iTEP Academic-Core common mistakes
iTEP Academic-Core · Understand the traps and how to avoid them.
Reading the answer options before the listening passage begins and locking onto the first option that shares a word with what is heard.
Candidates scan options during the short pre-question window instead of predicting the topic, then treat a single repeated keyword as proof of the correct answer, which is exactly how distractors are built.
What to do instead
Use the pre-listening seconds only to predict what kind of information is needed (a number, a reason, a location). After listening, select the option that matches the whole meaning of the passage, and reject any option chosen solely because it repeats a word you heard.
Answering a listening question from background knowledge or expectation rather than from what the speaker actually said.
Academic-Core listening items use familiar campus and classroom scenarios, so candidates fill gaps in comprehension with assumptions about how such situations usually go.
What to do instead
After choosing an answer, state the exact words in the passage that support it. If you cannot point to heard evidence, treat the answer as a guess and re-listen mentally to the relevant stretch before committing.
Missing the function of a short utterance, such as a speaker's purpose, attitude, or implied meaning, and answering only about its literal content.
Candidates focus on decoding vocabulary and stop before interpreting why the speaker said it, which is the actual target of pragmatic listening items.
What to do instead
For each short exchange, ask two questions: what was said, and what the speaker is doing with it (agreeing, correcting, declining, suggesting). Practise tagging short dialogues with an intent label before answering.
Spending too long on one reading passage or question and leaving later questions unanswered.
Academic-Core reading is timed as a whole, and a single dense passage can absorb time that the remaining questions needed; candidates also reread the same sentence repeatedly without progress.
What to do instead
Set a per-question time budget and move on when it is exceeded, marking a provisional answer. Return only if time remains. Practise with a visible timer so the budget becomes automatic.
Choosing a reading answer that is true in general but not supported by the passage.
Options are written to sound plausible and consistent with real-world knowledge, and candidates judge plausibility instead of checking the text.
What to do instead
For every option, locate the sentence in the passage that confirms or contradicts it. Eliminate any option you cannot anchor to specific lines, even if it sounds correct.
Confusing the main idea of a passage with a supporting detail, or vice versa.
Detailed passages contain many specific facts, and candidates who read closely remember the details better than the overall point, so a vivid detail feels like the main idea.
What to do instead
Before answering main-idea items, summarise the passage in one sentence in your own words and check which option matches that summary rather than any single fact.
Judging grammar items by how a sentence sounds rather than by the structure the sentence requires.
Everyday spoken English tolerates forms that written academic English marks as errors, and candidates rely on familiarity instead of analysis.
What to do instead
Identify the grammatical role of the blank first (subject, verb, modifier, connector), then choose the form that fits that role. Say the chosen sentence aloud only after the structural check, not before.
Overlooking agreement, tense consistency, and word-form errors when a sentence contains a distracting long phrase.
Inserted phrases between a subject and its verb, or between a noun and its modifier, break the candidate's tracking of the sentence's core.
What to do instead
Mentally strip the sentence to its core subject and verb before checking agreement or tense, then reinsert the modifiers. Train on sentences with long interrupting phrases.
Writing a short response that lists opinions without developing or supporting any of them.
Under time pressure, candidates produce several undeveloped points because generating ideas feels more productive than explaining one, and word-count anxiety pushes toward listing.
What to do instead
Commit to one position and two supporting reasons, each with a concrete example or explanation. Outline those two points in a sentence each before writing, and expand rather than add new points.
Using memorised, high-level vocabulary and complex structures that are inaccurate, which lowers the score more than simple correct language would.
Candidates believe advanced words and long sentences automatically raise the writing score and take risks with forms they cannot control.
What to do instead
Write with vocabulary and structures you can use accurately, and reserve one or two complex sentences for places where you are confident. Proofread for accuracy before adding sophistication.