![](media/image1.png){width="3.5548611111111112in"
height="1.4277777777777778in"}

**Ohio's Teacher**

####### Equity Plan

**to ensure that poor and minority students are not being taught at
higher rates**

**than other children by inexperienced, unqualified and out-of-field
teachers**

**July 2006**

##### Ohio's Teacher Equity Plan

##### 

##### TABLE OF CONTENTS

**PART I: The Message is Clear: High Quality Teachers Make a Difference
in Student Learning**.................................\...4

What Does the Research Tell Us?

Ohio's Dual Focus: Accountability and Teacher Quality

Closing in on the Goal: 100% Highly Qualified Teachers

The Key to Equitable Teacher Distribution: Policy Coherence and Targeted
Strategies

**PART II:** **Examining the Data:** **Where, and to What Extent, do
Inequities in Teacher Assignments Exist in Ohio?**......\...\...\...9

Quantitative Data Analyses and Findings: District Level

Quantitative Data Analyses and Findings: School Level

Case Study Data Analyses and Findings: Ohio's Schools of Promise

**PART III: Ohio's Strategies to Ensure that Poor and Minority Students
are Not Being Taught at Higher Rates than**

**Other Children by Inexperienced, Unqualified and Out-of-Field
Teachers**.....................................\...\...\...\...\...13

> .

# Key Strategies

> **Key Strategy 1:** Increase the percentage of highly qualified
> teachers in Ohio to 100%
>
> **Key Strategy 2:** Continuously monitor the distribution patterns of
> Ohio's teachers to ensure that poor and minority students are not
> being taught at higher rates than other children by inexperienced,
> unqualified and out-of-field teachers
>
> ***Supporting Elements and
> Sub-Strategies***..............................................................................................15
>
> Element 1: Data and Reporting Systems
>
> Element 2: Teacher Preparation
>
> Element 3: Out-of-Field Teaching
>
> Element 4: Recruitment and Retention of Experienced Teachers
>
> Element 5: Professional Development
>
> Element 6: Specialized Knowledge and Skills
>
> Element 7: Working Conditions
>
> Element 8: New Compensation Systems
>
> Element 9: Policy Coherence

**PART IV: Ohio's Plan to Conduct Ongoing State-Level Monitoring of
Teacher Distribution Patterns in Local**

> **Education Agencies**
> ......\.........\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\........\...\...\.....36

#### 

#### **PART V: Appendices**\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\......\.......39 

####  Appendix A: A Proactive Partnership: Ohio and The Education Trust

Appendix B: References

> **PART I: The Message is Clear: High Quality Teachers Make a
> Difference in Student Learning**

## 

## What Does the Research Tell Us?

> If there is one clear message that has emerged from educational
> research, it is this: Teachers make a difference in student learning.
>
> Teachers matter most, and high quality teachers matter even more.
>
> Research on the critical importance of teachers is not new. Over the
> last 10 years, major studies show that the single most important
> factor in determining how much students learn is how much their
> teachers know -- their preparation and qualifications, content
> knowledge and teaching skill (The George Lucas Foundation, 2005).
> These high quality teachers have extensive teacher preparation,
> classroom experience, and in-depth knowledge of the subjects they
> teach. A 1999 review of policies in 50 states strongly suggests that
> the quality of teachers is directly related to improved student
> performance. In fact, students' backgrounds -- poverty level, language
> background and minority status -- are less influential in predicting
> achievement levels than the quality of the teaching force
> (Darling-Hammond, 1999). Researchers say that while schools can have
> powerful effects on achievement, variation in teacher quality has the
> most effect on how much a student achieves (Hanushek et al., 1998).
>
> The public agrees. In a 1998 poll, nine out of 10 Americans said the
> best way to improve student achievement is to provide a qualified
> teacher in every classroom (Haselkorn & Harris, 1998). A 2004 poll
> again confirmed that 91 percent of the American public and 90 percent
> of public school teachers believe teacher quality is most important --
> more than parental involvement, facilities, resources or the quality
> of school principals (Teaching Commission, 2004). Since the landmark
> 1996 report of the National Commission on Teaching and America's
> Future, *What Matters Most: Teaching for America's Future*, states and
> the public have been paying attention to the commission's findings,
> including:

-   What teachers know and can do is the most important influence on
    what students learn.

-   Recruiting, preparing and retaining good teachers is the central
    strategy for improving our schools.

-   School reform cannot succeed unless it focuses on creating the
    conditions in which teachers can teach, and teach well.

> The commission challenged states to provide a competent, caring
> teacher in every classroom by 2006.
>
> Since 2000, Ohio has steadily built a standards-based educational
> system that clarifies content standards in every subject and grade
> level, and which aligns curriculum, assessments and the accountability
> system to those standards. In addition, Ohio took steps to strengthen
> teacher quality and close achievement gaps in student performance with
> the establishment of the Governor's Commission on Teaching Success in
> 2001 (Governor's Commission on Teaching Success, 2003). The 46-member
> commission focused on four areas:

-   Clarifying expectations for teachers and principals;

-   Recruiting and retaining high-quality teachers and principals;

-   Preparing teachers and principals to succeed; and

-   Advancing the professional practice of teachers and principals.

> When the historic *No Child Left Behind* Act became federal law in
> 2002, accountability for the performance of all groups of students and
> the issue of highly qualified teachers rose to the forefront of the
> nation's education agenda. States began to re-examine their policies
> and practices to ensure that all children are provided the opportunity
> to obtain a high quality education. Fortunately, Ohio was already well
> on its way to building a comprehensive educational system focused on
> two key areas: accountability and teacher quality*.*
>
> ***Ohio's Dual Focus: Accountability and Teacher Quality***
>
> When we ask what our children should know and be able to do, we also
> must ask: What should our educators know and be able to do? Ohio's
> focus on accountability and teacher quality addresses both questions.
>
> Within six months of the enactment of NCLB, Ohio's new accountability
> system merged the state system of rating school districts and schools
> based on student performance with the NCLB requirements, creating an
> accountability system that will allow the state to realize its vision:
> *Higher achievement for all* (Ohio Department of Education, 2004b).
> This accountability system rates Ohio school districts and schools as
> Excellent, Effective, Continuous Improvement, Academic Watch and
> Academic Emergency, merging the federal Adequate Yearly Progress
> standards for students in various demographic groups within this
> framework (Ohio Department of Education, 2005a).
>
> Ohio's proactive efforts in the areas of accountability and teacher
> quality have not gone unnoticed. Education Week's annual *Quality
> Counts* report on standards-based education in the states has
> consistently recognized Ohio's standards and accountability system as
> one of the strongest in the nation (Education Week, 1996-2005). For
> the third year in a row, Ohio earned a grade of "B" for the quality of
> its teachers, ranking Ohio among the top 10 states in the country for
> the progress that has been made in improving the caliber of teachers.
> The report commended content testing requirements for middle and high
> school teachers, the use of the Praxis III entry-year program for new
> teachers, and accountability for teacher education programs (Education
> Week, 2006).
>
> With the standards-based system in place, Ohio's students are
> achieving at higher levels than ever before, with increases in the
> average of students' scores on state tests and improved graduation
> rates for seven years in a row. And yet, annual state results show
> significant and troubling gaps in the achievement of all students,
> especially students of color and those from low-income communities
> (Ohio Department of Education, 2005b).
>
> In 2003, the State Board of Education's Task Force on Closing
> Achievement Gaps recommended that the state set clear standards for
> teachers and administrators, improve professional development and the
> sharing of best practices, and address issues of quality teachers and
> principals in high-need, hard-to-staff schools (Ohio State Board of
> Education, 2003). In addition, the Governor's Commission on Teaching
> Success called for the establishment of an Educator Standards Board to
> develop standards for teachers, principals and professional
> development (Educator Standards Board, 2004). The teacher quality
> standards focus on:

-   **Students:** Teachers understand student learning and development,
    and respect the diversity of the students they teach.

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   **Content:** Teachers know and understand the content area for which
    they have instructional responsibility.

-   **Assessment:** Teachers understand and use varied assessments to
    inform instruction, evaluate and ensure student learning.

-   **Instruction:** Teachers plan and deliver effective instruction
    that advances the learning of each individual student.

-   **Learning Environment:** Teachers create learning environments that
    promote high levels of learning and achievement for all students.

-   **Collaboration and Communication:** Teachers collaborate and
    communicate with other educators, administrators, students and
    parents and the community to support student learning.

-   **Professional Responsibility and Growth:** Teachers assume
    responsibility for professional growth, performance, and involvement
    as an individual and as a member of a learning community.

> Ohio now is in the process of implementing these new standards for
> teachers, as well as new standards for principals and for the
> professional development of all educators.
>
> ***Closing in on the Goal: 100% Highly Qualified Teachers***
>
> Ohio's new standards for teachers, principals and professional
> development provide a solid framework for a coherent, aligned system
> to improve educator quality. Ohio's State Board of Education has shown
> its commitment to ensuring that all of Ohio's 120,000 classroom
> teachers, and the thousands of administrators in the state, have the
> knowledge and skills they need to help *every* student reach
> challenging academic standards. NCLB, as well, emphasizes the
> importance of teacher quality and requires that all teachers be highly
> qualified (HQT) by the 2006-2007 school year.
>
> Ohio is well positioned to meet this NCLB requirement. Across the
> state, 94.4 percent of core academic courses are taught by teachers
> who meet the federal definition of a highly qualified teacher. In
> addition, more than 53 percent of Ohio's teachers have at least a
> master's degree, and 98.4 percent are fully credentialed in the
> subject they teach.
>
> *But 94.4 percent isn't good enough*. Ohio's goal is to have a highly
> qualified teacher in every classroom for every student -- regardless
> of race or ethnicity, socioeconomic status, gender, disability or
> English language proficiency. To meet that goal, the state provides a
> number of opportunities for Ohio teachers to meet the federal
> definition of highly qualified in the core subjects of mathematics,
> science, language arts/reading and social studies, including free
> online courses and college and university workshops. In addition, the
> state's 16 Special Education Regional Resource Centers provide
> resources for secondary special education teachers to become high
> qualified. The Ohio Department of Education also has formed
> partnerships with Ohio's large urban school districts to produce
> in-house workshops, which are supported by Title I federal funds.
> These continuing efforts, as well as summer workshops now in session,
> will assist in ensuring all Ohio teachers meet federal requirements.
>
> Ohio is on track to meet the NCLB requirement that 100 percent of its
> teachers be HQT by the 2006-2007 school year. Now, Ohio is focusing on
> an additional new challenge -- ensuring the equitable distribution of
> its best teachers.
>
> ***The Key to Equitable Teacher Distribution: Coherent Policies and
> Aligned Strategies***
>
> There's no question that Ohio has unacceptable gaps in student
> achievement, especially between blacks and whites as well as
> low-income and higher-income students. Unfortunately, Ohio's own
> research shows that often the children in high-need schools who need
> the most experienced, most educated, most skilled teachers get the
> least effective educators (Driscoll & Fleeter, 2005). Ohio's Teacher
> Equity Plan is focused on closing both the gaps in student achievement
> *and* the gaps in teacher quality.
>
> Ohio's research contributed to the basis for a national study on
> teaching inequality (Peske & Haycock, 2006). In 2004, Ohio, Illinois
> and Wisconsin partnered with The Education Trust to identify the
> extent of any inequitable distribution in teachers across each state.
> Over the course of this two-year project, Ohio conducted a
> comprehensive, multidimensional review of the distribution of teacher
> characteristics across different kinds of students and schools, with a
> focus on the distribution of teachers to low-performing, high-need
> schools and districts. This Teacher Equity Plan reports those results
> for Ohio, and the national report, *Teaching* *Inequality: How Poor
> and Minority Students Are Shortchanged on Teacher Quality*, gives a
> glimpse into the pervasiveness of inequitable distribution for poor
> and minority students in the Midwest (Peske & Haycock, 2006).
>
> But there's no single solution to the equitable distribution of the
> best teachers in Ohio and across our nation. As co-author Heather
> Peske says, "Accountability by itself doesn't improve student
> achievement. Expectations and standards are important, but nothing is
> more important than the quality of the classroom teacher" (Peske &
> Haycock, 2006). Why we don't have the best and brightest teachers in
> our high-need schools is a highly complex problem that not only
> relates to how we attract educators to the field and how we prepare
> them in teacher education colleges, but to the retention of those
> teachers in the classroom. According to the National Council for
> Accreditation of Teacher Education, almost a third of all new teachers
> leave the classroom after three years and close to 50 percent after
> five years (2003). Most leave because of low salaries and poor working
> conditions. Unfortunately, students in high-need school districts
> suffer the most. Teacher turnover, budget cuts and layoffs, and a
> shortage of teachers in mathematics, science and special education --
> all these factors affect high-needs schools and students in Ohio.
>
> To more equitably distribute the best and brightest teachers, Ohio has
> developed this Teacher Equity Plan under the umbrella that all
> teachers should have access to a lifelong resource system from the
> time they enter teaching until they retire. The plan presents a
> comprehensive set of 68 strategies, organized around nine supportive
> elements, that clearly demonstrate Ohio's *good faith effort* to
> improve the distribution of its most effective teachers. These
> supportive elements include:
>
> **Element 1:** Data and Reporting Systems
>
> **Element 2**: Teacher Preparation
>
> **Element 3:** Out-of-Field Teaching
>
> **Element 4:** Recruitment and Retention of Experienced Teachers
>
> **Element 5:** Professional Development
>
> **Element 6:** Specialized Knowledge and Skills
>
> **Element 7:** Working Conditions
>
> **Element 8:** New Compensation Systems
>
> **Element 9:** Policy Coherence
>
> Developing policies and strategies, however, is not enough. Ohio is
> ready and poised to move from recommending strategies to taking
> action. The time is right for Ohio's educational system to provide
> every child with a competent, caring, and highly qualified teacher.
>
> ***The plan is in place and the work is underway.***

PART II: Examining the Data: Where, and to What Extent, do Inequities in
Teacher Assignments Exist in Ohio?

Educators and policymakers at all levels of Ohio's educational system
know that good data are needed to make good decisions. Before the state
began developing a plan of action to improve the distribution of its
most effective teachers, researchers were enlisted to conduct a
comprehensive data review. Their charge? To answer one key question:
**Where, and to what extent, do inequities in teacher assignments exist
in Ohio?**

***Ohio's Quantitative Data Analyses***

Ohio researchers worked within the parameters established by the state's
recently completed two-year partnership project with The Education Trust
(see Appendix A). Over the course of the project, extensive
district-level and school-level quantitative analyses of the
distribution of teacher characteristics across different kinds of
students were conducted, with a targeted focus on the distribution of
teachers to the state's low-performing, high-need schools. The
researchers examined several measures of teacher quality within every
school: highly qualified status for all teachers, highly qualified
status for mathematics and science teachers, inexperience and
educational attainment. Teacher quality data were then compared to
school demographic variables \-- the percentage of low-income students
and the percentage of minority students (Driscoll & Fleeter, 2005).[^1]

Major findings from the district-level and school-level quantitative
data analyses indicate that some inequitable distribution of highly
qualified teachers exists in Ohio as outlined below:

**Major Findings from Quantitative Analysis of District-Level Teacher,
School and Student Characteristics**

-   Major urban, high poverty districts have significantly fewer highly
    qualified teachers than the state average

-   Lower achieving districts employ fewer highly qualified teachers

-   Districts with larger percentages of minority students employ fewer
    highly qualified teachers

-   No significant differences were found at the district level with
    regard to "years of experience" of Ohio's teachers

**Major Findings from Quantitative Analysis of School-Level Teacher,
School and Student Characteristics**

-   A higher percentage of teachers who are *not* considered to be
    "Highly Qualified" is correlated with the following:

> 1\) Lower rating on School Report Card; particularly Academic
> Emergency schools

2\) Higher percentage of students in poverty in the school --
particularly \> 90%

3\) Lower percentage of students who are white or Asian -- particularly
\< 20%

-   Analysis of patterns of teacher experience found little relationship
    to school variables

-   Contrary to conventional wisdom, the percentage of inexperienced
    teachers (3 years or less) does not appear to be correlated with
    school report card rating, percent poverty, or student racial
    composition. In some cases, the relationship is the *opposite* of
    what might be expected.

-   These patterns are apparent across Ohio's elementary schools, middle
    schools, and high schools[^2]

***Case Study Data Analyses: Ohio's Schools of Promise***

Wherever the level of achievement of state standards differs among
demographic groups, there is an achievement gap. In Ohio, gaps are
evident in academic achievement based on race or ethnicity,
socioeconomic status, gender, disability, and English language
proficiency. However, gaps in academic achievement are less an
indication of the characteristics or abilities of students than they are
an indication of the quality of teaching and learning provided by
schools. This can be said because there are schools in Ohio that are
getting all demographic groups of students to achieve proficiency, even
when the school has large percentages of students in poverty. These
schools are called *Schools of Promise*. They prove that achievement
gaps can be eliminated and that all students can achieve Ohio's
challenging academic standards.

Ohio's Schools of Promise demonstrate high achievement in reading and
mathematics for all groups of students, despite the fact that 40 percent
or more of these students come from low-income backgrounds. Students in
these schools met or exceeded the state standard of 75 percent passage
in reading or mathematics, or both.

In 2005, State Superintendent Susan Tave Zelman said "Our *Schools of
Promise* prove that students can meet and exceed high standards and
expectations, no matter where they live or how wealthy their families
are. Good teaching, committed leadership and a positive school culture
can help all students succeed."

The Schools of Promise program promotes a variety of efforts to make
schools and the general public aware of the potential of educators to
close achievement gaps, including:

-   Annually identifying schools that meet or exceed specific student
    performance and diversity criteria and awarding each school with a
    banner that identifies it as a School of Promise     

-   Conducting case-study research on the effective instructional
    practices and cultural qualities of Schools of Promise to assemble a
    compilation of the best practices of these successful schools

-   Creating resources based upon findings from the research for
    educators and administrators who are interested in improving student
    achievement for all populations of students in their schools

The Ohio Department of Education continues to conduct case study
analyses on the best practices in these schools to use in school
improvement efforts and technical assistance to low-performing schools
across the state. During the 2005-2006 school year, a collaborative
effort between Ohio's *Schools of Promise* program and Ohio's
partnership project with The Education Trust resulted in a sub-set of
case study research being focused on the analysis of teacher
characteristics in eight *Schools of Promise* and the role that teachers
play in these high-performing schools. 

**Major Findings from Case Study Analyses of Teacher Characteristics in
Eight of Ohio's Schools of Promise**

In the elementary schools studied, preliminary findings show that a high
percentage of teachers were *both* highly qualified and experienced
(over 10 year of teaching experience). The average years of experience
for all eight schools was 16.7, and more than half of the teachers hold
master's degrees. Researchers also found high levels of teacher
commitment, leadership and collaboration. For instance, teachers
established strong relationships with colleagues and students,
participated as teacher leaders in decision-making, and collaborated
with one another on professional development. Researchers also found
positive school cultures and climates in these *Schools of Promise*
(Ohio Department of Education, 2006).

**Case Study Analysis Findings: Elementary Schools of Promise (2004-2005
Data)**

-   In three out of four of the elementary *Schools of Promise* studied,
    100 percent of the teachers were highly qualified. In the fourth
    elementary schools, 95 percent of the teachers were highly
    qualified.

-   The average overall "years of experience" of the teachers in the
    four elementary Schools of Promise was 16 years.

**Elementary School Case Studies: Summary of Teacher Characteristics**

  --------------------- -------------- ------------ ------------ -----------
  **2004-2005**         **Brickell**   **Conrad**   **Maple      **Noble**
                                                    Leaf**       

  **Teachers**          12             12           27           19

  **Percent of Highly   100%           95%          100%         100%
  Qualified Teachers**                                           

  **Teacher Attendance  96.8%          97.6%        94.9%        96.5%
  Rate**                                                         

  **Average Years of    16.7           13.7         14.0         20.3
  Experience**                                                   

  **Percent of Teachers 70%            43%          84%          40%
  with Master's                                                  
  Degrees**                                                      
  --------------------- -------------- ------------ ------------ -----------

**Case Study Analysis Findings: Secondary Schools of Promise (2004-2005
Data)**

-   The average percentage of highly qualified teachers in the four
    secondary *Schools of Promise* was 85 percent.

-   The average overall "years of experience" of the teachers in the
    four secondary *Schools of Promise* was 17 years.

**Secondary School Case Studies: Summary of Teacher Characteristics**

  --------------------- ---------------- ------------ --------------- -------------
  **2004-2005**         **Centennial**   **Meigs**    **Struthers**   **Withrow**

  **Teachers**          50               50           38              50

  **Percent of Highly   97%              77%          80%             87%
  Qualified Teachers**                                                

  **Teacher Attendance  97%              95%          94%             95%
  Rate**                                                              

  **Average Years of    19.2             22.0         18.0            9.6
  Experience**                                                        

  **Percent of Teachers 77%              49%          66%             56%
  with Master's                                                       
  Degrees**                                                           
  --------------------- ---------------- ------------ --------------- -------------

PART III: Ohio's Strategies to Ensure that Poor and Minority Students
are Not Being Taught at Higher Rates than Other Children by
Inexperienced, Unqualified and Out-of-Field Teachers

Ohio's Teacher Equity Plan is built upon two *key strategies.* These key
strategies are (1) based on the major findings from Ohio's quantitative
and qualitative data analyses, and (2) targeted on identifying,
correcting and monitoring any inequitable distribution of the state's
highly qualified, experienced teachers:

**Key Strategy 1:** Increase the percentage of highly qualified teachers
in Ohio to 100%

> **Key Strategy 2:** Continuously monitor the distribution patterns of
> Ohio's teachers to ensure that poor and minority students are not
> being taught at higher rates than other children by inexperienced,
> unqualified and out-of-field teachers

Supporting Ohio's two key strategies is a comprehensive set of 68
sub-strategies, organized around nine supportive elements, that clearly
demonstrate Ohio's *good faith effort* to ensure that poor and minority
children are not being taught at higher rates than other children by
inexperienced, unqualified and out-of-field teachers. The 68
sub-strategies are the result of findings from Ohio's district- and
school-level quantitative data analyses, Schools of Promise case study
research, the expertise of The Education Trust partnership project's
working group and national research on teacher quality.

Ohio took a targeted and careful approach in developing this
comprehensive set of strategies. Recognizing that too often states
develop strategies that aren't refined enough to meet the real staffing
and teacher quality distribution issues of their school districts, two
key criteria guided the development of Ohio's Teacher Equity Plan:

> **Criteria 1:** Ensure that the 68 strategies are *targeted* on
> improving the distribution of effective teachers in Ohio's *high-need*
>
> *schools*, and
>
> **Criteria 2:** Ensure that the strategies are aligned with Ohio's
> long-term strategic education goals and policy environment.

**Ohio's Two Key Strategies to Correct Any Inequities in**

**Teacher Distribution as Evidenced by Data Analyses Findings**

+-----------------------------+-------------------+--------------------+
| **Data Analyses Findings**  | **Key             | **Progress         |
|                             | Strategies**      | Measures; Public   |
|                             |                   | Reporting; SEA     |
|                             |                   | Monitoring**       |
+-----------------------------+-------------------+--------------------+
| **DISTRICT LEVEL**          | **KEY STRATEGY 1: | **Key Strategy 1   |
|                             | Increase the      | Measure:**         |
| -   Major urban, high       | percentage of     | Percentage of      |
|     poverty districts have  | Ohio's highly     | highly qualified   |
|     significantly fewer     | qualified         | teachers in Ohio's |
|     highly qualified        | teachers to       | Academic           |
|     teachers than the state | 100%**            | Emergency,         |
|     average                 |                   | Academic Watch and |
|                             | **KEY STRATEGY 2: | School Improvement |
| -   Lower achieving         | Continuously      | schools (schools   |
|     districts employ fewer  | monitor, the      | not meeting AYP)   |
|     highly qualified        | distribution      |                    |
|     teachers                | patterns of       | **Publicly Report  |
|                             | Ohio's effective  | Progress:** Ohio's |
| -   Districts with larger   | teachers to       | Supply & Demand    |
|     percentages of minority | ensure that poor  | Report             |
|     students employ fewer   | and minority      | (Bi-annual), State |
|     highly qualified        | students are not  | Report Card, Local |
|     teachers                | being taught at   | Report Cards       |
|                             | higher rates than |                    |
| -   No significant          | other children by | **SEA              |
|     differences were found  | inexperienced,    | Monitoring:**      |
|     at the district level   | unqualified and   |                    |
|     with regard to "years   | out-of-field      | The Ohio           |
|     of experience" of       | teachers**        | Department of      |
|     Ohio's teachers         |                   | Education informs  |
|                             |                   | each school        |
| **SCHOOL LEVEL**            |                   | district, on an    |
|                             |                   | annual basis, of   |
| -   A higher percentage of  |                   | its progress       |
|     teachers who are not    |                   | toward reaching    |
|     considered to be        |                   | the goal of 100    |
|     "Highly Qualified" is   |                   | percent of         |
|     correlated with the     |                   | teachers being     |
|     following:              |                   | highly qualified   |
|                             |                   |                    |
|     1.  Lower rating on     |                   | (See PART IV)      |
|         School Report Card; |                   |                    |
|         particularly        |                   | **Key Strategy 2   |
|         Academic Emergency  |                   | Measure:**         |
|         schools             |                   | Percentage of      |
|                             |                   | highly qualified   |
|     2.  Higher percentage   |                   | teachers in Ohio's |
|         of students in      |                   | districts/schools, |
|         poverty in the      |                   | particularly       |
|         school --           |                   | urban, high        |
|         particularly \> 90% |                   | poverty, and       |
|                             |                   | low-achieving      |
|     3.  Lower percentage of |                   | schools            |
|         students who are    |                   |                    |
|         white or Asian --   |                   | **Publicly Report  |
|         particularly \< 20% |                   | Progress:** State  |
|                             |                   | Report Card, Local |
| ```{=html}                  |                   | Report Cards       |
| <!-- -->                    |                   |                    |
| ```                         |                   | **SEA              |
| -   Analysis of patterns of |                   | Monitoring:**      |
|     teacher experience      |                   | Ohio's data and    |
|     found little            |                   | reporting systems  |
|     relationship to school  |                   | track educator     |
|     variables               |                   | data over time for |
|                             |                   | the purposes of    |
| ```{=html}                  |                   | analyzing supply   |
| <!-- -->                    |                   | and demand trends, |
| ```                         |                   | demographics,      |
| -   Contrary to             |                   | distribution,      |
|     conventional wisdom,    |                   | mobility and       |
|     the percentage of       |                   | experience; and    |
|     inexperienced teachers  |                   | informing the      |
|     (3 years or less) does  |                   | development of     |
|     not appear to be        |                   | policies to        |
|     correlated with school  |                   | address any        |
|     report card rating,     |                   | inequities in the  |
|     percent poverty, or     |                   | distribution of    |
|     student racial          |                   | teacher quality    |
|     composition. In some    |                   |                    |
|     cases, the relationship |                   |                    |
|     is the *opposite* of    |                   |                    |
|     what might be expected. |                   |                    |
|                             |                   |                    |
|     -   These patterns are  |                   |                    |
|         apparent across     |                   |                    |
|         Ohio's elementary   |                   |                    |
|         schools, middle     |                   |                    |
|         schools, and high   |                   |                    |
|         schools             |                   |                    |
+-----------------------------+-------------------+--------------------+

## Supporting Elements and Sub-Strategies

**ELEMENT 1: Data and Reporting Systems**

Evidence for the probable success of Element 1 sub-strategies to develop
the teacher data and reporting systems needed to identify and correct
any inequities in teacher distribution

State departments of education across the country are becoming
increasingly aware of the importance of *high quality* data and
reporting systems. Such systems provide the critical information
educators at the state, district and school level need to make informed
decisions about policies and practices that will lead to higher student
achievement.  

The analysis of data is one of the key components of the federal *No
Child Left Behind* (NCLB) Act. This legislation requires every state to
collect data on public schools and districts and to establish annual
achievement goals based on that data. NCLB requires that state data
systems provide information about the qualifications of teachers and the
achievement levels of different groups of students to educators, parents
and stakeholders. The legislation also requires states and school
districts to publicly report on the distribution of highly qualified and
experienced teachers.

Ohio has put into place the appropriate data and reporting systems to
meet all federal legislative data requirements. In 2000, before NCLB
became law, Ohio launched its Local Report Card system to give
information to parents, educators, and the public about how well its
schools are performing and to initiate dialogue on improving education.
Feedback from educators around the state contributed to an enhanced
accountability system in 2003 that combined state requirements with
those of the federal *No Child Left Behind Act*. That same year,
President Bush and the U.S. Secretary of Education recognized Ohio as
one of five states that had won early approval of an accountability plan
aligned to federal goals. Education Week's *Quality Counts* report on
standards-based education consistently has recognized Ohio's
accountability system as one of the strongest in the nation.

Since 2003, Ohio has continued to make improvements to its data and
reporting systems by streamlining the data exchange between schools and
the state, establishing a system to track individual student progress
over time, creating a comprehensive school district planning tool that
links funding with school improvement goals, and developing a statewide
resource system so educators can make data-driven decisions to improve
teaching and learning. A key upgrade to date is the development of
value-added measurements that will give students, parent and educators a
more in-depth understanding of the factors influencing student
improvement over time.

Ohio's data systems collect and report information on a comprehensive
set of data elements related to the characteristics of its teaching
force, including the percentage of highly qualified teachers in every
school. As a testament to the quality of this system, the U. S.
Department of Education showcased Ohio's process for determining Highly
Qualified Teacher (HQT) status, and for gathering and reporting HQT
data, at four national meetings this past year. Ohio's systems track
educator data over time for the purpose of analyzing supply and demand
trends, demographics, distribution, mobility and compensation; and to
inform the development of appropriate policies to address any inequities
in the distribution of teacher quality across the state.

## Element 1: Ohio's Data and Reporting Systems Sub-Strategies 

1\. 1 Collect and publicly report data on the distribution of teacher
talent including the percentage of highly qualified teachers in each
core subject area and the percentage of highly qualified teachers in
schools not meeting Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP)

1\. 2 Collect data on teachers' certificates/licenses held; Enable
educators, parents and other stakeholders to review up-to-date
information on the credentials of their schools' teachers and leaders
and the achievement levels of various groups of students through a
web-based data system

1\. 3 Collect and publicly report data that describe patterns of teacher
turnover and mobility, specifically in high-need schools

1\. 4 Advocate for the development of a data system that reports the
number of teachers changing *schools* within their district, changing
*positions* within their district, *moving* to other districts or into
administration, or *leaving* the profession

1\. 5 Collect data related to teachers' perceptions about working
conditions associated with high teacher turnover including time,
facilities and resources, leadership and professional development

1\. 6 Monitor, on an ongoing basis, the specific staffing needs of
Ohio's schools through the generation of data reports that identify
subject and location area shortages

1\. 7 Utilize and continuously improve a web-based recruitment system
that matches districts' teaching vacancies with prospective teachers

1\. 8 Develop and implement a data system that is able to link teacher
qualifications to student achievement (value added data); Use the
value-added data to reliably measure students' individual progress and
to determine the impact of educational, instructional and program
practices on student achievement. \[Note: By the 2007-2008 school year,
Ohio will have a statewide information bank on value-added data.\]

**Spotlight Strategy**

**\[Strategy 1.8\]** The Ohio Accountability Task Force recently
presented its recommendations to the State Board of Education regarding
the growth standard for value-added measurement and the incorporation of
value-added into Ohio's accountability system. These recommendations
will serve as input to the State Board of Education as rules are adopted
during the 2006-2007 school year for the implementation of value-added.

To prepare for the implementation of value-added as part of Ohio's
accountability system, the Ohio Department of Education (ODE) secured a
two-year contract with the SAS Institute to calculate the value-added
measures and produce value-added reports for each school and district in
Ohio. Partnering with Battelle for Kids, ODE sponsored a series of
regional meetings to train and provide toolkits to each of the state's
80 Regional Value-Added Specialists. These individuals will provide
training to district personnel on how to use the measure to improve
student achievement.

## ELEMENT 2: Teacher Preparation 

## Evidence for the probable success of Element 2 sub-strategies to build a pipeline of prospective teachers for high-poverty, low-performing schools

In 2002, Ohio's Governor's Commission on Teaching Success issued a
report calling for the development of clear expectations for what
teachers should know and be able to do. In response to that call, Ohio
recently completed the development of new teacher standards. These
standards define the skills educators need to diagnose and respond to
the individual learning needs of the state's highly mobile students,
students with minimal reading skills, students with limited parental
support, students with limited proficiency in English, students with
disabilities and the vast array of students with other specific learning
needs.

All of Ohio's teacher preparation programs are required by law to align
to these new teacher standards. The Ohio Department of Education's
framework for reviewing, evaluating and accrediting teacher preparation
programs is aligned with the standards for teachers and considers
performance outcomes as well as the process standards that currently
define the accreditation framework.

Because teachers require certain knowledge and skills to be effective in
helping *all* students reach high academic standards*,* Ohio assesses
every teacher candidate in both content knowledge and pedagogy skills.
Research shows that fully prepared teachers with background knowledge of
pedagogy are better able to recognize individual student needs and
customize instruction to increase overall student achievement. Studies
have consistently found positive effects of teachers' formal education
training on supervisory ratings and student learning. The more methods
course in a teacher's preparation program, the more likely the teacher
is to emphasize conceptual understanding and hand-on learning techniques
in the classroom (Ohio Department of Education, 2003).[^3]

In addition to the incorporation of Ohio's new teacher standards into
preparation programs, all institutions of higher education are required
to do the following:

-   Be accountable for the performance of their graduates

-   Maintain strong, rigorous standards for teacher education that are
    aligned with Ohio's teacher standards and academic

> content standards

-   Align their curriculum with the most recent scientifically-based
    research and scholarly study

-   Assess progress and competencies for each teacher candidate

-   Maintain strong standards for accreditation and high expectations
    for new teachers

-   Focus on results and outcomes

-   Conduct data analyses and use findings to improve their programs

-   Identify the intervention strategies and instructional practices
    that will help candidates become successful new teachers

-   Incorporate cultural competency in designing education programs as
    well as address the relational skills essential to working

> with students and families from the vast array of cultures and
> backgrounds represented in Ohio

Strengthening teacher education programs' accountability for the
performance of their graduates has been a key component of Ohio's
efforts to improve educator preparation. The Ohio Department of
Education and the Ohio Board of Regents are working collaboratively with
institutions of higher education to expand the performance measures
contained in the annual Report on the Quality of Teacher Education in
Ohio to ensure that the standards driving the state's teacher-education
programs place more emphasis on results, not just on inputs.

## Element 2: Ohio's Teacher Preparation Sub-Strategies

2\. 1 Create new teacher standards and ensure that the new standards
serve as the foundation for preparing all of Ohio's teachers

2\. 2 Develop an annual report on the quality of teacher education in
Ohio that provides data on passing rates and the number and
specialization of teachers produced by each institution of higher
education; Expand the performance measures contained in the annual
report

2\. 3 Strengthen the collaboration between the Ohio Department of
Education and the Ohio Board of Regents to address the over-supply and
under-supply of teachers in certain subject areas and types of
districts; Explore imposing ceiling caps to manage the over-supply of
teachers in some areas and the possible use of financial incentives to
colleges and universities that recruit, graduate and place teachers in
shortage areas

2\. 4 Advocate for the establishment of goals for each institution of
higher education related to the number of graduates in high-need
subjects and based on the staffing needs of Ohio's high-need schools

2\. 5 Expand the number of Ohio's Charter Colleges of Education that are
based on an apprenticeship approach to teacher preparation and designed
to meet the specific staffing shortages of partnering high-need school
districts

2\. 6 Advocate for the establishment of state college loan forgiveness
programs to channel prospective teachers toward schools that have
difficulty attracting sufficient numbers of qualified teachers; Provide
up-to-date information on available federal loan forgiveness programs to
prospective teachers

2\. 7 Require teacher preparation programs to include *cultural
competence* in their curriculum to help new teachers understand and
appreciate the students, families and communities that they serve

2\. 8 Conduct research on the link between teacher preparation and
student performance. Use student achievement data to systematically
identify what works in teacher preparation and how to improve the
state's teacher preparation programs

**Spotlight Strategy**

**\[Strategy 2. 8\]** Launched in 2003, Ohio's Teacher Quality
Partnership is a comprehensive, longitudinal study of the preparation,
in-school support and effectiveness of Ohio teachers. As a research
consortium of Ohio\'s 50 colleges and universities providing teacher
preparation programs, the partnership is identifying how the preparation
and development of new teachers affect their success in the classroom as
measured by the academic performance of their students. In Ohio,
value-added assessment of student learning gains is becoming well
established, and the legislature recently passed a law requiring these
academic growth measures to be part of the state's school performance
index by 2007. Ohio's two teacher unions, the OEA and OFT support the
goals of the Teacher Quality Partnership, which will not report on
individual districts, teachers or programs.

## ELEMENT 3: Out-of-Field Teaching 

Evidence for the probable success of Element 3 sub-strategies to reduce
the incidence of out-of-field teaching (particularly in mathematics,
science, special education & bilingual education/English as a Second
Language) in high-poverty, low-performing schools

According to the National Commission on Teaching & America's Future,
national statistics over the past decade indicate that more than
one-fourth of teachers have entered the profession without having fully
met state licensing standards. Twelve percent of new teachers held no
license at all while another 15 percent worked under temporary,
provisional or emergency licenses (National Commission on Teaching &
America's Future, 1996).

Furthermore, about a third of America's teachers each year teach at
least one class a day for which they have not been trained. These
teachers are teaching "out-of-field." The problem with out-of-field
teaching, according to Richard Ingersoll, is that it is more likely to
be found in schools with high-poverty rates, high minority populations,
and low-achieving students (Ingersoll, 1996).

Consider these national statistics:

-   Just 41 percent of eighth-grade math teachers majored in math in
    college. That\'s 30 percentage points lower than the international
    average

-   In English, one-fifth of all public school students in grades seven
    through twelve were taught by teachers who did not have at least a
    minor in English literature, communications or journalism

-   In history and physical science, more than half of America\'s
    students are being taught by a teacher who has never studied the
    subject in any concentrated way

-   That\'s more than four million students in physics, chemistry and
    history classes every day with teachers lacking preparation for
    teaching their subjects

Source: United States Department of Education Web-site

Strong content knowledge has been consistently identified by researchers
as an essential element of effective teaching. Students perform better
when teachers have majored in the subject area they are teaching.
Teachers with a major or minor in a content area are associated with
higher student achievement, especially in areas of secondary science and
mathematics. Several studies have indicated that teachers with greater
subject matter knowledge use high-level questioning, engage students
more in discovery and have more student centered classrooms (Ohio
Department of Education, 2003).

Ohio has implemented a variety of strategies to monitor, publicly report
and reduce the incidence of out-of-field teaching, especially in
high-poverty, low-performing schools including eliminating temporary
licenses, expanding alternative routes into teaching, developing a
database to track out-of-field teachers, and providing professional
development opportunities for teachers to achieve highly qualified
teacher status.

A key goal of the Ohio Department of Education's current strategic plan
is to remove barriers into the teaching profession. To meet that goal,
the state encourages mid-career professionals to seek alternative
teacher certification and licensure in high-need areas and has expanded
accelerated, intensive licensure programs for those education
professionals looking to teach in the high-need subject areas. Research
shows that alternative pathways represent a valuable resource for
expanding the pool of prospective teachers, especially in mathematics
and science. The use of alternative pathways into the teaching
profession has grown each year with an estimated 80,000 people across
the country having become licensed to teach through such pathways (The
Pew Charitable Trusts & Education Week, 2000a).

Ohio has established a Credential Review Board to assess
alternative-route candidates' -- as well as out-of-state teachers' --
attainment of Ohio's teaching standards. The Board also helps teacher
candidates develop individualized plans for acquiring the skills they
need to earn licensure in Ohio.

Regardless of the route an individual takes to enter a classroom,
*Ohio's position is clear*. Established state standards for performance
must be met and all candidates must pass the same assessments, such as
Praxis II and Praxis III, before they are licensed to teach.

## Element 3: Ohio's Out-of-Field Teaching Sub-Strategies

3\. 1 End the temporary licensing of teachers in Ohio

3\. 2 Publicly report up-to-date information on teacher
certificates/licenses held and notify districts when teachers are not
properly credentialed in the subjects they are assigned to teach

3\. 3 Develop and implement a Revised HQT Plan that outlines state
initiatives to ensure that 100% of Ohio's teachers will be highly
qualified by the 2006-2007 school year; Provide a variety of
professional development opportunities for teachers to become highly
qualified

3\. 4 Expand high-quality alternative routes into the profession to
allow individuals with relevant expertise in hard-to-fill subjects to
enter the profession; Ensure that *all* routes into teaching and the
principalship are high quality and standards based

3\. 5 Streamline licensing and certification procedures

3\. 6 Provide stipends to teachers for teaching mathematics, science or
special education in schools that have been identified as hard-to-staff

3\. 7 Provide funds to school districts to contract with institutions of
higher education to provide instruction in mathematics, science

and foreign language

3\. 8 Develop and fund partnerships with institutions of higher
education to train already licensed teachers to become certified in
high-need subject areas

3\. 9 Support the development of partnerships between institutions of
higher education and high-need school districts to provide professional
development for teachers in the hard-to-staff subject areas of
mathematics and science

3\. 10 Provide technical assistance to hard-to-staff school districts to
help them fully utilize all of the features of the state's web-based
recruitment system

3\. 11 Promote partnerships that help districts recruit and hire
qualified international teachers of hard-to-fill subjects and
specializations

3\. 12 Utilize a Credential Review Board to review the licensure
applications of alternative route and out-of-state candidates

**Spotlight Successes**

\[May 2005-May 2006\]

-   Ohio replaced temporary teaching licenses for teachers and
    administrators with more rigorous alternative routes that meet
    Highly Qualified requirements.

-   Math and Science Partnership grants were awarded to 10 partnerships
    between the science, technology, engineering and mathematics faculty
    in institutions of higher education and high-need school districts.
    The purpose of these projects was to increase the academic
    achievement of students in mathematics and science by enhancing the
    content knowledge and teaching skills of classroom teachers.

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   In Ohio, data show that the need for intervention specialists is
    high among school districts across the state. The Ohio Department of
    Education is responding by working with university partners to
    develop alternative training programs that will increase the supply
    of intervention specialists for Ohio schools. These programs utilize
    online courses, intensive summer courses and weekend sessions to
    enable teachers to continue teaching full-time while earning
    intervention specialist licensure within one year. The goal is to
    have more than 200 fully licensed intervention specialists by the
    summer of 2007 and 350 by the fall of 2007.

-   Ohio has provided, in both the 2004-05 and the 2005-06 school year,
    16 regional grants of \$200,000 each to Special Education Regional
    Resource Centers to offer professional development in the Core
    Academic Content areas as defined by *No Child Left Behind*. These
    trainings included the Ohio Academic Content Standards, Ohio's
    Instructional Model Lesson Plans (IMS), as well as the academic
    discipline subject matter. These professional development
    opportunities were offered to fully licensed special education
    teachers who did not meet the HQT standards in the content area.
    Participation levels were high with over 2,560 participants.

-   Fifteen of Ohio's colleges and universities received grants to
    provide summer professional development for teachers who still need
    to meet federal Highly Qualified Teacher requirements.
    Content-focused professional development was available at no charge
    for approximately 2,000 teachers.

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   After reviewing the licensure systems of other nations, Ohio's
    Educator Standards Board endorsed the concept of a content-specific
    license for grades four though 12. This will increase the content
    expertise of middle school teachers and will provide school
    districts with increased flexibility in assigning teachers across a
    wider range of grade levels. Efforts are currently underway to
    identify several institutions of higher education willing to pilot
    such a licensure program.

-   Ohio signed memorandums of understanding with Spain, China and
    Taiwan to establish visiting teacher programs. Ohio is recruiting
    teachers from Spain and China to teach in Ohio schools in the
    2006-2007 school year. Ohio teachers also are being recruited to
    teach English in Taiwan for the coming year.

**ELEMENT 4: Recruitment and Retention of Experienced Teachers**

Evidence for the probable success of Element 4 sub-strategies to build a
mass of qualified experienced teachers willing to work in high-need
schools

With the landmark NCLB legislation bringing teacher quality to the
forefront of the nation's education agenda, states across the country
have been searching for new and innovative ways to recruit the best
teacher candidates. But states are quickly coming to realize that
recruiting an adequate supply of effective teachers for their schools is
only half the battle\...keeping them there is the other half. And,
school district personnel clearly understand that recruiting and keeping
*highly qualified and experienced teachers in high-need schools*
presents the greatest challenge of all.

Data show that overall, Ohio has enough teachers to meet the current
number of school district vacancies. However, the state continues to
have teacher shortages in some subject areas and some types of school
districts. For example, a 2005-2006 survey of Ohio school personnel
showed that 17 percent of vacancies are in special education; 9.3
percent are in English; 7.4 percent are in mathematics; and 6.9 percent
are in science. Not surprisingly, the areas of the state that most
typically have difficulty attracting new teachers are large urban school
districts and small, isolated rural districts -- very often districts
with high levels of family poverty and low levels of student performance
(Ohio Department of Education, 2004a).

A key strategy for keeping good teachers in high-need schools is the
provision of high quality induction that helps new teachers acquire the
knowledge and skills that they need to succeed. National research shows
that comprehensive induction programs can cut teacher attrition rates in
half (Center for Teaching Quality, 2006). Nationally, the attrition rate
for teachers within their first five years is over 50%, while in Ohio it
is 28% over the first five years of teaching as illustrated in the table
below.

  -------------- ---------- ---------- ---------- ---------- ---------- ---------- ----------
  **Percentage                                                                     
  of Ohio's                                                                        
  Teachers                                                                         
  Employed in a                                                                    
  Base Year                                                                        
  Still Employed                                                                   
  After One to                                                                     
  Five Years**                                                                     

  **Base Year**  **1998**   **1999**   **2000**   **2001**   **2002**   **2003**   **2004**

  After 1 year   93%        93%        92%        93%        93%        88%        91%

  After 2 years  88%        87%        88%        88%        84%        83%        

  After 3 years  82%        82%        83%        81%        79%                   

  After 4 years  78%        78%        77%        76%                              

  After 5 years  74%        73%        72%                                         
  -------------- ---------- ---------- ---------- ---------- ---------- ---------- ----------

Source: Ohio Department of Education: Condition of Teacher Supply and
Demand in Ohio, 2004

Ohio has invested heavily in supporting new teachers and administrators
as they enter the profession and in helping them develop into
high-quality educators who can increase achievement for all students.
Since 2002, Ohio has implemented and funded the Entry Year Programs for
Teachers and Principals, which have grown steadily and supported more
than 4,700 new teachers and more than 300 new principals in the
2005-2006 school year.

To address the challenge of recruiting and retaining teachers in
high-need *sc*hools, the Ohio Department of Education identified teacher
quality in high-need schools as one of its *main priorities* in its
2006-2007 strategic plan. Currently, the state implements a number of
innovative strategies to recruit and retain highly qualified,
experienced teachers for those schools. One such example is the state's
targeted funding support to National Board certification candidates who
teach in regions with large numbers of high-need schools. Ohio is a
leader in the support of National Board teachers and ranks fifth in the
nation with more than 2,500 National Board Certified teachers. An
additional 159 Ohio teachers achieved the rigorous National Board
Certification during the 2005-06 school year, bringing Ohio's total to
more than 2,500 teachers certified by the National Board for
Professional Teaching Standards.

School leaders in Ohio understand that numerous factors influence
teacher retention, and that many of these factors lie beyond the control
of the Ohio Department of Education and local school districts. However,
Ohio is committed to supporting districts in every possible way to build
a mass of qualified, experienced teachers in the state's high-need
schools by implementing the following sub-strategies.

**Element 4: Ohio's Recruitment and Retention of Experienced Teachers
Sub-Strategies**

4\. 1 Require and fund high-quality induction experiences for all new
teachers and principals, including those who enter the profession
through alternative routes; Advocate for funds to prioritize induction
in high-need schools by providing three years of structured mentoring
designed to support teachers and principals

4\. 2 Provide mentor training to experienced teachers to assist them in
mentoring entry-year teachers

4\. 3 Improve state-level data systems to reduce the time it takes to
issue educator licenses

4\. 4 Provide incentives to highly qualified, experienced teachers who
teach in high-need schools

4\. 5 Advocate for collecting data on the number of teachers changing
*schools* within their district, changing *positions* within their
district, *moving* to other districts or into administration, or
*leaving* the profession; Conduct exit interviews to identify the
factors influencing teacher mobility

4\. 6 Target support to National Board certification candidates who
teach in regions with high numbers of high-need schools and provide
incentives so they stay

4\. 7 Explore providing an opportunity for "high value added" teachers
in high-need schools to apply for incentives and rewards to encourage
them to stay

**Surveying the Source**

**What do Ohio's Teachers Say?** During the 2005-2006 school year, the
Ohio Department of Education (ODE) surveyed Entry-Year Program
participants. One positive finding is that 78 percent of Entry-Year
Teachers report that their mentors are assigned based upon the grade
level or content area. In addition, 76 percent of Entry-Year Teachers
are satisfied or slightly satisfied with the opportunities to meet with
their mentors, and 69 percent are satisfied or slightly satisfied with
the opportunities to work with their mentors. ODE will be identifying
and promoting best practice models for Entry-Year Programs and will use
these survey findings to improve Ohio's entry-year programs.

## 

## ELEMENT 5: Professional Development

Evidence for the probable success of Element 5 sub-strategies to
strengthen the skills, knowledge and qualifications of teachers already
working in high-poverty, low-performing schools

High-quality, research-based professional development is crucial to the
success of Ohio's aligned system of standards and assessments. The
Mid-continent Research for Education and Learning (McREL) recently
completed a study on the essential characteristics of high-quality
professional development (2006). Researchers found that high-quality
professional development

-   Is sustained over time;

-   Focuses on specific content areas or instructional strategies;

-   Supports the collective learning of most, if not all, teachers in a
    school;

-   Aligns with school and teacher goals; and

-   Provides opportunities for teachers to practice and apply new
    knowledge.

All teachers need ongoing training and support, but especially those
working in high-need schools. Ohio is committed to providing high
quality professional development to educators over the entire continuum
of their careers. The foundation for Ohio's system of professional
development is the state's new professional development standards. These
new standards, adopted by the State Board of Education in 2005, are
aligned with the findings of national research and consistent with the
definition of high-quality professional development contained in the *No
Child Left Behind* (NCLB) Act. NCLB requires the Ohio Department of
Education to annually report the percentage of teachers who have
participated in High Quality Professional Development (HQPD) as defined
in Title IX, Section 9101 (34). Ohio has developed the appropriate
reporting mechanisms to meet those requirements.

Ohio's professional development standards are not minimal expectations.
Schools that successfully implement these standards should expect to see
higher quality teaching and increased student achievement. These
standards will be used to inform the types of professional development
that Ohio teachers should include as part of their career growth. To
accomplish this, the state will promote research-based professional
development that demonstrates improved student achievement and is tied
to school improvement efforts.

Another recent accomplishment in Ohio was the reconfiguration of the
state's professional development delivery system. This redesigned system
is comprised of 12 regional service areas and *targets professional
development to low-performing schools*. Each service area is guided by a
Regional School Improvement Team (RSIT). Members of the RSIT work
collaboratively to provide a variety of services to school districts,
especially districts with buildings in "School Improvement" status
(those not meeting AYP). This system makes available aligned resources,
information, tools, professional development and technical assistance,
with a focus on expanding the use of technology, to support teachers'
professional growth. During the 2006-2007 school year and beyond,
activities will be developed in response to data analysis and deployed
strategically *to districts most in need*.

## Element 5: Ohio's Professional Development Sub-Strategies 

5\. 1 Develop and implement new professional development standards;
Target funds to support only those professional development activities
that are aligned with Ohio's new professional development standards and
the NCLB definition of high quality professional development

5\. 2 Require low-performing school districts as well as districts with
unacceptably wide achievement gaps to demonstrate compliance with the
state's professional development standards through their Comprehensive
Continuous Improvement Plans

5\. 3 Implement a state regional technical assistance support system
that provides targeted assistance to low-performing districts and
schools

5\. 4 Target additional high-quality professional development that
focuses on the analysis and use of data to help districts identify their
achievement gaps and raise the academic performance of all students

5\. 5 Create Local Professional Development Regional Support Sites to
ensure that Ohio's new professional development standards will be used
by all educators to guide the development of their own plans for
professional growth

5\. 6 Develop professional development academies focused on the specific
needs of teachers in the state's Appalachian region

5\. 7 Expand the use of technology to support teachers' professional
growth including more opportunities for online mentoring support and the
use of digital tools

5\. 8 Provide training to school district personnel in value added
growth models

## Spotlight Strategies

**\[5.7\]** In collaboration with the Ohio Board of Regents, OARnet,
eTech Ohio and the Management Council of the Ohio Educational Computer
Network, the Ohio Department of Education connected the first two school
districts to the Third Frontier Network (TFN). The TFN is the most
advanced high-speed K-12 network in the country and will become the
technical foundation for applications, such as the D3A2 and
videoconferencing for professional development and instructional
delivery. By September 30, 2006, Ohio's 23 Information Technology
Centers and the large urban districts will be connected to the TFN.

**\[5.8\]** Value-Added Growth will be included on Ohio's 2007-2008
State and Local Report Cards. Superintendents can begin preparing for
this progress measure and its use for school improvement. Each school
district has the opportunity to identify two education professionals who
will be trained on the value-added measure during the 2006-2007 school
year. H.B. 66 indicates there is no cost to districts for this training,
and funds will be available to help defray costs for travel and
substitute teachers. Training in the value-added growth measure is
provided through a partnership between Battelle for Kids and the Ohio
Department of Education.

## ELEMENT 6: Specialized Knowledge & Skills

Evidence for the probable success of Element 6 sub-strategies to ensure
that teachers have the specialized knowledge and skills they need to be
effective with the populations of students typically served in
high-poverty, low-performing schools

Ask veteran teachers to describe their first few years in a classroom
and you will probably hear words like "difficult," "challenging," or
"overwhelming." And, there may be good reasons why teachers choose these
and similar expressions. There is often a wide gap between how well
teachers feel they are prepared for the challenges they face in today's
classroom, especially in hard-to-staff schools.

Adding to that is the fact that the student population in schools across
America is becoming increasingly diverse. Consider this: Between 2030
and 2040, racial and ethnic minorities are expected to make up more than
half of the nation's students (The Pew Charitable Trusts and Education
Week, 2000b).

Preparing teachers to work with diverse populations of students in
diverse settings is a key component of Ohio's new teacher standards. New
teachers need to understand their subject matter and curriculum, need to
know how students learn and develop, and need to know how to teach the
subject so it can be understood by diverse learners (Darling-Hammond,
2005). Ohio's new teacher standards go far beyond the academic content
that teachers must master in order to teach Ohio's students well. They
define the skills teachers need to diagnose and respond to the
individual learning needs of highly mobile students, students with
minimal reading skills, students with minimal parental support, students
with limited proficiency in English, students with disabilities and the
vast array of students with other specific learning needs. In
particular, teachers learn how to identify and apply the instructional
strategies that are most likely to be successful given the individual,
cultural, academic and social background, needs and strengths of each
student. To ensure that new teachers have the knowledge and skills they
need to be successful, Ohio requires new teachers to demonstrate,
through the Praxis III assessment, their ability to teach diverse
learners.

Ohio recognizes that building the knowledge and skills of veteran
teachers, particularly those already working in high-need schools, is a
key strategy to ensuring that all students have access to good teachers.
And, Ohio has a strong support system in place for teachers. Ohio's
newly-configured regional professional development delivery system
targets professional development to low-performing schools and includes
the deployment of on-site professional development by trained coaches,
especially in the subject areas of reading and mathematics.

Ohio also provides a variety of professional opportunities for
administrators working in high-need schools. The State Action for
Educational Leadership Program offers professional development
for leaders in Ohio\'s eight urban districts focused on shared
leadership, using data to inform instructional decisions and preparing
principals for leadership in urban districts. In addition, the Ohio
Department of Education recently published *A Guide for School Leaders,*
a companion to *Standards-Based Instruction for All Learners: A Treasure
Chest for Principal-Led Building Teams in Improving Results for Learners
Most At-Risk*. This professional development resource assists in
building the capacity of school leaders and in applying lessons learned
from Ohio *Schools of Promise* on how to design and deliver
standards-based instruction.

**Element 6: Ohio's Specialized Knowledge and Skills Sub-Strategies**

6\. 1 Require new teachers to demonstrate, through the Praxis III
assessment, their ability to teach diverse learners

6\. 2 Place subject specialists/coaches in high-need schools; Provide
targeted coaching to teachers who teach reading and mathematics

6\. 3 Develop and promote research-based coaching models

6\. 4 Make a major investment in preparing principals for the unique
challenges of high-need schools (e.g., how to promote student learning,
how to hire strong teachers)

6\. 5 Study the school organization, culture, instructional practices
and characteristics of teachers in high-poverty, high-minority schools
that significantly raise student achievement

##### Spotlight Strategies

**\[6.2\]** In February 2006, the State Board of Education approved the
P-6 Mathematics Specialist credential. In FY06, the Ohio Department of
Education (ODE) placed mathematics coaches (i.e. specialists) in 34
elementary schools that are in School Improvement status. The initiative
will expand to 60 coaches in FY07. These coaches provide continuous,
on-site professional development in mathematics to the teachers of a
specific building to deepen the teachers' understanding of the
mathematics they are teaching and to familiarize them with effective
ways of communicating mathematics to young students. The coaches are
supported and directed by a team of mathematics education faculty and
facilitators from The Ohio State University. The Ohio State University
and ODE collaborated to pilot the Math Specialist program in 34 schools
in Ohio. This project will help to build quality coaching capacity in
schools around the state.

**\[6.5\]** Ohio's *Schools of Promise* program recognizes schools
across the state that demonstrate high achievement in reading and
mathematics for all groups of students, despite the fact that 40 percent
or more of these students come from low-income backgrounds. Students in
*Schools of Promis*e met or exceeded the state standard of 75 percent
passage in reading or mathematics, or both. This year, a sub-set of case
study research focused on the analysis of teacher characterizes in eight
*Schools of Promise* and the role that teachers play in these
high-performing schools.  Preliminary case study findings, based on
2004-2005 data, show that a high percentage of teachers in the sub-set
of elementary schools were *both* highly qualified and experienced (over
10 years of teaching experience) and that the average years of
experience for teachers in the sub-set of secondary schools was 17
years. These findings confirm the importance of teacher quality,
especially in serving high-minority, high-poverty populations of
students.

## ELEMENT 7: Working Conditions 

Evidence for the probable success of Element 7 sub-strategies to improve
the working conditions in high-need schools that contribute to
excessively high rates of teacher turnover (particularly high quality
leadership)

Working conditions that support teaching and learning help to keep
highly qualified, experienced teachers teaching in high-need schools.
Ohio has instituted a multi-dimensional approach to increasing teacher
retention by focusing on strategies that directly address school culture
and the working conditions within which teachers teach and students
learn.

The Ohio Department of Education completed a case study of districts
during the 2005-2006 school year to determine some of the reasons for
teacher attrition. Teachers cited several common themes, including
leadership, the amount of change occurring in the school or district,
culture and collegiality. Ohio has also joined a national effort -- the
Working Conditions Survey -- to gain insight into the factors that
impact teacher attrition. The state piloted the survey in spring of 2005
with 30 schools and offered the survey statewide again in the spring of
2006.

Research shows that one of the most important things that can be done to
attract and retain effective teachers in high-need schools is to develop
strong school leaders. In fact, one of the most common reasons given by
teachers for leaving certain schools is weak leadership and lack of
administrative support. When high-need schools have strong leaders, they
are more likely to keep good teachers, improve achievement and close
achievement gaps.

If the decade ahead resembles the past, more than 40 percent of current
principals can be expected to leave their jobs. Ohio, like other states,
faces retooling current principals while preparing a new generation of
school leaders to take their place. Ohio recently adopted three sets of
aligned standards: the Ohio Standards for the Teaching Profession, the
Ohio Standards for Principals and the Ohio Standards for Professional
Development. The Ohio Standards for Principals play an important role in
Ohio's standards-based system by clearly defining the traits and skills
of effective leaders. These standards will promote the most effective
leadership practices among Ohio's principals.

To further strengthen Ohio's cadre of school leaders, the state replaced
temporary administrator licenses with more rigorous alternative routes.
The alternative route for principals, superintendents and central office
administrators provides additional flexibility to candidates while
maintaining high standards. Toolkits were developed and disseminated,
and four pilot sites have been created for implementation of the
alternative route for administrators. In addition, Ohio aligns the
Praxis III, the Praxis administrator's exams, and the state's entry-year
programs to the new teacher and principal standards. Because the
standards outline expectations for knowledge and skills, they also will
serve as a tool for mentors in the entry-year programs to work more
effectively with new principals. Since 2002, Ohio has implemented and
funded the entry-year programs for principals, which have grown steadily
and will support more than 300 new principals this year.

On another front, Ohio recently adopted *School Climate Guidelines* that
describe how schools can create environments where every student feels
welcomed, respected and motivated to learn. Ohio is committed to
ensuring that all students go to school in safe, clean and modern
buildings that offer an environment that promotes quality teaching and
high levels of student learning. For this reason, the state works
closely with the Ohio School Facilities Commission (OSFC) and its
ongoing efforts to help school districts provide appropriate learning
environments and safe school facilities through its funding, management
oversight and technical assistance initiatives.

**Element 7: Ohio's Working Conditions Sub-Strategies**

7\. 1 Strengthen school leadership through the development and
implementation of new principal standards

7\. 2 Increase the pool of high quality principals through alternative
administrator preparation programs

7\. 3 Require and fund high-quality induction experiences for all new
principals, including those who enter the profession through alternative
routes

7\. 4 Develop a framework of essential criteria for school districts to
follow when creating locally determined evaluation systems to assess the
performance of principals

7\. 5 Collect data related to teachers' perceptions about working
conditions associated with high teacher turnover including time,
facilities and resources, leadership and professional development

7\. 6 Keep good teachers where they are needed most by providing tools
and resources for improving the working conditions in high-need schools

7\. 7 Adopt School Climate Guidelines to provide physically safe and
emotionally secure environments for all students and staff: Adopt a
Substance-Abuse and Violence Prevention Policy

7\. 8 Create smaller schools and/or smaller units within schools

7\. 9 Prioritize funds for the renovation of high-need school facilities
and construct new facilities based on need

**Spotlight Successes**

\[May 2005-May 2006\]

-   A \$3.6 million, three-year grant from the Wallace Foundation was
    renewed for the period of January 1, 2006 through June 30, 2007. The
    State Action for Educational Leadership Program provides
    professional development for school leaders in Ohio\'s eight urban
    districts focused on shared leadership, using data to inform
    instructional decisions and preparing principals for leadership in
    urban districts.

-   Ohio is one of two states selected for the three-year Harvard
    Leadership Initiative, funded by the Wallace Foundation. The program
    provides coaching and professional development for teams from the
    state and high-need school districts by faculty from Harvard's
    schools of business, education and government. The program will
    focus on building educators' knowledge and skills in systematic
    thinking and alignment, adaptive leadership and team building, and
    leadership for instructional improvement.

-   ODE published *A Guide for School Leaders,* a companion to
    *Standards-Based Instruction for All Learners: A Treasure Chest for
    Principal-Led Building Teams in Improving Results for Learners Most
    At-Risk*. This professional development resource assists in building
    the capacity of school leaders and in applying lessons learned from
    Ohio *Schools of Promise* on how to design and deliver
    standards-based instruction.

-   The working conditions survey, now titled the \"Teaching and
    Learning Conditions Survey,\" was implemented on a pilot basis and
    is now available statewide to all school districts through an online
    format. Tools and resources are available to districts participating
    in the survey to enable them to analyze and utilize survey results.

-   The State Board of Education adopted School Climate Guidelines to
    provide physically safe and emotionally secure environments for all
    students and staff. Ohio's State Board defines a positive climate as
    one which evokes non-violence, cooperation, teamwork, understanding,
    and acceptance.

-   The State Board adopted a Substance Abuse and Violence Prevention
    Policy in March 2006 that encourages districts to adopt policies and
    programs at the local level. The policy charges the State Board with
    developing a budget to support state and local implementation of
    prevention efforts. In addition, ODE is providing guidance to
    districts on the content for prevention programs and appropriate
    data for determining their effectiveness.

## ELEMENT 8: New Compensation Systems

Evidence for the probable success of Element 8 sub-strategies to develop
and implement new compensations systems

One of the ways that Ohio is working to improve its ability to recruit
and retain high-quality teachers and principals is through the
development and implementation of new compensation systems. As a
long-term strategic goal, Ohio is reviewing how to pay teachers and
principals differently using a "pay-for quality" approach that rewards
people for what they do and what they accomplish. It would also link
compensation to credible, standards-based evaluation systems that
include options for tiered career paths. The traditional salary schedule
of linking teachers' pay increases exclusively to number of years of
service, coursework and degrees is not well aligned with the goal of
building teaching capacity to ensure achievement for all students.

Recently, Ohio has been working with The Teaching Commission to pilot
the Teacher Advancement Program (TAP). TAP is a knowledge and
skills-based compensation system which provides teachers with
performance pay based on knowledge and skills; performance pay based on
student achievement at the classroom and school levels; and
differentiated pay based on career ladders. Four schools in Ohio
implemented the Teacher Advancement Program (TAP) during the 2005-2006
school year. Eight additional schools will implement TAP in 2006-2007.

Another strategy that can be implemented to provide more opportunities
for teachers to advance in their profession is career ladder systems.
Since the 1980s, policy makers in several states, including Ohio, have
been implementing teacher career ladders. One of the key purposes of
career ladders is to respond to the lack of career advancement
opportunities in teaching, where often the responsibilities on the first
day are the same as those on the last day before retirement. Without
career ladders, teachers seeking advancement have the options of moving
into school administration or leaving the field of education. Career
ladders are designed to provide teachers with the opportunity to grow
professionally and advance within their careers while remaining in the
classroom.

**■**

**Element 8: Ohio's Compensation Systems Sub-Strategies**

8\. 1 Implement new compensation systems that recognize challenging
schools; are linked to value added data; and allow for tiered career
paths

8\. 2 Provide monetary incentives to encourage highly qualified teachers
who teach in high-need schools to stay

8\. 3 Apply for Teacher Incentive Funding to develop innovative
compensation plans that reward teachers who demonstrate success in
improving student achievement and closing achievement gaps

8\. 4 Develop career advancement structures to raise compensation for
master or mentor teachers

8\. 5 Assist school districts in developing locally determined
evaluation systems to assess the performance of teachers

8\. 6 Pay teachers who earn National Board certification an annual
stipend in addition to their regular salary

##### Spotlight Strategy

**\[8.1\]** During the past year, four Ohio schools implemented the
Teacher Advancement Program (TAP) developed by the Milken Family
Foundation. The TAP program includes differentiated compensation for
teachers, a career ladder, intensive job-embedded professional
development and accountability for student achievement. A state-level
TAP director was employed through funding provided by the Foundation,
and Ohio anticipates adding eight new TAP schools next year. This work
will lay the foundation for Ohio's application for the federal *Teacher
Incentive Funding.*

## ELEMENT 9: Policy Coherence

Evidence for the probable success of Element 9 sub-strategies to improve
internal processes or revise state policies that may inadvertently
contribute to local staffing inequities

Ohio's vision for its educational system is to ensure that *all*
students success. This vision can be accomplished if stakeholders,
educators and parents work together to coordinate and leverage resources
and push their thinking about how to strengthen the linkages between
existing initiatives to better impact student achievement, especially in
high-need schools.

Taken together as a whole, the strategies outlined in Ohio's Teacher
Equity Plan provide a solid framework for ensuring that poor and
minority children are not being taught at higher rates than other
children by unqualified, inexperienced and out-of-field teachers. This
coherent and aligned set of strategies addresses two key goals: (1) To
improve the quality of *all* of Ohio's teachers, and (2) To improve the
distribution of the state\'s most effective teachers.

## Element 9: Ohio's Policy Coherence Sub-Strategies

9\. 1 Combine the action plan required of the state's partnership
project with The Education Trust *with* the NCLB required State teacher
equity plan to produce ***one aligned state plan*** (Ohio's Teacher
Equity Plan); Ensure that the state plan evidences coherent policies and
aligned strategies that are targeted on improving the distribution of
Ohio's highly qualified, experienced teachers

9\. 2 Ensure that Ohio's polices related to equitable teacher
distribution are grounded in data analyses findings and are aligned with
the state's long-term strategic goals and policy environment

9\. 3 Ensure that state testing policies and systems of rewards and
sanctions do not inadvertently drive teachers and principals away from
high-need schools

9\. 4 Build and nurture national- and state-level strategic partnerships
that promote policy coherence and strategy alignment

9\. 5 Develop strong working relationships between the Ohio Department
of Education and Ohio's General Assembly

**Spotlight Successes**

\[May 2005-May 2006\]

-   To enhance communication between the State Board of Education and
    the Ohio General Assembly, the Ohio Department of Education (ODE)
    coordinated meetings between the State Board president and vice
    president, and the chairs of both the House and Senate Education
    committees. As a result, the House Education Committee chair
    sponsored a meeting for the entire House Education Committee, and 16
    of the 21committee members attended. They discussed the Board's
    priorities, and committee members asked questions about the Board's
    general direction.

-   ODE held seminars and workshops for Ohio General Assembly staff
    members, including sessions on special education, teacher quality,
    student transportation, achievement testing and school finance. ODE
    staff also provided educational sessions for staff in the Office of
    Budget and Management.

-   Twenty of the State Board's 2005 Legislative Recommendations became
    law through House Bill 66 and House Bill 530.

-   Monthly Performance Council sessions held throughout the 2005-2006
    school year allowed ODE staff to review data on the effectiveness of
    initiatives and hold focused discussions on the vision of higher
    achievement for all students.

-   In March 2006, ODE began competing to work with national partners
    including the Council of Chief State School Officers, Asia Society,
    and National Institute for School Leadership as part of the State
    Alliance for High Performance. This alliance represents the best
    national and international research in education reform. Educators
    from the four states that are chosen to participate will take part
    in international benchmarking studies, learn about instructional
    best practices and materials, and engage in leadership training. A
    main focus of the partnership will include working with many of
    Ohio's 21 urban districts to close achievement gaps.

**PART IV: Ohio's Plan to Conduct State-Level Monitoring of Teacher
Distribution Patterns in Local Education Agencies**

Ohio tracks teacher-related data over time for the purpose of analyzing
supply and demand trends, demographics, distribution, mobility and
compensation; and for informing the development of appropriate policies
to address any inequities in the distribution of teacher quality.

Ohio's strategies for monitoring teacher distribution patterns in local
education agencies (LEAs) include

-   Collect and publicly report data on the distribution of teacher
    talent including the percentage of highly qualified teachers in each
    core subject area and the percentage of highly qualified teachers in
    schools not meeting Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP)

-   Collect data on teachers' certificates/licenses held; Enable
    educators, parents and other stakeholders to review up-to-date
    information on the credentials of their school's teachers and
    leaders and the achievement levels of various groups of students
    through a web-based data system

-   Collect and publicly report data that describes patterns of teacher
    turnover and mobility, specifically in high-need schools

-   Advocate for the development of a data system that reports the
    number of teachers changing *schools* within their district,
    changing *positions* within their district, *moving* to other
    districts or into administration, or *leaving* the profession

-   Monitor, on an ongoing basis, the specific staffing needs of Ohio's
    schools through the generation of data reports that identify subject
    and location area shortages

-   Utilize and continuously improve a web-based data recruitment system
    that matches districts' teaching vacancies with prospective
    educators

-   Require each school district to analyze Highly Qualified Teacher
    (HQT) data in order to meet staffing and professional development
    needs

Ohio's data and reporting systems collect information on a comprehensive
set of data elements related to the characteristics of the state's
teaching force, including the percentage of highly qualified teachers in
every school. As a testament to the quality of this system, the U. S.
Department of Education showcased Ohio's process for determining HQT
status, and for gathering and reporting HQT data, at four national
meetings over this past year.

The state's Comprehensive Continuous Improvement Plan (CCIP) requires
each LEA to analyze HQT data in order to meet the staffing and
professional development needs of Ohio's schools, especially those not
meeting Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP). The CCIP District Agency Plan
requires the LEA to include strategies that support goals and
performance measures targeting ongoing training and professional
development.

**The Ohio Department of Education HQT Monitoring and Notification
Process**

The Ohio Department of Education notifies each district of its progress
toward reaching the goal of 100 percent of teachers teaching within the
school district being highly qualified. The federal *No Child Left
Behind Act* calls for all teachers teaching in core academic subjects
(English, reading or language arts, math, science, foreign languages,
civics and government, economics, arts, history, and geography) to
become highly qualified. Section 1119(a)(3) requires that every local
educational agency (LEA) "develop a plan to ensure that all teachers
teaching within the school district served by the local educational
agency are highly qualified not later than the end of the 2005-2006
school year."

The Ohio Department of Education's procedure for monitoring whether LEAs
attain 100% HQT is outlined below:

*Using the November 2004 data (from the 2003-2004 school year) on
percent of courses taught by highly qualified teachers, ODE determined
and notified districts of their district annual objectives for the years
2004-2005 and 2005-2006 that would reasonably ensure the district meets
the goal of 100% highly qualified teachers by the beginning of the
2006-2007 school year. ODE will then use data submitted in November
2005, 2006, and 2007 to determine if the measurable objects were met.
The timeline follows:*

  ------------- -------------- ---------------------------- --------------
  **Data        **School Year  **Action to be Taken**       **Deadline for
  Source**      from which                                  action**
                data is                                     
                taken**                                     

  November,     2003-2004      Determine district HQT       October, 2005
  2004                         objectives and report to     
                               them                         

  November,     2004-2005      Determine HQT "met" or "not  January, 2006
  2005                         met" status for meeting      
                               objectives and report status 
                               to districts.                

  November,     2005-2006      Determine HQT "met" or "not  January, 2007
  2006                         met" status for meeting      
                               objectives and report status 
                               to districts.                

  November,     2006-2007      Determine HQT "met" or "not  January, 2008
  2007                         met" status for meeting      
                               objectives and report status 
                               to districts.                

  November,     2007-2008      Determine HQT "met" or "not  January, 2009
  2008                         met" status for meeting goal 
                               of 100% and report status to 
                               districts.                   

  Subsequent    Subsequent     Continue annual process      Subsequent
  year          fiscal year                                 year
  ------------- -------------- ---------------------------- --------------

**Ohio's HQT Benchmark Notification to Districts**

An analysis of data regarding highly qualified teachers that your LEA
has submitted to ODE over the past two years indicates that during the
2003-2004 school year, \[XX\] percent of core courses were taught by
highly qualified teachers. During the 2004-2005 school year, this
percentage was \[XX\]. In order to reach the goal of 100 percent of core
courses being taught by highly qualified teachers by the end of the
2005-2006 school year, your LEA should have reached a benchmark of
\[XX\] percent during the 2004-2005 school year. Therefore, according to
these data, your LEA did not meet the benchmark and is not on track to
meet the 100 percent requirement by the end of this school year.

######## PART V: Appendices

**Appendix A: A Proactive Partnership: Ohio and The Education Trust**

On April 13, 2004, the Joyce Foundation approved a grant to The
Education Trust to collaborate with key state and local education
leaders in Ohio, Illinois, and Wisconsin, in partnership with the
Cleveland Municipal School District, Chicago Public Schools, and
Milwaukee Public Schools. The project called on the partner states and
districts to take a comprehensive approach to improving the distribution
of effective teachers to low-income, minority and low-performing
students.

In Ohio, the project was conducted and directed by two working groups of
key education stakeholders, one at the state level and one focusing on
the large urban partner school district (Cleveland Municipal School
District). The working groups consisted of representatives from the
different branches of government and both K-12 and higher education,
with additional participation by teacher unions, and business and
community leaders.

As part of its partnership commitment, Ohio conducted a multidimensional
review of the distribution of key teacher characteristics across
different kinds of students and schools, with a focus on the
distribution of teachers to low-performing, low-income and minority
students. The first phase of the project focused on a *quantitative*
statewide analysis of district-level and school-level teacher, school
and student characteristics.

Ohio's Phase II analyses included case study data analysis of teachers
in Ohio's Schools of Promise, where low-income and high minority
students are achieving at high levels. This phase of Ohio's Teacher
Distribution Project included *data collection from teachers
themselves.* The focus of this research was on teacher quality and the
role of teachers in high-poverty, high-minority schools where students
achieve at high levels.

The project's final phase, Phase III, called for the development of an
Action Plan outlining policies and strategies to improve the
distribution of effective teachers in Ohio. As work continued on the
development of this Action Plan, it became apparent that two separate
but parallel initiatives were unfolding \-- The Education Trust project
and the United States Department of Education's requirement that each
state submit a plan to address the equitable teacher distribution
provisions of *No Child Left Behind* (NCLB).

The common goal shared by The Education Trust project and the NCLB
provisions presented a timely opportunity for Ohio to align two powerful
initiatives and, with the support of leaders at The Education Trust,
develop ***one state plan***.

Ohio's Teacher Equity Plan addresses the NCLB requirement that each
state demonstrate *a good faith effort* to ensure that poor and minority
children are not being taught at higher rates than other children by
inexperienced, unqualified and out-of-field teachers. The strategies
included in Ohio's plan are the result of findings from extensive data
analyses, the expertise of the project's working group, and national
research on teacher quality.

  ------------------------------------- ---------------------------------
  **Ohio's Teacher Distribution Project 
  Working Group Members**               

  Susan Bodary \[Office of the          Tracy Martin \[Cleveland
  Governor\]                            Municipal School District\]

  Maria Bonachea \[South-Western City   Mary McGriff \[Robert E. Lucas
  School District\]                     Intermediate ES\]

  John Bryant \[Cincinnati, Ohio\]      Alicia Pagan \[Dayton, Ohio\]

  Charles Hancock \[The Ohio State      C. J. Prentiss \[Ohio Senate\]
  University\]                          

  Jean Harper \[Springfield City        Mark Real \[KidsOhio.org\]
  Schools\]                             

  Denise Hewitt \[Cincinnati Federation Arlene Setzer \[Ohio House of
  of Teachers\]                         Representatives\]

  Kaye Jeter \[Central State            Sylvester Small \[Akron City
  University\]                          School\]

  Thomas Lasley \[The University of     Richard Stoff \[Ohio Business
  Dayton\]                              Roundtable\]

  Jim Mahoney \[Battelle for Kids\]     
  ------------------------------------- ---------------------------------

**Ohio Department of Education Staff**

Marilyn B. Troyer, Acting Deputy Superintendent, Ohio Department of
Education

Rebecca S. Schell, Ohio's Teacher Distribution Project Manager, Center
for the Teaching Profession

Office of Policy and Accountability Staff, Ohio Department of Education

**Ohio's Teacher Distribution Project Researchers**

Howard Fleeter & William Driscoll

The Ohio Collaborative Research Group

The Strategic Research Group

**Appendix B: References**

Center for Teaching Quality. (2006). Why Mentoring and Induction Matters
and What Must Be Done for New Teachers. *Teaching Quality Across the
Nation: Best Practices & Policies, 5,* 2.

Darling-Hammond, L. (1999). Teacher Quality and Student Achievement: A
Review of State Policy Evidence. *Education Policy Analysis Archives,
8*, 1. Retrieved June 14, 2006, from epaa.asu.edu/aepaa/v8n1

Darling-Hammond, L and Baratz-Snowden, J. (2005). *A Good Teacher in
Every Classroom: Preparing the Highly Qualified Teachers Our Children
Deserve*. Sponsored by The National Academy of Education.

Driscoll, W. & Fleeter, H. (2005). *Key Findings from the Ohio
Distribution of Teacher Characteristics Study*: Ohio Department of
Education.

Education Week. (1996-2005). *Quality Counts Reports*. Retrieved June
14, 2006, from
<http://www.edweek.org/rc/articles/2004/10/15/qc-archive.html>

Education Week. (2006). *Quality Counts at 10: A Decade of
Standards-Based Education*. Retrieved June 14, 2006, from
[www.edweek.org/rc/articles/2004/10/15/qc-archive.html](http://www.edweek.org/rc/articles/2004/10/15/qc-archive.html)

Educator Standards Board. (2004). *Fact Sheet*. Retrieved June 14, 2006,
from
[http://esb.ode.state.oh.us/PDF/Revised%20Fact%20Sheet%203-9-06%20in%20PDF.pdf](http://esb.ode.state.oh.us/PDF/Revised Fact Sheet 3-9-06 in PDF.pdf)

The George Lucas Foundation. (2005). \[Interview with Linda
Darling-Hammond; an expert on education and teaching\]. *Edutopia
Online,* 1-3. Retrieved June 14, 2006, from
edutopia.org/php/print.php?id=Art_832&template=printinterview.php

The Governor's Commission on Teaching Success. (2003). *Achieving More:
Quality Teaching, School Leadership, Student Success*. Retrieved June
14, 2006, from teaching-success.org

Hanushek, E.A., Kain, J.F., Rivkin, S.G. (1998). *Teachers, Schools and
Academic Achievement*: *National Bureau of Economic Research, working
paper no. W6691.* Retrieved June 14, 2006,
<http://ssrn.com/abstract+122569>

Haselkorn, D. & Harris, L. (1998). *The Essential Profession: A National
Survey of Public Attitudes toward Teaching, Educational Opportunity and
School Reform*. Retrieved June 14, 2006, from
[http://www.rnt.org](http://www.rnt.org/)

Ingersoll, R. (1996). *Out of Field Teaching and Educational Equality*.
U.S. Department of Education. National Center for Education Statistics.
Retrieved June 14, 2006, from
<http://www.ed.gov/nclb/methods/teachers/teachers.html>

Mid-continent Research for Research for Education and Learning. (2006).
*New McREL research affirms link between high-quality teacher
professional development and improved student achievement.* Retrieved on
July 3, 2006, from
<http://www.mcrel.org/newsroom/pr_ProfessionalDevelopmentAnalysis.asp>

National Commission on Teaching & America's Future. (1996). *What
Matters Most: Teaching for America's Future*. New York, New York

National Council for Accreditation of Teacher Education. (2003). *No
Dream Denied: A Pledge to America's Children*. Retrieved June 14, 2006,
from www.nctaf.org/article/?c=4&sc=16

The Ohio Department of Education. (2003). *Highly Qualified Teacher
Rubric*. \[Brochure\]. Columbus, OH

The Ohio Department of Education. Condition of Teacher Supply and Demand
in Ohio. (2004a). Condition of Teacher Supply and Demand in Ohio 2004.
Retrieved on July 3, 2006, from

> ode.state.oh.us/teachingprofession/pdf/S_D_Revised_final.pdf

*The Ohio Department of Education.* (2004b). *Strategic Plan.* Retrieved
June 14, 2006, from
[www.ode.state.oh.us/centers/strategic_plan.asp](http://www.ode.state.oh.us/centers/strategic_plan.asp)

*The Ohio Department of Education.* (2005a). *Guide for Ohio's Report
Card System 2004-2005.* Retrieved June 14, 2006, from
[www.ode.state.oh.us/reportcard/pdf/0405guide.pdf](http://www.ode.state.oh.us/reportcard/pdf/0405guide.pdf)

The Ohio Department of Education. (2005b). *Annual Report on Educational
Progress in Ohio*. Retrieved June 14, 2006, from
[www.ode.state.oh.us/reportcard/state_report_card/SRC2005.pdf](http://www.ode.state.oh.us/reportcard/state_report_card/SRC2005.pdf)

The Ohio Department of Education (2006). *Schools of Promise Case
Studies 2005-2006*. Draft in progress.

Ohio State Board of Education. (2003). *Toward High Achievement for All
Students: the Report of the State Board of Education Closing Achievement
Gaps Task Forc*e. Retrieved June 14, 2006, from
ode.state.oh.us/achievement_gaps/closing_achievement_gaps_task_force/AG_task_force_report.pdf

The United States Department of Education web site. Retrieved June 29
from [http:///www.ed.gov/nclb/methods/teachers/teachers.html]()

Peske, H. & Haycock, K. (2006). *Teaching Inequality: How Poor and
Minority Students Are Shortchanged on Teacher Quality*. Retrieved June
14, 2006, from
<http://www2.edtrust.org/NR/rdonlyres/010DBD9F-CED8-4D2B-9E0D-91B446746ED3/0/TQReportJune2006.pdf>

The Pew Charitable Trusts & Education Week. (2000a). *Quality Counts
2000: Who Should Teach?, 14.*

The Pew Charitable Trusts & Education Week. (2000b). *Quality Counts
2000: Who Should Teach? Education Week Analysis of U.S. Census Bureau's
1992-1999 Current Population Survey -- March Supplement, 13*

The Teaching Commission. (2004). *Teaching at Risk: A Call to Action*.
Retrieved June 14, 2006, from
theteachingcommission.org/press/FINAL_Report.pdf

[^1]: In Ohio, a "highly qualified" teacher must hold at least a
    bachelor's degree with a major or 30 semester hours of coursework in
    the core academic subject he/she is teaching; demonstrate
    subject-matter knowledge by passing the PRAXIS II subject area
    assessment; have a master's degree in the subject area or
    successfully complete the HOUSSE process; and be fully
    certified/licensed by the state.

[^2]: Note: In schools with less than 10 percent of low-income students,
    only 1.5 percent of the teachers were not highly qualified as
    opposed to 11.9 percent in schools with 90-100 percent low-income
    students.

    Note: The lowest performing high schools had more than six times as
    many teachers who were not highly qualified compared to the highest
    performing schools.

    Note: In schools serving the lowest percentage of minority students,
    2.1 percent of teachers were not highly qualified, compared to
    schools that had the highest number of minority students (90-100
    percent) where six times as many (12.1 percent) of the teachers were
    not highly qualified.

[^3]: Research also speaks to the importance of teachers' content
    knowledge and is discussed further under Element 3: Out-of-Field
    Teaching.