CAASPP common mistakes
CAASPP · Understand the traps and how to avoid them.
On ELA constructed-response and performance-task items, the student answers the prompt in one or two sentences with a general claim ("the author uses details to support the main idea") without citing specific evidence from the passage.
Students often treat constructed response like a short-answer recall question and stop at the first idea that feels correct. They may not realize that Smarter Balanced full-write and short-text items are scored on evidence/elaboration as a separate trait, so an unsupported claim earns little credit even when the reading comprehension is sound.
What to do instead
Practice the claim-evidence-explanation routine on every passage: state a precise claim, quote or paraphrase at least two specific details with paragraph references, and explain how each detail supports the claim. Use released scoring rubrics (purpose/organization/evidence/elaboration) to self-score drafts and revise once before submitting.
On ELA reading items, the student picks an answer that matches a single word or phrase from the passage rather than the option that best captures the inference or central idea the question asks for.
Word-matching is a fast, low-effort strategy that feels safe under time pressure, and distractors are deliberately written to echo passage vocabulary. Students also skip re-reading the question stem to notice whether it asks for an inference, a summary, or the author's purpose.
What to do instead
Require students to annotate the question stem for the task verb (infer, summarize, compare, analyze) before reading options, then eliminate each distractor by explaining what makes it wrong (too narrow, off-topic, contradicted, or true but not answering the question). Practice with paired passages where the correct answer requires combining two sentences.
On the math performance task, the student jumps straight to computation without planning, then abandons multi-step reasoning when an intermediate answer looks unusual, leaving justification boxes blank or with only a number.
Performance tasks are scored on modeling, reasoning, and communication, not just the final number, but students trained on multiple-choice items equate math with getting an answer. Time management also pushes them to skip the written justification to 'save time' for other items.
What to do instead
Rehearse the full task cycle: restate the scenario, list given quantities and the goal, choose a model, compute, then write a justification that names the quantities and explains why the method is valid. Use a two-minute planning pause before any calculation and reserve the last portion of the session for written explanations.
On math items with an equation editor or drag-and-drop interface, the student enters a correct value in an incorrect format (for example, a decimal where a fraction is required, or an expression that is not fully simplified) or fails to place all required tokens.
The digital interface differs from paper habits: some items require equivalent forms, exact values, or specific entry conventions, and students lose points on formatting rather than mathematics. Unfamiliarity with the equation editor and drag targets adds errors.
What to do instead
Practice on the same interface type used in the summative test during interim assessments, including fraction entry, exponents, and dragging points on a graph. Before submitting, re-read the item's directions for required form and check that every blank or drop zone is filled.
On CAST, the student answers items about experimental design or data interpretation by choosing the option that 'sounds scientific' rather than applying the crosscutting concept or disciplinary core idea the item targets, and ignores the phenomenon described in the stimulus.
CAST items are three-dimensional (core ideas, crosscutting concepts, science and engineering practices), and students who memorized vocabulary may not connect it to the described investigation. Distractors often use correct terminology in an incorrect relationship.
What to do instead
For each item, identify the phenomenon, the variable being changed or measured, and the practice being assessed (analyzing data, arguing from evidence, modeling). Practice explaining why each distractor misstates the relationship, and review the three dimensions explicitly during instruction rather than drilling isolated facts.
On the California Alternate Assessments, the test administrator delivers items with improvised or inconsistent prompting, or the student's response is recorded without the prescribed wait time and prompting hierarchy.
CAA administration depends on standardized procedures so scores are comparable; well-intentioned staff may over-prompt, change materials, or rush to finish, which invalidates the response. Unfamiliarity with the student's communication system also leads to guessing on the student's behalf.
What to do instead
Complete the CAA test administrator training and rehearse the scripted administration, including the specified wait time, allowable prompts, and materials for each item. Confirm the student's access to their communication device or mode before testing and document any deviation per the test administration manual.
On the CSA, the student writes responses using English-influenced spelling, direct calques, or anglicized syntax (for example, using 'realizar' for 'realize' or English word order in questions), and reads instructions in English rather than in Spanish.
Students in bilingual programs often develop academic Spanish alongside English and transfer English structures, especially when academic Spanish vocabulary has not been explicitly taught. Test familiarity with Spanish-language directions and item formats is also lower.
What to do instead
Practice academic Spanish literacy tasks (summarizing, citing evidence, writing an argument) with attention to false cognates and Spanish orthography, including accents and punctuation conventions. Take practice CSA items in Spanish from the start, and review common cross-linguistic transfer errors explicitly.
On ELPAC, the student gives one-word or off-topic answers during the speaking domain, or writes short, underdeveloped responses on the writing tasks, failing to use the academic language and connectors expected at the target proficiency level.
Speaking tasks are scored on meaningful communication, appropriate language, and use of expected linguistic structures; students may freeze, answer minimally, or avoid complex sentences out of fear of error. Writing tasks are scored on organization and language use, not just task completion.
What to do instead
Practice timed speaking prompts with a recording device to build fluency and volume, using structured frames (claim, evidence, explanation) and academic connectors. For writing, rehearse planning an organized multi-paragraph response with topic sentences and transitions, and self-score against the ELPAC rubrics.
On interim assessments, the student treats them as low-stakes and rushes, guessing through items without engaging, so the results do not reflect actual skills and cannot guide instruction.
Students may not understand that interim assessments are designed to predict summative performance and inform teaching, and teachers may not debrief results. The absence of a grade consequence reduces effort and persistence on difficult items.
What to do instead
Frame interim assessments as practice for the summative test and explain how results will be used. Have students set a goal, use the same tools and interface as the summative test, and conduct a short item review afterward to identify which skills need reteaching.
Across all domains, the student runs out of time because they spend excessive time on early items, do not use the embedded tools (strikethrough, highlighter, flag for review, notepad), and skip the review of flagged items before the session ends.
Digital tests allow navigation within a segment, but students who do not know the tools or the segment structure may not return to flagged items. Anxiety about hard items causes them to linger, while easy items later go unanswered.
What to do instead
Do a full-length practice test with the actual interface to learn the tools and the segment structure. Adopt a time budget (for example, check the clock at set intervals), flag and move on from items that stall, and reserve the final minutes to revisit flagged items and confirm all responses are submitted.