Stöðu- og framvindupróf í lesskilningi common mistakes
Stöðu- og framvindupróf í lesskilningi · Understand the traps and how to avoid them.
Answering from the first sentence that mentions the topic instead of scanning the whole passage for the specific detail the question asks about (a date, a number, a named person), so a later correction or exception in the text is ignored.
Candidates recognize the topic word and stop reading, treating the first match as the answer. Exam passages often state a fact early and then refine or contradict it, and the question is usually built on the refined version.
What to do instead
Read the question stem first and underline the exact detail requested. Then scan the full passage for every place that detail or its synonyms appear, and confirm the answer against the sentence that actually answers the question, not the first mention.
Mixing up who did what when several people, groups, or places are named, and attributing a statement or action to the wrong one.
Names recur in close proximity and pronouns (hann, hún, þeir, það) shift referent between sentences. Candidates track the topic rather than the grammar, so the nearest name wins by default.
What to do instead
When more than two actors appear, jot a quick chain (A → did X; B → said Y) beside each sentence as you read. For every pronoun, trace back to the last matching noun before choosing an answer.
Choosing an option that is true in real life or plausible in general but is not stated or supported in the passage.
Background knowledge fills gaps automatically, and a familiar-sounding option feels safer than one that requires locating textual evidence. This is especially strong on topics like health, nature, or technology.
What to do instead
For each option, point to the line in the passage that supports it. If you cannot locate supporting text, mark it wrong regardless of how true it seems. Treat the passage as the only source of truth.
Treating a hedged or partial statement as a full claim, for example reading 'some studies suggest' as 'research proves', or 'in most cases' as 'always'.
Candidates skim for content words and drop qualifiers (sumir, oft, getur, að hluta, í flestum tilfellum), so the strength of the claim is lost and a stronger option looks correct.
What to do instead
Circle or mentally flag every qualifier and modal as you read. Before answering, compare the strength of the passage's claim with the strength of each option; reject options that are stronger or more absolute than the text.
Guessing an unfamiliar word's meaning from its general shape or a similar-looking word, then building the answer on that guess instead of on the surrounding sentence.
Candidates panic at unknown vocabulary and substitute the closest word they know. Icelandic compounds and loanwords can look transparent but mean something narrower or different in context.
What to do instead
Cover the word and read the sentence around it, asking what meaning the sentence requires. Check the part of speech and any prefix or suffix, then test your guess by substituting it back into the sentence before choosing.
Reading figurative or idiomatic expressions literally and selecting an option that matches the literal words rather than the intended meaning.
Idioms (koma sér saman, taka til sin, fara í taugarnar á) are learned as chunks, and a candidate who half-recognizes one defaults to the word-by-word sense, which the test writer often provides as a distractor.
What to do instead
When an expression does not make literal sense in context, treat it as a unit and ask what attitude or situation it conveys. Eliminate any option that simply repeats the literal words; prefer the option that matches the tone of the surrounding sentences.
Confusing the author's own view with a view the author reports, quotes, or refutes, and then choosing an option that describes the opposing position as the author's attitude.
Argumentative texts spend several sentences presenting the counterargument, and reporting verbs (segja, halda því fram, gagnrýnendur benda á) are easy to skim past, so the last strong statement gets attributed to the author.
What to do instead
Mark every shift in voice: underline reporting verbs and quotation marks, and note in the margin whose view each paragraph carries. Answer attitude questions only from the concluding or evaluative sentences where the author speaks in their own voice.
Judging a text's reliability from its surface features (length, formal vocabulary, many numbers, a confident tone) rather than from its source, evidence, and purpose.
Candidates equate difficulty and polish with authority, and they do not routinely ask who wrote the text, for whom, and on what basis. Advertisements, opinion pieces, and satirical texts are then read as neutral fact.
What to do instead
Before evaluating, identify three things: the likely source or genre, the intended reader, and the kind of support offered (data, anecdote, authority, emotion). Weigh these explicitly, and reject options that praise or dismiss the text without tying the judgment to those features.
Choosing the option that matches personal experience or a strongly held opinion instead of what the passage actually implies, and then rationalizing the choice afterwards.
Reflection questions invite agreement, and a candidate who has a relevant experience answers from memory rather than from the text. The most attractive option is often the one that sounds wisest, not the one the passage supports.
What to do instead
Write the passage's point in one short sentence before looking at the options. Then check each option against that sentence, and prefer the option that extends the text's own reasoning over one that merely sounds like good advice.
Running out of time on early passages because every sentence is read at the same slow pace, leaving the final and often longer passage unanswered or rushed.
Candidates treat all text as equally important and do not adjust pace to question type, so detail-heavy sections consume time that inference and evaluation questions need.
What to do instead
Do a first pass at a steady pace, flagging hard items and returning to them. Allocate more time to inference and evaluation questions than to direct-detail ones, and never leave blanks, since an eliminated-guess answer costs nothing.