What you will get from this guide
- Use the command-word guidance for your exact board, qualification and subject.
- Read command, content, context and constraints as one instruction.
- The mark tariff suggests scale, but not a universal number of sentences or minutes.
- Practise command words through real subject questions, not definitions alone.
- Check level descriptors and assessment objectives for extended responses.
Command words are the verbs that direct an exam response: state, describe, explain, compare, analyse, assess, evaluate, calculate and many more. They matter because knowing a topic is not enough if you present that knowledge in the wrong form. A description may accurately say what happens while an explanation needs the link that says why it happens.
Do not treat a generic command-word poster as a universal contract. AQA publishes different resources by subject, Pearson places subject-specific taxonomies in specifications and OCR states that the exact response depends on context. Start with your qualification's glossary, then read the whole question and marking approach.
Find the official list for your course
Search the exam board's subject page, specification or assessment resources using the specification code. Some boards provide a separate glossary; others include a command-word taxonomy in the specification. Check that the resource matches GCSE, AS or A-Level and the current course. An international GCSE document is not automatically the same as a GCSE document from the same board.
Make your own short list from words that actually appear in your papers. Beside each one, add an example question reference, the assessment objective it tested where published and one feature of a successful response. This is more useful than copying a long alphabetised glossary because it connects the word to your subject.
Read command, content, context and constraint
Split the task into four parts. The command tells you what to do. The content names the knowledge or skill. The context tells you where to apply it, perhaps a graph, extract, case study, experiment or named text. The constraint limits the answer, for example “one reason”, “using Figure 2”, “in terms of particles” or “without a calculator”. Missing any part can turn a knowledgeable answer into an irrelevant one.
Imagine the original prompt “Compare the change in output for Factory A and Factory B using the data.” The command is compare, the content is change in output, the context is two factories and the constraint is use the data. Writing two separate descriptions may show knowledge but never make the relationship explicit. A useful plan begins with the similarity or difference, then supports it with paired evidence.
- Box the command
Identify the main action and any second action, such as “state and justify”.
- Underline the content
Name the precise idea, period, process, method or feature being tested.
- Circle the context
Notice any source, diagram, case, extract, practical situation or named example that must shape the answer.
- Mark the constraint
Keep limits such as number, time period, evidence requirement, unit or method visible while writing.
Handle recall and description words precisely
Words such as name, give, identify and state often ask for concise knowledge or selection. That does not mean every use is identical. “Identify” may require choosing information from a stimulus, while “give a reason” adds justification. Follow the number requested and avoid burying a correct response inside contradictory extras.
Describe usually asks what something is like, what happens or what pattern is present. In data questions, include the important direction and supporting values where required, with units. In literature or language, description alone may not satisfy an analysis task because naming a feature is not the same as interpreting how it works. In geography, describing a distribution differs from explaining the processes behind it.
Build explanations as connected reasoning
Explain normally needs links between ideas. A practical structure is cause, process and outcome, but the subject decides what counts as a valid link. In biology, an explanation might connect a changed condition to a process and then to an observed result. In history, it might show how a factor produced consequences in a specific period. In economics, it may require a chain from a change in incentives through behaviour to an outcome, applied to the case.
Suggest invites a plausible response using your knowledge and the information provided, especially where more than one answer could work. It is not permission for unsupported guessing. Make the inference visible. If a graph shows a plateau, for example, identify the limiting idea that could account for it and connect that idea to the pattern. Use only concepts that fit your specification and the given evidence.
- Start with a relevant cause or principle.
- Show the intermediate link that makes the outcome follow.
- Return to the named context rather than ending generically.
- Check whether the question asks how, why, or both.
- For “suggest”, make a defensible inference and show the evidence behind it.
Make relationships explicit when comparing or analysing
Compare requires paired treatment. State the similarity or difference and bring both items into the same point. Writing one paragraph about A and another about B leaves the reader to perform the comparison. In a data task, paired figures can support the relationship. In literature, the relationship may concern methods, meanings or perspectives rather than a simple list of features.
Analyse usually asks you to break information down and explore relationships, meaning or consequences. What that looks like varies sharply. English analysis may examine how a precise language or structural choice shapes interpretation. Economics analysis may develop linked reasoning from a change to an outcome. Science analysis may involve processing data, identifying patterns and drawing justified conclusions. Use the assessment objective and exemplars for your paper rather than memorising one paragraph acronym.
| Task | A useful move | What to avoid |
|---|---|---|
| Compare two data sets | State the relationship, then support it with paired values and units | Two unrelated descriptions |
| Analyse a writer's method | Select a precise feature, interpret its operation and connect it to the question | Feature spotting followed by a generic effect |
| Analyse an economic change | Build a contextual chain where each step follows from the last | Several accurate points with no connection |
| Analyse scientific data | Process or compare the evidence, identify the pattern and justify the conclusion | Repeating every value without interpretation |
Support judgement commands with criteria
Assess, evaluate, discuss, justify and “how far” tasks usually require more than listing two sides. The exact definition and mark grid differ, but a defensible judgement needs criteria: effective for whom, over what time, under which assumptions, against which alternative or to what extent. Build relevant reasoning first, then weigh it.
A balanced answer does not always mean equal space for every view. It means the conclusion has considered the important evidence and explains why one factor, interpretation or limitation carries more weight in the set context. In science, evaluation may focus on a method, evidence quality or conclusion. In history it may weigh factors or interpretations. In psychology it may consider evidence, validity, applications or debates, depending on the task. Check what the assessment objectives reward.
Treat mathematical instructions as method decisions
Calculate, determine, find, solve, show and prove can carry different expectations. A calculate question may require relevant working and an answer in specified units or accuracy. “Show that” gives the target, so your working must establish it from valid earlier steps rather than treating the printed result as evidence. A proof needs a general argument where examples alone would not establish the claim.
Maths wording also contains constraints beyond the verb: exact form, a required method, a stated degree of accuracy, interval notation or a demand to show working. In science, calculate questions may include conversions, significant figures and practical context. Read your specification and mark schemes to learn when method or follow-through marks may be available and what an acceptable final form looks like.
Use the marks to judge scale, not sentence count
The tariff helps you estimate the amount and depth of work, but “one sentence per mark” is not a reliable rule. One calculation line can earn more than one kind of credit. A concise comparison can use paired evidence efficiently. A levels-based extended response is judged holistically against descriptors, not by matching a fixed number of points to marks.
- Check the tariff
Use it as a signal of expected scale alongside the space, task and published assessment approach.
- List the required moves
Write a tiny plan based on the command, context and assessment objectives.
- Stop when the task is complete
Do not add a second answer that contradicts a precise response or repeat a judgement without further reasoning.
Questions people ask
Short answers to the practical questions that usually come next.
Do command words mean the same thing for every exam board?
No. There is overlap, but boards and subjects publish their own definitions and use them within particular assessment structures. Use the glossary or specification for your exact course and confirm meaning through official questions and mark schemes.
Is one sentence per mark a good rule?
No. Marks can reward method, accuracy, selected points or the overall quality of a response. A tariff helps you judge scale, but the task and mark scheme decide what receives credit.
What is the difference between describe and explain?
Describe generally sets out characteristics, events or patterns. Explain connects ideas to show how or why something happens. The exact requirement still depends on the subject, context and board definition.
How can I revise command words?
Build a small list from your own specification, then sort official questions by command. Plan or answer short sets and use the schemes to identify how the required thinking changed. Definitions without subject practice are rarely enough.
Sources and further reading
We use official and first-party sources wherever the detail could affect a decision, specification or exam approach.