New York Regents common mistakes
New York Regents · Understand the traps and how to avoid them.
Writing the final answer without units, or with units that do not match the quantity asked for (for example, giving a speed in meters when the question asks for a time), on constructed-response items.
Candidates compute a number, feel finished, and stop; scoring rubrics award points for the labeled quantity, and unit slips are the single easiest point to lose under time pressure.
What to do instead
Before writing, re-read the prompt's final sentence and underline the quantity and unit requested; write the unit immediately after the number, then check dimensional consistency by carrying units through the calculation.
Choosing an answer because a word in the choice matches a word in the passage or stimulus, without checking whether the choice actually answers the question asked.
Word-matching feels like evidence and is fast; under time pressure the brain rewards surface familiarity over verification.
What to do instead
Cover the choices, state the answer in your own words, then uncover and pick the closest match; for any choice containing a passage word, locate the exact sentence and confirm it supports the whole choice, not just one term.
Skipping the reading passage's line references and answering from general knowledge or personal opinion instead of the text.
Familiar topics invite prior knowledge, and candidates assume the passage says what they expect rather than what is printed.
What to do instead
For every question, return to the cited lines (or scan for the relevant sentence) and quote the supporting words in the margin before selecting; reject any choice you cannot tie to specific text.
On multi-part constructed-response questions, answering only the first part or leaving later parts blank because the first part was hard.
Parts are often independent, but candidates treat the item as all-or-nothing and run out of time before returning.
What to do instead
Read all parts before starting, answer the easiest part first, and label each response (a), (b), (c) so partial credit is visible; never leave a part blank if it can be attempted in one sentence.
Ignoring the scoring rubric's demand for explanation and giving only a final answer on questions that say 'explain', 'justify', or 'show your work'.
Candidates equate a correct number with full credit and skip the reasoning step, especially when the answer feels obvious.
What to do instead
Treat command words as point markers: 'identify' needs a term, 'describe' needs a sentence, 'explain' needs a because-clause linking evidence to conclusion; write one explicit reasoning sentence for every such verb.
Misreading graphs, tables, or diagrams by reading the wrong axis, ignoring the scale, or skipping the legend and units.
Stimulus items are designed so that a careless glance yields a plausible but wrong value; axis labels and multipliers are small print.
What to do instead
Before answering, say aloud the x-axis quantity, y-axis quantity, and the value of one grid interval; trace from the requested point to both axes with a finger or pencil before reading a number.
Failing to eliminate answer choices using process of elimination, instead committing to the first plausible option and moving on.
First-instinct commitment saves seconds but forgoes the strongest multiple-choice tool, especially on items with two near-synonymous distractors.
What to do instead
Cross out choices that are factually wrong, answer the wrong question, or contain absolutes like 'always' or 'never' unless the text supports them; choose among survivors only after marking why each rejected choice fails.
Mismanaging time: spending too long on one hard item early and leaving later, easier items unanswered or unread.
Exams mix difficulty randomly, and anxiety makes a hard early question feel like a gate that must be cleared before continuing.
What to do instead
Set a per-item time budget from total minutes divided by item count; mark and skip any item exceeding roughly 1.5 times that budget, then return with remaining time, and reserve the last several minutes to confirm no blanks remain.
Leaving answers blank instead of guessing on multiple-choice items, or writing nothing on a constructed-response part that seems impossible.
Candidates fear being penalized for wrong answers or believe a partial attempt looks worse than silence.
What to do instead
Confirm the exam's guessing policy in advance (typically no penalty for wrong multiple-choice answers) and adopt the rule: every item gets a mark, and every constructed-response part gets at least a defined term or one relevant sentence.
Not checking that a numerical answer is reasonable in context, submitting results like a negative time, a human mass of 500 kg, or a probability above 1.
Candidates trust the calculator output and skip the final sanity check, so sign errors, unit-conversion mistakes, and misplaced decimals survive to the answer sheet.
What to do instead
End every calculation with a ten-second plausibility test: estimate the answer mentally first, compare magnitude, check sign and units, and confirm the value falls in a physically sensible range before writing it down.