MTTC Elementary Education (103) common mistakes
MTTC Elementary Education (103) · Understand the traps and how to avoid them.
On mathematics items, the candidate reads the question, computes an answer, sees it in the options, and selects it without checking the operation the question actually asked for (e.g., finds area when perimeter was requested, or finds the discount amount rather than the final price).
Under time pressure the brain latches onto the first familiar computation the numbers suggest, and the presence of the distractor matching that wrong computation confirms the error instead of catching it. Elementary-level items often embed a two-step problem in a single sentence, so the requested quantity is easy to skim past.
What to do instead
Before computing, underline the quantity named in the question stem (perimeter, final cost, remaining amount) and write the unit it should carry. After computing, restate the answer in a full sentence with that unit; if the unit does not match the underlined quantity, redo the setup rather than the arithmetic.
The candidate applies a memorized procedure to a place-value or fraction item without checking magnitude, producing answers like 0.5 < 0.25 or 3/4 + 1/2 = 4/6, and does not notice the result is implausible.
Procedural fluency drilled in isolation leaves conceptual benchmarks undeveloped. Candidates who learned 'add the tops, add the bottoms' or 'more digits means bigger' never built the comparison habits that would flag an impossible result, and the exam deliberately offers the procedural-error result as an option.
What to do instead
Build three anchor facts and use them as a checklist on every fraction and decimal item: fractions with the same numerator get smaller as the denominator grows; a sum of two positive fractions exceeds each addend; decimals are compared digit by digit from the leftmost place. Estimate the answer before computing and reject any option on the wrong side of the estimate.
On science items the candidate answers from everyday intuition or a familiar real-world example instead of the scientific model being tested, for instance saying heavier objects fall faster, that seasons are caused by distance from the Sun, or that plants get their mass mainly from soil.
Everyday experience is compelling and often locally correct, and the misconceptions involved are among the most resistant to instruction. Candidates who have not explicitly confronted their own preconceptions revert to them under time pressure even after study.
What to do instead
For each physical science and Earth science topic on the blueprint, write the correct model and the common misconception side by side, then write one sentence explaining why the misconception fails. On the exam, when an option matches your intuition exactly, treat that as a prompt to check it against the model rather than a reason to select it.
The candidate treats an item describing a classroom scenario, a student misconception, or a lesson sequence as a recall question and picks the option that names the right term, rather than the option that describes the most appropriate instructional response.
Many candidates prepare only with content flashcards and never practise the applied-pedagogy format. Scenario items reward the option that best supports student thinking, which is often not the most technical-sounding or the most efficient-sounding choice, so vocabulary knowledge actively misleads.
What to do instead
Practise with scenario stems and, for each, rank all four options from most to least supportive of student learning before checking. Learn to recognize the two recurring wrong-option types: the one that tells the student the answer, and the one that changes the task to something easier rather than addressing the misconception.
The candidate misreads a negation, an 'EXCEPT', or a 'which is NOT' stem and selects a true statement when an untrue one was requested, or the reverse.
These items invert the normal search task. The reading habit built over dozens of straight stems overrides the single reversed word, and the reversed word is frequently buried mid-sentence rather than at the start.
What to do instead
Circle or note every negative cue word as you read the stem, then before marking an answer, re-read the stem's final clause and confirm the truth value of your chosen option matches the direction asked. On EXCEPT items, deliberately mark each option T or F in the margin and select the lone odd one out.
The candidate spends disproportionate time on a small number of hard items, then rushes or fails to reach the final items in the section, leaving several questions unanswered.
Elementary education generalist tests draw on many content areas, so almost every candidate meets items outside their strongest subject. The instinct to keep working a familiar-feeling but stubborn item, combined with not tracking elapsed time against item count, produces a back-loaded time crisis.
What to do instead
Set a per-item budget from the section's item count and time limit before starting, and mark and skip any item that exceeds roughly 1.5 times that budget. Reserve the final minutes for returning to marked items and for confirming that no item is blank, since an unanswered item scores zero while a reasoned guess has a real chance.
On reading comprehension and vocabulary items, the candidate chooses an option because it repeats words from the passage or sounds academic, rather than because the passage actually supports it.
Word-matching feels like evidence and is fast. Distractors are frequently built by lifting exact phrases from the text and attaching a claim the text does not make, while the correct option paraphrases in different words and therefore looks less familiar.
What to do instead
For every option you are tempted by, return to the passage and locate the specific sentence that licenses it. If you cannot point to that sentence, eliminate the option regardless of how familiar its wording is. Prefer correct answers that paraphrase over answers that echo the text verbatim.
The candidate answers a word-analysis or phonics item by sounding the word out as they personally pronounce it, instead of applying the phoneme–grapheme rule the item is testing, and so misjudges items about consonant blends, vowel teams, or syllable types.
Adult readers process words whole and automatically, so their own dialect and sight-word knowledge override the explicit rule. Items about how a word is decoded by a beginning reader require stepping back into a rule-based stance that fluent readers no longer use.
What to do instead
Study the standard scope of phonics elements (short and long vowel patterns, vowel teams, r-controlled vowels, consonant digraphs and blends, syllable types) and practise segmenting words aloud into phonemes rather than syllables. On each item, state the rule first, then test the word against the rule.
On social studies and history items, the candidate selects an option because it names a famous person, document, or event, without checking whether the option's stated role, date, or causal claim is correct.
Recognition memory for names is strong even when the associated facts are fuzzy, and the exam pairs well-known names with subtly wrong actions or periods. Candidates who studied by reading summaries rather than by building timelines and cause-and-effect chains have names without anchored context.
What to do instead
Build a short timeline of major eras and documents with one-line significance notes, and for each key figure record what they did and roughly when. On exam items, verify each option's verb and date against the timeline before selecting, and eliminate any option whose claim falls outside the era named in the stem.
The candidate answers questions about assessment, legal requirements, or professional practice from general impressions of what schools 'usually do' rather than from the specific principle being tested, such as confusing formative with summative assessment or misstating which students are entitled to services.
Classroom experience and memory of one's own schooling supply plausible but non-authoritative norms. Foundational-practice items test defined principles and legal entitlements, and the intuitive everyday option is often the distractor.
What to do instead
Make a one-page reference of the key distinctions: formative versus summative purpose, norm-referenced versus criterion-referenced interpretation, screening versus diagnosis, and the referral and eligibility flow for students with disabilities and English learners. For each exam item, name the principle being tested before reading options, then select the option consistent with that principle rather than with habit.