This test is supposed to be gauging my knowledge of Language Arts and History/Social Sciences/Gov&Econ, specifically as it relates to teaching. Language Arts is no problem, since I've always been an avid reader and writer, and since I had a Language Arts concentration while earning my B.A.. The history, though... I like certain types (Ancient history, especially Egypt and Greece) and US history (especially the Revolutionary and World Wars) and hate others (California history, all of it, and everything in Europe between the Plague and World War I). I just don't have the best fact retention, especially since the last time I actually studied most of this stuff was in high school.
It's mostly multiple choice with 4 short answer questions (short answer = drabble length), two per subject. I'm hoping that my strength in LA will make up for my relative weakness in history.
The silly thing is that I probably don't have to take the stupid thing. The new state laws (which I understand were rewritten to be in accordance with NCLB, which I generally support because Karl Rove controls my brain) say that teaching credential candidates before a certain date have to pass all three areas of this test before they can student teach (which is one of the last steps before getting awarded your credential). However, I was in the program before this was all put into effect. From what I understand from the credential person at school, I don't fall under the new rules. However...
1) I'm not entirely sure I trust her; I don't want to get to the point in six months where I'm ready to student teach and then get screwed because I haven't passed this test
2) Even if she's right, individual districts have the option of mandating their employees pass this test (in order to prove that their teachers know things about stuff). I don't want to go into a job interview and get passed over because I haven't passed this test
So... I'm going to pass it. That's all there is about that.