IB French B SL common mistakes
IB French B SL · Understand the traps and how to avoid them.
In the individual oral, the candidate describes the stimulus or their chosen topic in general terms for most of the time instead of connecting it explicitly to a francophone culture and to their own experience, so the presentation becomes a generic summary of a theme like 'le tourisme' or 'les réseaux sociaux'.
Candidates prepare broad vocabulary lists per theme and rehearse content, but never rehearse the structural move of 'this stimulus shows X in [specific francophone context], which compares with my own community because Y'. Under time pressure they default to describing what is in front of them rather than analysing it.
What to do instead
Build a fixed oral scaffold: 30 seconds situating the stimulus and its francophone context, 90 seconds analysing one or two ideas with a comparison to your own culture, 60 seconds personal reaction and conclusion. Practise with a timer and record yourself; count how many sentences name a specific place, community or practice rather than a theme. If a sentence could apply to any country, replace it with a concrete francophone example you actually know.
In Paper 1 reading, the candidate lifts whole sentences from the text as the answer to a question that asks for a reformulation or an inference, and gives two or three pieces of information when the question asks for one, so markers cannot award the point.
Students equate 'finding the answer' with 'copying the line where the word appears'. They do not distinguish between questions testing literal location and questions testing understanding, and they add extra detail hoping something will score.
What to do instead
Before answering, underline the question's instruction verb: 'relevez' means quote exactly, 'expliquez' or 'd'après le texte' means reformulate in your own words. Answer with exactly the number of elements requested. For inference questions, write a short paraphrase and check it does not reuse the text's phrasing. Do past-paper reading sections and mark your own answers strictly against the mark scheme's wording.
In Paper 1 writing, the candidate produces a text that ignores the required text type conventions: a formal letter without a formulaic opening and closing, an article without a headline, a blog post without an informal register, or a speech with no address to the audience.
Candidates focus on grammar and vocabulary and treat the format as decoration. Many have never been explicitly taught the conventions of French text types such as la lettre formelle, l'article, le blog, le discours and la critique.
What to do instead
Memorise a one-page checklist per text type: layout elements, opening formula, closing formula, register (tu/vous, contractions, punctuation), and typical tense use. Before writing, spend two minutes drafting the skeleton with those elements labelled. In practice essays, self-assess format separately from language so it becomes a scored criterion rather than an afterthought.
The candidate writes or speaks in long, ambitious sentences with English word order and literal translations of English collocations ('je suis d'accord avec ce point de vue parce que c'est vrai' repeated, 'faire une différence', 'dans le monde d'aujourd'hui' as the only opener), producing errors that break communication.
Students translate from English under exam pressure and believe complex structures earn marks. They have not internalised high-frequency French collocations, and they overuse a small set of memorised connectors.
What to do instead
Build a personal bank of 20 accurate French collocations and 8 varied discourse markers (d'une part, en revanche, certes, par conséquent, qui plus est, en définitive) and drill them in full sentences until automatic. In writing, prefer structures you can control; after each practice piece, rewrite the three most English-sounding sentences into idiomatic French and keep the corrections in a log.
In the listening section, the candidate tries to transcribe every word and loses the thread, then answers from a single keyword heard rather than from the overall meaning, especially on questions about attitude, tone or implied opinion.
School listening practice often rewards catching individual words. Candidates do not preview questions before the audio, do not use the pauses to predict vocabulary, and panic when they miss a word instead of continuing.
What to do instead
Use the reading time to underline question keywords and predict likely vocabulary and synonyms. During the first listening, note only key content words and the speaker's stance; answer questions on gist first. On the second listening, confirm details. Train with authentic francophone audio (news bulletins, podcasts, interviews) at natural speed, doing gist-then-detail tasks rather than dictation.
The candidate treats cultural content as a list of stereotypes (the French eat baguettes, take long lunches, are always on strike) and applies them to any francophone country, ignoring differences between France, Belgium, Senegal, Quebec, Switzerland or Morocco.
Textbooks and classroom materials often foreground metropolitan French customs, and candidates lack exposure to the diversity of la francophonie. They repeat what they have heard rather than what they have read or discussed.
What to do instead
For each theme, prepare two contrasting francophone examples from different regions with one concrete fact each (for example, language policy in Quebec versus Senegal, or urban transport in Dakar versus Lyon). Read francophone news sources from several countries and note the source and date. In the oral and written work, name the place explicitly rather than saying 'en France' as a default.
In Paper 2 and the written assignment, the candidate narrates or summarises the source text or the literary work instead of responding to the task, so the argument never addresses the question asked and the conclusion merely restates the introduction.
Students are anxious about content knowledge and fill space with plot or description. They have not been trained to identify the task's exact demand (compare, evaluate, argue for or against) and to plan an argument before writing.
What to do instead
Spend five minutes planning: underline the task's demand, write a one-sentence thesis, and list two or three arguments each with evidence from the source. Check every paragraph starts with a claim that answers the question, not a summary. End with a conclusion that answers the question directly and opens a further perspective rather than repeating the introduction.
The candidate's spoken French stalls on high-frequency irregular verbs and tenses under pressure, mixing up avoir/être auxiliaries in the passé composé, using the present where the past or future is required, and losing fluency through long silent pauses and English fillers.
Grammar is studied receptively and rarely automatised orally. In the oral exam, cognitive load shifts to content and the unautomatised forms collapse, so accuracy drops compared with written work.
What to do instead
Drill a short list of high-frequency verbs (aller, faire, prendre, venir, pouvoir, devoir, voir, dire) across présent, passé composé, imparfait and futur simple in spoken sentences, using the Dr Mrs Vandertramp auxiliary set for movement verbs. Practise 90-second monologues on a timer, recording and counting hesitations; replace English fillers with French ones (alors, en fait, donc, c'est-à-dire) so hesitation sounds natural.
On questions about the environment, human rights or globalisation, the candidate gives a moralising opinion with no evidence and no counter-argument, or avoids taking a position at all, producing a text that neither argues nor evaluates.
These themes invite emotional responses and candidates have strong views but thin factual knowledge; alternatively, they fear being wrong and hedge. They have not practised the structure of a balanced argument in French.
What to do instead
Prepare three concrete, datable facts per global theme (for example, a named agreement, a named organisation, a specific statistic with its source) and one counter-argument for each position. Use a fixed structure: thesis, argument with evidence, counter-argument with evidence, nuanced conclusion. Rehearse phrases for concession and refutation (certes... mais, il n'en reste pas moins que, on peut objecter que).
The candidate misreads the register and audience of the Paper 1 writing task, using tu and slang in a letter to a newspaper editor or formal structures in a message to a friend, and misapplying conventions such as vous for one person versus vous for a group.
Register is rarely taught explicitly as a graded feature, and candidates transfer the register of their classroom chat into all tasks. They also confuse the pronoun vous with a plural addressee.
What to do instead
Before writing, write the audience and relationship at the top of your plan and choose tu or vous deliberately. Keep two parallel phrase sets, one informal (salut, ça te dit, à plus) and one formal (Madame, Monsieur, je vous prie d'agréer, cordialement), and check the whole text for consistency. In practice, annotate each piece for register errors separately from grammar errors.