Advise: a word often used in a scenario style question where a situation involving one or more people is given and you are then asked to advise one (or more) of the characters. You need to explain the legal points involved in the question, come to a conclusion on the likely outcome of a case based on those legal principles and use this to advise the person(s).

Analyse: to break a topic down into its separate elements/parts. This also indicates that depth is required in the answer: a descriptive outline will riot be enough. You should consider several aspects of the, topic and form a conclusion based on your analysis.

Assess: weigh up two or more options or arguments or consider advantages and disadvantages and reach a conclusion. You need to justify your conclusion from the arguments you present.

Comment: draw conclusions from the facts. You need to set out relevant facts or legal principles and then point out problems or anomalies as well as advantages. Setting out the facts on their own is not enough; there must be comment on those facts.

Compare: explain the differences and the similarities between two or more things: for example, you may be asked to compare the role of juries and lay, magistrates. It is not enough just to describe the role of each: You must point out the differences and the similarities.

Consider: another term which requires you to weigh up options or arguments and reach a conclusion.

Consider the liability of: in a scenario style question involving one or more characters, decide whether a character is legally liable. This requires you to identify the particular legal points involved in the scenario, explain the legal principles in detail and then form a conclusion about the person's legal liability, based on those legal principles.

Critically analyse: break down the topic into its component parts and look at those parts critically. Remember that criticism is not, just about negative points; criticising is the art of judging, so it is necessary to consider the pros and cons of the topic.

Critically comment on: draw conclusions from facts, consider pros and cons and make a judgement. The word critically, indicates that more sophisticated comment is (analyse remember that criticism is not just about negative points).

Define: give an explanation of' the word or term given in the question. If there is an Act of Parliament setting out a definition, for example, as theft is defined in the Theft Act 1978, start with that definition, then go on to expand upon it, preferably with case examples.

Describe: give a factual (and fairly detailed) account of the topic.

Discuss: means that both sides of a problem have to be explained and considered before you can come to conclusion. The word discuss may also be used inviting you to comment on a statement or quotation. In this case you must make sure that you use the information in the statement as the basis for your discussion.

Discuss the liability of: basically the same as consider the liability of. The key point to remember is that you must explain the legal principles involved and base your discussion of the liability of the person (s) in the scenario on those legal principles.

Draft: draw up a specific document as required by the question. This might be a letter or a more formal document such as a claim form.

Evaluate: consider a broad range of information on the topic and come to a conclusion. Evaluation involves weighing up the points on both sides using the information you have. So you should present your evidence first (facts, legal principles, cases, research findings etc.) showing both and then come to a conclusion.

Examine: look in detail at the arguments, evidence and theories and then come to a conclusion.

Explain: make clear and illustrate the point. This means you need to demonstrate good knowledge and understanding of the facts of the topic in the question. There may be a second part to the question which then requires you to use that knowledge to assess or analyse.

Explain in your own words: this is likely to be used a data or source based paper and requires you to re-phrase the source material, literally in your own words. Merely copying out bits of the source material will not gain marks. Giving examples in your explanation can help to make sure that you do use your own words.

Illustrate your answer with relevant cases: this means you need to cite decided cases in your answer. To do this effectively you need to he able to give the case name, a brief outline of the facts of the case and explain the legal point of the case and why it is relevant to the question. Also remember that although this command specifically asks for cases, you should always use relevant cases in answer to other questions.

Outline: to give a brief explanation. A large amount of detail is not required. Check the mark allocation to help you judge how much you should include.

Suggest: put forward ideas, For example, in a question asking you to suggest how the law on a particular point could be reformed, you need to put forward ideas for reform. You should also explain and justify your suggestions.

To what extent: reach a judgement about the degree to which a statement or theory is true. This requires you to explain your points in depth in order to reach your conclusion.