A bank of formative assessments aligned to IB command terms should organize questions by both subject content and the thinking students must demonstrate. Teachers should tag prompts by command term, response type, mark value, difficulty, and likely misconception, rather than filing them only under topics such as genetics, market failure, or authoritarian states.
This structure helps teachers distinguish between a student who lacks content knowledge and one who understands the material but cannot yet analyse, explain, compare, or evaluate it effectively. It also makes focused, low-stakes assessments quicker to assemble and easier to improve.
Why command-term alignment matters
The IB defines command terms as words and phrases that indicate what a student must do in response to a question. They signal the type and depth of thinking expected, although the glossary in the current subject guide remains authoritative because usage can vary by discipline.
According to the IB's assessment principles and practices, formative assessment is ongoing assessment used to guide teaching and improve performance. A quiz becomes genuinely formative when its evidence changes what the teacher or student does next.
Command-term alignment makes that evidence more precise. A student might accurately describe causes of inflation but fail to evaluate a policy response. The weakness may involve criteria, counterarguments, or judgment rather than knowledge.
Start with the current subject guide
Before building a question bank, extract four elements from the current guide:
- Syllabus content and learning expectations
- Assessment objectives
- The official command-term glossary
- Current examination components and question formats
An unofficial generic command-term poster should not replace subject-specific guidance. The public Mathematics: analysis and approaches guide, for example, includes mathematical terms such as differentiate, integrate, and hence alongside more widely used commands.
Do not connect each command term mechanically to a fixed mark value. Explain requires reasons or causes, but the necessary depth also depends on the marks, stimulus, content scope, and paper format.
Create a practical planning framework
A department can group terms by the response behaviour they elicit. This is a planning tool, not an official IB hierarchy.
| Response behaviour | Typical command terms | Evidence to look for |
|---|---|---|
| Precise recall | Define, identify, list, state | Correct terminology and factual accuracy |
| Structured account | Describe, outline | Relevant features, stages, or characteristics |
| Reasoning and application | Apply, explain, interpret, suggest | Valid application, causal links, or evidence-based conclusions |
| Relational thinking | Analyse, compare, contrast, distinguish | Components, similarities, differences, and relationships |
| Supported judgment | Discuss, evaluate, justify, to what extent | Criteria, evidence, limitations, and a defensible conclusion |
This framework exposes gaps. A bank containing many definition questions but few opportunities to interpret evidence or defend judgments gives an incomplete picture of readiness. RevisionDojo's IB command terms guide can support classroom modelling, but teachers should verify terminology against the relevant official guide.
Build each item around one purpose
Use a consistent design sequence:
- Select the learning objective. Identify the knowledge or skill being assessed.
- Choose the command term. Decide what students must do with that knowledge.
- Define observable success. State what a creditworthy response contains.
- Set the marks. Match them to the number and depth of expected elements.
- Draft the prompt and stimulus. Remove irrelevant information.
- Write scoring guidance. If the expected answer is unclear, revise the question.
- Predict errors. Separate content misconceptions from command-term failures.
Consider this simplified economics item:
Explain how an increase in interest rates may reduce demand-pull inflation. [4]
A strong response should form a causal chain: higher borrowing costs reduce consumption or investment, aggregate demand falls, and inflationary pressure weakens. State would require less development, while evaluate would require enough marks and context for limitations and judgment.
Tag questions for reliable reuse
A folder of worksheets is not a functional question bank. Each item needs searchable metadata.
| Field | What to record |
|---|---|
| Course | Subject, SL or HL, and syllabus version |
| Content | Topic, concept, and learning objective |
| Assessment demand | Command term, objective, format, and difficulty |
| Administration | Marks and approximate completion time |
| Scoring | Mark points, alternatives, and quality indicators |
| Diagnosis | Likely misconception or reasoning error |
| Use history | Date, class performance, and revision notes |
Recording the syllabus version prevents outdated items from remaining in circulation after changes to content, terminology, objectives, or papers. For secure reuse, create parallel versions by changing the data, source, case, or context while preserving the same construct.
RevisionDojo's Question Bank and Test Builder can help teachers assemble practice sets. Every selected question still requires review for syllabus alignment, accessibility, timing, and fit with what students have been taught.
Use focused low-stakes formats
Short tasks can isolate particular weaknesses:
- A 3-minute retrieval check using define, identify, or state
- A single-paragraph explanation focused on causal reasoning
- A comparison grid followed by a comparative claim
- An evaluation skeleton requiring criteria, evidence, limitation, and judgment
- A data-response exit ticket using interpret or suggest
- A same content, different command exercise
The final format is especially diagnostic. Asking students to describe a process, explain it, and evaluate its significance keeps the content stable, so differences between responses reveal their understanding of each command.
Design feedback and retesting together
Build short feedback codes into the bank:
- K: inaccurate or missing knowledge
- CT: command term not fulfilled
- E: insufficient evidence or example
- R: reasoning link missing
- J: judgment absent or unsupported
- C: communication, notation, or organization problem
Corrections should match the diagnosed error. A CT error on an evaluation task might require the student to identify criteria and add a supported judgment. A K error requires content repair first.
Retest with fresh content or a revised context after feedback. This checks transfer rather than memorization. RevisionDojo's guide to meaningful formative assessment explains a related practice, feedback, correction, and retest cycle.
Quality assurance and common mistakes
Before releasing an item, ask another teacher to complete and mark it. This exposes ambiguous wording, missing information, unrealistic timing, and scoring guidance that rewards something other than the stated command.
Departments should audit coverage across syllabus areas, objectives, cognitive demands, and levels. They should also check accessibility for multilingual learners, consistency between prompts and marks, unusual performance patterns, and continued alignment with the guide.
Common mistakes include treating explain, analyse, and evaluate as interchangeable; assigning too few marks; writing prompts before defining creditworthy evidence; and giving comments without requiring correction. Topic-only tagging also hides whether students are practising the necessary thinking. The IB overview of Diploma Programme assessment and examinations emphasizes the broad combination of knowledge, application, analysis, argument, and problem-solving involved in DP assessment.
Conclusion
An effective formative assessment command-term bank connects content, intellectual action, success criteria, feedback, and retesting. Start with the current subject guide, give every item a clear purpose, add useful metadata, and use the resulting evidence to determine the next teaching step.
RevisionDojo can support this process through its Question Bank, Test Builder, Jojo AI feedback, and teacher assessment resources. Departments can consult RevisionDojo for IB teachers and departments, then begin with one unit and a small set of moderated questions.
Sources and referenced URLs
- IB Assessment principles and practices
- IB Diploma Programme assessment and examinations
- IB Mathematics: analysis and approaches guide
- RevisionDojo IB Question Bank
- RevisionDojo Test Builder and Exam Mode
- RevisionDojo IB exam command terms guide
- RevisionDojo guide to meaningful formative assessment
- RevisionDojo for IB teachers and departments
