UNAM Mature Age Entry common mistakes
UNAM Mature Age Entry · Understand the traps and how to avoid them.
Spending equal time on every English comprehension passage instead of triaging by question value, so the final passage is answered while the invigilator is calling time.
Candidates treat Paper 1 as a reading test rather than a timed assessment and work strictly in page order, unaware that the last passage often carries the same marks as the first.
What to do instead
Before starting, count the passages and allocate minutes per passage (total minutes minus 5 for transfer, divided by passages). Do a 60-second skim of each passage's questions first, then answer in order of confidence, returning to hard items last. Practise with a visible timer so pacing becomes automatic.
Choosing an English comprehension answer that is true in real life or matches a word from the passage, rather than one supported by the passage itself.
Under time pressure candidates pattern-match on familiar vocabulary and outside knowledge instead of locating the exact line that justifies the option.
What to do instead
For every answer, underline the sentence in the passage that proves it and reject any option that cannot be tied to a specific line. Learn the standard distractor types (true-but-not-stated, half-true, reversed cause and effect) and label each rejected option with its type.
In English usage items (tense, prepositions, concord, word choice), picking the option that 'sounds right' without identifying the grammatical rule being tested.
Everyday spoken English differs from examined standard English, and candidates have never been taught to name the rule, so they rely on intuition that fails on formal written items.
What to do instead
For each practice item, write the rule being tested in the margin (e.g. subject-verb agreement with collective nouns, since/for with time). Build a one-page rule sheet from errors and review it weekly. Where two options sound acceptable, choose the one that satisfies the formal rule, not the colloquial one.
Treating General Knowledge as trivia and guessing immediately on questions about current officeholders, regional bodies, or recent events, instead of reasoning from what is known.
Candidates assume General Knowledge cannot be studied and do no systematic preparation, so they have no framework for eliminating options on unfamiliar items.
What to do instead
Keep a dated one-page current-affairs sheet (national leadership, regional and continental bodies, major recent events) updated monthly for the six months before the test. In the exam, eliminate options that are chronologically or geographically impossible before guessing, and never leave a blank.
Answering General Knowledge items from memorised 'facts' absorbed from social media or rumour without checking them against a reliable source.
Misinformation circulates widely and candidates rarely verify claims, so confidently held wrong facts produce confidently wrong answers.
What to do instead
Restrict revision sources to reputable reference material and official publications. For any fact you intend to rely on, note the source beside it; if you cannot name a source, mark the fact as uncertain and do not build an answer on it.
In the Numerical Ability paper, reading the question once and computing immediately, so the calculation answers a slightly different question than the one asked (wrong unit, wrong quantity, 'remaining' versus 'total').
Exam pressure and the desire to bank easy marks push candidates past the final line of the question, where the actual requirement usually sits.
What to do instead
Adopt a fixed routine for every item: circle what is asked, note the units, estimate the answer's rough size, then compute. Compare the result with the estimate; if they diverge by more than about 10 per cent, re-read the question before moving on.
Losing marks on multi-step numerical problems through untidy working - misaligned columns, dropped negative signs, decimals shifted during multiplication or division - and then being unable to trace the error.
Candidates do rough work in margins or on the question paper with no structure, and under time pressure small transcription errors compound silently.
What to do instead
Use a dedicated rough-work area with one problem per block, write each step on its own line, and keep decimal points vertically aligned. Carry units through every line. When an answer looks wrong, rework from the previous line rather than restarting, so the faulty step is isolated.
Running out of time on Numerical Ability because a single hard problem is pursued for many minutes while several easy marks later in the paper go unattempted.
Sunk-cost thinking - candidates feel the invested effort must be redeemed - combined with no preset abandonment rule.
What to do instead
Set a per-question time budget from the total marks (e.g. total minutes divided by number of questions, minus review time). If a question exceeds roughly 1.5 times that budget, mark it, move on, and return only after all other items are attempted. Practise this rule under timed conditions until abandoning feels routine.
In the Faculty Specific paper, revising the whole undergraduate syllabus broadly instead of the stated scope, so depth on the actually examined topics is missing.
Candidates do not obtain or read the faculty's published syllabus or past-paper structure, and default to whatever textbook they already own.
What to do instead
Obtain the official syllabus and any specimen materials for the specific faculty, list every stated topic, and rate confidence 1–5 on each. Spend revision time in proportion to (topic weight in the syllabus) × (1 minus confidence), and confirm with the faculty office which sections are examinable before finalising the plan.
In the Faculty Specific paper, answering essay or structured questions with unsupported general statements and no subject-specific terminology, structure, or worked reasoning.
Candidates transfer school-style narrative writing into a test that rewards precise disciplinary language and explicit argument or calculation steps.
What to do instead
Before writing, spend two minutes drafting a skeleton: defined terms, three or four headed points, and a conclusion. In each paragraph, state the point, give the technical term or evidence, and link it to the question. For calculation-based items, show every step and state assumptions, since method marks are awarded independently of the final answer.