Secondary 5 French as a Second Language Basic Programme Ministerial Examination - Québec common mistakes
Secondary 5 French as a Second Language Basic Programme Ministerial Examination - Québec · Understand the traps and how to avoid them.
When answering short-answer reading questions, the candidate copies a whole sentence from the text that contains the key word but does not actually answer the question asked (e.g., asks 'Combien de...' and the candidate copies a sentence with a number that refers to something else).
Under time pressure, candidates scan for a matching keyword and stop at the first sentence containing it, rather than reading the question's precise demand (who, how many, why, according to whom) and locating the exact clause that satisfies it. The strategy of 'find the word, copy the line' feels efficient and is often taught as a shortcut.
What to do instead
Before reading the text, underline the interrogative word and the target in each question (Combien de + quoi? Pourquoi + quel événement? Selon qui?). Then locate the sentence, and verify by substituting your answer back into the question: 'Il y a ___ personnes' must be grammatically and logically true. Answer in your own short phrase, not a copied sentence, unless the question says 'Citez le texte'.
The candidate confuses words that look alike in French (faux amis and near-pairs) and answers with the wrong meaning, e.g., treating 'actuellement' as 'actually', 'éventuellement' as 'eventually', 'assister à' as 'to assist', or mixing 'emprunter' (to borrow) with 'prêter' (to lend).
English-French cognates create a strong pull toward the English meaning, and candidates read quickly without checking the word's role in the sentence. Many of these pairs appear in everyday informational texts (news, ads, school notices), so the error recurs across items.
What to do instead
Keep a personal faux-amis list of about 40 high-frequency pairs and review it weekly. In practice, for each suspect word, ask: does the English meaning fit the sentence's logic? If not, substitute the French meaning (actuellement = currently; éventuellement = possibly; assister à = to attend; emprunter = to borrow). Build five sentences per pair to anchor the difference.
For inference items ('Que peut-on déduire...?', 'Quel est le ton de l'auteur?', 'L'auteur suggère que...'), the candidate gives a personal opinion or a real-world assumption instead of a conclusion supported by clues in the text.
Candidates do not distinguish between 'explicit' and 'implied' questions, and they treat inference as an invitation to react freely. They also skip the step of locating the evidence that licenses the inference.
What to do instead
Use a two-column routine: left column = what the text says (a quoted clue), right column = what it implies. Only accept an inference you can tie to at least one textual clue. For tone questions, identify the evaluative words (malheureusement, heureusement, enfin, soi-disant, prétendre) before choosing. Reject options that are true in real life but not supported by the passage.
On reaction/critical-response items ('Êtes-vous d'accord avec l'auteur? Justifiez.', 'Quelle est la position de l'auteur par rapport à...?'), the candidate writes an unstructured opinion with no reference to the text and no justification, or simply repeats the author's view as their own.
Candidates do not have a template for the reaction genre, and they confuse 'give your opinion' with 'summarize the author'. They also run out of time and produce one-line answers that cannot earn the justification marks.
What to do instead
Use a fixed three-move frame: (1) state your position in one sentence ('Je partage en partie l'avis de l'auteur, car...'), (2) cite or paraphrase a specific element of the text, (3) explain the link between the two. Practise writing this in 60–80 words, and check that your answer contains at least one explicit reference to the text.
In the written production, the candidate misreads the task (e.g., writes a letter when a short article was required, ignores a required element such as 'mentionnez deux avantages', or writes far under or over the required length) and loses task-fulfilment marks even though the French is correct.
Candidates start writing immediately after reading the prompt once, and they do not extract the constraints (genre, audience, purpose, required content points, word count) before drafting. The pressure of a timed exam encourages jumping straight to prose.
What to do instead
Spend 2–3 minutes on a planning grid before writing: genre and audience, purpose, the list of required content points (numbered), and the target length. After drafting, tick each required point and count words. If a point is missing, add a sentence rather than rewriting. Practise with past-style prompts under timed conditions to internalize the checklist.
The written text lacks visible organization: no paragraphing, no connectors, ideas in random order, and no opening or closing appropriate to the genre (e.g., a formal letter with no salutation or formula de politesse).
Candidates write in a single block as ideas come, and they have not internalized the genre conventions (lettre formelle, courriel, article, texte d'opinion). Connectors are often reduced to 'et', 'mais', 'parce que'.
What to do instead
Learn a short genre template for each text type (salutation, opening, two body paragraphs, closing, signature for a formal letter). Memorize a bank of connectors by function: addition (de plus, par ailleurs), contrast (cependant, en revanche), cause (en effet, puisque), consequence (par conséquent, donc), conclusion (en somme, pour conclure). Use at least four different connectors per text and indent paragraphs clearly.
Recurring grammatical errors that lower the accuracy mark: subject-verb agreement with tricky subjects (tout le monde, la plupart des, chacun), past-participle agreement with être/avoir, wrong auxiliary in the passé composé (j'ai venu), and confusion of futur simple and conditionnel in si-clauses.
These structures are irregular and are learned late; under exam pressure, candidates revert to the form that 'sounds right' in their first language or to an overgeneralized rule. They often do not proofread for these specific targets.
What to do instead
Do a targeted error log: after each practice text, list only your agreement and auxiliary errors and rewrite the corrected sentence. Memorize the short list of verbs of motion/state that take être (aller, venir, arriver, partir, entrer, sortir, monter, descendre, naître, mourir, rester, devenir, retourner) and drill participle agreement with a direct object placed before avoir. For si-clauses, memorize the pairings: si + présent → futur simple; si + imparfait → conditionnel présent. Reserve 3 minutes at the end to proofread only for these four targets.
Vocabulary and spelling errors that change or obscure meaning: anglicisms (réaliser for 'to realize', supporter for 'to support'), wrong register (tu/toi in a formal letter), and spelling confusions (a/à, ou/où, ce/se, leur/leurs, -er/-é/-ez at the end of verbs).
Candidates translate word-for-word from English and have not learned the French equivalents; register is rarely taught explicitly; and homophone endings are fast to write and slow to check. These errors are frequent because they occur in almost every sentence.
What to do instead
Build a list of 30 common anglicisms with their correct French equivalents (réaliser → se rendre compte; supporter → soutenir/appuyer; attendre → s'attendre à). For register, decide 'vous' or 'tu' at the planning stage and keep it consistent. For homophones, apply a quick test: replace with 'avait' to choose 'a' vs 'à'; replace with 'pouvait' to choose '-er' vs '-é'. Read the final text aloud in your head to catch endings.
In the oral interaction, the candidate answers in single words or short phrases, does not ask questions back, and lets long silences develop; in the oral production (monologue), the candidate reads a memorized script flatly or runs out of content after 30 seconds.
Candidates prepare content but not interaction strategies, and they fear making errors, so they say less. Memorized monologues collapse when the examiner asks a follow-up question, and there is no plan for keeping the exchange going.
What to do instead
Prepare a set of functional phrases for each interaction move: asking for clarification (Pouvez-vous répéter, s'il vous plaît?), giving an opinion (À mon avis, je trouve que...), agreeing/disagreeing (Je suis d'accord, mais... / Je ne suis pas tout à fait d'accord), and asking back (Et vous, qu'en pensez-vous?). For the monologue, prepare a plan with three points and one example each, plus a closing sentence, and practise with a timer and a partner who asks one unexpected follow-up.
In the oral production, the candidate's pronunciation and prosody make the message hard to follow: final consonants pronounced (ils parlent with a sounded -ent), silent letters sounded, flat intonation with no liaison, and English stress patterns placed on the wrong syllable.
Candidates read French with the letter-to-sound habits of their first language, and they have had little feedback on their own pronunciation. They also focus on vocabulary during preparation and neglect the sound shape of the text.
What to do instead
Record yourself reading your prepared monologue and compare with a model recording; mark liaisons and silent endings on your script before speaking. Drill high-frequency patterns: -ent verb endings are silent; final consonants usually silent (petit, grand, beaucoup); obligatory liaisons (les_amis, vous_avez, un_homme). Practise chunking sentences into rhythmic groups rather than word by word, and have a partner flag the three words they understood least.