![](3D"NEWELARTAKSNovember2008_files/image002.gif")
NEW ELAR-TAKS TESTS: A NEW BEGINNING FOR
BY DONNA GARNER
NOVEMBER 6, 2008
Aristotle once said, “Anybody can become angry, = that is easy; but to be angry with the right person, and to the right degree, an= d at the right time, and for the right purpose, and in the right way, that is not within everybody's power and is not easy.” Educators, students, parents, and = the general public are angry with the Texas Assessments of Knowledge and Skills (TAKS) tests. However, now is= the time to quit being angry and to change the accountability system.
Because the Texas State Board of Education recently pa= ssed new English / Language Arts / Reading (ELAR) standards for all Texas K-12 classrooms, new ELAR-TAKS tests must also be developed by the Texas Education Agency working in conjunction with Pearson (i.e., Pearson Educational Measurements). (To simp= lify terminology, from this point on in this paper, I will refer to the ELAR-TAK= S as TAKS.) Substantive changes to= the TAKS tests can and must be made at the beginning of the developmental stage; that time is right now!
Rather than spend the next ten years griping and compl= aining about the new TAKS tests, I believe we need to make our case right now to t= hose in policymaking positions. These are the questions that need to be answered: What should the new TAKS tests look like?&= nbsp; What should they test? How should they be graded? Should= they be similar to the present TAKS tests? If not, why not? Are the present tests fair, and are they graded correctly? If not, then how c= an the TAKS tests be changed so that they test what the= y need to test and are scored in a sensible, uncomplicated, and transparent manner= ?
Since
END-OF-COU= RSE TESTS TO REPLACE EXIT-LEVEL TAKS
The Legislature passed SB 1031 in the last legislative session in 2007. SB 1031 does away with the Exit-Level TAKS given in Grade 11and instead requires high-school students to take a series of end-of-cour= se tests (EOC’s) in the four core subject areas. The combined scores on= these EOC’s will determine whether a student graduates. The first EOC’s to be develope= d will be those given in English I, II, III, and IV. The English I EOC is to be adminis= tered for the first time in the spring of 2011. Because of the timeline, these new English EOC’s are in the process of being written right now. (In the ne= ar future the various Grades 4 – 8 ELAR-TAKS tests will also be rewritte= n to align them with the new ELAR standards.)
WHAT THE <=
st1:State
w:st=3D"on">
When the majority of the members of the Texas State Bo= ard of Education (SBOE) adopted brand new ELAR-TEKS standards on May 23, 2008, the= process of upgrading and transforming our public schools began. The new ELAR-TEKS standards are measurable, explicit, and are specific for each grade level, K-12. What the public needs to understan= d, however, is that teachers will teach whatever gets tested on the TAKS. The content of the new-and-improve= d ELAR standards will not permeate teachers’ classroom instruction until the TAKS tests change also. If th= e new TAKS tests are a throwback to the TAKS tests we have had in our public scho= ols for the last ten years, then students will not be taught the new-and-improv= ed TEKS standards; and we will not see our public school students improve in t= heir core knowledge, college-readiness, and workplace skills.
MY HISTORI= CAL MEMORY
Because I started teaching in the
“Culturally diverse written texts” became = the cornerstone for the present TAKS writing and literary sections. Rather than= the Texas Education Agency’s choosing literary selections based solely up= on the merit of the authors’ skill and style, the TEA began choosing literary selections based upon how culturally diverse the selections were. TEA’s TAKS Information Booklet for Reading stat= es, “Cultural diversity includes regional, economic, social, and ethnic differences and may be represented through subject matter and/or characters.”
In the TAKS, the grading of the essays became much more
subjective, and “voice” was introduced by
Also, a new and more subjectively scored section was a= dded to the TAKS called “open-ended response” questions (OE’s). These questions added one more “dance” for students to learn and because of the labyrinthine w= ay the OE’s are scored by Pearson/TEA, the <= span class=3DSpellE>OE’s have raised the frustration levels of both students and teachers to all-new levels.
Unfortunately,
It is hard for teachers to look ahead to the new TAKS = tests when their students are still held accountable to the old standards and to = the old TAKS tests.
MUST NOT L= ET HISTORY REPEAT ITSELF
Now that we have brand new ELAR-TEKS standards, we mus= t make sure that history does not repeat itself.&= nbsp; We must not allow the new TAKS tests to be patterned after the old E= LAR standards and the field test questions based upon them. The new ELAR-TEKS standards are an= attempt to undo the damage caused by the 1997 ELAR-TEKS and the accompanying TAKS tests. Those standards have <= span class=3DSpellE>dumbed down our public schools for the last ten years= by causing confusion among teachers and students. Nobody knew exactly what should be learned at each grade level because the elements repeated themselves year a= fter year, and the language of the 1997 ELAR-TEKS was murky.
A NEW BEGI= NNING
The new-and-improved ELAR-TEKS standards (2008) will introduce a completely different emphasis in every public school classroom = in our state. Now teachers will be expected to emphasize knowledge-based, acad= emic curricula with a heavy emphasis on phonemic awareness, decodable text, gram= mar, usage, sentence structure, punctuation, spelling, capitalization, handwriti= ng, persuasive/expository/research writing, informational text, and content-ric= h, quality literature.
DUMP THE O= LD ELAR-TEKS STANDARDS AND TAKS TESTS
As of May 23, 2008, the 1997 ELAR-TEKS standards techn=
ically
became a thing of the past; and the TAKS tests and field test questions bas=
ed
upon the old standards must be discarded also. We have a chance in
This is also the right time to advocate for Pearson/TE= A to change completely the organization and structure of the TAKS. Let’s dream “big.̶= 1;
HOW BAD AR= E THE PRESENT ELAR-TAKS TESTS?
To help the public to see how bad the “old”= ; TAKS tests really are, I decided to update my knowledge and then to share public= ly my observations after I attended the two-day Pearson training (October 2008= ) on the open-ended response questions (OE’s) = and the essay. Pearson (working under the guidance and authority of the Texas Education Agency) is the company that writes and scores the ELAR-TAKS tests, and this two-day training was a version of the three-day training offered to the graders who actually score the OE and the essay.
OPEN-ENDED= (OE) RESPONSE QUESTIONS – TAKS
After having taught thousands of students over my 33+ =
years
of teaching, I can honestly say that I do not know how our
Because the scoring of these two written sections is so complicated, it is no wonder that teachers are forced to spend all of the school year getting their students ready to take the ELAR-TAKS. Those people who fault teachers for “teaching to the test” simply do not understand how terribly complicated the Texas Education Agency and Pearson = have made the TAKS tests. If teachers did not repeated= ly have students take practice TAKS tests, students would not have a chance at passing them – not because students are totally ignorant but because = it takes much class time for them to learn to “dance the two TAKS dances.”
Please picture the ELAR-TAKS subjectively scored secti= ons (OE and essay) as two separate dances with two separate sets of intricate dance steps; yet on TAKS test day, the student is supposed to be able to jump from one “dance” to the next without missing a step.
HOW DID OU=
R
A Pearson trainer (I am going to refer to him as
“ABZ” as an identifier) gave us the following statistics for th=
e Spring 2008 TAKS, Exit-Level, Grade 11, open-ended res=
ponse
questions (OE’s). The OE’=
s
are graded on a scale of 0 to 3, with 3 being the highest. Please notice th=
at
in the entire state of
Spring 200= 8 TAKS – Exit-Level, Grade 11 -- Literary Selection
10% =3D 0
58% =3D 1
32% =3D 2
0% =3D
3 (S=
o few
students in
Spring 200= 8 TAKS – Exit-Level, Grade 11 – Expository Selection
5% =3D 0
49% =3D 1
46% =3D 2
0% =3D
3 (So few students in
Spring 200= 8 TAKS – Exit-Level, Grade 11 – Crossover Question
8% =3D 1
58% =3D 1
34% =3D 2
0% =3D
3 (S=
o few
students in
When I was teaching, if I had given a major test on wh=
ich 0%
of my students could excel, I would have
realized something was definitely wrong with the test itself or with the wa=
y I
scored it. Since not even 1% =
of the
Grade 11students in
ABZ, who admitted to our training group that he had ne= ver been a teacher, said students who make 3’s are just “born that way.” A teacher in our training session reported that she had previously attended the TEA’s training session and that the TEA person = in charge of the ELAR TAKS (Victoria Young, Director of Reading, Writing, and Social Studies TAKS in the Division of Student Assessment) made a similar statement saying that students should not try to make 3’s because 2&#= 8217;s are fine – "Mediocrity is fine." This statement by ABZ and Young created much dissatisfaction among the teachers in our training group= who were frustrated that both the Pearson trainer and TEA would set mediocrity = as a student expectation. It also frustrated our group that both Pearson and TEA seem to think that the skills tested on the OE and the essay cannot be taught.
If teachers cannot teach their students the skills nee= ded for them to do exemplary work on the ELAR-TAKS, then the test is not testing what needs to be tested! Afte= r all, the TAKS should not be testing a student’s genetic superiority= or inferiority. If students are = simply “born good writers,” then why are teachers wasting their time trying to help develop good writers?
DESCRIPTIO=
N OF
EXIT-LEVEL ELAR-TAKS TEST
The Exit-Level ELAR-TAKS test is made up of the follow= ing – all to be completed by the student in one day:
- Test questions should be placed in=
a
more logical order. The first set of questions relating to a story should be
asked right after that first story. The second set of questions relating to=
a
story should be asked right after that second story, etc.]
STRUCTURE = OF THE OPEN-ENDED RESPONSE SECTION
ABZ, the Pearson trainer, said the open-ended response questions are based upon one literary and one expository selection. He led = our training group through the TAKS Exit Level Released Version, February 2006.=
The selection dubbed by Pearson/TEA as “liter= ary” was entitled “The First Day” from the book Lost in the City (c. 1992) by Edward P. Jones. The selection was basically an autobiographical personal narrative.
The second selection was entitled “Unforgettable= Miss Bessie” by Carl T. Rowan and was reprinted from the March 1985 Readers Digest. The second selecti= on (dubbed “expository” by Pearson/TEA) was again an autobiogra= phical personal narrative.
Neither selection was written by a well-known author. = Both were stories about Afro-American children and their educational experiences= at school.
The first piece was filled with an abundance of grammatically incorrect dialect and verbiage. This was particularly troubli= ng because students had to quote frequently from the text to support their OE statements. This meant that students were continually rewriting incorrect grammar, usage, spelling, capitalization, punctuation, and sentence structu= re into their answers. Whenever students reinforce errors by repeating them ov= er and over again in their writing, they will soon adopt those same error-fill= ed writing and speaking habits themselves. Is this what we should be teaching = our
The second piece also had grammatically incorrect sent= ences but was written on a little higher academic level. Even though TEA had dubb= ed it as an expository piece (i.e., fact-based), it was simply another pers= onal narrative. First- and second-person pronouns were used throughout the piece. It is no wonder our =
The two selections taken together made up nine pages of single-spaced text, and the OE questions and the essay were all built upon = the two selections. No pieces of literature by well-known authors were referenced.
WHO CHOOSE= S THE SELECTIONS AND DECIDES ON THE PROMPTS?
ABZ said the selections were chosen by one TEA person = (i.e., presumably Victoria Young who also chooses the TAKS prompts). This means that one person in the = state of
Victoria Young is the Director of
THE SCORIN= G OF THE OPEN-ENDED RESPONSE QUESTIONS
How are the OE’s scored? ABZ said OE’s are graded on a scale of 0, 1, 2, 3 with 3 being the highest. A 3 has to be particularly insight= ful. A 2 just answers the question. Sounds simple, does it not? However, here is where the “= OE dance” goes astray.
ABZ said that correct grammar, usage, punctuation, capitalization, quotation marks, ellipses, and handwriting do not count = at all on the OE. (ABZ gave our training session actual sample packets of student answers to read, and then we were given practice sets to score. I c= an attest to the fact that students even with high scores wrote answers that w= ere absolutely filled with grammar/usage errors, and the handwriting of many of these students was deplorable. Students will rise to meet high academic expectations, but they will also sink if they know they have permission to = do so.)
Students have to write their OE answers in a space abo= ut the size of a half of a 3x5 card, and they must not write outside the box. The = box has five horizontal lines.
Students must give textual evidence to support their answers. The textual evidence can either be direct quotes from the selectio= ns or paraphrases or synopses; any inaccuracies of any kind drive the scores down.
The correct answers are determined through field testing. For the answer to be= correct, the idea must be correct; and it must be supp= orted by relevant text. If the stud= ent repeats an idea, she is marked down. If the student introduces any new idea= at all without its being supported with relevant text, she is marked down. Each idea must address the prompt directly. If a student is at all vague, she is marked down. If she mentions = any little idea that is not reasonable, the student is marked down. If she gives too general an idea, = the student is marked down. If she includes one more word in her quote/paraphrase/synopsis that is not relevant, the student’s score falls. If the student leaves out one word in her quote/paraphrase/synopsis = that is irrelevant to the idea, she is marked down.
SCORING A “0”
Remember that the student taking the ELAR-TAKS must re= ad through nine, single-typed pages of text before answering the three OE questions. One such student i= n the sample set made a 0 because he wrote that the little girl’s mother had given her daughter some school supplies when it actually was the neighbors = who had provided the supplies. This was a very minor point and was just stated = in passing without having a significant impact on the story.
Another OE answer was scored a 0 because the student h= ad mistakenly used the word “teachers” when comparing the two selections even though in the first selection, the mother, who so nobly tau= ght her daughter valuable lessons in life, was technically not a “teacher.” =
SCORING A “1”
A 1 is given when there is a reasonable idea (i.e., ve= ry subjective) but no textual support or when an idea is reasonable but not fundamentally inaccurate (such as in a 0). A student also makes a 1 if her answer is too general or is weakly connected to the textual reference. If t= he student answers the question but does not provide any analysis, she gets a 1. Every idea that is present= ed must have textual backup, or she gets a 1.
SCORING A “2”
A 2 is given when the student gives a reasonable, spec= ific idea and supports it with accurate, relevant textual evidence; but no new i= deas can be thrown in. If he throws in another idea of any kind and does not sup= port it with relevant text, he makes a 1. Any synoptic statements must be supported with relevant text; if any extra words that are not directly rele= vant to the text are included, then the student is marked down to a 1. A student could be on his way to receiving a 3; but if he adds one extra idea (no mat= ter how major or how minor) without its being supported, he drops to a 1.
SCORING A “3”
A 3 is given when a student gives some particularly insightful analysis and strongly supports it with relevant text. Of course, this is very subjective and lies in the eyes of the beholder. If a student can embed quotes skil= lfully and sporadically throughout her answer, this can help her make a 3; however= , if she throws in any kind of inaccurate idea (no matter how insignificant) or = paraphrases or quotes a part of the selection that is not relevant, she is marked down.=
OPEN-ENDED= -- CROSSOVER QUESTION
In the crossover question, the student must utilize bo= th selections to script his answer. The student must have at least one correct idea taken from each selection and at least one textual support taken from = each selection. If he has one idea= from each selection but only has one textual support, he gets a 0. If he has two textual supports but has failed to give at least one idea from each selecti= on, he gets a 0. (Please remember that students are utilizing nine pages of single-typed text to write their OE’s. Al= so, remember that students at all times are addressing the required prompt. If = they do not meet explicitly the OE scoring requirements, they get a 0.)
MAJOR FLAW= OF OE’s
One major flaw with the OE’= s is that they defy all common practice of teaching students to write a good paragraph. A good paragraph should have a topic sentence, several support i= deas with textual evidence, and a summary or concluding statement. In the OE if the student dares to = repeat in the concluding statement even a smidgen of any wordi= ng, her OE is marked way down.
SCORING OF= TAKS ESSAYS
The rubric for the TAKS essay offers yet another “dance” for students to navigate because the essay rubric is di= fferent from the OE rubric. The ̶= 0;OE dance” is scored from 0 to 3 while the “essay dance” is scored from 1 to 4. For a student to be allowed to take dual-credit courses= , he must make either a 3 or a 4 on his Exit-Level TAKS essay.
A different Pearson trainer (dubbed by me as “LMN”) presented the essay part. She told us some information a= bout how the scorers are chosen. They must be college graduates, and Pearson hir= es 200+ readers to grade the TAKS Exit-Level essays. Many people are hired who work all day and then moonlight at night as TAKS scorers. Scorers go throug= h 2 to 3 days of training, must show proficiency on three qualifying rounds, and must write a live piece themselves. Scorers are not required to have had any teaching experience of any kind.
Student essays are currently graded on computers = where scorers can enlarge the print. The essays of those students who make 1̵= 7;s or those upon which graders cannot agree are sent to a higher-level team wh= ich has had special training in “1-2 line.” Those who still receive a 1 are se= nt to the TEA for final scoring. Es= says generally take three minutes to score.&nbs= p; Some scorers grade 75 to 90 per day; some grade 200 to 300 per day. = It takes six weeks for the graders to finish grading all of the essays. At tim= es embedded papers are placed in the essay stacks to catch any scorers whose scores might be drifting.
All the prompts and selections are chosen by one person (Victoria Young at the TEA.). The TAKS tests are the possession of the TEA. Field test questions help to build the prompts.
*Please see the TAKS-Released Written Composition Prom= pts (2003-2006) that are posted at the end of this report.
Each year during the month of July, 30 to 40 teachers&= #8217; names are randomly drawn from those who have filled out the application on = the TEA website. These teachers are paid $25 a day; and their transportation, housing, and meal expenses are paid by Pearson. These teachers go over the selections and prompts to check for bias, gender/ethnicity issues, vocabulary, and philosophical pitfalls.
If any troubling statements are made by the students in their essays, scorers send the essays to the TEA where the decision is made= as to whether the school needs to be contacted.
If a teacher or a student’s parents believe a student’s essay score has been scored too low, the school district can appeal the process to Pearson ($10 fee).&n= bsp; Pearson will re-evaluate the scoring of the essay. If Pearson changes the score, then= the school district gets the $10 back. LMN said Pearson hardly ever changes a score.
Scoring centers concentrate on particular levels of TA= KS tests. The Exit-Level TAKS is graded in Austin, TAKS Grades 4 and 7 in Dall= as, and TAKS English II in
One participant in the training session said Pearson w= as very helpful to her when she contacted them. They welcomed visitors and wor= ked hard to offer testing help. The participant believes that Pearson basically does what the TEA tells it to do, and it is the TEA that has made the scori= ng process so convoluted and confusing.
To read more details about how the ELAR-TAKS tests are scored, please go to my two articles written in April 2008: “An Exposé of the TAKS Tests” and “Addendum to ‘An Exposé of the TAKS Tests’ ”
http://ednews.org/articles/24590/1/quotAn-Expose-= of-the-TAKS-Testsquot/Page1.html
http://ednews.org/articles/25071/1/AD= DENDUM-TO-quotAN-EXPOSE-OF-THE-TAKS-TESTSquot/Page1.html
FALLACIES = BEHIND THE SCORING OF ELAR-TAKS ESSAYS
The old TAAS prompts that were geared to persuasive/expository writing required students to write an introduction, to produce well-thought-out support ideas, and to write a cogent closing. The TAKS personal narrative requir= es students to present only one idea; encourages students’ opinions, feelings, and emotions to be displayed; and the thesis can be implied rather than stated directly.
A student can have a perfect score on the entire TAKS;= but if she fails the subjectively scored essay, then she fails the entire TAKS test.
The TAKS scorers make no attempt to verify for accurac= y any information given by the students; therefore, students are free to make up = any information they so choose. A student is not required to reference the lite= rary selections in his essay. He c= an simply fabricate a tale so long as it addresses the prompt.
[Because
Even though several of the sample essays that I saw cl= early contained comparison/contrast writing by the students, LMN discouraged teac= hers from teaching their students to use persuasive strategies (e.g., similes, metaphors, personification, sensory details, defining terms, etc.); and aga= in LMN reiterated the idea that students who make 4’s are basically “born that way.” She said she does not believe students can be taught to be “4’s.” She also cautioned against students using transitional devices and persuasive strategies because they might sound contrived, but she had a difficult time helping teachers to understand exactly how they can teach th= eir students to improve their essays and retain a systematic flow of ideas.
Grammar, punctuation, spelling, capitalization, usage,= and handwriting do not count against students unless they interfere severely wi= th what the writer is trying to communicate. Students do not have to punctuate dialogue correctly, and they are permitted to use the ampersand sign in the= ir essays. The essays are untimed, and students are provided dictionaries and thesauruses for use during the writing of the essay.
The essay that students write must be thematically lin= ked to the two reading selections that are taken from “culturally diverse written texts.” The con= tent of the essays does not have to be based upon fact. Students can erase, use insert signs, or write notes in the margins; but because the essays are sca= nned onto computer screens for the scorers to evaluate, students are urged to wr= ite within the boxes allotted on the test copy.
THE ESSAY = RUBRIC
Here are important things that students must remember = about the essay rubric as they perform the “essay dance”:
The student does not have to mention the prompt in his= paper because the thesis can be implied. Because these are personal narratives, students are not required to have a formal introduction or conclusion. Students must make sure they are continually relating their essays to the prompt and must not make any irrelevant or repetitive statements. Students = must demonstrate an effective organizational strategy; a controlling idea must be present; and the composition must show depth rather than abundance of words. The paragraph development must not be vague.
In the essay the student can write a plot summary abou= t one or both of the literary selections provided in the test, but he must show h= ow the summary applies to him personally in order to score points on his essay= . If the student does not make the personal reference, then the plot summary cou= nts against his score.
A mere plot summary of the selections is not acceptabl= e, but relevant text from the culturally diverse selections can be embedded in the student’s essay in order to get a high score. Again, that means if the selections contain incorrectly written English, students who quote directly from the selections are continually rewriting incorrectly written English.
The student’s verbiage must not sound contrived,= and he must demonstrate “voice” or persona. (This is where the “victimization” writing comes in.) I saw a number of sample ess= ays that received 3’s but which had plenty of “voice” but lit= tle substantive content.
In their essays, students are allowed to identify them= selves and their school districts. This could influence scorers to grade these subjectively scored essays higher or lower.
[The essay scoring rubric in the current TAKS tests is= the same in Grades 4 through 11. When the new Grades 4 through 8 TAKS tests are produced, they need to contain an essay scoring ru= bric that is specific for each grade level to align with the new grade-level-specific ELAR-TEKS.]
RECOMMENDA= TIONS FOR THE NEW END-OF-COURSE ELAR-TAKS TESTS – ENGLISH I, II, III, IV
- A multiple-choice, objectively scored section (i.e., right-or-wrong answers) should count 40% of the = ELAR score and should test the grade-level conventions of the English langu= age (i.e., grammar, usage, sentence structure, spelling, capitalization, punctuation). The conten= t of the questions should contain statements of historical, contemporary, and/or literary significance. The ELAR-TAKS tests should become a lear= ning experience for students by increasing their foundational knowledge at = the same time they are being tested on their skills.
- = [TEA/Pearson should not refrain from choosing excerpts from time-honored classics because of worry that students may have previous= ly read them. If students have already read these pieces of quality literature, why should that be a problem? After all, the ELAR-TAKS shou= ld be evaluating students’ prior and/or current knowledge. If the stud= ents have previously chosen to read quality pieces of literature, then their TAKS scores should reflect that.]
- = Students’ scores should be increased for skillful implementation of persuasive strategies (e.g., examples, analogies, personification, action words, sensory images, descriptions, similes, metaphors, personal anecdotes, exaggerations, facts, details, settings, dialogues, characterizations, comparison/contrast, definitions), liter= ary allusions, historical references, and content-rich, substantive discou= rse demonstrating analysis and original thinking.
- The scoring rubric =
should
be similar in explicitness to that of the SAT. The essay prompts should foll=
ow one
of the three common types: (1)
respond to a statement, (2) choose between contrasting statements,
CALCULATIO= N OF ELAR SCORES ON EOC TESTS
Conventions of English – 40%
Comprehension/analysis of various types of text –= ; 40%
Persuasive/expository/research-based essay – 20%=
WHAT ACTIO= N CAN WE TAKE?
The purpose of this report is to raise the awareness of students, educators, parents, and the general public to the specific proble= ms with the ELAR-TAKS. Hopefully= this will equip people with the information they need to better verbalize their complaints and their suggestions to the officials who have the power to eff= ect change.
Each of us has the right and the responsibility to con= tact the officials who make decisions over our
LIST OF OF= FICIALS TO CONTACT
Robert Scott, Texas Commissioner of Education:
http:/= /www.tea.state.tx.us/sboe/commissioner.html
Texas State Board of Education members:
http://www.= tea.state.tx.us/sboe/members.html
Texas Governor Rick Perry:
http://governor.state.tx.us= /
Texas Senate members:
http://www.senate.state.t= x.us/
Texas House members:
http://www.capitol.state= .tx.us/
Texas Lieutenant Governor:
http:/= /www.senate.state.tx.us/75r/LtGov/Ltgov.htm
http://= www.house.state.tx.us/speaker/welcome.htm
Senate Committee on Education:
http://www.capitol.state.tx.us/Comm= ittees/MembershipCmte.aspx?LegSess=3D79R&CmteCode=3DC530
House Committee on Public Education:
http://w= ww.house.state.tx.us/committees/400.htm
*TAKS-RELE= ASED WRITTEN COMPOSITION PROMPTS (2003-2006)
T= AKS Grade 4 Writing
2003
Write a composition= about the best day you ever had.
2004
Write a composition= about an adventure you have had.
2006
Write a composition= about your favorite place to go.
TAKS Grade 7 Writing
2003
Write a composition= about a time when something unexpected happened.
2004
Write a composition= about trying to do something you thought was difficult.
2006
Write a composition= about your favorite memory.
TAKS Grade 10 ELA
2003
Write an essay expl= aining how your surroundings can affect your life.
2004
Write an essay abou= t the impact another person can have on your life.
2004 – Makeup
Write an essay expl= aining the importance of accepting responsibility.
2006
Write an essay abou= t a time you made an important choice.
2006 – Makeup
Write an essay abou= t a time you received encouragement from another person.
TAKS Exit Level ELA
2003 – Feb.
Write an essay expl= aining how one experience can have the power to affect a person’s life in a positive way.
2004 – Feb.
Write an essay expl= aining the importance of accepting others as they are.
2004 – July retest
Write an essay expl= aining what courage means to you.
2005 – Oct. retest
Write an essay abou= t the importance of participating in an activity you enjoy.
2005 – Fall/Dec. retest
Write an essay abou= t whether it is important to seek friendships with people who are different from yo= u.
2006 – Feb.
Write an essay abou= t the effect that someone you admire can have on your life.
2006 – April retest
Write an essay expl= aining how a person can feel connected to a special place.
2006 – July retest
Write an essay expl= aining the value of the small, everyday events of life.
Donna Garner
wgarner1@hot.rr.comWriter/Consultant for MyStudyHall.com
http://www.mystudyhall.comEnglish Success Standards (K-12)
http://mystudyhall.com/myskillbuilder/articles/= ENGLISH%20SUCCESS%20STANDARDS%20(K-12).mht- The scoring rubric =
should
be similar in explicitness to that of the SAT. The essay prompts should foll=
ow one
of the three common types: (1)
respond to a statement, (2) choose between contrasting statements,