June 2026
The 2025 VCE French Exam Report made one lesson very clear: high-scoring responses were precise, task-focused and controlled.
Students did not need to produce the most elaborate French possible. They needed to understand the texts accurately, answer the exact question, use the correct language, respect the required text type, and avoid drifting into prepared material that did not fit the task.
Across the examination, the strongest students showed control in three areas.
They understood details.
They expressed those details clearly.
They shaped their responses according to the question.
This mattered in every section: listening, reading, responding and extended writing.
The report repeatedly showed that students lost marks not because they had no French, but because they misunderstood a key word, omitted a required detail, used the wrong text type, translated too loosely, or wrote something pre-prepared rather than responding to the stimulus.
In VCE French, marks are not awarded for general relevance.
They are awarded for exact communication.
Listening required precise comprehension, not approximate meaning
Section 1 tested students’ ability to understand and convey general and specific aspects of listening texts.
In Part A, students answered in English. This can create a false sense of safety. Because the response is in English, students sometimes assume that approximate understanding is enough.
The 2025 report showed otherwise.
For Question 1b, students needed to explain why Nicolas’s parents decided to move back to France. One required point was that they were inspired by a TV series about living in a château. Many students instead wrote that the parents had bought a château, which did not answer the question accurately.
This is a small difference, but an important one.
Being inspired by a television series is not the same as buying a château.
The text’s detail mattered.
Translation errors changed the answer
Question 1d asked how Nicolas’s parents planned to earn money in France.
Students needed to understand that they would rent out the large rooms or halls of the château for weddings and birthdays, and that they would make money from wine or sell wine.
The report noted several common errors. Some students did not correctly translate louer, which means to rent or hire out. Others confused anniversaires with anniversaries, when in this context it meant birthdays. Some students wrote that the parents would make wine, but did not explicitly link this to earning money.
Each of these errors changed the answer.
In VCE French, vocabulary precision matters because a mistranslated word can redirect the whole response.
Louer is not a decorative vocabulary item.
Anniversaire is context-dependent.
Making wine is not the same as earning money from wine.
High-scoring students carried the exact meaning across.
In French responses, content and language worked together
Section 1 Part B required students to answer in French.
The report explained that students were not awarded separate marks for content and language. Instead, responses that included relevant information and were expressed clearly in French were awarded full marks.
This is important.
Students needed to convey the information accurately in French. A response could not simply contain isolated key words. It needed enough grammatical control to communicate the answer.
Question 2b asked how Chloé prepared for the Vendée Globe. Strong responses included ideas such as:
Elle fait du sport cinq jours sur sept.
Un médecin vérifie sa santé régulièrement.
Elle est aidée par une nutritionniste.
Elle fait de la méditation.
Un psychologue l’aide à contrôler ses peurs.
Son équipe technique a vérifié chaque partie du bateau.
The report noted that some students did not include appropriate verbs or verb formations. Others confused médecin with médecine.
That distinction matters.
Un médecin is a doctor.
La médecine is medicine.
Knowing the vocabulary is only part of the task. Students also needed to place it into a clear French sentence.
Students needed to answer the exact relationship in the question
Question 2c asked why Chloé named her boat Vers l’horizon.
The answer required students to explain that the name represented the potential of youth and referred to the foundation or charity she supports.
The report noted that many students did not correctly translate soutenir. Some recognised the idea of support, but incorrectly wrote that Chloé supported young people directly rather than supporting the foundation.
This is an excellent example of how VCE French tests relationships between ideas.
Who supports what?
What does the boat name refer to?
What does the foundation represent?
The student needed to preserve the exact connection from the text.
A partially understood sentence could easily become inaccurate if the relationship was changed.
Reading and listening together required source control
Section 2 Part A combined a reading text and a listening text on overtourism.
The reading text explained that overtourism causes deterioration of cultural heritage, destruction of animal habitat, overuse of natural resources, pollution of soil, water and air, loss of biodiversity, increased cost of living, increased noise pollution and friction within the local population.
Students then needed to use information from Text 3A, Text 3B, or both, depending on the question.
This required source control.
For Question 3e, students needed to explain how overtourism affects local people according to both texts. Strong answers included increased cost of living, increased noise pollution, friction within the local population, benefits to businesses linked to tourism, and rubbish being left for locals to manage.
The report noted two important errors.
Some students mistranslated les nuisances sonores as “noise nuisance” or “sound disturbance” instead of noise pollution. Others incorrectly wrote that there was friction between tourists and locals, rather than friction within the local community itself.
That second error is especially instructive.
The issue was not conflict between tourists and locals. It was tension within the local population, especially between those who benefit economically from tourism and those who suffer its effects.
The distinction changed the answer.
Dictionary use mattered, but only when used intelligently
The French exam allowed dictionaries during reading time and writing time.
The report encouraged students to refer to their dictionaries for unfamiliar words, such as les nuisances sonores.
This is important because dictionary access does not automatically solve comprehension problems. Students still need to choose the meaning that fits the context.
A dictionary may offer several possibilities. The student must decide which one works in the sentence and in the topic.
For overtourism, nuisances sonores is best understood as noise pollution. A literal or awkward translation weakened the answer.
Dictionaries are useful tools.
They are not substitutes for contextual reading.
Specificity determined marks in short-answer questions
Question 3f asked students to list measures that some cities had taken to limit overtourism.
Strong answers included:
- a tax to enter a city or village
- a tax or surcharge on entry tickets to tourist sites
- a quota on the number of tourists
- compulsory advance booking of accommodation
The report noted that many students mentioned a tax or surcharge on entry tickets but did not specify that it was for tourist sites. That was not specific enough.
This is a major VCE French lesson.
A broad answer can be close but still incomplete.
“Tax on entry tickets” does not carry the same information as “tax on entry tickets to tourist sites”.
The required detail must be included.
Section 2 Part B was not creative writing
Question 4 required students to read a poster about becoming a class representative and then write a short persuasive speech in French to classmates, using information from the poster and giving examples from their own experiences to show they had the necessary qualities.
The report stated that this question was not answered very well.
One major issue was that students treated the task as creative writing or wrote about what they had done in their current role as school captain or sports captain. But the task was a reading comprehension involving reorganisation of information and ideas from the stimulus text.
This is crucial.
The student needed to use the poster’s categories:
Intérêts
Rôle
Compétences
Responsabilités
They also needed to provide examples for each category, rather than merely mentioning the categories.
The task was not asking students to invent a generic leadership speech.
It was asking them to persuade classmates by showing that they matched the qualities described in the poster.
Text type mattered
For Question 4, some students did not follow the conventions of a persuasive speech. The report noted that they failed to provide an appropriate introduction or conclusion.
This matters because VCE French writing is not assessed only on language accuracy. Students must also respond to the prescribed audience, purpose, style and text type.
A persuasive speech to classmates should sound like a speech. It should have an opening that addresses the audience, a clear persuasive purpose, examples that support the candidate’s suitability, and a conclusion that encourages classmates to vote for them.
A response that simply lists qualities may contain relevant information, but it does not fully meet the task.
The form matters because communication happens through form.
Section 3 rewarded careful reading of prompts
Section 3 required students to choose one writing task in French.
The report noted that high-scoring responses demonstrated a careful reading of the prompts and included relevant content. It also advised students to plan and proofread for grammar and spelling accuracy.
This was especially clear in Question 5, the most popular task.
Students had to write an email to a cousin evaluating the positive and negative aspects of their part-time job and indicate whether the cousin should apply for a similar position.
Many students handled the positive and negative aspects reasonably well, but some failed to mention what type of job they had. Others did not make a final recommendation about whether the cousin should apply.
Both omissions were costly.
The task had two parts:
Evaluate the job.
Give advice to the cousin.
A response that evaluates but does not recommend remains incomplete.
Evaluative writing needed both sides and a conclusion
For Question 5, the report stated that high-scoring responses included two positive and two negative aspects of the job, as well as the student’s opinion to their cousin.
Possible positives included earning money, meeting new people, gaining experience for future jobs, improving time management, and receiving benefits such as discounts or vouchers.
Possible negatives included poor treatment by management, less time for interests, impact on schoolwork, early mornings or late returns, and bullying by other workers.
The strongest responses did not just list these points.
They presented them logically and then reached a conclusion.
That is what evaluation requires.
Students needed to weigh positives and negatives and then indicate whether the cousin should apply.
Writing style had to match the text type
Question 5 required an email to a cousin. That meant informal language and an appropriate opening and ending.
Question 6 required a blog post. The report stated that the blog format required the date, headings, subheadings and hyperlinks.
Question 7 required a personal journal entry. Strong responses were written in the first person, used informal and emotional language, and connected the image to the student’s feelings.
Question 8 required an imaginative informal letter in a bottle. Strong responses established setting and character, described the first days on the island, mentioned objects found in the suitcase, and asked for help.
Each question required different writing choices.
A blog should not sound like a diary.
A diary should not sound like a formal article.
An email to a cousin should not sound like an academic essay.
A speech should not sound like a list.
Text type is not a minor formatting issue.
It shapes the response.
Pre-prepared responses were a problem
The report explicitly advised students to avoid pre-prepared or previously attempted responses.
This is one of the most important lessons from 2025.
In Question 6, low-scoring blog responses appeared to be pre-prepared, based on opinion rather than fact, and written in a persuasive rather than informative style.
The prompt asked students to inform readers about their ideal sustainable city design. This required informative language, commentary, and explanation of features such as technology, sustainability practices, energy-efficient buildings, open spaces, bike paths, houses, shops, schools and medical facilities.
A pre-prepared sustainability essay may not meet those requirements.
It may be impressive in places, but if it is persuasive rather than informative, or if it does not describe the city design, it misses the task.
High-scoring students adapted to the prompt.
Visual stimulus had to be used
Question 7 required students to use information from an image of a Paris flea market.
The report noted that low-scoring responses did not refer to the image or to an item from the image, and did not mention the special item bought.
The image showed a lively market scene with many objects, including decorative items, ceramics, framed pictures, plates and objects displayed near the Seine in Paris.
A strong journal entry needed to connect the image to the experience and the student’s feelings. It could describe the impressive size of the market, the variety of objects, the atmosphere, and a special item that evoked memory or emotion.
The report gave examples of useful language such as:
Je suis émerveillé(e).
Je suis stupéfait(e).
Je n’arrivais pas à croire.
La grandeur du marché aux puces était impressionnante.
Cet objet que j’ai trouvé m’a fait redécouvrir une période de mon enfance.
The image was not optional.
It was part of the task.
Idioms were risky
The report advised students to avoid using idioms because they are not included in the marking criteria and are often used incorrectly.
This is practical and important advice.
Students sometimes memorise idioms to sound sophisticated, but incorrect idiom use can damage clarity. In VCE French, accurate and appropriate language is more valuable than decorative language that may not fit.
A clear sentence with correct grammar is usually stronger than an ambitious idiom used awkwardly.
High-scoring French writing is controlled.
It does not need to be over-ornamented.
Grammar accuracy still mattered
Although some sections were assessed holistically, the report made clear that language accuracy remained an important expected quality, particularly in French responses.
Students needed to proofread for grammar and spelling.
Common risks included incorrect verb forms, incorrect vocabulary choices, confusion between similar words, and lack of complete sentences.
This does not mean every response needed to be flawless. But repeated errors can interfere with communication.
In a language exam, accuracy is not cosmetic.
It is part of meaning.
What future French students should learn from 2025
The 2025 VCE French exam shows that students need to prepare for precision and adaptability.
Students should be able to:
- listen for exact details, not approximate meaning
- translate vocabulary in context
- use dictionaries carefully
- answer the precise question asked
- preserve relationships between ideas in the text
- write clear complete sentences in French
- distinguish content required by different sections
- use stimulus material rather than ignore it
- match text type, style, audience and purpose
- avoid pre-prepared responses that do not fit the prompt
- avoid risky idioms
- plan and proofread written responses
- include conclusions or recommendations when required
These skills decide marks across the whole paper.
VCE French rewards students who communicate accurately, appropriately and specifically.
How ATAR STAR approaches VCE French
At ATAR STAR, VCE French is taught as precise communication.
Students learn to extract exact information from listening and reading texts, write clear French sentences, use vocabulary in context, and shape responses according to text type, audience and purpose. They practise adapting to the task rather than relying on memorised material.
The 2025 Examination Report confirms why this matters. High-scoring students did not simply know French.
They used French accurately for the task in front of them.