The Four-Axis Diagnostic

Suppose you have six months and four evenings a week. Do you spend them on the axis where you are weakest, or the one where the next twenty hours buy the most marks? Those are usually not the same axis, and the instinct to attack the weakness is often the expensive answer — an immersed learner is frequently closest to B2 on listening, which they have been doing involuntarily for years, and furthest on writing, which no amount of further immersion will improve. Choosing well is worth more than working harder, and you cannot choose without measuring.

This track is that measurement. It assesses all four DELF B2 épreuves — CO, PO, CE, PE — and produces four separate results rather than one level, because a single number would average away the entire point. It then ranks them not by score but by ease of progress: quick win, steady work, long game. That distinction is the whole design. A weak axis that responds fast belongs at the front of your sequence; a weak axis that needs a year belongs as a short daily loop running underneath everything else, not as the thing you spend February on.

The output is a personalised study sequence, and it does not survive contact with reality unchanged — which is why the diagnostic repeats every fortnight. Axes move: an axis you have worked hard converts from quick win to steady work and something else takes the front, and if a plan written in month one is still governing month four, it has stopped describing you. Every other part of this discipline reads from this result — what your campaign schedules, what the weekly review re-ranks, how much time the fossilized grammar strand gets. Start here, before anything else.