I did something yesterday that, even up to a couple of months ago, I was very unsure about trying.

I took the two tests I'd need to pass to get a teacher's licence in Massachusetts.

My very long day of standardized testing started with me needing to be at Lynn English High School by 7:45 am. This wasn't so bad, though I was a little irritated to learn that Beverly High School about three minutes from where we live, was also a testing site (on the other hand, someone I know from Manchester-Essex who I ran into at Lynn Enligh has a classmate who lives in Danvers but had to go into Arlington to take her test). As it was I got in, found the room I needed and my numbered seat.

The morning test was on "communications and literacy," basically a reading and writing test to make sure that prospective teachers have a reasonable command of the English language. The reading part wasn't too bad; 30 multiple choice reading comprehension questions and something like 6 to 8 vocab questions where I had to define given words (mine included homogeneous and deviate).

The writing section was much different that I expected from the practice tests I took. There were 44 multiple choice questions, 30 of which were based on five six-sentence paragraphs. For each sentence, I had to tell if it had a spelling error, capitalization error, punctuation error, or no error. A couple were on the subtle side, but others mentioning "breckfast" and Susan B. Anthony going to "cast a Ballot" made up for things. The other 14 were more focused on the grammar and mechanics of a few short readings.

After that, I had to define three grammatical terms and rewrite three sentences to make them more grammatically correct. I thought there would be more of these, but I'm not complaining. I was a little nervous about the grammar definitions, as it's been a good 20 years since my last serious study of grammar. Thankfully, I had to define exclamatory sentence, imperative sentence, and adverb.

After this were two open-response writing questions. One basically asked you to re-write a selection to demonstrate its main points, a practice which kind of confuses me given that the selection was pretty well-organized to begin with. For the persuasive essay, I surprised myself by writing in favor of a nationwide 55 mile per hour speed limit. I think I found it easier to write from that perspective given that I grew up during the days where 55 was pretty much the rule. I certainly don't drive in favor of such a speed limit.

I had about an hour and 15 minutes for lunch. There's a pizza place across from the school, but I feared it would be crowded with test takers. When I was at the car behind the school, I saw a sign for a sub shop beyond the playing fields. So I walked on over. It was closed. I then walked down to a supermarket, thinking they may have prepared sandwiches. They didn't. So I walked back across the playing fields, around the school, to the pizza place I feared would be packed. I was the only person there.

They don't take debit cards.

They did point me towards a convenience store up the street, where I got money. I went back, finally got some food, and ate lunch under a tree (the pizza place not having any tables, oddly). I had about a half-hour left, so I tried to get in a little last-minute studying.

Which seems like a good point to mention that the afternoon test was a subject test for health education. When I decided to take this test, I spent a little time trying to sort out what to take. I figured I had several options from the listed subjects:

* political science, which made sense given that I'd majored in it. However, I've never seen a school here looking for a poli sci teacher.
* history, given the classics degree and general interest in history. There were even test materials that would allow me to coach myself up prior to the test. But I figured that was a reach, so I passed.
* library, given that I'm a dork and like libraries. But I have little experience and no education in library science, so it seemed like a bad idea, career-wise.
* speech, based on my debate career. Then I thought about my success as a debater and speechie. Pass.
* health, based on having a MPH. Seemed like the best option at the time.

The question of how to study was a hard one, given that there aren't any test prep books and the published test objectives are very general. So I wound up borrowing a health textbook from a teacher at Manchester and outlined it.

In any case, the health test was interesting. I'd expected more questions about "factual" information (in fact, I feared questions asking details about what foods contain what vitamins and the like). The questions tended to be more situational, and there was a definite focus on the problem-solving sorts of things that seem to be the new focus of health education (or at least new to me, compared to my last health ed class in 1985). I then had to write a couple of essays, one about things that cause cardiovascular disease and ways to prevent the illness, the other asking me to discuss the information you'd find on nutrition labels on food products, how a consumer can use that information to their advantage, and three special cases or circumstances where reading the labels would help (I went with someone trying to lose weight, people with allergies or sensitivities, and religious/ethical dietary restrictions).

So how'd it go? With the communications and literacy test, I can't help but think about the line FX uses in promos for King of the Hill.

You're failing English? Bobby, you speak English.

I'll be very unhappy if I don't pass.

With health, I think I did pretty well, but it was more of a crap shoot.

I'll know August 26. By which point I could already have a job and this all is more or less moot. We'll see.