Bac C Burkina Faso common mistakes
Bac C Burkina Faso · Understand the traps and how to avoid them.
In a math exercise, the candidate writes the final result without justifying the intermediate steps (e.g. states the limit of a sequence or the derivative of a composed function without showing the theorems used).
The candidate has memorised the result and treats the exercise as a calculation test, whereas the Bac C mathematics paper awards the majority of marks for reasoning and correct citation of the course theorems; time pressure at the end of the four-hour paper reinforces this shortcut.
What to do instead
Before writing, list the theorems and properties that apply to the question, then write each line as an implication with its justification in the margin (e.g. 'by continuity of ...', 'by the intermediate value theorem'). Train with timed exercises where only the reasoning is graded, and keep a personal checklist of justifications for limits, continuity, differentiability and integration.
The candidate solves a differential equation or integral without stating the interval of validity or the initial conditions, and forgets the constant of integration or the solution set on R.
Attention is focused on the algebraic technique; the candidate reproduces a worked example from the textbook without checking the hypotheses (interval, continuity, initial condition) that make the result valid.
What to do instead
Adopt a fixed writing template for each standard question type: hypotheses, general solution on the stated interval, use of initial conditions, conclusion. Practise by re-doing corrected exercises and marking in red every hypothesis or interval that was omitted.
In physics, the candidate applies a formula such as v = d/t or P = UI with quantities in inconsistent units (minutes mixed with seconds, grams with kilograms, centimetres with metres) and gives a numerical answer without a unit or with the wrong number of significant figures.
The candidate treats the formula as a recipe and skips the preliminary conversion step; the mental load of the calculation leaves no attention for dimensional checking.
What to do instead
Systematically convert all data to SI units in a dedicated 'data' block at the start of the solution, then perform a dimensional check of the final expression before substituting numbers. Write the unit after every numerical result and round only at the end, in line with the precision of the given data.
In chemistry, the candidate writes an unbalanced equation or a half-equation with wrong stoichiometric coefficients, then uses the wrong molar ratio to compute the amount of substance or the concentration.
The candidate jumps straight to the calculation without first establishing the balanced equation, and confuses the coefficients of the redox half-equations with the overall equation.
What to do instead
Impose a mandatory step: write the unbalanced equation, balance it (atoms, then charges for redox), verify it, and only then build the stoichiometric table. Practise balancing ten equations per session, including redox in acidic and basic media, and check the mole ratio explicitly in each calculation.
In SVT, the candidate answers a document-based question by describing the document ('the curve rises, then falls') instead of interpreting it and linking it to a biological mechanism such as photosynthesis, respiration or hormonal regulation.
The candidate confuses description with explanation and has not memorised the causal chains of the programme, so the answer stays at the surface of the graph or table.
What to do instead
Use the three-step method for every document: identify what is measured, extract the key variation with its values, then explain it with the course mechanism (e.g. light intensity increases the photolysis of water, hence O2 release). Practise by writing explanations of graphs from past papers, then compare with the marking scheme to see where the causal link was missing.
In French, the candidate produces a dissertation or a commentaire composé that is a paraphrase of the text or a catalogue of ideas, with no problem statement, no announced plan and no transitions between parts.
The candidate has not internalised the difference between the three exercises and writes from inspiration rather than from a method; under exam pressure the introduction is rushed and the plan is improvised as the writing proceeds.
What to do instead
Draft the introduction and the plan on a separate sheet before writing: problem statement, announced plan, then a one-sentence transition between each part. Rehearse the specific method of each exercise (dissertation: thesis/antithesis/synthesis; commentaire: thematic axes drawn from the text's form and meaning) on past subjects under timed conditions.
In philosophy, the candidate writes a general discussion on the topic without defining the key concepts, without a clear thesis, and without referring to any philosopher or doctrinal position studied in the programme.
The candidate believes that philosophy rewards personal opinion and volume, and lacks a repertoire of concepts and authors to anchor the argument; the essay therefore drifts into commonplace assertions.
What to do instead
Begin by defining the terms of the subject and formulating the problem as a tension between two answers; build a plan in three parts, each supported by an explicit thesis and at least one reference to a studied doctrine, then write a conclusion that answers the problem posed. Keep a revision sheet of concepts and authors matched to the main programme notions.
In history-geography, the candidate answers an essay question with a flat narrative of events or a list of facts, with no organised plan, no dates, no spatial scale and no map or croquis when one is required.
The candidate revises by reading course notes passively and retains isolated facts rather than structures; the essay is written as a memory dump because the plan was never prepared.
What to do instead
For each theme, memorise a small set of dated reference points and a plan skeleton (chronological or thematic), and practise writing introductions with a problem statement and an announced plan. For geography, train on the standard croquis: title, key, scale, and a legible layout, drawn from a blank outline map.
In the foreign language paper, the candidate translates word for word from French into the target language, producing sentences with French syntax, wrong tenses and false friends, and answers comprehension questions by copying long passages of the text.
The candidate thinks first in French and transposes, has limited active vocabulary, and adopts copying as a safe strategy in comprehension because it avoids producing original sentences.
What to do instead
Build active vocabulary and structures by learning short model sentences rather than isolated words, and practise the specific grammar points tested (tenses, reported speech, comparatives). In comprehension, answer in a complete sentence of one's own words, quoting at most a few words to justify, and check the tense and subject-verb agreement of each sentence produced.
Across all papers, the candidate misallocates time: spending most of the allotted time on the first exercise or on the essay, then leaving whole questions unanswered or writing a rushed conclusion, and failing to reread the copy for units, signs and agreement errors.
The candidate works in the order of the paper without a timing plan, and the anxiety of the first exercise leads to over-investment; no time is reserved for checking because the paper is perceived as finished once the last line is written.
What to do instead
At the start, read the whole paper and allocate minutes per exercise according to the marks, keeping ten minutes for a final check. During practice sessions, use a timer and simulate the real conditions, and keep a short final-check list (units, signs, agreements, question actually answered, conclusion present).