Državna Matura Spanish common mistakes
Državna Matura Spanish · Understand the traps and how to avoid them.
Answering reading-comprehension items from personal opinion or general knowledge of the topic instead of locating the exact sentence in the text that decides the answer, then choosing the option that sounds most reasonable.
Under time pressure candidates recognise a familiar theme (environment, technology, tourism) and let prior knowledge fill gaps; distractor options are deliberately written to sound plausible and true in the real world while being unsupported by the passage.
What to do instead
Train a two-step routine: for each item, underline the keyword in the question, scan for its paraphrase in the text, and mark the exact line that justifies the choice. Reject any option you cannot tie to a specific sentence, even if it is factually true. Practise with texts where two options are plausible and only one is textually anchored.
Misreading the question type in reading tasks, e.g. answering 'Verdadero/Falso' without justifying, or confusing 'según el texto' items with inference items, so the answer is correct in content but wrong in format or scope.
Candidates skim the stem and jump to the options; Croatian-language exam instructions are read quickly and the difference between '¿Qué dice el texto?' and '¿Qué se deduce?' is not registered.
What to do instead
Before reading the passage, read all instructions and note the task type and required response format (justification line, letter, maximum words). Build a checklist for each task type used in the exam and apply it mechanically. In practice, do one full task per type and compare your format against the mark scheme.
Losing points on listening items because the candidate writes the first number, name or date heard rather than waiting for the correction or contrast the speaker makes ('en realidad', 'más bien', 'aunque').
Authentic-style audio contains self-correction and hedging, and candidates commit to the first plausible detail; they also stop listening after hearing a keyword instead of following the sentence to its end.
What to do instead
Practise prediction before each listening: read the items, anticipate the type of information needed, and mark where the speaker corrects or contrasts. Never write during the first hearing if it breaks attention; note only keywords, then complete answers on the second hearing. Drill short clips containing explicit self-correction until you automatically wait for the final version.
Failing listening tasks that require identifying the speaker's attitude, intention or agreement, because the candidate only transcribes factual content and ignores intonation, discourse markers and register.
School listening practice often tests facts, so candidates are untrained in inferring stance; irony, hesitation and polite disagreement in Spanish ('bueno, no sé…', 'hombre, tampoco es para tanto') are missed.
What to do instead
Study a fixed list of Spanish stance markers and their typical intonation patterns, then do focused listening where the only question is '¿está de acuerdo o no?'. After each clip, justify the answer with the exact phrase and tone that signalled it.
In grammar and vocabulary tasks, choosing the option that 'sounds right' in Croatian or English rather than applying Spanish rules, especially with ser/estar, por/para, pretérito imperfecto/indefinido, and personal a.
Transfer from the first language and from English creates false analogies; candidates have passive recognition of forms but no explicit rule to check against under exam pressure.
What to do instead
Keep a one-page contrast sheet per problematic pair with a decision test (e.g. por = cause/movement through/exchange; para = purpose/destination/deadline) and apply it to every item. Do timed 20-item drills on one contrast at a time until the decision is automatic, then mix contrasts.
In cloze or word-formation items, ignoring the surrounding syntax - agreement, gender/number, verb government and prepositions - and inserting a lexically correct word in the wrong form.
Candidates translate the gap in isolation and do not check what the sentence requires; they also forget accents and plural marking when the word is copied from the prompt.
What to do instead
After filling each gap, re-read the whole sentence and verify four things: agreement with the noun, verb tense and mood required by context, the preposition the verb governs, and spelling including accents. Make this a fixed four-point check applied to every gap before moving on.
In written production, writing far more than the required word count or far less, and including prepared memorised chunks that do not answer the prompt.
Candidates believe length earns marks and rely on pre-learned openers; the task rewards task achievement and coherence, and irrelevant or padded content is penalised, while under-length answers lose content marks.
What to do instead
Practise with a strict plan: count the words of your last three essays, learn what 120–150 words looks like in your handwriting, and allocate one paragraph per bullet point in the prompt. Before writing, list the communicative points required and tick each one off in the plan; delete any sentence that does not serve a point.
Losing coherence marks in writing because the text is a sequence of short sentences with no connectors, no paragraphing, and register mixing 'tú' and 'usted' or informal vocabulary in a formal letter.
Candidates focus on avoiding grammar errors and treat cohesion as decoration; they also do not decide the register before starting, so it drifts.
What to do instead
Memorise a small set of connectors by function (addition, contrast, cause, consequence, conclusion, opinion) and require at least one per paragraph. Decide register and the corresponding forms (tú/usted, greetings, closings) in the plan, and do a final pass checking only connectors, paragraph breaks and consistent address.
In the oral exam, producing a memorised monologue or answering with one-word or single-clause replies, so interaction and fluency descriptors stay low.
Nervousness and fear of errors push candidates to recite or to say as little as possible; they have practised alone, never with a partner or examiner asking follow-up questions.
What to do instead
Rehearse the monologue as bullet points, not a script, and record yourself to check you can vary the wording. Practise interaction with a partner using a fixed set of follow-up moves: asking for opinion, disagreeing politely, asking for clarification, and extending an answer with a reason and an example. Aim for at least two sentences per turn.
In oral tasks based on a stimulus, describing the picture or reading the prompt instead of completing the communicative task (comparing options, giving an opinion, reaching a decision with the partner).
Description feels safe and provides vocabulary to display, but the marking criteria reward task completion, opinion and negotiation; candidates also run out of time on description and never reach the decision stage.
What to do instead
Use a time budget: roughly one third for description/comparison, two thirds for opinion, justification and negotiation. Learn functional phrases for suggesting, agreeing, disagreeing and deciding ('yo optaría por…', 'no me convence porque…', '¿y si…?', 'vamos a ponernos de acuerdo en…') and practise reaching a joint decision within the time limit.