UB Concours d'Entrée common mistakes
UB Concours d'Entrée · Understand the traps and how to avoid them.
In philosophy dissertations, the candidate immediately restates the question and then lists authors (Plato, Descartes, Kant) one after another without ever formulating a problem or a thesis to defend.
Secondary-school training rewards reciting knowledge and 'covering the programme'; candidates have rarely been taught that a dissertation must construct a problématique and argue a position, so they treat the topic as an invitation to show what they know.
What to do instead
Before writing, spend 10 minutes drafting a one-sentence problem statement ('the tension is between X and Y') and a one-sentence thesis. Open the introduction with that tension, announce the thesis, and make every paragraph either defend, test, or refine it; ban any paragraph that only summarises an author.
In the French literature commentary, the candidate produces a line-by-line paraphrase of the poem or extract ('the author says that... then he adds that...') instead of identifying formal devices and linking them to meaning.
Under time pressure, paraphrase feels safe because it always generates text; candidates lack a reflex for spotting figures of style, versification, or narrative voice, so they fall back on reformulating content.
What to do instead
Annotate the text first: mark lexicon, syntax, rhythm, images, and enunciation, then group observations into two or three axes. Every claim must quote a precise expression and name the device (metaphor, anaphora, alexandrine, focalisation) before interpreting its effect.
In mathematics, the candidate writes the final numerical answer without justifying key steps, or jumps from hypothesis to conclusion with 'obviously' or 'we can easily see'.
Candidates mimic the compressed style of correction keys and textbooks, where routine algebra is elided; they do not realise that the grader is assessing reasoning and that unstated intermediate results earn no credit.
What to do instead
Practise writing full solutions under exam timing: state the theorem used, verify its hypotheses, show the intermediate equality, and conclude explicitly. Treat 'obviously' as a red flag and replace it with the actual one-line justification.
In physics and chemistry, the candidate substitutes numbers into a formula before deriving the literal expression and checking units and significant figures.
School exercises often involve simple plug-in calculations, so candidates develop the habit of reaching for numbers first; they also neglect dimensional analysis because it was rarely graded.
What to do instead
Impose a fixed routine: list data with units, write the general relation, solve algebraically for the unknown, check dimensions, then substitute and give the result with correct units and significant figures. Do this even when the arithmetic looks trivial.
In history-geography, the candidate writes a narrative account of events or a list of facts about a territory without answering the question's exact wording or organising the answer around an argument.
Revision is dominated by memorising dates and figures, and candidates confuse 'knowing a lot' with 'answering a question'; they also misread the scope words (explain, assess, characterise) in the prompt.
What to do instead
Underline the verb and the spatial or temporal limits of the question before planning. Build a two- or three-part plan in which each part answers the question directly, and use facts as evidence for a claim rather than as content in themselves.
In biology, the candidate answers with vague everyday vocabulary ('the body defends itself', 'energy is produced') instead of precise scientific terms and the required scale (molecule, cell, organ, ecosystem).
Candidates learn definitions passively and cannot retrieve the exact term under stress, so they paraphrase; they also fail to identify which level of organisation the question targets.
What to do instead
Build vocabulary cards with the term, its definition, and an example, and rehearse labelling diagrams from memory. In answers, name the structure and the mechanism explicitly and state the level of organisation being described.
In the English or second-language paper, the candidate translates idiomatic French expressions word for word into the target language, or writes a long essay with flawless grammar but no answer to the prompt.
Candidates compose in French first and translate, which transfers syntax and idioms; simultaneously, they treat the writing task as free expression rather than as a response to a precise instruction.
What to do instead
Practise thinking directly in the target language and memorise collocations rather than isolated words. For the writing task, spend five minutes identifying the required format, audience, and register, and check the draft against the prompt's instructions before polishing grammar.
In general knowledge and current affairs, the candidate either leaves questions blank or invents a plausible-sounding answer instead of eliminating options and committing to a reasoned guess.
Fear of negative marking and lack of a revision routine for institutions, geography, and recent events lead to avoidance; candidates also rely on vague impressions rather than structured knowledge.
What to do instead
Confirm the marking rules in advance and, if there is no penalty, never leave a blank. Revise from a structured grid (international organisations, heads of state, major treaties, economic indicators) updated regularly, and practise elimination on mock questions.
The candidate allocates time uniformly across sections or spends too long on one difficult mathematics question, leaving the essay or commentary unfinished.
Candidates plan by question order rather than by marks per minute, and perfectionism makes them refuse to abandon a stubborn problem; they rarely rehearse full papers under timed conditions.
What to do instead
Before the exam, compute a minute budget per section from its weighting. In the exam, set a hard cutoff per question, mark and move on, and reserve the last 15 minutes for the highest-weight writing task and a final check.
The candidate misreads the instructions: answering three questions when two are required, ignoring the 'comment on the document' part, or writing in the wrong genre (dissertation instead of commentary).
Stress and haste cause candidates to start writing from the first line of the prompt; instruction pages are treated as formalities, and the different exercise types have never been explicitly contrasted.
What to do instead
Read the whole paper once before writing, highlight every instruction verb and constraint, and rehearse each exercise type separately so its expected structure is automatic. Spend two minutes restating the task in your own words before starting.