SEE Science & Technology common mistakes
SEE Science & Technology · Understand the traps and how to avoid them.
Writing the definition of a science term (जस्तै force, energy, cell, ecosystem) in one sentence and moving on, instead of stating the term, its formula or unit where applicable, and one concrete example from Nepali daily life or the SEE syllabus.
Candidates memorise short textbook lines and assume the marker will fill in the rest; SEE science marking schemes award marks per point, so a single-sentence answer caps the score even when the concept is understood.
What to do instead
Practise answering every 'define/explain' question in a fixed three-part pattern: definition, formula or unit or classification, and one example or application. Drill this on ten syllabus terms per day and self-mark against the number of marks allotted, adding one point for each missing mark.
Mixing up units and symbols: writing joule for power, watt for energy, newton for mass, or omitting the unit entirely in numerical answers.
Formulas are memorised as strings without the quantity each symbol represents, and Nepali and English symbols are used interchangeably during revision, so the unit is chosen by habit rather than by reasoning about the quantity.
What to do instead
Maintain a one-page quantity–symbol–unit–formula table (बल–N, कार्य–J, शक्ति–W, चाप–Pa) and rewrite it from memory before each practice set. In numericals, write the unit at every step and treat a missing or wrong unit as a lost mark during self-checking.
Solving numericals by grabbing a formula that contains the given numbers, without first converting all quantities to SI units or listing what is given, asked, and the relation connecting them.
Under time pressure candidates pattern-match numbers to familiar formulas; grams, centimetres, minutes, and kilometres per hour appear in SEE-style problems and are silently plugged in unconverted, producing answers that are wrong by powers of ten or by 3.6.
What to do instead
Adopt a written 'दिइएको / सोधिएको / सूत्र' header for every numerical, convert mass to kg, length to m, and time to s before substitution, and keep a conversion checklist (1 g = 10⁻³ kg, 1 cm = 10⁻² m, 1 km/h = 5/18 m/s) at the top of the answer sheet.
Describing a scientific process (photosynthesis, digestion, water cycle, mitosis, refraction) as a list of nouns rather than as an ordered sequence with the location, inputs, outputs, and the cause of each step.
Textbook diagrams are remembered visually as labels, and candidates reproduce the labels without the connecting logic, so examiners cannot award marks for sequence, condition, or cause.
What to do instead
For each process in the syllabus, write a numbered flow with arrows and state at each arrow what enters, what leaves, where it happens, and why it happens. Then close the book and redraw the flow from memory, checking against the textbook only afterwards.
Treating physics, chemistry, biology, and earth science as separate silos and failing to link a concept across them, for example not connecting the law of conservation of energy to food chains, or pH to soil and agriculture.
Revision is organised chapter by chapter as printed in the book, and SEE integrated questions that combine two chapters are rarely practised, so the candidate does not recognise which concept a mixed question is testing.
What to do instead
Build a cross-chapter map linking at least five pairs (energy conservation–food chain, pressure–respiration and transpiration, pH–soil fertility, density–floatation of ships, electricity–household wiring) and practise one integrated question per pair, naming both chapters explicitly in the answer.
Reading a question asking to 'explain with reason' or 'justify' and answering with only the fact, omitting the causal 'because' clause that carries the marks.
Candidates equate a correct fact with a complete answer and are trained on one-line questions; command words such as व्याख्या गर्नुहोस्, कारण दिनुहोस्, र प्रमाणित गर्नुहोस् are skimmed rather than decoded.
What to do instead
Underline the command word in every question before writing and match it to a template: define, explain (fact + mechanism), justify (claim + because + evidence), compare (two columns with a stated criterion). Answer ten command-word questions daily and check that each answer contains the required connector.
Answering 'scientific reason' questions with a restatement of the phenomenon instead of the underlying principle, for example writing 'a ship floats because it is made to float' instead of invoking displaced water weight and density.
Everyday observation language is more fluent than scientific language, so under pressure the candidate writes what they see rather than the principle, and the principle name (upthrust equals weight of displaced fluid) is not retrieved.
What to do instead
Keep a running list of 'reason' questions from past SEE papers with the one-line principle as the answer key, and practise writing each as 'principle name + how it applies here'. Rehearse the top twenty such questions until the principle, not the observation, comes first.
Drawing diagrams freehand without labels, title, or correct proportions, and labelling parts in Nepali only when the syllabus and mark scheme expect standard scientific terms.
Diagrams are treated as decoration rather than as scored content, and candidates are unsure whether Nepali or English labels are acceptable, so they leave labels out or write ambiguous ones.
What to do instead
Follow a diagram protocol: pencil, ruler for straight lines, title at the bottom, all parts labelled with straight leader lines, and standard terms written in English with the Nepali term in brackets where useful. Redraw the ten most frequent syllabus diagrams three times each and self-mark against the label checklist.
Leaving the laboratory-based and 'applied technology' parts of the syllabus to the end and revising them only by reading, without practising the observation, apparatus, precaution, and conclusion structure.
These topics feel easy to read but are hard to write; candidates cannot recall apparatus names, safety precautions, or the difference between observation and conclusion, and technology questions about local applications feel unfamiliar.
What to do instead
For each standard experiment write a four-line card: apparatus, procedure in numbered steps, observation, and conclusion plus one precaution. Add one local technology example per topic (biogas, solar dryer, drip irrigation, water filter) and practise explaining how it applies the science principle.
Managing time and answer order poorly: spending too long on early long-answer questions, leaving objective and short-answer sections under-attended, and writing long essays where two points were asked.
Candidates answer in the order printed and equate length with marks, so a five-mark question consumes fifteen minutes and the final short questions are rushed or blank, even though they are the cheapest marks on the paper.
What to do instead
Rehearse with timed full papers: first pass the objective and one-mark questions in a fixed short block, then allocate minutes proportional to marks (roughly one minute per mark plus reading time), and stop writing when the number of required points is reached. Review the time log after each paper and adjust the block lengths.