Eag20's Blog

Today we’re watching a movie in class August 4, 2009

Posted by eag20 in Uncategorized.
1 comment so far

I came across an article on what I think is a very interesting topic, the use of historical films in the classroom.  As a future Social Studies teacher and total history nerd I love historical films and how they can be used in the classroom.

What Do Students Learn from Historical Feature Films?

I read this article, “What do Students Learn from Historical Feature Films“, on Teaching History.org.  Basically, what the article finds is that students are more likely to view a film as historically inaccurate if the cinematography is outdated or poor, or if the film plays into stereotypes of certain groups.  This was evident when students watched the older western The Searchers, starring John Wayne, and the more recent film Dances with Wolves.

Can’t historical films be a tool for teaching history, if presented correctly?

I like what this article says about films being a way for students to empathize with characters in history.  Some people have a really hard time just visualizing historical settings.  Films can give them a much needed visual representation of life in other places and times, almost like providing the set and costumes so they can reenact historical scenes in their own minds.   Plus cuing students in on historical inaccuracies in films helps them look critically at the difference between historical fact and fiction.

Is showing movies in class being lazy?

Maybe it’s just the schools I grew up in, but there was always this stigma about showing films in class, as if it immediately indicated that a teacher was being lazy.  I believe there is a use for movies in the history classroom, if used judiciously and presented in an academic context.

The problem is that there are just so many great historical films out there, how do you decide which ones to show, or how much of the film to show? Perhaps an alternative is compiling a list of films for each unit and just suggesting to students that they watch one or two on their own time.  Could this be an opportunity for extra credit? The following is my first attempt at compiling a list of worthy historical films.

Films I would definitely show in class:

• Alexander the Great (definitely not the Colin Farrell film, an older version starring Richard Burton)
• Sparticus
• Gladiator
• Rome (the TV series)
• 1776 (musical about the Declaration of Independence if you’ve never seen it)
  
• Amistad
• Gone with the Wind
• Glory

Maybes:  The problem with most of these is that they are rated R and I question whether they would be considered suitable to show to high-schoolers.

• Braveheart
• The Patriot
• Saving Private Ryan (a WWII veteran once said that watching the opening scene of this movie was like being back in Normandy on D-day)
• Flags of our Fathers/ Letters from Iwo Jima

Pencils Down: the final blog August 3, 2009

Posted by eag20 in Uncategorized.
add a comment

This is my last blog post on standardized testing.  For my last blog I will examine another blog, the questions it poses about standardized tests, and weigh in with my own final opinions.

Opinions in The New York Times

Stephen Dubner’s December 20, 2007 post on his blog in the Opinions section of the New York Times website deals with the issue of standardized testing.  I feel that “What should be done about Standardized Tests?  A Freakonomics Quorum” presents an interesting question for consideration.

Should there be less standardized testing in the current school system? More? Should all schools, including colleges, institute exit exams?

Dubner asks testing experts James Popham, Robert Zemsky, Thomas Toch, Monty Neill, and Gaston Caperton to weigh in with their opinions.  Here, I summarize their opinions and add my own two cents to the debate.

James Popham:

• Compares standardized tests to French Fries.  Both differ vastly in composition and quality.
• It depends on whether the right kinds of tests are being used, and if they’re good tests.
• Given the current situation, there should be less tests, because the wrong tests are being used.
• We need more standardized tests that are “sufficiently sensitive to instructional quality… Standardized tests can be written that accurately measure a school’s instructional effectiveness, yet also stimulate teachers to do a better job of teaching.”
• On the topic of exit exams, we owe it to students to make sure they’ve been taught property, but questions the ability of professor to make exit exams or French fries.

Robert Zemsky:

• Compares testing to planning a visit to the dentist – it’s all about remembered pain.  No one likes testing, but high-stakes testing has become a standard feature, even considered in higher education.
• Testing raises many problematic questions about who is actually being tested, what is being tested, and how should the results be used.
• The best predictor of how well college students will do on a test is how they do on the SAT or the ACT.  These tests are really good at telling us who the best test takers are.

Thomas Toch:

• Testing is valuable for telling us how well schools are performing.
• We need better tests.  Today’s multiple-choice tests measure low-level skills instead of higher level skills, such as open-ended questions.  And high-stakes testing just encourages teachers and principles to teach these low-level skills at the expense of other material.
• Exit exams make sense, but the exams already required of high school students are often given based on ninth and tenth-grade skills because lawmakers are wary of setting the bar higher and seeing large numbers fail.
• Such tests do not encourage high schools to aim high with their students.  They try to “jack up the floor of student achievement in the nation’s schools”
• Good high school exit exams would be more like the comprehensive exams that colleges require students to pass in their majors, which would “raise the ceiling of student achievement”.

Monty Neill:

• No Child Left Behind has “given a black eye to education policies based on the overuse of standardized testing.”  No wonder more than 140 groups have called for its comprehensive overhaul.
• High-stakes testing narrows curricula and dumbs them down, weakening untested subjects and turning classrooms into test preparation centers.
• Exit exams make even less sense for college.  How could they accurately assess the learning of students majoring in a variety of subjects?
• Better ways to assess student learning include classroom-based information like grades.  GPA is a better predictor of college success than the SAT or ACT.
• “High-quality assessment is an educational necessity. But high-stakes standardized tests harm educational quality and promote inequity.”

Gaston Caperton:

• Quality is more important than quantity when it comes to testing.
• The SAT is a success because it is the most level playing field in an era of rampant grade inflation.
• Exit exams already exist as final exams in various subject areas in high school and college.

My Opinion:

My opinion is that standardized testing is a reality of the modern age that we are not going to be able to stop.  I would, however, agree with Toch we need better tests.  The national insistence on testing encourages rapid adoption of standardized tests.  We cannot compromise quality tests in exchange for quick results.  There are ways to write test questions that require higher-level skills to answer.  Such tests may take longer to write, administer, and grade, but they would encourage critical thinking and problem solving, and hopefully those objectives would translate back into the classroom. After all, if the government is going to give so much attention, priority, and aid to education, it may as well spend the money on more effective tests.

As far as exit exams go, I could get behind comprehensive subject tests in high schools if, of course, they were good tests.  The use of exit exams in particular subjects would both more than just ninth and tenth grade content and leave students more accountable for cumulative knowledge and skills. However, I fear that a comprehensive high school exit exam might be too overwhelming and broad and might also compete with the SAT and ACT, not to mention AP exams, which are more useful to colleges because they are the same across the country.

Perhaps the real problem here is that everyone is jumping on the standardized testing bandwagon. We have SATs, ACTs, APs, and countless state testing requirements.  Instead of testing the same thing over and over again develop one set of tests on a range of topics.  Kind of like AP/SAT II style tests given to every high school student before graduation that counts for both graduation requirements and national or collegiate recognition

Some Sense from the Senate July 29, 2009

Posted by eag20 in Uncategorized.
1 comment so far

Race to the Top July 27, 2009

Posted by eag20 in Uncategorized.
1 comment so far

I feel that standardized tests seem to be more of a check on schools and teachers, with a secondary implication for students. This seems to be true based on a recent article in the New York Times, “Administration Takes Aim at State Law on Teachers” (23 July 2009).

Basically the Obama Administration, with Educational Secretary Arne Duncan, aims at challenging state laws barring the use of student achievement data to evaluate teacher performance.  Race to the Top, a $4.3 billion educational innovation fund, will be distributed to states with positive “school reform as well as plans for additional improvements”.  It is designed to prevent states with laws against evaluating teachers based on student achievement from receiving additional funds.

• The proposed rules for Race to the Top insist that states “must not have any legal, statutory or regulatory barriers to linking data on student achievement or student growth to teachers and principles for the purpose of teacher and principle evaluation”.
• “You must be willing to change”.  President Obama and Arne Duncan have advocated the need for changes in the way public schools work, including the way teachers are hired, trained, and evaluated.  Thousands of schools are failing and we must rethink seniority and teacher tenure in order to improve public education.
• Arne Duncan singled out New York, California, and Wisconsin for laws that he deems “simply ridiculous”.
  

Check out this video for the President’s recent announcement concerning Race to the Top:

This proposal is challenging many national teacher unions, as well as other states such as New York which has enacted laws limiting the use of student achievement scores in deciding teacher tenure decisions. They argue that students are often taught by several teachers and teacher evaluations should be based on several measure of performance, not just scores.

This topic has brought New York public schools into the news lately:

---

What can we make of this?  Is this the way in which the federal Department of Education chooses to revamp No Child Left Behind, with Race to the Top?  First of all I should say that I have a problem with considering school success a “race”.  It just suggests a hurried frenzy to win without careful thought and consideration.  However, I do appreciate that the new administration is already trying to make some changes and rethink the incentives for better education.  President Obama claims that Race to the Top is about more than a test (see the youtube video), that it’s a whole new tactic.  I can appreciate that sentiment, but will have to see it in action to be fully convinced.

I do not have a problem with focusing on how teacher and principles are hired, trained, and evaluated.  I do think that using student standardized tests scores is not the best way to approach it.  Like the teacher unions are arguing, tests scores do not show everything.  If I can suggest another testing analogy, it’s like the use of SAT scores in college admission (a whole other topic I can’t get into right now).  I’ve heard many college admissions officers impress upon potential students that yes, they look at the SAT or ACT scores, but they aren’t the most important part of the application and they usually will not make or break a decision.  Likewise, I think we should consider student scores in evaluating teachers, but they’re not everything and they shouldn’t be the deciding factor

If ensuring the quality of our teachers and administrator is the key to schools success, as I feel No Child Left Behind and Race to the Top are suggesting, there are other factors to consider.  Funds could go toward monitoring and supporting the use of teacher training services and support in schools.  It seems unfair to label teachers as failing and kick them out while simultaneously putting immense pressure on their performance and not offering them any way to improve themselves or seek assistance.

The Devil and the Deep Blue Sea July 22, 2009

Posted by eag20 in Uncategorized.
1 comment so far

I would like to direct my attention now to Social Studies: what is the status of social studies in a school system preoccupied by testing?  For this transition I would like to talk about an article from the American History Association, “’No Child’ Leaves Social Studies Behind” by Robert Townsend from July 2007.  I know I said I was done with No Child Left Behind last blog, yet here it is again.  However, while it remains a reality that I cannot ignore, my focus here is the discipline of Social Studies.

• Integration:  Historians are still a little uneasy about history sharing time with all the other social studies — it could be the start of a slippery slope that leads to social studies getting integrated entirely into other subjects such as ELA and math.

• Assessment:  Whether social studies teachers believe in standardized tests or not, if social studies is to be a priority in schools, it must be assessed.

These statistics are terrifying to me.  How am I going to become a social studies teacher if there is no place left to teach it?  Of course this does not represent the fate of every school, but it represents a terrible trend.  The pressure of schools to perform on standardized tests has required schools to reassess their priorities, and some subjects just aren’t making that list, including social studies.

I would appreciate assessment tools that represented state standards, but no, personally I do not want to have to administer standardized tests to my classroom.  I detest multiple choice tests, and would hardly choose to test my students that way anyway.  Still, I feel this dilemma these historians are talking about – between the devil and the deep blue sea.  Preserving social studies within schools is much more important than being able to teach it exactly the way I want.  If the current trend in schools is that tests are required to make a subject “important,” then give me a social studies test.  Just stop sending students, teachers, and the public the impression that socials studies – our history and our government – are of little or secondary importance.

The Verdict July 20, 2009

Posted by eag20 in Uncategorized.
1 comment so far

The Future of No Child Left Behind July 15, 2009

Posted by eag20 in Uncategorized.
2 comments

With the change in administration, what is in store for the No Child Left Behind Act? Few can deny that it has acquired a very poor reputation, especially among teachers.

In February of 2009 the newly inaugurated President Obama made the following statements about education:

• Dropping out of high school “is a prescription for economic decline, because we know the countries that out-teach us today will out-compete us tomorrow. …Dropping out of high school is no longer an option.  It’s not just quitting on yourself, it’s quitting on your country”

• · “I ask every American to commit to at least one year or more of higher education or career training”

• · We know that our schools don’t just need more resources. They need more reform… new incentives for teacher performance; pathways for advancement, and rewards for success. We’ll invest in innovative programs that are already helping schools meet high standards and close achievement gaps. And we will expand our commitment to charter schools.”

A Recent article, in June, states that the President and the Department of Education are looking at the future of No Child Left Behind:

· New Image – “It’s like the new Coke”

· New Name – the current name has been labeled “toxic”

· Tearing down the Red School House that has been the entrance to the Department of Education since 2002

I think it is fair to say that No Child Left Behind will not remain the way it is now. Changing the name is a start, but we need more.

We need to reassess where the money goes and who gets it. Millions and billions of dollars are being put towards No Child Left Behind. Yet many states are complaining that the money promised often isn’t received. Most of the funds do not even go where they are needed most.

I have discovered that one of my biggest problems with No Child Left Behind is its policy on giving school choice to students in failing schools. First of all, failing schools that need the most help are being penalized and not receiving the funds that they legitimately need. It’s like telling a struggling student they can’t come after school for help anymore because they haven’t worked hard enough to earn it. They’re the ones who need it most! Secondly, the students who do choose to leave failing schools are the ones who were doing well in the first place. Take out all the kids who were bringing your test scores up and what’s that going to look like? Talk about a self-fulfilling prophecy.

It’s the same idea as we brought up in class. You give extra attention to the struggling students so that you can get everyone to a minimum level, and then move forward together. Likewise, extra attention needs to be paid to the struggling schools. The schools that are succeeding won’t cease to succeed if the government isn’t watching them as closely. (No Child Left Behind missed the lesson on effective scaffolding) I feel that only once we devote a sincere effort to helping our schools that struggle the most can we even think of implementing a system like No Child Left Behind that expects everyone to achieve the same lofty goal.

Who is reading in North Carolina? July 13, 2009

Posted by eag20 in Uncategorized.
1 comment so far

North Carolina’s 2008-2009 goals are 39% in reading and 68% in math.  The target graduation rate is 80%.

I read this as a mere statistic, looking at the numbers on their own, and not their relationship to each other.  In doing so I missed something incredibly significant, which was luckily pointed out to me.  (Thank you Alex)  I would like to give my attention to this situation now.

If Carolina has a goal of 39% meeting standards in reading, and hopes to see 80% of its students graduate, how many students are graduating without really learning to read and write? The same case is true with California whose goals are 45% in reading and 48% in math, with a target graduation rate of 82.8%.

This is quite a conundrum.  Many of the 20% who do not graduate in North Carolina may be the same students who did not perform well on their writing test.  The North Carolina writing test is administered during the 10^th grade.  The writing test is aligned with the standard course of study for North Carolina, but it is not one of the required EOCs necessary to graduate.  Of course, the English I End of Course test that is required typically taken in the 9^th grade.  Do 39% of students hope to pass that as well?

I would suspect that when students have five other EOCs to pass in order to graduate, the writing test that is required by the No Child Left Behind Act in 10^th is the absolute least of their worries. It matters particular little if they’ve already managed to pass their English I EOC.  Just to note, apparently 73.8% of students passed the English I EOCs in 2007-2008.  But that does not include students who took alternate tests, such as the Alternate English I test which 68.6% of students passed, or the Occupational test for English I which approximately 47.3% of students passed. grade is the absolute least of their worries.  It matters particular little if they’ve already managed to pass their English I EOC.  Just to note, apparently 73.8% of students passed the

Please do not think that in North Carolina no one cares about English after the freshmen year.  Course credit is required in some form of English I, II, III, and IV, although the English I EOC is the only one required to graduate.

Why not combine the EOC and the North Carolina writing test?  Well, NCLB requires that reading and math tests be administered in grade 10.  It also makes sense to have the required English EOC be English I, and English I is clearly going to be a freshmen course.  It would be silly to take English I sophomore year, or to wait until the end of sophomore year to test students only on what they took freshmen year.

If No Child Left Behind is so strict about testing in 10^th grade, why couldn’t we test at the end of English II during the sophomore year, and satisfy both requirements.  We’re making them accountable for the content anyway.   Some would say testing them on English II is unfair if we neglect English I.  I disagree.  I would rather give one test that covers material the students are responsible for receiving credit for anyway, than give two tests when one doesn’t even matter to the students.   It makes little sense to over-test kids, and shouldn’t the students get as much out of these tests as the state assessors do?  North Carolina doesn’t look very good, statistically, if approximately 61% of students cannot pass a writing test but 80% are deemed sufficient to graduate.

Looking over your shoulder ~ No Child Left Behind July 8, 2009

Posted by eag20 in Uncategorized.
4 comments

So why all these standardized tests?  In part because of the No Child Left Behind act that you’ve probably heard of.  If I’m going to understand testing, that means understanding what kinds of pressure NCLB is placing on state assessments.

The No Child Left Behind Act of 2002 is a reauthorization of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) first passed in 1965, the main federal law affecting students in grades K-12 today.  The goal of NCLB is to close the achievement gap and have all students performing at grade level in reading and math by 2014.

The Four Principles of No Child Left Behind

• Accountability for Results – we will close the achievement gap and schools will receive their own report cards indicating their progress in meeting our goals
• More Choices for Parents – if your school is considered underperforming by our standards, you can transfer to a school that will serve your child better
• Greater Local Control and Flexibility – locally you will have more say over how federal education funding is used
• Emphasis on Doing What Works Based on Scientific Research

NCLB requires state assessments

By 2005-2006 every state must measure reading/language arts and math in grades 3-8 and once in high school.

By 2007-2008 every state must have a science assessment to be administered three times, once in grades 3-5, in 6-9, and again in 10-12.

Other subject tests can be administered if the state chooses.

A little bit of a check-up on the states I profiled last time.  This is how each state’s status was reported to chief school officials in January of 2009.

Massachusetts: meets all provisions in reading and math, but science assessments are not yet fully compliant.  Their goal for high school students in 2008-2009 was 85% in reading and 77% in math.  Target graduation rate is 60%. (note that every state has different criteria for judging the dropout rate)

Connecticut:  Fully approved assessment system.  High School goal was 81% in reading and 80% in math. Target graduation rate, 70%.

North Carolina: Science standards are not yet fully compliant.  Goal was 39% in reading and 68% in math.  Target graduation rate was 80%.

California:  Approval Pending because of lack of a fully compliant reading and mathematics assessment system.  Funds may be withheld, and science is also not fully compliant.  Goal was 45% in reading and 48% in math.  Target graduation rate was 82.8%.  I told you there was something wrong with California’s test.  Apparently the people behind NCLB don’t like the fact that 8^th graders are being tested at 6^th and 7^th grade levels either.

Michigan: Fully Approved but not fully compliant in science yet.  Target was 61% in reading, 55% in math.  Target graduation rate was 85%.

That science assessment requirement is giving some states quite a bit of trouble, although it seems to be a topic that they’re fairly lenient on.  States that appear to be working on a state science test, even if it is not yet fully compliant, have not lost their approval status.

I’m not really buying the “Greater Local Control and Flexibility” principle, because it seems like even if no one is explicitly saying it, all federal funds are expected to go towards improvements directed by NCLB anyway.  Transferring kids out of schools doesn’t seem like a very encouraging way to improve a school, especially when it’s only the students who are achieving who choose to transfer.  That’s just pushing those failing schools deeper into the hole.  I’m also slightly skeptical on the scientific research bit.  Research is great, but to an extent.  At some point I feel like too much of the power to improve our schools is being taken out of the hands of the individual teachers and administrators.  I see education and learning as a very personal thing that requires interaction and personal empathy which is lost when distant organizations dictate too many local actions.

I would like to point out the obvious; there is no required social studies test.  Personally, I’m not sure that I would even like having to give a standardized test to students in social studies (my jury is still out on the benefits of standardized testing).  However, what upsets me is that there seems to be this overwhelming sense that social studies is not as important as reading, math, or science.  I have a problem with that.

I see the benefits of using school and state assessments to guide future school reforms.  Testing kids multiple times throughout their educational careers is also necessary, and only fair to the child.  Don’t test them in fourth grade and risk sticking them with a label of passing or failing for the rest of their childhood.  On the other end, I would hate to find out in 10^th grade that student who has never seen a bubble sheet before and doesn’t know what reading level is expected of him/her fells like their future is riding on a single test.  It’s all about how we use these standardized tests.

I don’t mind the ideas behind NCLB, but I certainly do not agree with the way the idea has been carried out.  The national awareness that NCLB has brought upon our schools may seem like a burden, but at least we care enough about our children and our education to make it a priority that people are willing to argue about.  Of course our schools are important, and we should all take an interest in ensuring that schools continue to educate our children.

Will there be a test on this? July 6, 2009

Posted by eag20 in Uncategorized.
4 comments

Will there be a test on this?  Good question.  As I’ve admitted, I never had to take state standardized tests in high school, but I still lived in Massachusetts, and the MCAS test was certainly a popular subject.  So great, I know a little bit about what’s on the Massachusetts test.  There are still 49 other states that administer their own assessments.  What do they look like??

I did not investigate the standardized testing requirements of all 50 states.  Check out the website of the Department of Education in your state of interests if you want to know that.  I limited my findings here to Massachusetts, North Carolina, Connecticut, California, and Michigan.  The first three are relevant to me.  The last two are honestly random, although I admit I was a little disappointed by California.

The Massachusetts Department of Education.

• The Massachusetts Comprehensive Assessment System (MCAS) is administered in:  English, Math, Science and Technology/Engineering, and History and Social Studies.
• Graduation Requirements: Students must pass grade 10 tests in English and Math.  In 2010 Science with be added to the MCAS graduation requirement.  Students will have to achieve a passing score in one of the Science areas: Biology, Chemistry, Intro Physics, and Technology/Engineering.
• In 2006 Mass decided to introduce the History and Social Studies test as a graduation requirement by 2012.  Previous pilot tests were to become fully operation in the spring of 2009.  However, in February of 2009 the Education Board decided to postpone that transition due to budget constraints.  There are no plans to administer the History and Social Studies test in 2009 or 2010.  Although they do wish to eventually include it that will likely have to wait until at least 2013.  

As a future Social Studies teacher who happens to have gone to school in Massachusetts, this situation is extremely upsetting to me.  I feel like Social Studies is an incredibly important subject that should be given the same care as reading, math, and science.  Yet often it is the last subject to be considered and in this case tragically left out of state standardized assessments. Plus, look what the economy just did to standardized testing! I wonder if we will see more of this?

Connecticut State Department of Education

• Connecticut students take the Connecticut Mastery Test (CMT) in grades 3-8 and the Connecticut Academic Performance Test (CAPT) in 10^th grade.
• The CAPT tests in four content areas: writing across disciplines, reading across disciplines, mathematics, and science.
• There is no passing score on the CAPT, each student must meet state goals in each content area.  They have the opportunity to retest in grades 11 and 12.
• All local and regional school boards must have graduation requirements.  The CAPT can be used as an assessment tool, but it cannot be the sole requirement for graduation in any school district.

I really really agree with Connecticut here on the last point.  Standardized tests should not be the sole graduation requirement at any school.  Local districts who know their students should set the requirements that best suit their schools.  Unfortunately no social studies test here, but I do see how reading and writing across the disciplines could incorporate aspects of reading and writing used in a social studies curriculum.

North Carolina Public Schools

• Testing is administered in the form of End of Course (EOC) and End of Grade (EOG) Tests.
• EOCs are required by students enrolled in the following courses: Algebra I, Algebra II, Biology, Chemistry, English, Geometry, Physical Science, and Physiscs.  According to the website in 2005-2006 operational End Of Course tests will be implemented in Civics and Economics, and US History.  Has anyone bothered to update this site in the past three or four years?
• High School Exit Standards:  Graduating students must pass (achieve an Achievement Level III or above) on each of the five required EOC assessment tests. Those are Algebra I, Biology, English, Civics and Economics, and US History.
• These assessments requirements are the five courses all students following the career preparation, college technical preparation, or college/university preparation course of study must pass for graduation.

My first reaction is that I appreciate the presence of History, and especially Civics, among the required tests.  I say Civics especially, because as important as I think history is, teaching students about our government, their rights and responsibilities as citizens is one of the things they can expect to encounter constantly.

California Department of Education

• California High School Exit Exam (CAHSEE), begun in 2006, has two parts.  The English Language Arts portion tests reading and writing based on state standards through grade 10.  The Mathematics portion tests state standards in grades 6 and 7, and Algebra I.
• There are other state and local graduation requirements for graduation.

Poor form California.  Maybe California just doesn’t believe in standardized testing, and that’s fine, but this looks poorly designed to me.  They must not expect too much of their students if they’re including a large portion of 6^th and 7^th grade math on their tests.

Michigan Department of Education

• The Michigan Merit Exam (MME) is administered in grades 11 and 12 while the Michigan Educational Assessment Program (MEAP) in grades 3-9.
• The test includes the ACT Plus Writing college entrance exam, portions of WorkKeys work skills assessment (designed to measure work readiness skills in Reading for information and Applied Mathematics), and components assessing English Language Arts, Mathematics, Science, and Social Studies.
• All schools must administer the MME, and it may be used for local graduation requirements.

One of the better constructed tests I’ve seen in their coverage of subject areas.  They’re also catering to student goals after high school by including the ACT Plus and WorkKeys portions.

If I were to adopt any of these as my model, I would actually combine two states.  I like Michigan’s test because of all the different elements it includes.  I also appreciate Connecticut’s belief that any state assessment cannot be used as the sole requirement for any local or regional school board.  Their emphasis is on this test being merely a statewide assessment and not a graduation requirement.