- Blog & Article
How to Really Prepare Students for State Tests
A teacher uses her state’s testing blueprint to give students practice with the standards and question types they’ll encounter most frequently.
By March, my classroom used to feel heavy. Not chaotic, not defiant—just tired.
Like many teachers, I responded to testing season by trying to fit more in: More review. More practice. More reassurance that we had covered what mattered. My students complied, but the energy told a different story. They weren’t confused—they were overwhelmed, and so was I.
That’s when I stopped asking “How do I review everything?” and started asking a better question: “What does the test actually prioritize?”
What the Test Blueprint Made Clear
I teach in Virginia, and my students take the state’s Standards of Learning (SOL) assessments at the end of the year. I found information on the test structure by locating the SOL testing blueprint. I didn’t just skim the list of standards—I studied it for patterns. The SOL blueprint explicitly lists the standards assessed and shows how often they appear. Some standards appeared far more frequently than others, and some did not show up at all.
Seeing those percentages mattered because it made clear that the assessment is not evenly weighted across all standards, and this is the case for most state tests. Two things stood out immediately: Informational text carries more weight than literary text. And many of the most frequently assessed standards ask students to analyze, compare, revise, or justify their thinking rather than simply identify a correct answer.
Those realizations changed how I planned. If certain standards dominate the assessment, then treating all standards as equal during test prep wouldn’t actually help students. It would just create noise. Instead of reviewing everything, I realized, I could use the blueprints to narrow my instruction to a small set of high-leverage thinking types, and I could give students short, playful opportunities to practice them without the pressure of a test.
Research supports this approach. A recent study on cognitive load and instructional design shows that learning improves when educators intentionally manage working memory demands and engage students in active, meaningful tasks rather than simply increasing the volume of practice.
Start With the Blueprint, Not a Packet
Testing blueprints are often treated like technical documents meant for specialists, but in reality, they are one of the most teacher-friendly tools we have. When I sat down with the SOL blueprint, I saw that it could give me direction.
I deliberately used the blueprint to identify
- which standards appeared most frequently,
- what kinds of thinking those standards required, and
- which question formats students would see again and again.
That information became my planning guide.
From February through testing season in May, I now plan weekly station rotation tables based on the most heavily tested standards. I identify which standards need the most repeated exposure and intentionally pair each one with every major question type students will encounter on the assessment.
Before we begin, I make one expectation clear to students: As long as every member shows their thinking, the group will receive full credit regardless of whether their answer is right or wrong.
Setting the Conditions for Real Thinking
To make that expectation visible, each table has paper for recording group thinking, and every student is required to write. Students cannot copy a peer’s response and add their name—each person has to explain their own reasoning.
The focus is not on speed or correctness but on their thinking.
That structure establishes a positive dynamic immediately. Students slow down. They listen. They explain. And because full credit is guaranteed if they document their thinking, they are willing to take risks and be honest about what they don’t yet understand.