I think there are subtle differences between definitions / conceptual confusion and algorithms, although they are really close to each other. But when I flunked my first calculus test, I realized that having memorized the Newton-Leibniz definition did not give me the practical, algorithmical skill to solve 10 equations in the allocated time for the test, I should actually practice the algorithm. Definitions people can argue forever, but algorithms work or don't.

Nevertheless clearing up conceptual confusion is close enough - although I haven not seen everybody thinking about philosophy that way. Rather it is so that they ask "what is concept x?" and by that "is" they tend to reify the concept, as if it had an individual existence.

The point is to propose an algorithm that by matching the intuitive, unconscious algorithm, makes it conscious. There is an element of self-consciousness there that goes beyond clearing up concepts. It is more like "I am now really aware what I am actually doing when I do X!"