Kansas State Department of Education

Revised State Plan

For

Meeting Highly Qualified Teacher (HQT) Goal

In

No Child Left Behind

Contact:

Judi Miller, Assistant Director

State and Federal Programs

785-296-5081

<judim@ksde.org>

or

Martha Gage, Director

Teacher Education and Licensure

785-296-8010

<mgage@ksde.org>

July 7, 2006

**Title II, Part A, Teacher and Principal Training and Recruiting Fund**

**Requirement 1: The revised plan must provide a detailed analysis of
the core academic subject classes in the State that are currently not
being taught by highly qualified teachers. The analysis must, in
particular, address schools that are not making adequate yearly progress
and whether or not these schools have more acute needs than do other
schools in attracting highly qualified teachers. The analysis must also
identify the districts and schools around the State where significant
numbers of teachers do not meet HQT standards, and examine whether or
not there are particular hard-to-staff courses frequently taught by
non-highly qualified teachers.**

The Kansas Department of Education (KSDE) maintains a *highly qualified
teacher* database on all licensed teachers in the state and collects
assignment and class data on each teacher employed in Kansas every year
in the Licensed Personnel Report (LPR). After local districts input
assignment and class data in the Licensed Personnel Report, KSDE
generates a list of core content teachers who are "not highly
qualified". Currently, it is the district's responsibility to consult
with the teacher who is not a highly qualified teacher and assist
him/her in becoming highly qualified for the assignment. KSDE is in the
process of requiring more direct district participation in this process.

2005-2006 HQT Preliminary Data

  ---------------- -------------- --------------------- ------------------
  Core Academic    Total Teachers Number of classes     Percent of classes
  Subject                         taught by not HQ      taught by not HQ
                                  teachers              teachers

  Elementary       17371          502                   2.9

  Fine Arts        14998          946                   9.9

  Foreign Language 3857           550                   14.3

  Language Arts    16017          2361                  14.7

  Mathematics      12974          1704                  13.1

  Science          11181          1467                  13.1

  History          7979           1903                  23.8

  Government       1178           49                    4.2

  Geography        584            62                    10.6

  Economics        241            41                    17.0
  ---------------- -------------- --------------------- ------------------

KSDE possesses the ability to review and analyze the teacher quality
data in multiple ways and provide technical assistance when needed.
Staff from Teacher Education and Licensure ensures the quality of data
through comparing and analyzing multiple data points for accuracy. In
this manner, KSDE validates the accuracy of all classroom level data.

Three examples of data analysis are provided. However, it should be
clear that the data analysis is not limited to just these three
examples. Poverty data is presented in Requirement 6 along with the
discussion of the Kansas equity plan. Also refer to the accompanying
Excel spreadsheet, *Kansas HQ Data by LEA, Schools, Content Areas 05-06*
for the number and percent of teachers in specific content areas by
school who are highly qualified compared to the total number of teachers
in that area.

**Example One**: Schools that did not make Adequate Yearly Progress
(AYP)

Included in the analysis process is an extensive examination of the
staffing needs of schools that are not making AYP. For the 2005 school
year, KSDE identified 20 school districts that did not make AYP for in
2005 and 6 districts that did not make AYP in both 2004 and 2005. There
are 7 districts on improvement. In addition, at the school level, KSDE
identified 121 schools that did not make AYP in 2005 and 15 Title I
schools on improvement. Of the 121 schools, 23 are elementary schools,
53 are middle schools, 48 are high schools and 2 are special education
centers. Fifteen of the 121 schools that did not meet AYP requirements
for at least one of the last two years did meet the requirements of 100%
highly qualified core content teachers.

2005-2006 HQT Preliminary Data

For Schools with Less Than 100% ^1^HQT Who Did Not Make AYP

For At Least One of the Last Two Years

+---------------+-----------+---------------------+-------------------+
| Core Academic | Total     | Number of           | \% of assignments |
| Subject       | Teacher   | assignments taught  | taught by         |
|               |           | by teachers not     | teachers not HQ   |
|               | As        | ^2^HQ               |                   |
|               | signments |                     |                   |
+---------------+-----------+---------------------+-------------------+
| Elementary    | 267       | 39                  | 14.6              |
+---------------+-----------+---------------------+-------------------+
| Fine Arts     | 255       | 135                 | 52.9              |
+---------------+-----------+---------------------+-------------------+
| Foreign       | 102       | 46                  | 45.1              |
| Language      |           |                     |                   |
+---------------+-----------+---------------------+-------------------+
| Language Arts | 1034      | 304                 | 29.4              |
+---------------+-----------+---------------------+-------------------+
| Mathematics   | 704       | 208                 | 29.5              |
+---------------+-----------+---------------------+-------------------+
| Science       | 622       | 217                 | 34.9              |
+---------------+-----------+---------------------+-------------------+
| Aggregate     | 698       | 169                 | 24.2              |
|               |           |                     |                   |
| History,      |           |                     |                   |
| Government,   |           |                     |                   |
| Geography,    |           |                     |                   |
| Economics     |           |                     |                   |
+---------------+-----------+---------------------+-------------------+

^1^ HQT means Highly Qualified Teacher ^2^HQ refers to highly qualified

Number of Districts (Duplicated Count) Not Making AYP with One or More
Schools Not Having 100% HQT by Core Academic Subject

  ----------------------------------------- -----------------------------
  Core Academic Subject                     \# Districts by Subject

  Elementary                                13

  Fine Arts                                 16

  Foreign Language                          9

  Language Arts                             17

  Mathematics                               15

  Science                                   14

  History, Gov't, Geography, Econ.          12
  ----------------------------------------- -----------------------------

**Example Two**: Special Education Core Content Teachers

Throughout the state, it is apparent that there are issues with special
education core content teachers not meeting the highly qualified
guidelines. As evident by an analysis of initial data, the state faces
an issue with 70% of special education teachers not being highly
qualified in mathematics. Of the special education science teachers,
69.3% are not highly qualified. KSDE is addressing this issue in the
following manner: in January of 2006, approval was granted from the US
Department of Education to use a special education HOUSSE checklist.
KSDE is processing Special Education HOUSSE check lists throughout the
summer and anticipates beginning the 2007 academic year with more of the
special education core content teachers being highly qualified. In
addition, KSDE will provide technical assistance to ensure special
education teachers become highly qualified in at least one core subject
immediately. KSDE will also assist those special education teachers who
teach multiple content areas and who are highly qualified in one of
those areas develop plans to become highly qualified in the other areas.

2005-2006 HQT Preliminary Data -- HQT Special Education Core Content

+---------------+-----------+---------------------+-------------------+
| Core Academic | Total     | Number of classes   | Percent of        |
| Subject       | Teacher   | taught by not HQ    | classes taught by |
|               |           | teachers            | not HQ teachers   |
|               | As        |                     |                   |
|               | signments |                     |                   |
+---------------+-----------+---------------------+-------------------+
| Elementary    | 914       | 238                 | 26.0              |
+---------------+-----------+---------------------+-------------------+
| Language Arts | 401       | 181                 | 45.1              |
+---------------+-----------+---------------------+-------------------+
| Mathematics   | 207       | 145                 | 70.0              |
+---------------+-----------+---------------------+-------------------+
| Science       | 137       | 95                  | 69.3              |
+---------------+-----------+---------------------+-------------------+
| Aggregate     | 172       | 73                  | 42.4              |
|               |           |                     |                   |
| History,      |           |                     |                   |
| Government,   |           |                     |                   |
| Geography,    |           |                     |                   |
| Economics     |           |                     |                   |
+---------------+-----------+---------------------+-------------------+

**Example Three**: Teachers Teaching Multiple Subjects in Rural Schools

In addition to the need for more highly qualified special education
content areas, it became apparent that KSDE also needs to focus its
attention on teachers in rural districts. The US Department of Education
has identified 165 of 300 unified school districts in Kansas as "rural"
under the Rural Education Achievement Program. Fifteen of the 165 rural
districts meet the 100% HQT requirement. Ninety-seven of the 150
districts that do not meet the 100% requirement have at least one
teacher who is not highly qualified teaching multiple subjects. Further
analysis identifies a total of 176 teachers who are eligible to take
advantage of the time extension allowed for teachers of multiple
subjects in meeting the HQT requirements.

As indicated in the table below, the largest number (238) of teachers
teaching multiple subjects who are not highly qualified in one or more
areas is in fine arts. The subject area with the greatest percentage of
teachers not being highly qualified is in foreign language with 34.1%.

2005-2006 HQT Preliminary Data -- Highly Qualified Rural Teachers

+---------------+-----------+---------------------+-------------------+
| Core Academic | Total     | Number of           | \% of assignments |
| Subject       | Teacher   | assignments taught  | taught by not HQ  |
|               |           | by not HQ teachers  | teachers          |
|               | As        |                     |                   |
|               | signments |                     |                   |
+---------------+-----------+---------------------+-------------------+
| Elementary    | 2038      | 55                  | 2.7               |
+---------------+-----------+---------------------+-------------------+
| Fine Arts     | 1192      | 238                 | 20.0              |
+---------------+-----------+---------------------+-------------------+
| Foreign       | 167       | 57                  | 34.1              |
| Language      |           |                     |                   |
+---------------+-----------+---------------------+-------------------+
| Language Arts | 905       | 203                 | 22.4              |
+---------------+-----------+---------------------+-------------------+
| Mathematics   | 574       | 116                 | 20.2              |
+---------------+-----------+---------------------+-------------------+
| Science       | 913       | 225                 | 24.6              |
+---------------+-----------+---------------------+-------------------+
| Aggregate     | 1021      | 130                 | 12.7              |
|               |           |                     |                   |
| History,      |           |                     |                   |
| Government,   |           |                     |                   |
| Geography,    |           |                     |                   |
| Economics     |           |                     |                   |
+---------------+-----------+---------------------+-------------------+

It is important to note that rural schools often only have one teacher
per subject. For example, a small rural district may only employ one
science teacher to teach all of the high school science classes
-physics, chemistry, biology and general science. The teacher would be
reported with four different assignments in the core areas and eligible
for the rural school exception if the teacher was designated "HQ" in at
least one of the science areas. The teacher, however, who only teaches
music even though it is in three schools (elementary, middle and high
school) would not be eligible for the flexibility.

The last piece of data critical to the analysis of rural school
flexibility would be to look at the number of teachers who are
designated not highly qualified but who are on a State approved plan to
become highly qualified. This plan was in place before No Child Left
Behind was enacted and provided a way for licensed teachers to have
access to practice while completing requirements to add additional
endorsements to their teaching licenses. The State plan includes the
following options:

**(1) Waiver** -- a district may obtain a waiver for an **[already
licensed teacher]{.underline}** to teach out-of-field if the following
conditions are met: 1) the teacher must have a signed plan of study from
a Kansas institutions of higher learning to complete the approved
program for the additional endorsement within a specified time period
not to exceed three years, 2) the teacher must enroll in at least one
class per year on the approved plan of study, 3) the teacher must be
provided support by the local district to successfully complete the
program. The maximum length of a waiver is three years. The waiver must
be renewed annually and a teacher eligible for a provisional endorsement
may not have a waiver.

**(2) Provisional endorsement** -- **[licensed teachers]{.underline}**
may apply for a provisional endorsement to be added to their teaching
license when 50% of an approved program is complete. A provisional
endorsement is good for two years and may be renewed once with
sufficient progress. The time for completing the entire program and
adding the endorsement is limited to four years.

A highly qualified status is noted in the licensure database once the
teacher completes the approved program at an institution of higher
education, passes the content test and adds the endorsement to a
license.

Preliminary Data -- Rural Teachers Not Highly Qualified on a State
Approved Plan

+---------------+------------------+-----------------+-----------------+
| Core Academic | Number of        | Number of       | Percent of      |
| Subject       | assignments      | assignments     | assignments     |
|               | taught by        | taught by       | taught by       |
|               | teachers not HQ  | teachers on     | teachers on     |
|               |                  | State approved  | State approved  |
|               |                  | plans           | plans           |
+---------------+------------------+-----------------+-----------------+
| Foreign       | 57               | 20              | 35.1            |
| Language      |                  |                 |                 |
+---------------+------------------+-----------------+-----------------+
| Language Arts | 203              | 25              | 12.3            |
+---------------+------------------+-----------------+-----------------+
| Mathematics   | 116              | 8               | 6.9             |
+---------------+------------------+-----------------+-----------------+
| Science       | 225              | 51              | 22.7            |
+---------------+------------------+-----------------+-----------------+
| Aggregate     | 130              | 30              | 23.1            |
|               |                  |                 |                 |
| History,      |                  |                 |                 |
| Government,   |                  |                 |                 |
| Geography,    |                  |                 |                 |
| Economics     |                  |                 |                 |
+---------------+------------------+-----------------+-----------------+
| Art           | 38               | 8               | 21.1            |
+---------------+------------------+-----------------+-----------------+
| Music         | 138              | 23              | 16.7            |
+---------------+------------------+-----------------+-----------------+
| S             | 62               | 2               | 3.2             |
| peech/Theatre |                  |                 |                 |
+---------------+------------------+-----------------+-----------------+

**Requirement 2: The revised plan must provide information on HQT status
in each LEA and the steps the SEA will take to ensure that each LEA has
plans in place to assist teachers who are not highly qualified to attain
HQT status as quickly as possible.**

The Kansas Department of Education (KSDE) maintains a highly qualified
teacher database on all licensed teachers in the state and collects
assignment and class data on each teacher employed in Kansas every year
in the Licensed Personnel Report (LPR). After local districts input
assignment and class data in the Licensed Personnel Report, KSDE
generates a list of core content teachers who are "not highly
qualified".

The Kansas State Department of Education (KSDE) determines the highly
qualified status of each district and individual schools and publishes
on its website at [www.ksde.org](http://www.ksde.org/) the data in the
district and building report cards each fall. Of the 299 districts in
2005-2006, 283 districts had at least one teacher who was not highly
qualified; therefore, they did not meet the annual measurable objective
of 100%. See the accompanying Excel spreadsheet, *Kansas HQ Data by LEA,
Schools, Content Areas 05-06* for the number and percent of teachers in
specific content areas by school who are highly qualified compared to
the total number of teachers in that area.

The district is responsible for reviewing its teacher quality data and
submitting a highly qualified teacher plan to KSDE. The plans will be
collected according to published procedures by the State and Federal
Programs Team. The *District Plan for Highly Qualified Teachers*
(referred to as *District HQT Plan*) will be disseminated to all
districts in September of 2006. (See attachment.) The District HQT Plan
will be due to the KSDE in November 2007. These plans will be reviewed
by a cross section team of the agency including members from the Teacher
Education and Licensure Team and the State and Federal Programs Team.
Plans will be reviewed in a timely manner and feedback to the district
will occur prior to the second semester, in order for the district to
implement the strategies outlined in the plan at the beginning of the
second semester.

Prior to drafting the District HQT Plan, the district will analyze the
data as part of its needs assessment to determine the specific issues
that have prevented the district and/or schools from meeting the highly
qualified teacher goal. The district will also analyze major differences
among schools overall, within specific subject areas, and for high and
low poverty schools in terms of equitable distribution of highly
qualified teachers as well as including an analysis to show how the
district will reallocate and recruit the necessary qualified teachers to
fill gaps in current staffing of core content areas.

The district will also provide a timeline of how teachers who are not
highly qualified will be provided with support via technical assistance,
professional development, and financial and/or other incentives.

The District HQT Plan will provide information on how the district will
meet the annual measurable objectives of 100% of their teachers being
highly qualified. In addition, the District HQT Plan will include the
following:

1\) Analysis of data concerning highly qualified teachers to determine
the specific issues that have prevented the district and specific school
from meeting the goal.

2\) Timeline of support provided by the district to provide a positive
solution for individual teachers

3\) Benchmarks for determining success

4\) Funding sources and amount of funds to be used by the district to
assist any teachers not meeting the highly qualified teacher status.

**Requirement 3: The revised plan must include information on the
technical assistance, programs, and services that the SEA will offer to
assist LEAs in successfully completing their HQT plans, particularly
where large groups of teachers are not highly qualified, and the
resources the LEAs will use to meet their HQT goals.**

Technical assistance will be provided by the Kansas State Department of
Education to districts in writing their new District HQT Plans for
having 100% of their teachers become highly qualified. This assistance
will be provided by the State and Federal Programs team with input from
the Teacher Education and Licensure Team during the fall of 2006. Once
the plans are written, technical assistance will be provided to
districts as they implement their plans through on-site visits, on-line
courses, and other professional development opportunities. Priority for
technical assistance will be to those districts with high numbers or
percents of teachers who are not highly qualified.

Currently, KSDE provides the following professional development
opportunities to assist teachers in becoming highly qualified:

-   Middle-level Mathematics and Science online courses/program for
    assisting teachers in obtaining endorsements including partial
    tuition reimbursement

-   Reimbursement for teachers successfully completing ninth grade
    mathematics courses at universities and colleges

-   Scientifically Based Reading Research (SBRR) professional
    development series for non Reading First schools

-   SBRR professional development series for Title I teachers

-   SBRR professional development series for Special Education teachers

-   Reimbursement program for teachers completing required courses
    leading to an ESOL endorsement.

These opportunities are funded primarily with Title II-A funds. IDEA
funds assist with the professional development for the special education
teachers.

Both the *Title II Part A Subpart 3 Subgrants to Eligible Partnerships*
and the *Title II Part B Mathematics and Science Partnership (MSP)*
grants provide opportunities for elementary and middle school teachers
to become highly qualified in the areas of mathematics and science. The
Kansas Board of Regents in collaboration with institutions of higher
learning focus the Title II Part A funds on increasing the number of
highly qualified teachers at the middle school level in primarily
science. To address the shortage of highly qualified teachers in middle
schools in mathematics, the KSDE Mathematics and Science Partnership
grants are focusing on the following:

## Washburn University in collaboration with districts: 

*Professional Development for 5^th^-8^th^ grade Mathematics teachers*

*Professional Development for Building District Administrators*

## Sterling College in collaboration with 15 rural districts:

*Professional Development to increase the number of Highly Qualified
Mathematics teachers in grades 5^th^-8^th^*

***Ft. Hays State University in collaboration with rural Western Kansas
districts:***

Professional Development for 4^th^ -8^th^ grade teachers in
Scientifically Based Research strategies

***Baker University in collaboration with an urban district***:

> Professional Development to increase Mathematics content knowledge for
> K-8^th^ grade teachers

## Tabor College in collaboration with rural Central Kansas districts:

*Professional Development to increase the number of Highly Qualified
Mathematics teachers in grades 5^th^-8^th^*

In addition, the KSDE continues to analyze the highly qualified teacher
data to determine what other core academic areas have significantly high
numbers of teachers who are not highly qualified and who might benefit
from professional development opportunities funded through the use of
Title II Part A funds.

As first priority, the KSDE will analyze the highly qualified teacher
data targeting the schools and districts not making adequate yearly
progress (AYP). If any of these schools and districts are not meeting
the highly qualified teacher objectives, the KSDE will ensure that
districts are giving high priority to staffing and professional
development needs of these schools in the district's Title II-A section
of the Local Consolidated Plan application for federal funds. In this
section, districts identify through the needs assessment how the Title
II Part A funds will focus on the schools that have the lowest
proportion of highly qualified teachers and are identified for school
improvement. Based upon this needs assessment, districts will be
required to utilize at least 5% of Title II Part A funds to address the
barriers to staff becoming highly qualified. In addition, districts will
also need to specifically explain how they will utilize their Title I
Part A 5% set aside to ensure all teachers in Title I schools are highly
qualified.

The districts with a significant number of teachers who are not highly
qualified will be monitored for Title II Part A compliance. The KSDE is
also examining more effective ways to utilize Title II Part A dollars to
support teachers in schools not meeting AYP. In this manner, issues
preventing the district from meeting their measurable goals will be
discussed and strategies will be selected for implementation. Some of
the strategies that will be examined include:

-   Reallocation of resources to include financial and non-financial
    incentives

-   Targeted professional development

-   Support and mentoring of teachers who are not highly qualified.

In addition to providing professional development opportunities to
assist teachers in becoming highly qualified, the Kansas State
Department of Education is also addressing the shortage of foreign
language teachers through the Visiting Teachers from Spain program. The
KSDE staff interview and recruits teachers from Spain who are then
placed in districts as foreign language teachers or ESOL teachers. Their
records are reviewed to ensure they are highly qualified in the areas
assigned.

Kansas continues to examine innovative ways to address the issue of high
quality teachers in the state with several programs and services. Under
the leadership of the governor, Kansas schools will begin addressing the
issue of special education core content teachers becoming highly
qualified. In the 2006 legislative session, funds were appropriated to
provide special education teachers with focused professional development
to assist these teachers in achieving highly qualified status. This
program will be implemented in 2006-2007.

**Requirement 4: The revised plan must describe how the SEA will work
with LEAs that fail to reach the 100% HQT goal by the end of the 2006-07
school year.**

The goal is to have 100% of teachers highly qualified by the end of
2006-07. If a district fails to meet the 100% highly qualified teacher
(HQT) goal, KSDE will provide the following:

-   Technical assistance to ensure the districts are accurately
    reporting the HQT data;

-   A review of the issues contributing to the situation, i.e.
    multi-subject teachers in rural areas who have additional time to
    meet the highly qualified requirements in every subject taught or
    teacher shortages in particular areas

-   A cross team review of specific strategies within the District HQT
    Plan;

-   On site monitoring of the Title II Part A program; and

-   Annual review of the District HQT Plan to determine if progress is
    being made.

The KSDE will provide technical assistance in two distinct ways:
ensuring that all data is accurate and that the district is utilizing
appropriate strategies to provide support for 100% of its teachers
achieving highly qualified teacher status. In addition, the District HQT
Plans will be reviewed on an annual basis to ensure that all goals are
being met and to provide additional assistance as needed.

Title II Part A is also part of the Local Consolidated Plan monitoring
process. The KSDE is revising the monitoring instrument to include an
increased focus on ensuring that districts meet the 100% goal. The
revision will be completed during the summer of 2006 for implementation
in the fall of 2006. The monitoring instrument will also include an
increased emphasis on high quality professional development. Districts
will be required to ensure that all professional development is
scientifically based research. Districts will be expected to use the
High Quality Professional Development Criteria checklist developed by
KSDE to determine if the professional development meets the definition
in No Child Left Behind. (See attachment.)

### Teacher Quality Corrective Action

If a district fails to meet the conditions set forth in its District HQT
Plan after one year (2006-2007), the district will be required to enter
into an agreement with KSDE. This agreement will ensure that the LEA
will meet all NCLB teacher requirements and conditions by the end of the
school year (2007-2008).

If the KSDE determines that a district continues to fail to meet the
requirements set-forth in the District HQT Plan and has also not made
adequate yearly progress (AYP) for three consecutive years, the district
will be required to develop and implement a Teacher Quality Corrective
Action Plan (TQCAP) in collaboration with KSDE and submit it for
approval. The TQCAP will include the following:

-   A detailed description of all staffing, recruitment, and retention
    strategies the district will use to meet their goals.

-   Funding sources and projected budgets specific to each participating
    school and/or staff. (The KSDE will work with the district to
    determine how it may use its Title II Part A funds.)

-   Assurances that the district will not use Title I, Part A funds to
    hire new paraprofessionals.

-   Evidence that the Title II Part A funds are directed to specific
    schools that have not met their goals. (The KSDE may provide the
    district's allocated funding directly to the schools for high
    quality professional development.)

-   Other actions as determined by the Kansas State Board of Education.

The Teacher Quality Corrective Action Plan must be reviewed and approved
by:

1\) The Superintendent

2\) All relevant site administrators and

3\) The Kansas State Department of Education

The TQCAP will be reviewed by a cross section team of the Kansas State
Department of Education including members from the Teacher Education and
Licensure Team and the State and Federal Programs Team. Plans will be
reviewed in a timely manner and feedback will be provided to the
district.

In addition to the previously mentioned technical assistance, districts
that are in need of corrective action will be assigned a District
Support Team (DST). The DST provides support and technical assistance to
districts not making AYP. The DSTs will ensure that teacher quality
issues are addressed.

**Requirement 5: The revised plan must explain how and when the SEA will
complete the HOUSSE process for teachers not new to the profession who
were hired prior to the end of the 2005-2006 school year, and how the
SEA will discontinue the use of HOUSSE procedures for teachers hired
after the end of the 2005-2006 school year (except for allowable
situations).**

Since the Kansas State Department of Education maintains the official
highly qualified teacher database identifying which teachers are highly
qualified for assignments based on licensure endorsement requirements,
monitoring the acceptable use of the HOUSSE documents is relatively
easy. Kansas has always limited the situations in which the HOUSSE could
be used.

In addition, the KSDE already discontinued the 9^th^ grade HOUSSE rubric
at the beginning of the 2005-2006 school year. In September 2007, all
general education teachers will be sent a final letter inviting them to
become highly qualified for any content endorsements on their teaching
licenses regardless of their current teaching assignment. After the 2007
school year ends, the HOUSSE rubric will be deleted from the KSDE
Teacher Education and Licensure website and KSDE will monitor requests
for use of the HOUSSE rubric. Any general education teacher wanting to
use the HOUSSE rubric after June 2007 to achieve highly qualified status
for an assignment will be required to send past employment documentation
to the state along with the rubric to verify they are a veteran teacher
in the specific assignment area of the request.

The exception to this policy will be for teachers who can document they
had an approved plan of study from their building or district
administrator and have been working toward the highly qualified
designation. For the last two years, Kansas has asked districts and
schools who find it necessary to employ a teacher who is not highly
qualified to act in good faith and provide the professional development
necessary for their teacher to become highly qualified as soon as
possible. Teachers were asked to develop a plan of study to meet the
highly qualified requirements. They were told that when they completed
their plan and could meet the HOUSSE rubric requirements, the KSDE would
honor the document. The KSDE intends to honor its promise and will
continue to accept HOUSSE rubrics from teachers who have been working in
good faith to become highly qualified.

The HOUSSE Checklist for special education content teachers was not
approved by the US Department of Education until January of 2006.
Therefore, the KSDE is almost two years behind in the special education
data collection by content areas. There will be continued focus on the
current assignments for the 2006-2007 special education content teachers
to determine their highly qualified status. If the data collection is
successful, then the KSDE will send the same letter to special education
teachers in 2008 that is sent to general education teachers in 2007,
giving them the opportunity where appropriate to achieve highly
qualified status in any additional content areas for which they are not
currently teaching. A new special education teacher in Kansas is not a
"new to the profession" teacher. Special education is an added
endorsement and the teacher will usually meet the definition of veteran
teacher. Until the KSDE is able to slow the turnover rate of special
education teachers and find an acceptable multiple- subject test, there
is a need to continue the use of the special education HOUSSE checklist.

The HOUSSE for multi-subject secondary teachers in rural areas is not
used extensively as Kansas requires an endorsement in each subject to be
considered appropriately licensed. The HOUSSE will be available,
however, on a case by case basis for veteran teachers in this situation.

At the same time as the KSDE is attempting to phase out the use of
HOUSSE for determining the highly qualify status of teachers, it is
seeking additional ways in which teachers can add endorsements to their
teaching licenses. Currently, Kansas does not allow teachers to be
highly qualified in a secondary content area unless they have completed
a teacher preparation program in the content area and added the
endorsement to their license. In many ways the Kansas licensure
requirement is more stringent than the highly qualified requirement of
No Child Left Behind and often creates barriers difficult for teachers
to overcome. One proposal being discussed by the Kansas State Board of
Education is to allow secondary teachers to add similar endorsements by
passing the state approved content test. Another proposal is to pay for
the development of additional on-line programs similar to the on-line
middle level mathematics program.

Another issue about which Kansas is concerned is the middle level
licensure structure. With the new licensure system, elementary licenses
teachers are no longer allowed to teach in middle schools. There are
very few students in the middle school preparation programs; therefore,
the data indicates that Kansas will soon be facing a shortage of middle
school teachers. The Professional Standards Board is currently reviewing
teacher preparation regulations and data to find a way to head off this
predicted shortage.

**Requirement 6: The revised plan must include a copy of the State's
written "equity plan" for ensuring that poor or minority children are
not taught by inexperienced, unqualified, or out of field teacher at
higher rates than are other children.**

As stated in the Kansas 2003 highly qualified teacher plan, Kansas first
began reviewing teacher recruitment and retention data with a special
task force appointed by the Commissioner of Education during the spring
of 2001. The Title II Teacher Quality Enhancement Grant advisory board
expanded the work of the task force and held a summit on teacher
recruitment December 2003. The conclusions from all groups studying the
problem remained the same. When examining district level data, Kansas
does not have a problem providing equal access to highly qualified
teachers. One could continue to draw the same conclusion from the
2003-2004 data.

District Level Distribution of Highly Qualified Teachers

+------------+------------+----------+-------+-------+-------+------+
|            | A          |          | Hi    |       | L     |      |
|            | ssignments |          | gh-Po |       | ow-Po |      |
|            | taught by  |          | verty |       | verty |      |
|            | HQT        |          |       |       |       |      |
|            |            |          | (Dist |       | (Dist |      |
|            |            |          | ricts |       | ricts |      |
|            |            |          | with  |       | with  |      |
|            |            |          | 4     |       | less  |      |
|            |            |          | 6.36% |       | than  |      |
|            |            |          | or    |       | 2     |      |
|            |            |          | gr    |       | 7.18% |      |
|            |            |          | eater |       | free  |      |
|            |            |          | free  |       | and   |      |
|            |            |          | and   |       | re    |      |
|            |            |          | re    |       | duced |      |
|            |            |          | duced |       | l     |      |
|            |            |          | l     |       | unch) |      |
|            |            |          | unch) |       |       |      |
+------------+------------+----------+-------+-------+-------+------+
| 2004       | Number     | Percent  | N     | Pe    | N     | Per  |
|            |            |          | umber | rcent | umber | cent |
+------------+------------+----------+-------+-------+-------+------+
| All        | 35990      | 94.5     | 11071 | 95.6  | 12836 | 94.5 |
| Classrooms |            |          |       |       |       |      |
+------------+------------+----------+-------+-------+-------+------+
| Elementary | 13258      | 97.9     |       |       |       |      |
+------------+------------+----------+-------+-------+-------+------+
| Secondary  | 22732      | 92.6     |       |       |       |      |
+------------+------------+----------+-------+-------+-------+------+

However, when the data were aggregated by building level instead of
district level, the results are different. The next table shows the
distribution of classes taught by highly qualified teachers by building
level and poverty. The total percent of highly qualified teachers
changed and poverty differences emerged. The difference in total number
is attributed to class verses assignment counts.

Building Level Distribution of Highly Qualified Teachers by High and Low
Poverty

  -------------- --------- ---------- -------------- ---------- ------------- ---------
                 Classes              High-Poverty              Low-Poverty   
                 taught by                                                    
                 HQT                                                          

  2005           Number    Percent    Number         Percent    Number        Percent

  All Classrooms 77465     89.26                                              

  Elementary     25688     94.79      5739           94.77      8115          96.23

  Secondary      51777     86.74      12090          77.68      18591         92.03
  -------------- --------- ---------- -------------- ---------- ------------- ---------

The same poverty metric of free and reduced meals was used but the
quartile breaks were different:

-   Elementary Schools---

    -   High-Poverty schools have more than 58.62% poverty

    -   Low-Poverty schools have less than 29.79% poverty

-   Secondary Schools---

    -   High-Poverty schools have more than 44.67% poverty

    -   Low-Poverty schools have less than 23.04% poverty

Needless to say it was a surprise to see the shift in data particularly
at the secondary level with only 77.68 % of the high poverty schools
having teachers who are highly qualified. The low poverty secondary
schools have 92.03% of their teachers highly qualified. There had been a
false presumption that districts were ensuring that highly qualified
teachers were distributed equitably among the schools in their
districts. Low poverty schools have a higher percent of teachers meeting
the highly qualified requirements than do high poverty schools. Once the
problem was identified in March of 2006, KSDE began to work aggressively
on the development of an equity plan.

Multiple groups within the KSDE are working on the issue of equitable
distribution of teachers to ensure that poor and minority children are
not taught by teachers who are not highly qualified at higher rates than
other children. The following work plan identifies current and proposed
activities that Kansas will take to ensure a more equitable distribution
of highly qualified experienced teachers.

**Kansas Equity Plan**

The intent of the Kansas Equity Plan is to ensure that poor and minority
students are not taught by inexperienced, unqualified, or out-of-field
teachers at higher rates than other children. In order to have Kansas
students reach universal proficiency by 2013-2014, it is imperative that
every student has highly qualified teachers. This is supported by the
Kansas State Board of Education's goal to have a caring and competent
teacher in every classroom.

Step 1---Dissemination of Information

Information will be disseminated to districts this summer and fall
reminding them of the importance of having highly qualified and
experienced teachers in schools with higher numbers of poor and minority
students. Districts will be encouraged to consider this issue as they
make teaching assignments. They will also be reminded of the
requirements of No Child Left Behind and also Kansas statute which
states that it is unlawful for a district to pay a teacher a salary if
they do not hold a license which is valid for their particular teaching
assignment.

Kansas is attempting to bolster its recruitment efforts as well as
developing mechanisms for teacher support. In order to provide more
quality support to new teachers in schools with large numbers of poor or
minority children, Kansas is investigating implementation of a
comprehensive mentoring program to keep quality teachers in the
profession. The Kansas legislature currently provides funds for
mentoring of beginning teachers.

The KSDE also supports the implementation of districts signing bonuses
with highly qualified teachers who teach in schools with large numbers
of poor or minority children. Districts will be encouraged to utilize
their Title II Part A funds to ensure that highly qualified teachers are
placed in schools with larger numbers of poor or minority children.

Kansas law specifies that teachers are to be paid only when they are
appropriately licensed for the teaching assignment. There has been no
enforcement of this; however, the Kansas State Board of Education is
scheduled to discuss this issue at its July meeting and adopt possible
sanctions for districts that violate this provision. Otherwise, the KSDE
has no authority regarding teaching assignments; this is the option of
the district as Kansas is a local control state. In addition, there is
no statewide salary plan for teachers.

Kansas equity plan focuses on four major areas: increasing the supply of
teachers, redistributing existing teachers, improving the knowledge and
skills of teachers, and improving working conditions of teachers. In
each of these areas, the state will identify and disseminate appropriate
strategies to all districts.

Component One: In order to increase the supply of highly qualified
teachers, KSDE will recommend the following strategies:

-   Scholarships, loans, loan forgiveness programs to recruit and
    prepare a pool of teachers specifically for high-poverty,
    low-performing, and hard-to-staff schools

-   Alternative routes to teaching

-   International teachers

-   Targeted teacher preparation programs to prepare teachers
    specifically to work in high-need schools.

Component Two: Redistributing existing teachers, KSDE will recommend the
following

strategies:

-   Offer additional compensation as a way to attract experienced
    teachers to high-needs, high poverty schools

-   Financial incentives including use of Title II Part A funds

-   Non-monetary incentives

-   Increase the number of National Board Certified Teachers in
    high-need schools

-   Hire retired teachers

Component Three: Improve the knowledge, skills, and training of teachers
already working in high-need schools to improve their skills, KSDE will
recommend the following strategies:

-   Provide targeted professional development

-   Fund Mentoring Programs for more than one year

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   Use master teachers and coaches

-   Transition to Teaching program

Component Four: Improve working conditions that case teachers to avoid
or leave high -- needs schools, KSDE will recommend the following
strategies:

-   Develop policies and programs to attract effective principals and
    teachers

-   Reallocate resources to high-needs schools

-   Improve working conditions

-   Improve safety and discipline in high-needs school

Step 2---Data Collection and Analysis

The Kansas State Department of Education annually collects from
districts information on teaching assignments through the Licensed
Personnel Report. The data will be analyzed to determine which schools
have teachers who are not highly qualified. In addition, the data will
be analyzed according to poverty levels to determine if higher poverty
schools have greater numbers of teachers who are unqualified or
out-of-field. Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) data will also be reviewed
to determine whether or not students are succeeding.

Step 3---Communicate with Identified Districts

Once districts are identified as having higher numbers of inexperienced,
unqualified or out-of-field teachers in higher poverty schools, the
Kansas State Department of Education will review the district's highly
qualified teacher plan to determine what strategies are being
implemented to address this issue. The KSDE will communicate with the
districts to determine what the contributing factors are that cause this
situation to exist.

Step 4---Modifying Plan

Districts may need to modify their Teacher Quality Plan if there are
insufficient strategies or changes for addressing equity issues. An
updated timeline may be needed.

Step 5---Monitoring Equitable Distribution of Highly Qualified Teachers

The Kansas State Department of Education will monitor the issue of
equitable teacher assignments in two ways. The first is to annually
review the data on teaching assignments through the Licensed Personnel
Report. The second way is through the Local Consolidated Plan monitoring
process. In monitoring Title II Part A, the KSDE staff will address the
distribution of highly qualified teachers.

**District Plan for Highly Qualified Teachers**

**2006-2007 School Year**

[/]{.underline} [/]{.underline}

[USD \# / USD Name Superintendent Name (Print or Type) Superintendent
Signature / Date]{.smallcaps}

[Name of Designated Point-of-contact Contact Person's Telephone number
Contact Person's E-Mail Address]{.smallcaps}

[[/]{.underline} [/ ]{.underline}]{.smallcaps}

[Plan approved by (Person or Entity) /Date of Approval Plan approved by
(KSDE) /Date of Approval]{.smallcaps}

Review the district's report card data or licensed personnel report
regarding the number and percent of teachers who are and are not highly
qualified. Consider which core academic subjects and grade levels have
teachers, if any, who are not highly qualified. Use this information in
responding to the questions in this plan.

**A. Current Practice as Identified by District Needs Assessment**

1\. Describe how teachers are presently being supported by the district
in meeting the No Child Left Behind highly qualified teacher (HQT)
requirements.

2\. What issues or conditions are preventing the district from having
100% of the teachers highly qualified?

**B. TEACHERS NOT HIGHLY QUALIFIED BY SCHOOLS & SUBJECTS:** Using the
following chart, list each school with teachers who are NOT highly
qualified and the core academic subject classes they teach. Indicate the
current actions to become highly qualified. Below the table, write a
brief summary to describe highly qualified teacher issues in the
district. (Add additional rows to expand the chart, as needed.)

+-----------------+----+----+------------+--------+-----------------+
| **Name of       | *  | ** | *          | **No.  | **Current       |
| School with     | ** | Gr | *Subject** | of     | Actions to      |
| Teacher(s) Not  | \# | ad |            | Cla    | Become Highly   |
| Highly          | of | e( |            | sses** | Qualified**     |
| Qualified**     | te | s) |            |        |                 |
|                 | ac | ** |            | **Ta   |                 |
|                 | he |    |            | ught** |                 |
|                 | rs |    |            |        |                 |
|                 | n  |    |            |        |                 |
|                 | ot |    |            |        |                 |
|                 | H  |    |            |        |                 |
|                 | Q* |    |            |        |                 |
|                 | ** |    |            |        |                 |
+-----------------+----+----+------------+--------+-----------------+
| *Example:       | *  | *  | *Spanish I | *5*    | *This teacher   |
| Lincoln High    | 1* | 9- | and II*    |        | is highly       |
| School*         |    | 1  |            |        | qualified in    |
|                 |    | 2* |            |        | French and has  |
|                 |    |    |            |        | a waiver with   |
|                 |    |    |            |        | plan on file at |
|                 |    |    |            |        | KSDE for        |
|                 |    |    |            |        | Spanish.*       |
+-----------------+----+----+------------+--------+-----------------+
| *Example:       | *  | *9 | *Special   | *10*   | *1 teacher has  |
| Lincoln High    | 2* | -1 | Education* |        | a waiver.*      |
| School*         |    | 2* |            |        |                 |
|                 |    |    | *Math*     |        | *1 teacher is   |
|                 |    |    |            |        | completing SpEd |
|                 |    |    |            |        | checklist for   |
|                 |    |    |            |        | HQT*            |
+-----------------+----+----+------------+--------+-----------------+
|                 |    |    |            |        |                 |
+-----------------+----+----+------------+--------+-----------------+
|                 |    |    |            |        |                 |
+-----------------+----+----+------------+--------+-----------------+
|                 |    |    |            |        |                 |
+-----------------+----+----+------------+--------+-----------------+
|                 |    |    |            |        |                 |
+-----------------+----+----+------------+--------+-----------------+
|                 |    |    |            |        |                 |
+-----------------+----+----+------------+--------+-----------------+
|                 |    |    |            |        |                 |
+-----------------+----+----+------------+--------+-----------------+
|                 |    |    |            |        |                 |
+-----------------+----+----+------------+--------+-----------------+
|                 |    |    |            |        |                 |
+-----------------+----+----+------------+--------+-----------------+

**SUMMARY:**

**C. DISTRICT ACTIONS TO ASSIST TEACHERS BECOME HIGHLY QUALIFIED**: List
and describe the district's actions to ensure those teachers who are not
highly qualified become highly qualified by the end of the 2006-2007
school year. Refer to district report card data and list of not highly
qualified teachers to keep local needs in mind. (Insert additional rows
in the chart, as needed.)

+---------------------+-------------+---------+---------+-------------+
| **District          | **Person    | **Reso  | **Tim   | **How Will  |
| Strategies**        | Re          | urces** | eline** | Progress Be |
|                     | sponsible** |         |         | Monitored** |
|                     |             | **(Fund |         |             |
|                     |             | Source/ |         |             |
|                     |             | \$\$)** |         |             |
+---------------------+-------------+---------+---------+-------------+
| \*Appoint a         |             |         | \*Sept. |             |
| system-level        |             |         | 15,     |             |
| administrator as    |             |         | 2006    |             |
| the single          |             |         |         |             |
| point-of-contact    |             |         |         |             |
| who will work       |             |         |         |             |
| directly with       |             |         |         |             |
| teachers and with   |             |         |         |             |
| KSDE staff on       |             |         |         |             |
| "highly qualified"  |             |         |         |             |
| issues.             |             |         |         |             |
+---------------------+-------------+---------+---------+-------------+
| \*Consider (1)      |             |         |         |             |
| changing teacher    |             |         |         |             |
| assignments within  |             |         |         |             |
| a school, (2)       |             |         |         |             |
| within-school       |             |         |         |             |
| transfers, and (3)  |             |         |         |             |
| between-school      |             |         |         |             |
| transfers to have   |             |         |         |             |
| teachers highly     |             |         |         |             |
| qualified.          |             |         |         |             |
+---------------------+-------------+---------+---------+-------------+
| \*Conduct a meeting |             |         | \*By    |             |
| with each teacher   |             |         | Nov. 1, |             |
| who is not yet      |             |         | 2006    |             |
| highly qualified.   |             |         |         |             |
| Develop an          |             |         |         |             |
| individual action   |             |         |         |             |
| plan with each      |             |         |         |             |
| teacher.            |             |         |         |             |
+---------------------+-------------+---------+---------+-------------+
| \*Schedule and      |             |         |         |             |
| conduct periodic    |             |         |         |             |
| checks for          |             |         |         |             |
| completion of       |             |         |         |             |
| agreed-upon         |             |         |         |             |
| actions.            |             |         |         |             |
+---------------------+-------------+---------+---------+-------------+
| *(Add other         |             |         |         |             |
| actions, as         |             |         |         |             |
| appropriate.)*      |             |         |         |             |
+---------------------+-------------+---------+---------+-------------+
|                     |             |         |         |             |
+---------------------+-------------+---------+---------+-------------+
|                     |             |         |         |             |
+---------------------+-------------+---------+---------+-------------+
|                     |             |         |         |             |
+---------------------+-------------+---------+---------+-------------+

**\*** These actions are recommended; other actions may be added.

**D. DISTRICT ACTIONS TO ENSURE EQUITABLE DISTRIBUTION OF HIGHLY
QUALIFIED TEACHERS:** List and describe district actions to ensure that
poor and minority students and those in schools identified for
improvement are not taught by inexperienced, unqualified, or
out-of-field teachers at higher rates than other students. Complete
*Resources* column as appropriate. Refer to district report card data
and list of not highly qualified teachers to keep local needs in mind.
(Insert additional rows in the chart, as needed.)

+---------------------+-------------+---------+-----------------------+
| **District          | **Person    | **Reso  | **How Will Progress   |
| Strategies**        | Re          | urces** | Be Monitored**        |
|                     | sponsible** |         |                       |
|                     |             | **(Fund |                       |
|                     |             | Source/ |                       |
|                     |             | \$\$)** |                       |
+---------------------+-------------+---------+-----------------------+
| \*Consider (1)      |             |         |                       |
| changing teacher    |             |         |                       |
| assignments within  |             |         |                       |
| a school, (2)       |             |         |                       |
| within-school       |             |         |                       |
| transfers, and (3)  |             |         |                       |
| between-school      |             |         |                       |
| transfers to have   |             |         |                       |
| teachers highly     |             |         |                       |
| qualified.          |             |         |                       |
+---------------------+-------------+---------+-----------------------+
|                     |             |         |                       |
+---------------------+-------------+---------+-----------------------+
|                     |             |         |                       |
+---------------------+-------------+---------+-----------------------+
|                     |             |         |                       |
+---------------------+-------------+---------+-----------------------+
|                     |             |         |                       |
+---------------------+-------------+---------+-----------------------+
|                     |             |         |                       |
+---------------------+-------------+---------+-----------------------+
|                     |             |         |                       |
+---------------------+-------------+---------+-----------------------+
|                     |             |         |                       |
+---------------------+-------------+---------+-----------------------+

\*Example of one strategy to consider.

**E. DISTRICT ACTIONS TO ENSURE HIRING ONLY HIGHLY QUALIFIED TEACHERS:**
Indicate the district procedures or actions for recruiting and hiring
highly qualified teachers, i.e. signing bonuses. Also indicate the
actions taken should a teacher be hired who is not highly qualified.
Complete the *Resources* column as appropriate. (Expand the table to
include other actions, as needed.)

+-----------------------+-----------+-----------+---------------------+
| **District Action**   | **Person  | **Re      | **Comments /        |
|                       | Resp      | sources** | Notes**             |
|                       | onsible** |           |                     |
|                       |           | **(Fund   |                     |
|                       |           | Source/   |                     |
|                       |           | \$\$)**   |                     |
+-----------------------+-----------+-----------+---------------------+
| \* The district will  |           |           |                     |
| retain documentation  |           |           |                     |
| related to announcing |           |           |                     |
| the position, efforts |           |           |                     |
| to recruit highly     |           |           |                     |
| qualified candidates  |           |           |                     |
| for the position,     |           |           |                     |
| applications and      |           |           |                     |
| resumes received, and |           |           |                     |
| notes from            |           |           |                     |
| interviewing and      |           |           |                     |
| selecting the teacher |           |           |                     |
| for employment.       |           |           |                     |
+-----------------------+-----------+-----------+---------------------+
| \* The district will  |           |           |                     |
| keep on file a        |           |           |                     |
| mutually agreed upon  |           |           |                     |
| plan from the teacher |           |           |                     |
| to fulfill            |           |           |                     |
| requirements to       |           |           |                     |
| achieve highly        |           |           |                     |
| qualified status,     |           |           |                     |
| using the most        |           |           |                     |
| expedient option.     |           |           |                     |
+-----------------------+-----------+-----------+---------------------+
| \* The district will  |           |           |                     |
| ensure that the       |           |           |                     |
| teacher receives      |           |           |                     |
| support and           |           |           |                     |
| assistance necessary  |           |           |                     |
| to achieve the highly |           |           |                     |
| qualified designation |           |           |                     |
| as expediently as     |           |           |                     |
| possible.             |           |           |                     |
+-----------------------+-----------+-----------+---------------------+
| *Other actions:*      |           |           |                     |
+-----------------------+-----------+-----------+---------------------+
|                       |           |           |                     |
+-----------------------+-----------+-----------+---------------------+

**\*** These actions are highly recommended if teachers are not highly
qualified.

**F.** **DISTRICT ACTIONS TO RETAIN HIGHLY QUALIFIED TEACHERS:** List
and describe district actions to [retain]{.underline} highly qualified
teachers. All actions should be supported by the district's policies and
procedures for recruiting, hiring, inducting, and retaining highly
qualified teachers. Complete the *Resources* column as appropriate.

+-----------------------+-----------+-----------+---------------------+
| **District Action**   | **Person  | **Re      | **Comments /        |
|                       | Resp      | sources** | Notes**             |
|                       | onsible** |           |                     |
|                       |           | **(Fund   |                     |
|                       |           | Source/   |                     |
|                       |           | \$\$)**   |                     |
+-----------------------+-----------+-----------+---------------------+
|                       |           |           |                     |
+-----------------------+-----------+-----------+---------------------+
|                       |           |           |                     |
+-----------------------+-----------+-----------+---------------------+
|                       |           |           |                     |
+-----------------------+-----------+-----------+---------------------+
|                       |           |           |                     |
+-----------------------+-----------+-----------+---------------------+
|                       |           |           |                     |
+-----------------------+-----------+-----------+---------------------+