ICAS English common mistakes
ICAS English · Understand the traps and how to avoid them.
Selects the answer option that is merely a near-synonym of the target word, without inserting it back into the sentence to check it fits the grammatical slot and the words either side of it (e.g., accepting a verb that does not collocate with the noun in the sentence).
Candidates store new words attached to one remembered context and judge options by similarity of meaning rather than by how the word is actually used, so a plausible synonym with the wrong grammatical pattern or collocation looks correct.
What to do instead
Before committing, substitute each option into the sentence and read the whole sentence, not just the gap, checking the preposition or object that follows. Keep a running collocation log (word + word it habitually pairs with) rather than a synonym list.
Answers a 'meaning in context' item using the word's most frequent everyday sense even when the surrounding sentence signals a secondary sense (e.g., reading a fee-related word as a movement verb).
The dominant sense is retrieved automatically first, and candidates do not slow down to mine the sentence for the clue that disambiguates it.
What to do instead
Cover the options, find the context clue (a definition, a contrast such as 'unlike' or 'but', a cause-effect link, an example), and write a one- or two-word paraphrase of the meaning in the margin. Only then compare that paraphrase to the options.
Chooses an option that is genuinely stated in the passage but does not answer the particular question asked - a true-but-off-target statement that shares vocabulary with the text.
Recognising familiar wording produces a strong feeling of correctness, and the option is checked against the passage rather than against the question.
What to do instead
Read the question stem last, after scanning options, and underline its exact demand (who, why, which detail, what the writer suggests). Reject any option that cannot be matched to that demand, even if the passage supports it.
Answers inference and attitude items from general knowledge or personal opinion, or accepts an over-extended inference containing absolute wording ('always', 'never', 'everyone') that the passage does not support.
Fluent readers automatically fill gaps with prior knowledge, and strong-sounding absolute claims feel more decisive than hedged, text-anchored ones.
What to do instead
For every chosen answer, point to the line or short phrase that licenses it and state the extra step the inference takes. If the step is more than one small logical move, or if an absolute word has no matching absolute in the text, reject the option.
Places a sentence into a paragraph, or selects a topic sentence, by judging where it 'reads nicely' or by matching a repeated keyword, without tracking the pronoun and lexical links on either side of the insertion point.
Candidates read for content and story, not for the referential architecture of a paragraph, so an unresolved 'this' or 'these findings' goes unnoticed.
What to do instead
Before choosing, write a one-phrase job description for each paragraph. Then check the candidate sentence for words that must refer backwards (pronouns, 'this', 'such', definite noun phrases) and forwards (general nouns that the next sentences specify). The link must resolve both ways.
Selects a connective or transition option by its general flavour rather than by the logical relation between the two clauses, so a contrast word is used where a cause, result, or addition is required.
Connectives are learned as loose synonyms ('however', 'therefore', 'moreover' all felt as 'linking words'), and the candidates do not name the relationship before looking at the options.
What to do instead
Name the relationship in plain words first ('the second part is a result of the first'), then choose only the word that expresses that relation. Test by reversing: would a contrast word make the two clauses contradict each other?
Chooses a grammatically incorrect option because it sounds smooth, typically missing subject-verb agreement or a pronoun-antecedent mismatch when a phrase separates the two parts of the sentence.
The ear latches onto the nearest noun before the verb, and interrupted constructions defeat short-term grammatical tracking.
What to do instead
Bracket out every interrupting phrase (commas, dashes, prepositional phrases) and rebuild the bare sentence core: subject + verb + object. Test agreement and pronoun reference on that core only, then reinsert the interrupters.
Accepts an opening participial or infinitive phrase whose logical subject is not the subject of the main clause, or joins clauses into a run-on when combining sentences, losing the cause or contrast relationship between the original ideas.
Sentence-combining items reward length, and longer options feel more sophisticated; the candidate also drops the logical link because the original two sentences are no longer visible side by side.
What to do instead
Ask 'who is doing this -ing or to- action?' and check that same doer appears immediately after the comma. For combining items, write the original logical link (cause, contrast, condition) before reading options, then reject any option that needs two commas or a semicolon to stay grammatical.
Labels the tone or attitude of a text from its topic rather than its language (calling a piece about a serious issue 'serious' when the wording is mocking), or gives the purpose as the tone ('to persuade').
Topic is the most salient feature of a passage, and purpose, tone and main idea are loosely distinguished in everyday classroom talk.
What to do instead
Collect the evaluative adjectives, adverbs and figurative comparisons in the passage and place them on two axes: positive/negative/neutral and mild/strong. Answer tone with an attitude word, purpose with a verb plus audience ('to persuade readers that...'), and never let the two swap roles.
Fails to notice a shift within a single text - a move from formal to colloquial register, a change of narrator or person, or a passage whose surface praise is actually ironic.
Candidates form a global impression from the first paragraph and then read the rest through that frame, so internal changes are smoothed over.
What to do instead
Annotate each paragraph in the margin with one word for register and one for who is speaking. Compare the first and last paragraphs directly, and treat any cluster of contradictions or exaggerated praise as a signal to test for irony before choosing a tone word.