Skip to Main Content
University of York Library
Library Subject Guides

Study & revision: a Practical Guide

Understanding exam questions

Feedback
X

Understanding exam questions

Understanding what the question is asking you to do is a significant part of any exam task.

This guide is designed to help ‘unpack’ questions so you can see exactly what is and is not required.

Dissecting essay questions in exams

Each exam, each department, and each module will require a specific set of nuanced choices when writing exam essay answers. But, there are some basic general steps that can help you succeed:

Dissecting questions in three steps


Look for instruction words 


Look for the concepts, theories, key ideas and/or examples that are part of the question


Look for relationships in the question 

  1. Look for instruction words: 

    • These will tell you the sort of answer you need to give.

  2. Look for the concepts, theories, key ideas and/or examples that are part of the question: 

    • These will be based on your module learning and will tell you what intellectual information and understanding you need to include in your answer. 

    • Key words can indicate the general topic and focus of the question. 

    • Key words can also imply how you should approach the task.

  3. Look for relationships in the question: 

    • Among other possibilities, you may be asked to show a connection between theories, to discuss an apparent correlation, or to discuss how two things interrelate. 

    • Evaluative, evidence-based judgement is at the heart of gaining a high mark.

Instruction words in examinations

Exam questions contain instructive words that tell you what is required in each answer.

Below are some common instruction words (verbs) found in exam questions, with a description of what each means.

This resource is for general guidance only. Be sure to look for and follow any guidance issued by your department.

Instruction Word Meaning
Analyse Break down information into parts, show relationships, and differentiate between categories.

An example question: Analyse the suitability of gold as a precious metal. 
Compare Highlight similarities between two or more things. Depending on the marks available, this may require a detailed explanation and could also include differences. A concluding statement that concerns the overall similarity may be necessary.
Define Write a precise meaning of something. The number of marks available indicates how detailed the definition needs to be. Definitions can vary greatly in both length and level of detail involved.
Describe To describe is to give a detailed account, in words, of something, like a theory, object, framework. It is critical to remember that describing is not explaining.

For example, you can describe what a person is wearing, but if you state the reason why a person is wearing a particular item, that would be explaining.
Discuss Investigate or examine using argumentation of an issue or question from multiple angles using evidence. This is most typically used in exam essay questions. Examine an issue from multiple perspectives using evidence, comparing, and evaluating different viewpoints.

An example question: Discuss the factors that led to a British victory at the Battle of Trafalgar.
Evaluate Assess and justify the worth of something. This requires justification and explanation using evidence.

An example question: Evaluate the efficacy of interviews as a research tool in study A.
Examine Carefully consider various aspects of the subject.
Explain This asks you to write about why something is happening/connected/has particular characteristics. It requires you to give reasons why something has the characteristics, qualities or relationships that it has.

For example: A person’s face becomes red when they undertake exercise due to the blood moving towards the surface of the skin, so heat can be lost to the air.
Identify Point out and describe, offering specific examples when necessary.

An example question: Identify four factors that led to success in scenario B.
Identify trends Point out and describe patterns in data or a scenario.

An example question: Using the data in figure 1, identify three trends that are significant.
Illustrate Explain and describe using examples for clearer understanding.
Justify Provide evidence and reasoning to support a particular decision or viewpoint. Show the reasoning behind a choice, argument or standpoint.

An example question: Justify the use of force in scenario B.
List This means that you must accurately list the items specified in the question. This is a pure test of knowledge and understanding.

An example question: ‘List four elements that are more reactive than potassium’. This can be 1 mark per time, or could be marked in bandings.
Outline Describe the main features or a general overview, omitting minor details.

An example question: A dog has four legs, a spine, is a mammal, is derived from wolves, and is a pet kept by humans. This is a simple example, but shows the basic characteristics of outlining.
State Present in clear, concise, brief form what something is or does.

An example question: State what is meant by ‘type A personality disorder’.
Synthesise Integrate evidence and information to form a cohesive understanding, showing how ideas or issues interrelate.

Example question:
Philosophy


Question:
‘Critically evaluate the supervaluationist solution to the Sorites Paradoxes’.
(One hour was allocated to this question.)


  1. Look for the instruction words:
    • ‘Critically evaluate’ — In simple terms this means to break down theories and ideas in the question, and to supply some form of evidence based judgement. 
  2. Look for theories, ideas and/or frameworks you must use:
    • ‘Supervaluationist solution’ and ‘Sorites Paradoxes’ — You'll need to show the examiner that you understand and can use both of these concepts; using them critically means you show their limits, complexity, strengths/weaknesses, etc.
  3. Look for relationships you must explore: 
    • In this case the ‘Supervaluationist solution’ is being applied to the ‘Sorites Paradoxes’.
    • The critical evaluation will be in showing how suitable, efficacious, and coherent the solution is to the paradoxes.
    • Explore this using detail and examples, showing the limits of each concept and drawing upon the work of key theorists and thinkers.


Example question:
Environment and Geography


Question:
‘What do you think are the main disadvantages to using modernisation theory to guide development interventions? In your answer refer to TWO required texts used during the module.’
(Approximately 45 minutes was allocated to answering this question.)


  1. Look for the instruction words:
    • ‘Refer to TWO required texts’. — a compulsory element: not including this will limit your highest possible mark. The mark scheme will have mark limits for no texts and just one text used.
    • ‘Main disadvantages' — instructs you to focus on the disadvantages and to evaluate the two most significant ones, using evidence and logical argument to support your choices.
  2. Look for theories, ideas and/or frameworks you must use:
    • In this case ‘modernisation theory’ and 'development interventions’ — each of these are clear and defined ideas within the subject area and have been taught in the associated module. You must show knowledge and understanding of both in their answer to achieve high marks.
  3. Look for relationships you must explore: 
    • The first is the idea that modernisation theory does guide development interventions. The way this is presented suggests a critical evaluation is needed, as you are told there are disadvantages to this relationship.
    • The second is that there are disadvantages to using modernisation theory in the way described; this is presented by the question as an established understanding so you do not need to argue against it. But you can use it and explore it as part of the essay.


Example question:
Philosophy, Politics and Economics


Question:
‘“The bureau shaping model is theoretically more persuasive than the budget maximising model, but the empirical support for it is weak.” Discuss.’
(Approximately 1 hour was allocated to answering this question.)


  1. Look for the instruction words:
    • ‘Discuss’ — this instruction is asking you to consider the statement in a balanced way, using evidence to explore the various aspects of the statement from multiple perspectives. In this case, there are several elements to discuss.
  2. Look for theories, ideas and/or frameworks you must use:
    • ‘Bureau shaping model’ and ‘budget maximising model’ are the two key ideas to be considered. You'll need to show you can understand and use each model in the context of the question and be critical by showing their limits, complexity and relative efficacy.
  3. Look for relationships you must explore: 
    • Firstly, that the bureau shaping model is theoretically more persuasive than the budget maximising model — this is asking you to consider only the theoretical (non-applied) understanding of the first model in relation to the theoretical understanding of the second;
    • Secondly, the relationship between empirical evidence and the bureau shaping model;
    • Both of these relationships will need to be explored and used as part of the judgments formed within the essay.

Forthcoming training sessions

Forthcoming sessions on :

Taught students
Staff
Researchers
Show details & booking for these sessions

There's more training events at: