A European competition is prepared over months, sometimes more than a year, with no test date known at the outset. That timetable constraint dictates the method: it makes last-minute cramming useless and regularity decisive.
This page separates three things that are often mixed up: what EPSO officially publishes, what research on learning has established, and what nobody can honestly assert. The third category is the most useful.
EPSO is explicit about its position: it offers no preparation course and endorses no outside publication and no outside training service. The sample tests it publishes are given for information and are not, in its own words, training material.
That position has a practical consequence: the only official material available concerns the format of the tests, almost never their content. The one known exception concerns the European Union knowledge test, for which EPSO undertakes to publish the sources used about two months before the date of the test.
The tests are now taken online, under remote invigilation. The consequence is brutal: your equipment, your connection and your room become parameters of the examination. A candidate perfectly prepared on substance can lose the competition on a camera that fails to start.
EPSO publishes the technical requirements and the clear desk rules. Reading them a week before the test, and running a full trial on the machine that will be used on the day, costs an hour and avoids the irreparable.
The reference review on the subject assessed ten revision techniques and ranked them by utility. Only two come out with high utility: testing yourself and spreading revision over time. Rereading your notes and highlighting, the two most widespread reflexes, appear there with low utility.
The testing effect is the most counter-intuitive result: five minutes after working on a text, rereading gives better results than testing yourself. Two days and a week later, the relationship clearly reverses. Worse still for the intuition of the candidate, rereading produces the most reassuring subjective feeling. The method that reassures the most is therefore the one that prepares the least.
The optimal spacing depends on the deadline: the more distant the date of the test, the more spread out the repeats of a given content have to be. A review covering more than three hundred experiments establishes this, and a later study measured the optimal gaps for horizons of seven, thirty-five, seventy and three hundred and fifty days. For a deadline several months away, the order of magnitude is counted in weeks, not in days.
Test anxiety degrades performance: a meta-analysis covering more than five hundred studies establishes this, and shows above all that a reduction in that anxiety is systematically accompanied by an improvement in results. A more recent review confirms the negative link, including on standardised tests and entrance examinations, the situations closest to a competition.
A survey carried out among more than one thousand four hundred pupils reports that the regular practice of retrieval from memory makes them less nervous in the face of tests, and they attribute this to the familiarity acquired with the test situation. These are self-reported data, collected from secondary school pupils: to be handled with caution.
One point calls for honesty: we found no peer-reviewed study isolating the effect of the sitting conditions, timer and invigilation included, compared with identical practice without that constraint. To claim that research proves the usefulness of mock exams under real conditions would be an unsourced assertion. The link is plausible, it is not demonstrated.
Recent notices ask for a first language at C1 level as a minimum, chosen from the twenty-four official languages, and a second language at B2 level as a minimum, different from the first. The level is self-declared: EPSO requires neither a certificate nor a diploma.
What candidates often underestimate is the reach of that choice. The distribution of the tests between the two languages is set by the notice, and in recent competitions it is the reasoning tests that are taken in the first language, while the knowledge test, the digital test and the written test are taken in the second. The choice entered on the form therefore determines the language of several tests, including the writing test.
Certain profiles, translators in particular, follow different language rules. As always, it is the notice of the competition concerned that is authoritative.
Get upcoming competition notices and calendar updates.
Sign-up opens soon.