European Baccalaureate Latin common mistakes
European Baccalaureate Latin · Understand the traps and how to avoid them.
In the Latin written paper, the candidate translates clause by clause in the order the words appear, producing French or English word order and misreading the case system (e.g. rendering an ablative absolute as a main clause, or attaching a genitive to the wrong noun).
School translation practice often rewards 'getting the gist' quickly, so students never build the habit of identifying the main verb first, then mapping subject, object and subordinate clauses before writing anything. Latin's free word order punishes linear reading precisely where the exam sets the hardest sentences.
What to do instead
Before writing a single word, annotate the passage: box every finite verb, underline subjects and mark their cases, bracket subordinate clauses and circle conjunctions. Draft the translation in a fixed order (main clause skeleton, then subordinate clauses, then ablative absolutes and participial phrases). Practise on 6–8 unseen passages under timed conditions and compare your parse against a commentary, not just against a model translation.
On the Latin set-text/commentary questions, the candidate retells the plot of the passage instead of answering the question asked (e.g. asked how the author creates tension, gives a summary of what happens).
Set texts are usually learned as narrative content in class, and students revise plot summaries because they feel productive. They never rehearse the analytical move of linking a specific stylistic feature (word order, chiasmus, apostrophe, historic present) to an effect on the reader.
What to do instead
Build a per-text table with columns: quotation (Latin), feature, literal meaning, effect/interpretation. Answer every practice question in the form 'feature + quotation + effect', never 'then X happens'. In revision, cover the translation and answer commentary questions from the Latin alone, then check.
The candidate answers the compulsory L1 written examination with a memorised essay structure and pre-learned quotations that do not fit the actual question, so the argument drifts off the prompt and the conclusion restates the introduction.
L1 revision is dominated by learning set works and stock essay plans; under time pressure candidates force the question to fit the plan they have. The L1 paper rewards close reading of an unseen extract or a precise response to a formulated question, which the stock plan does not address.
What to do instead
Spend the first five minutes of the exam unpacking the question into its key terms and writing a one-sentence thesis that uses those terms. Plan three body paragraphs, each tied explicitly back to the question wording. Leave 5–8 minutes to reread and check that every paragraph answers the question rather than merely discusses the work.
In the Mathematics written examination, the candidate loses method marks by jumping straight from the problem to an answer with no intermediate working, or by leaving answers in an unrounded/unjustified form when the question specifies precision or units.
Candidates practise with calculators and answer keys where only the final value is checked, and they underestimate how the marking scheme allocates credit to stated method, justification and correct rounding. Reading time is also misallocated, so the last questions are rushed.
What to do instead
Write every step as if it will be marked: state the formula, substitute, compute, then state the answer with units and the required rounding. Do a timed mock and mark it against a method-mark scheme yourself. Allocate time per question in advance (roughly proportional to marks) and never leave a question blank - write the relevant formula and first step to earn partial credit.
The candidate misreads the L2 written examination's instructions and register: writing an informal letter when a formal article or a structured argument was required, ignoring a word limit, or omitting one of two required tasks in a choice question.
L2 papers combine comprehension, language and production tasks in one booklet, and candidates under time pressure skim rubrics. Register and text-type conventions (salutation, structure, connectors) are often taught separately from exam technique and not rehearsed under timing.
What to do instead
In the first two minutes, highlight every instruction verb (describe, argue, compare), the required text type, the audience and any word limit. Before writing, produce a 30-second skeleton matching the required structure. In practice, do full past-paper tasks under timing and mark yourself against the rubric criteria (task achievement, register, range, accuracy) rather than just correcting grammar.
In the oral examination, the candidate delivers a memorised monologue on the prepared topic and then collapses when the examiner asks a follow-up question, answering in single words or switching into the wrong language.
Candidates prepare the presentation thoroughly but never rehearse interaction; the oral is assessed as a conversation, and unprepared follow-up questions expose limited spontaneous vocabulary and listening. Anxiety also pushes candidates toward recitation.
What to do instead
Rehearse the presentation once, then spend most practice time on unpredictable questions: have a partner ask 10 follow-up questions per topic, including 'why', 'compare', 'what if' and 'what is your view'. Prepare a small set of functional phrases (giving an opinion, conceding, asking for clarification, buying time) and practise using them aloud.
In the oral examination, the candidate treats the text or image stimulus as a prompt to summarise it, spending most of the preparation and speaking time describing content instead of analysing it and connecting it to the course topic.
The stimulus is unfamiliar and candidates default to description because it feels safe. They have not internalised the expected structure of a stimulus-based oral (identify the issue, analyse the document's position and means, relate to the studied theme, offer a personal conclusion).
What to do instead
Use a fixed four-part grid in preparation: what the document is and says; how it says it (tone, vocabulary, structure); how it links to the studied theme or work; your own position. Time yourself: no more than a quarter of the speaking time on description. Practise with unseen stimuli and record yourself to check the balance.
The candidate chooses an oral examination subject or L2 route late in the year and prepares it with too little subject-specific vocabulary, so fluency breaks down whenever the discussion moves into technical content.
The oral may be taken in L1, L2 or a subject taught through L2, and candidates pick the option that seems easiest rather than the one they can sustain. Subject teachers and language teachers do not always coordinate, so discipline-specific terminology is never systematically drilled.
What to do instead
Decide the oral route by the end of the first term, based on a trial oral in each option. Build a personal glossary of 60–100 terms for the chosen subject with example sentences, and rehearse explaining three core concepts of the subject aloud in the exam language to a non-specialist listener who can flag unclear phrasing.
The candidate treats the preliminary mark as automatic and lets continuous-assessment work (class tests, oral participation, written assignments, project work) slip, believing only the final written and oral examinations count.
Students focus revision on terminal examinations and underestimate how heavily the s7 preliminary mark weights formative and summative assessment across the year. Late or weak coursework cannot be recovered in June.
What to do instead
At the start of s7, list every assessed task with its date and weight and put them in a calendar alongside exam dates. Treat each class test as a mini-exam (same preparation routine, same timing discipline) and request feedback on each piece, tracking recurring errors in a personal error log that feeds revision.
In the Latin written examination's essay or civilisation question, the candidate writes general impressions about Roman society with no reference to specific Latin evidence, primary sources or the prescribed material, so the answer stays abstract and unsupported.
Civilisation and background topics are often revised from summaries and documentaries rather than from texts, inscriptions or artefacts, and candidates lack a bank of citable evidence. They also misjudge how much weight the paper gives to use of evidence.
What to do instead
For each civilisation topic, compile a one-page evidence sheet: 8–10 short sources (textual, epigraphic, archaeological) with what each shows and its limitations. Practise essay plans that begin each paragraph with a claim followed by named evidence and an evaluation of that evidence, and check past-paper mark schemes for how evidence and source criticism are credited.