Cambridge B2 First common mistakes
Cambridge B2 First · Understand the traps and how to avoid them.
In Part 1 (multiple-choice cloze), the candidate picks the option whose meaning 'feels right' and moves on without reading the whole sentence, ignoring the dependent preposition, verb pattern or collocation the gap requires.
They read only the clause around the gap, or translate the gap word from their first language, so an option that is semantically close but grammatically impossible looks attractive.
What to do instead
After selecting an option, read the complete sentence back with the word inserted and check three things: the preposition/pattern that follows it, the word class needed, and whether it collocates naturally with its neighbours. Eliminate options that fail grammar even if the meaning fits.
In Part 3 (word formation), the candidate produces a derivative of the right family but the wrong word class (a noun where an adjective is needed, or an adjective where an adverb is needed), or spells the derivative wrongly.
They look at the stem word and try to remember a form, rather than analysing what the sentence structure demands at that position.
What to do instead
Decide the word class before touching the affixes: look at what comes immediately before and after the gap (article, preposition, noun, verb) to fix whether it must be noun/adjective/adverb/verb, and whether singular/plural or comparative is needed. Only then apply prefixes and suffixes, and check spelling rules (consonant doubling, -y to -i, dropped -e, -ible/-able).
In Part 4 (key word transformation), the candidate's second sentence is grammatically correct but shifts the meaning of the first (changes tense, subject, or drops a piece of information), uses too many words, or alters the given key word.
Attention is entirely on 'getting the given word in', so the candidate stops checking equivalence between the two sentences and stops counting words.
What to do instead
Treat it as a two-way test: after writing, compare the original and the new sentence item by item (who, what, when, how many, negation) and confirm nothing has been added or lost. Count the words in the completed part only, and copy the key word exactly as printed, unchanged.
In Writing Part 1, the candidate writes a general essay on the topic that develops only one of the two notes, adds no idea of their own, or lists opinions without developing any of them.
Time pressure leads to starting to write immediately from the first idea that comes, and the notes are treated as decoration rather than as compulsory content points.
What to do instead
Spend 5 minutes planning: underline each of the two notes plus 'your own idea', and assign each one its own paragraph with a topic sentence plus one consequence or example. Before starting, write the three content points in the margin and tick them off as you draft.
In Writing Part 2, the candidate produces a text that does not follow the conventions of the genre named in the task - a review with no evaluation or recommendation, a report with no headings or conclusion, an article that reads like an essay, or a formal letter written in an informal register (or vice versa).
They rehearse a single generic essay structure for every task type, and they do not identify who the target reader is.
What to do instead
Before writing, state in one line: genre, target reader, register, and the 2-3 obligatory moves (review = describe + evaluate + recommend; report = headings + facts + recommendation; letter/email = purpose + points + appropriate closing). Check the finished text against that list.
The candidate writes well over the word limit, has no time left to proofread, and submits work with basic errors of agreement, tense and spelling that they could correct themselves.
No timing plan is applied in the exam, so Part 1 expands and Part 2 is rushed or the checking stage is dropped entirely.
What to do instead
Fix the timings in advance: about 20 minutes for Part 1, 20 minutes for Part 2, and 5 minutes at the end for checking. Aim for 150-180 words in each answer, and use the final minutes only on high-frequency errors: subject-verb agreement, past tense forms, plurals, articles and the spelling of common words.
In Listening Parts 1 and 4, the candidate selects the option that contains a word they hear in the recording, rather than the option that matches what the speaker actually means.
They listen for sound-to-text matching instead of meaning, and they do not use the pause before each track to read and predict.
What to do instead
Use the preparation time to read all three options and predict a paraphrase for each. Expect the words in the recording to be different from the words in the correct option, and treat exact lexical matches as likely distractors; decide only after the speaker finishes the relevant exchange.
In Listening Part 2, the candidate writes the first word or number they hear, exceeds the stated word limit, or leaves answers with misspellings that make them unrecognisable.
They write while the speaker is still mid-phrase, and they do not check the instruction above the gap ('ONE WORD AND/OR A NUMBER').
What to do instead
Wait for the complete phrase before writing, then check each answer against the word limit printed for that gap. Write in clear capital letters, check the spelling of days, months, numbers and common nouns, and use the second listening to confirm or replace answers rather than to write them for the first time.
In Speaking Part 2, the candidate describes the two photographs in turn ('In the first photo there is... in the second photo there is...') and never answers the written question above them, or runs out of time before reaching it.
Nervousness and the visual detail of the photos pull attention towards description, which feels safe and easy to produce.
What to do instead
Structure the minute explicitly: a brief sentence of direct comparison (both/similar/different), two or three points of contrast with speculation ('they might be...', 'it looks as if...'), then the final third of the time devoted to answering the written question directly. Practise with a timer so the comparison, not the description, carries the long turns.
In Speaking Parts 3 and 4, the candidate either dominates the discussion or says almost nothing, gives one-line answers with no development, and never responds to or builds on what the partner says.
They have no functional language for turn-taking and agreeing/disagreeing, and they treat Part 4 as a comprehension test with a single correct answer rather than an invitation to give opinions.
What to do instead
Learn a small set of interaction phrases (asking for an opinion, agreeing and adding, politely disagreeing, bringing a quiet partner in) and use them deliberately in Part 3. In Part 4, answer every question with opinion + reason + brief example, which naturally extends the answer and demonstrates range.