CLEP College Composition Modular common mistakes
CLEP College Composition Modular · Understand the traps and how to avoid them.
Choosing a verb form that agrees with the noun nearest to it rather than with the actual subject, as in selecting 'were' for 'The box of old files ___ on the shelf.'
Proximity bias: the plural noun inside the prepositional phrase sounds like the subject, especially when the sentence is long or read quickly.
What to do instead
Bracket or mentally remove every prepositional phrase between the subject and verb, then match the verb to the head noun alone.
Using a plural pronoun or verb with singular indefinite pronouns such as 'each,' 'everyone,' 'either,' or 'neither,' as in 'Each of the students submitted their essay.'
The meaning feels plural even though the grammatical subject is singular, and informal usage often treats these words as plural.
What to do instead
Memorize the singular indefinite pronoun list, then either use singular pronouns ('his or her') or recast the sentence in the plural ('All the students submitted their essays').
Accepting a comma splice or fused sentence because it sounds natural in speech, as in 'The experiment failed, the team revised the hypothesis.'
Spoken English frequently joins clauses with only a pause, so the ear does not flag the missing conjunction or semicolon.
What to do instead
Test each side of the comma as a standalone sentence. If both are independent clauses, replace the comma with a period, semicolon, or comma plus coordinating conjunction.
Leaving an introductory modifier without a clear subject, as in 'After reviewing the data, the conclusion was revised.'
Writers focus on the action in the main clause and do not check who is performing the action named in the opening phrase.
What to do instead
Ask who performs the action in the introductory phrase, then make that person or thing the subject of the main clause: 'After reviewing the data, the researchers revised the conclusion.'
Answering sentence-level revision questions before reading the whole passage for its thesis, purpose, and organization.
Time pressure encourages jumping straight to the underlined portion or the first question, which hides context needed to judge whether a revision fits.
What to do instead
Skim the entire passage first, noting the thesis and the function of each paragraph, then return to individual revision questions.
Selecting a revision that fixes a grammatical problem but changes the author's original meaning, scope, or tone.
The option is grammatically cleaner, so it looks correct; candidates stop checking whether the claim itself has shifted.
What to do instead
Before choosing, compare the revision to the original statement and eliminate any option that strengthens, weakens, narrows, or broadens the claim.
Choosing the most elaborate rewrite rather than the smallest change that solves the sentence's problem.
Longer, more formal-sounding options seem more 'revised,' and candidates equate complexity with correctness.
What to do instead
Prefer the least invasive option that resolves the error and preserves meaning; treat a full rewrite as a last resort unless the question asks for a substantial revision.
Accepting a paraphrase that keeps the source's sentence structure and most of its wording, only swapping a few synonyms.
Candidates believe changing some words is enough to make the material their own, so they overlook structural copying.
What to do instead
Check that both the wording and the sentence structure differ from the source; if key phrasing remains, use quotation marks and a citation.
Citing only direct quotations and leaving paraphrased ideas, data, or arguments uncited.
Citation is often associated only with quoted text, so borrowed ideas in the writer's own words appear to need no attribution.
What to do instead
Cite every borrowed idea, statistic, or line of reasoning, whether quoted or paraphrased, unless the information is common knowledge.
Judging an argument by whether the candidate agrees with its conclusion instead of analyzing how it targets its audience, purpose, and appeals.
Readers respond to content and personal stance first, which crowds out analysis of rhetorical strategy and evidence.
What to do instead
Separate personal agreement from analysis: identify the speaker's goal, intended audience, and use of evidence, appeals, and structure, then evaluate whether those choices suit that audience and purpose.