. The CDC’s explanation of research biases gives this distinction. In our course example, prior experience may influence both who selects the course and how well they perform. That possibility limits a claim that the course alone caused the result.
Keep TOK focused on knowing
The TOK subject brief describes an essay responding to one of six session-specific prescribed titles. The discussion should stay with that title. An interesting example is useful when you explain what it reveals about knowledge, methods, justification or perspective in the relevant area of knowledge.
As a small independent exercise, distinguish “The witnesses disagree” from “The disagreement raises a question about which features of testimony justify confidence”. The first reports a situation. The second opens an inquiry into knowing, but still needs a real, accurately understood example and a connection to the assigned title. Merely adding epistemology or positionality would not supply that connection.
In all three contexts—English A, research and TOK—keep your source notes separate from your own sentences. Mark exact quotations as quotations while taking notes, retain their locations, and check paraphrases against the source. Use this article’s models to study decisions, then write from your own evidence under your school’s acknowledgement requirements.
A practical feedback conversation can begin with one paragraph and three questions: What is the paragraph claiming? Which detail most strongly supports it? Where does the explanation ask the reader to accept too much? Answer in ordinary language before editing individual words. This is an eduKate revision routine, not a mark conversion or official assessment grid.
Match the next action to the actual difficulty
- You cannot explain the claim aloud: rewrite its core in one sentence. Remove abstract nouns until the idea becomes clear, then restore only those that add precision.
- You can explain it but cannot locate evidence: return to the text or notes. Do not solve a knowledge gap with a stronger-sounding verb.
- You have evidence but only describe it: ask what the specific choice changes in the reader’s understanding. Write the missing connection before adding another example.
- The comparison is present but superficial: explain why the relationship matters to the question. Similar settings alone may tell you little about how the works treat the issue.
- The reasoning is clear but expression distracts: check sentence boundaries, verb forms, reference words and collocations. Preserve the argument while repairing language.
Keep evidence of independent use
Save three short records: the original sentence, the revised sentence and the reason for the change. Add a later attempt on a different text without the model in front of you. That later attempt helps distinguish a successful copied pattern from a choice you can make independently. Date the attempts and note what assistance you received.
For example, a student might change “This proves the narrator is dishonest” to “This contradiction weakens the narrator’s account of the meeting”. This narrows the claim to one account. A contradiction may reveal an inaccurate or incomplete account without establishing deliberate deception. In a later passage, the student may choose a firm verb because the text establishes the contradiction directly. Progress means calibrating certainty to evidence, not making every sentence hesitant.
Make a final reading pass with a small purpose
In timed practice, reserve a realistic amount of your available time to reread, based on your own practice pace and teacher’s advice. First check that you answered the chosen question. Then repair one recurring language problem that you know how to spot. Last-minute synonym replacement is rarely useful when you cannot check the new word’s meaning. Keep clear wording that you can defend.
A parent or study partner can help by asking for explanations and listening for the connection between claim and evidence. They do not need to assign an IB grade. Bring unresolved subject-specific questions to the teacher with a concrete paragraph and a precise question about what to improve next.
Must I learn all 200 words before the examination?
No. This is a reference bank selected for practice. Begin with words that solve problems in your actual writing. Accurate use of a smaller set is more useful than recognising a long list that you cannot apply independently.
Will using sophisticated words guarantee a higher grade?
No vocabulary list can guarantee a grade. An unfamiliar word can weaken an otherwise clear sentence if its meaning, register or grammar is wrong. Your argument still needs accurate knowledge, relevant evidence, analysis and appropriate organisation.
Can I use the same words in English A, TOK and the extended essay?
Some words transfer, but their jobs change. Evidence in a literary argument refers to textual support; in a research essay it must fit the chosen inquiry and method. In TOK, the discussion should examine knowledge rather than simply decorate a general opinion with abstract terminology.
Is the Fencing Method an IB essay structure?
No. It is eduKate’s practice approach for developing an accurate idea in controlled stages. Your final structure should fit the task. You can use the method to improve one sentence, a comparison or a research claim without forcing every paragraph into an identical shape.
Should every sentence contain a connector?
No. Clear sequence, repeated key ideas and precise pronoun reference can connect sentences without a conspicuous linking word. Use however, therefore or similarly when the relationship needs that signal, and check that the relationship is real.
What if my school calls this Grade 12 or Senior Year?
Use the programme stage, DP Year 2, to identify the relevant guide. School Year 13 is only the illustrative British-style label used in this series. Local year names and age cut-offs vary.
Can I submit the model paragraph?
Use it to examine the relationship between evidence and wording, then create your own response to your assigned texts and task. The fictional miniatures do not provide evidence about your studied works. Follow your school’s academic integrity and acknowledgement requirements.
Assessment information was checked against official IB sources on 8 November 2026. The programme and course requirements belong to the IB; the word selection, definitions, examples, practice passages and revision routines on this page are original eduKate teaching material. This page is not an official IB publication.
- IB Diploma Programme overview: programme context.
- Language A: language and literature guide, first assessment 2026: current assessment outline and criteria.
- Language B overview: language acquisition course distinction.
- Extended essay subject brief, first assessment 2027 and official update: research requirements and the assessment transition.
- TOK subject brief: the separate knowledge-focused assessment.
- The Fencing Method explanation: the origin of the controlled-expansion practice used here.
For a subject-focused companion, continue with IB English A: Language and Literature essay vocabulary or IB TOK essay vocabulary. The present guide focuses on final-year refinement and transfer; choose the companion that matches your actual course.
Where this guide sits in the IB pathway
| Reader band | Approximate ages | Programme route |
|---|---|---|
| School Years 1–6 | About ages 5–11 | PYP writing foundations; school-year bands selected for this series |
| School Years 7–11 | About ages 11–16 | MYP Years 1–5 |
| School Years 12–13 | About ages 16–18 | DP Years 1–2 |
The IB programme overview gives broader age ranges: PYP 3–12, MYP 11–16 and DP 16–19. This school-age series begins around age five; it does not cover every PYP early-years age or the separate Career-related Programme.
Explore the Age 12 vocabulary reference · Use the Fencing Method for vocabulary · Choose another vocabulary guide
Continue through the IB vocabulary series
Choose your programme stage. The school-year labels are approximate reader bands; start where the writing tasks fit your current needs.
Primary Years Programme: school-age writing foundations
- PYP · School Year 1
- PYP · School Year 2
- PYP · School Year 3
- PYP · School Year 4
- PYP · School Year 5
- PYP · School Year 6
Middle Years Programme: Years 1–5
- MYP Year 1 · School Year 7
- MYP Year 2 · School Year 8
- MYP Year 3 · School Year 9
- MYP Year 4 · School Year 10
- MYP Year 5 · School Year 11
Diploma Programme: Years 1–2
- DP Year 1 · School Year 12
- DP Year 2 · School Year 13 · this guide
Previous stage: DP Year 1 · School Year 12 · Explore the Vocabulary Learning Hub