Burkina Faso CAPES common mistakes
Burkina Faso CAPES · Understand the traps and how to avoid them.
In the disciplinary essay, candidates recite definitions and course summaries instead of building an argued response to the exact question asked, so the copy ends up descriptive and off-topic.
Under time pressure they fall back on memorised lesson content and treat the prompt as an invitation to 'say everything I know about the topic', without identifying the verb (analyser, comparer, justifier) or the scope of the question.
What to do instead
Before writing, spend 3-4 minutes decoding the prompt: underline the key verb, the object, and any limits (period, author, level). Write a one-sentence thesis and a three-part outline, then check every paragraph against the thesis before moving on.
Candidates transpose university lecture content directly into a lesson plan without translating it into age-appropriate, curriculum-aligned objectives and activities for collège or lycée pupils.
They have never been trained to read the national programme and its competences, and they confuse 'knowing the content' with 'knowing how to teach it', so the lesson is scientifically correct but pedagogically unusable.
What to do instead
Practise writing fiches de leçon that begin from the official programme: state the target competence, the prerequisite knowledge, the duration, and at least one pupil activity per objective. Have a peer check that a pupil, not a professor, is the intended audience.
When asked to analyse a learning situation, candidates describe what the teacher does and stop there, without naming the underlying learning theory or explaining why the activity should produce learning.
Learning theories are studied as isolated labels (behaviourism, constructivism, socio-constructivism) and never practised as analytical tools, so candidates cannot connect a classroom scene to a mechanism such as conflict sociocognitif or zone proximale de développement.
What to do instead
Build a one-page grid linking each theory to observable classroom indicators and to a typical critique. In practice, force yourself to write 'this works because...' and 'this would fail if...' for every activity you propose.
Classroom-management answers propose sanctions and discipline as the first response to disruption, ignoring prevention, rules co-construction, and the pacing of the lesson itself.
Candidates imagine the class as hostile and prepare for conflict, and they have little experience of how routine, clear instructions, and active tasks reduce off-task behaviour before it starts.
What to do instead
Structure every management answer in three layers: prevention (rules, seating, routines, clear task), intervention (proximity, private reminder, redirect), sanction (proportionate, explained, followed by reintegration). Always state the preventive layer first.
Assessment questions are answered with a list of instrument names (devoir surveillé, interrogation écrite) but no reference to criteria, levels of mastery, remediation, or the difference between formative and summative purposes.
Candidates have experienced assessment only as a grade, so they reproduce the administrative vocabulary of their own schooling rather than the evaluative reasoning expected of a teacher.
What to do instead
For each assessment task, specify the targeted competence, the observable criteria, the performance levels, and the remediation decision that follows. Practise converting a mark into a diagnostic statement about what the pupil can and cannot yet do.
In ethics scenarios, candidates answer with moral generalities ('the teacher must be fair and respect pupils') without citing the concrete obligation, the appropriate procedure, or the person to inform.
They treat professional ethics as personal morality and do not know the deontological framework: confidentiality, neutrality, duty to report, relations with parents and hierarchy.
What to do instead
Memorise a short decision protocol: identify the values in tension, name the applicable rule or text, state the immediate action, state who is informed and how confidentiality is preserved, and state how the pupil is protected. Apply it to five realistic scenarios.
Written answers in French contain agreement, tense, and connector errors, and candidates use vague verbs ('faire', 'il y a', 'chose') instead of precise academic vocabulary, weakening otherwise correct content.
Under exam pressure candidates write as they speak, do not reserve time for rereading, and have not internalised the register expected in an administrative or academic text.
What to do instead
Reserve the last 5-10 minutes for a targeted reread checking verb endings, subject-verb and noun-adjective agreement, and punctuation. Keep a personal list of ten precise substitutes for vague verbs and practise using them in timed paragraphs.
Candidates cannot state the structure of the Burkinabe education system (cycles, durations, certificates, ages) or the legal texts governing the teacher's status and duties, and answer with approximations.
This material is treated as minor administrative knowledge and revised late, from scattered notes, rather than as a structured body of facts that the exam explicitly tests.
What to do instead
Build a single annotated diagram of the system (préscolaire, primaire, post-primaire, secondaire, certificates at each exit) and a short table of the key legal references on the teaching profession. Test yourself on the diagram weekly until you can redraw it from memory.
Candidates allocate time evenly across the paper and run out of time on the highest-coefficient exercise, leaving the essay or the didactic part unfinished or reduced to bullet points.
They start writing immediately without reading the whole paper, and they underestimate how long a structured French essay takes compared with short-answer items.
What to do instead
In the first five minutes, read all instructions, note the marks per section, and set explicit clock times for each part. Practise at least three full timed mock papers so the allocation becomes automatic.
Candidates answer the didactic question in abstract terms about 'the teacher should motivate pupils' without producing a concrete artefact: no lesson sequence, no exercise, no expected pupil response.
They have read about pedagogy but rarely designed teaching materials, so they substitute intentions for the operational detail that examiners are looking for.
What to do instead
Train yourself to always deliver a concrete product: a short sequence with stages and timings, a sample exercise with its expected answer and common errors, and a differentiation note for struggling pupils. Keep a portfolio of ten such artefacts across topics.