Task 3, the common mistakes

Task 3 asks for 120 to 180 words. You compare two points of view from two documents, then give your opinion on the theme. It is the longest of the three, and its mistakes come up again and again. Candidates summarise instead of comparing, reuse the documents’ sentences, or give an opinion without defending it.

The labels follow the same rule as our other pages. “Named by FEI” means the candidate handbook names it, “Our reading” means it is our interpretation of the criteria. Copying from the documents has its detailed section on the writing mistakes page, so this page only touches on it.

Mistake	Status
Summarising the documents one after the other	Our reading. FEI assesses comparing two points of view
Reusing the documents’ sentences	Named by FEI for copying one or more sentences
Putting your opinion in part 1	Our reading of the topic development criterion
An opinion with no argument	Our reading. FEI assesses giving an opinion and arguing it
Agreeing with both	Our reading of the topic development criterion
Vague attribution of ideas	Our reading of the coherence and cohesion criterion
A part 1 that runs too long	Guide from the older official handbook, not a current rule
Not finishing the task	Named by FEI for a task not done

Summarising instead of comparing

Le premier document parle des pistes cyclables. L’auteur pense qu’elles sont bonnes pour la santé. Le deuxième document parle aussi des pistes cyclables. L’auteur pense qu’elles prennent de la place aux voitures.

Both summaries are accurate, but nothing links them. Comparing means showing how the two views clash or meet. Corrected, the passage becomes “Les deux auteurs ne voient pas les pistes cyclables de la même façon. Le premier y voit un moyen de rester en bonne santé, alors que le second leur reproche de réduire l’espace des automobilistes.” One connector of contrast (alors que, tandis que, au contraire, en revanche) makes the difference.

Reusing the documents’ sentences

Changing a pronoun is not enough. “Le premier auteur dit qu’il va au travail à vélo tous les jours et qu’il se sent en meilleure forme” takes the document’s sentence almost word for word. Copying one or more sentences from a document is a case FEI says could lead to “A1 non atteint”.

Close the document in your head before writing part 1. Note each author’s position and reason in three words, then write from those notes only.

Putting your opinion in part 1

“Le premier auteur a raison de dire que le vélo est bon pour la santé” mixes presentation and opinion. Part 1 presents both views neutrally. Your opinion starts in part 2, with a clear opener such as “À mon avis” or “Selon moi”.

An opinion with no argument

Selon moi, les pistes cyclables sont une bonne idée. J’aime le vélo. C’est bien pour tout le monde.

The opinion is clear, but “j’aime le vélo” is a taste, not an argument, and “c’est bien pour tout le monde” proves nothing. An argument gives a reason that holds for people other than you, ideally with an example. “Selon moi, les pistes cyclables sont utiles, car elles rendent le trajet plus sûr pour les enfants qui vont à l’école à vélo. Dans ma rue, les parents laissent enfin leurs enfants partir seuls.”

Agreeing with both

“Les deux auteurs ont raison” feels safe, but the text then defends nothing. A nuanced position is fine as long as it is clear. “Je suis favorable aux pistes cyclables, à condition qu’on les construise sur les grandes avenues et non dans les petites rues commerçantes.” The nuance becomes a position, and it gives you the closing proposal.

Vague attribution of ideas

“Le document dit”, “ils pensent” and “on dit que” leave the reader guessing who holds which view. Name the author every time, as in “le premier auteur”, “la seconde” or “selon le premier texte”. The coherence and cohesion criterion also looks at these references.

A part 1 that runs too long

Retelling every detail of both documents can take 100 words and leave only 60 for your opinion. The current handbook sets no split. The older official handbook gave 40 to 60 words for the comparison and 80 to 120 for the opinion. Use it as a guide, two sentences per author at most.

Not finishing the task

If you do the tasks in order, task 3 comes last and is the one that runs out of time. A task not done is one of the cases FEI names. A guide that is not an FEI rule is to keep 30 of the 60 minutes for task 3. If time runs short, finish part 2 in two sentences rather than leave the text open.

Check a task 3 in two minutes

1. A connector of contrast links the two authors in part 1.
2. No sentence in part 1 keeps the structure of a document’s sentence.
3. Your opinion starts in part 2, in its first sentence.
4. Each argument gives a reason, and at least one has an example.
5. The total is between 120 and 180 words, ideally 140 to 175.

To see a working comparison next to a plain summary, read the annotated model answer. To test your own, write a task 3 with the task 3 timer and have it corrected.